FRED WEIR: SEEKING NEUTRALITY, KREMLIN STAYS ON SIDELINES OF ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR
OCTOBER 29, 2023 1 COMMENT
By Fred Weir, Christian Science Monitor, 10/26/23
For over half a century, Moscow has held the same basic position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: It will ultimately require a two-state solution. To that end, and since the collapse of the former USSR, Moscow has striven to maintain good relations with both Israel and the Palestinians.
But when the horrific events of Oct. 7 and the aftermath erupted onto Russian TV, they divided society and put serious strains on the Kremlin’s ability to maintain its traditional stance of equidistance between the antagonists.
The Russian public has expressed sympathy for both sides. Hundreds of people came to lay flowers at the Israeli embassy in Moscow, many expressing grief and anger to reporters at the massacre of Israeli civilians by Hamas shooters. And support for Palestinians was evident in the many bouquets placed at the Palestinian embassy in Moscow, especially after Israeli retaliation in Gaza began to escalate and reports of heavy Palestinian casualties flowed in.
As the West, led by the United States, lined up unequivocally behind its ally Israel, Moscow may have been tempted to lean toward a different corner. Perhaps that is why it took Russian President Vladimir Putin more than a week to phone Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to express condolences, condemn violence against civilians, and affirm Israel’s right to self-defense.
But Russian experts broadly say that Moscow is sticking to its nonpartisan stance, and beyond that does not want to get involved.
“The Russian position may change a bit as the situation changes, but the essence has been the same for many decades and will remain that way,” says Andrei Klimov, deputy head of the international affairs committee of the Federation Council, Russia’s upper house of parliament.
“In the 1940s, the U.N. decided to create two states, Israel and Palestine, and we have supported that plan ever since,” he points out. “We’ve seen wars and attacks come and go many times, but Russia still believes that a political solution, resulting in two states, is the only way forward.”
Warm ties with Israel
Russia is home to about 145,000 Jewish people, many of whom hold dual Russian/Israeli citizenship, while Israel has around a million Russian speakers in its population. The ties between the two countries are strong, underpinned by warm personal relations between Mr. Putin and Israeli leaders, particularly Mr. Netanyahu.
Trade remains fruitful, as do cultural relations. Israel has so far declined to impose Western-led sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine war. Russians enjoy visa-free travel to Israel, Mr. Putin has lauded Israel as a “Russian-speaking” country and joined Mr. Netanyahu a decade ago to unveil a monument to the Red Army’s WWII victory in Netanya, Israel.
Dasha Mikhelson, spokesperson for the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia, says that the Jewish community in Russia today is flourishing. She says there is a common view of WWII and the Holocaust, shared tastes in music and cuisine, and lots of two-way tourism, as well as many kinds of cultural exchanges between Russia and Israel.
“Today, the leaders of both countries set the task of strengthening our friendship; they visit each other, discuss important political events,” she says. “All this, as well as the flourishing of Jewish religious life in our country, correlates with good relations between Russia and Israel. Russians and Israelis understand each other well; we have a lot of similarities in our way of thinking and preferences.”
Still, over the past couple of years, Russia’s war in Ukraine has tested Russian-Israeli ties, while military and political priorities have driven Moscow much closer to Israel’s main foe, Iran. The delicate, carefully negotiated arrangements that keep Russian and Israeli forces from clashing on the tense battleground of Syria have all but broken down, experts say.
And Russia’s call for a cease-fire in Gaza failed in the United Nations Security Council on Oct. 16 in part because it declined to describe the actions of Hamas as “terrorism” – a baseline requirement for Israel.
While the basic relationship between the two countries is likely to survive present tensions, analysts say, political ties are definitely chilling.
“It’s a bit strange to me that the attack of Hamas was not condemned immediately by Russia,” says Lyudmila Samarskaya, a Middle East expert at IMEMO, an official foreign policy research institute in Moscow. “Perhaps this can be understood in the context of the general confrontation between Russia and the West, which overshadows everything else these days. But Russia’s basic policy remains unchanged.”
Russia has also maintained official relations with Hamas as well as the Palestinian Authority over the years. About 20% of Russia’s population is Muslim, and some religious charities have been publicly raising money to provide humanitarian aid to Gaza, something the Russian government officially supports.
But outright backing for the violence committed by Hamas on Oct. 7 has been sparse. The main exception appears to be Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov, who issued a statement of support for the Palestinian territories after the massacres and offered to send Chechen “peacekeeping forces” to mediate between Israel and Hamas.
“Kadyrov’s reaction is a bit of an exception to the general Russian attitude,” says Ms. Samarskaya. “Such one-sidedness does not coincide with the official Russian position, nor with what most people think.”
“Not our business”
Sergei Markov, a former Kremlin adviser, suggests that Russia hopes to take part in a peace settlement at some point and wants to maintain an appearance of impartiality.
“Russia didn’t condemn Hamas directly because both sides are using terrorist methods according to the Russian point of view, and there is no reason to single out one side,” he says. “Russia is ready to be a mediator when it might be necessary, and that means keeping a balance.”
Few analysts see that as a realistic possibility, as the defeat of Russia’s U.N. resolution would seem to confirm. Indeed, the only poll to appear after the Oct. 7 events, an unscientific survey done by the Moscow daily newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda, found almost a quarter of respondents leery of any Russian involvement in the conflict.
“Russia has nothing to do with this conflict, and we do not need it,” one reader commented.
Denis Volkov, head of the independent Levada Center, says that the cumulative results of past polls suggest that most Russians don’t take a side. “About half the population is indifferent, with maybe a bit more supporting Israel. But when asked who is to blame, the majority of people answer that it’s the USA,” he says.
Mr. Klimov, the senator, says that despite its involvement in Syria and growing ties with Iran, Russia would probably prefer to sit this conflict out.
“For much of Russian society, this conflict is perceived as happening far from us,” he says. “We really have enough concerns close to home, without looking for distant problems to get involved with. I don’t mean to say that we are indifferent to what’s happening, just that there’s not much we can do about it.”
https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2023/10/fre ... hamas-war/
PUTIN SHOOTS DOWN PROPOSALS TO LOWER THRESHOLD FOR USE OF NUKES
OCTOBER 29, 2023 2 COMMENTS
Russia Matters, 10/6/23
Putin has shot down proposals to lower the threshold for nuclear weapons use in Russia’s doctrinal documents, but called for Russia to de-ratify the CTBT. When asked by Sergei Karaganov at the Valdai Club meeting on Oct. 5 whether Russia should “modify the doctrine on using nuclear weapons, lowering the nuclear threshold,” Putin said: “[T]here are two reasons stipulated in the Russian Military Doctrine for the possible use of nuclear weapons by Russia. The first is the use of nuclear weapons against us, which would entail a so-called retaliatory strike … The second reason for the potential use of these weapons is an existential threat to the Russian state.” “Do we need to change this? Why would we? Everything can be changed, but I just don’t see that we need to,” Putin asserted. While rejecting a lower threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, Putin made clear in his Valdai remarks that he was not going to abandon nuclear saber-rattling altogether. “The United States signed the treaty [Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty] without ratifying it, while we both signed and ratified it. As a matter of principle, we can offer a tit-for-tat response in our relations with the United States,” he said. Putin’s decision to stick to the doctrinal language on the conditions for first use is remarkable, given that he has previously said Russia can initiate a nuclear strike when its “territorial integrity,” “sovereignty,” and the “safety of our people” are threatened (none of these threats are explicitly identified in Russia’s military doctrine as conditions for use of nuclear weapons). That the Russian commander-in-chief has publicly rejected the suggestion by Karaganov—who sits on the scientific council of the Russian Security Council, which is run by Putin’s hawkish confidant, Nikolai Patrushev—to lower the threshold, on paper, may also indicate Putin’s decision to conclude internal debates on this issue. That said, Putin’s call for de-ratifying the CTBT indicates that, at the very least, he is not going to stop invoking Russia’s nuclear weapons in his attempts to coerce the West. In the run-up to this call, Russian officials and pundits had made a number of statements on resuming nuclear tests, while top officials visited a former nuclear test site, where construction has been going on, in what, in hindsight, looks like a coordinated campaign meant to prepare internal and external audiences for Putin’s announcement on CTBT.
See full transcript of Putin’s remarks at the Valdai Conference on 10/5/23 here. http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/72444
https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2023/10/put ... -of-nukes/
'coerce' the West? Really? I seems to me that 'coercion' has been a one way street these past thirty plus years. Who surrounds who?
Russia today
Re: Russia today
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
HOW RUSSIAN DEMOCRACY WORKS – ROSNEFT FIGHTS GAZPROM IN PARLIAMENT OVER TAX
By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with
According to the rules-based order of the US and allied states now fighting their wars against Russia, Palestine, Syria, Iran, China, and North Korea, the enemy states are dictatorships by single men ruling by decree without elected legislatures, imposed by armed forces and propaganda apparatus using by terror methods. In a nutshell, the democracies versus the fascists.
In fact the opposite is the case. The US, France, and Germany are more efficiently fascist than the United Kingdom, but this is a matter of degrees. Since October 7, Israel has become more visibly fascist at the same time as it is proving less efficient, compared to its past in reputation and in fact.
When it comes to performance on the battlefield, where the fascist states must dominate in order to continue to subject their domestic populations, the power of their arms, money, propaganda is being defeated. This is happening in circumstances when the gender (he/she/they) of the dictatorship is as irrelevant as the mental competence. President Emmanuel Macron is a case of the first; President Joseph Biden a case of the second.
Every so often in the Russian press it is possible to catch a glimpse of how the domestic democracy really works. Of course, such glimpses and snippets don’t make political science, nor antidotes to the fascist ideology of the US side. They are also examples of how Russian money talks when it is at home.
Here is the touchstone question in the history of all the democracies of the west, and, incidentally, the trigger of many of their civil wars and wars of independence – who should pay tax to the state, who should decide, and how much?
During Boris Yeltsin’s regime there was a giveaway of assets, with an additional free-for-all concession scheme to foreigners investing in mining and oil and gas drilling. There were as many names for these schemes as there was ingenuity in the stealing.
To put a stop to that, recover revenues for the state treasury, and transfer the benefits from foreign corporations to local oligarchs, the individual and special-interest favouritism of the 1990s was replaced with two across-the-board or gross taxes – one on production out of the ground and a second on oil, gas and minerals exported over the border. The first of these has been called the Mineral Extraction Tax; MET for short in English, NDPI in Russian.
Since 2019 the Finance Ministry has been transferring its tax collection priority from export duty collection to MET. In the new trading blocs created by US and NATO economic warfare, this also protects the secrecy of Russian export and shipping transactions. Sanctions war is the final nail in the Yeltsin coffin of production sharing agreements (PSA) and other tax favours for western corporations.
Naturally, the Chinese interest in understanding and negotiating terms of investment and trade with Russian miners and oil and gas suppliers has grown. This is an example of recent research by the think tank of the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) to assist future calculations of investment margin and net profitability in projects CNPC is negotiating with its Russian counterparts, Gazprom, Rosneft, and Novatek.
The CNPC researchers express the purpose of their study more discreetly, and also more politically — “to investigate instability of tax regime which is one of the main concerns for decision making in asset acquisition…to reduce aboveground risk of unstable fiscal regime and boost international investment in Russia. Also, [to make] key suggestions…for international investors who are interested in oil and gas assets in Russia.” Here is their diagram of how MET operates in the larger Russian treasury scheme of revenue collection:
RUSSIAN TAX REGIME FOR OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION
DD&A = Depreciation, Depletion and Amortisation, the accounting scheme allowed by the state as a tax offset or deduction in the calculation of property and profit tax. Source: https://hal.science/
A Polish think-tank interpretation of the transfer of tax collection from export duty to MET, the so-called tax manoeuvre, can be read here. In this self-serving history of taxation during and after the Yeltsin regime, this International Monetary Fund (IMF) staff paper noticed that “the underlying problem was a lack of political will to take tough actions against politically well-connected taxpayers”.
In this news report by Octagon, published last week in Moscow, the current political contest is analysed between Gazprom and Rosneft, the leading state-controlled energy corporations. The principals named in the contest are Alexei Miller, chief executive of Gazprom, Igor Sechin, his counterpart at Rosneft, and Vyacheslav Volodin, Speaker of the State Duma.
For the back story archive on Miller, click to open; for Sechin, click; and Volodin here.
The one decision-making, power-wielding name missing from this Russian report is the name which is never missing from the foreign media – Vladimir Putin.
The Russian text has been translated verbatim without cuts or editing. Illustrations and captions have been added for clarification.
Left, Igor Sechion; right, Alexei Miller. Source: https://octagon.media/
A Harvard University propaganda outlet has attempted to discredit Octagon’s reporting as state controlled with the objective of “discrediting stories from independent newsrooms, criticizing protestors, or vilifying the Ukrainian government.”
October 26, 2023
ROSNEFT CALLS FOR DEPRIVING GAZPROM OF TAX PREFERENCE
By Anna Tavolga
The downside of the unplanned increase in the wholesale gas tariffs scheduled for the next two years will be an increase in the tax on the extraction of natural resources. The corresponding bill was adopted by the State Duma in the first reading on October 17. According to the legislators, the measure will allow replenishing the budget by withdrawing additional revenues from gas producers which they will receive from indexing.
However, the increase in the mineral extraction tax for Gazprom will be lower than for the other gas producing companies. The head of Rosneft, Igor Sechin, has called for correcting the mistake. Will the regulators and legislators acknowledge this?
A new round of confrontation between Gazprom and Rosneft in the gas field was outlined this week. Three days after the adoption of the bill providing for an increase in the MET for gas from 2024, State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin received a letter from Igor Sechin. In his appeal, referred to by Kommersant, the chief executive Officer of Rosneft points to the ‘disparity’ that will arise in the event of the adoption of the law.
Judging by the figures given in the bill, the discrepancy is quite significant. The MET rate is planned to be increased by a special coefficient (Kkg) introduced this year. From January 2023 to June 30, 2024, this is to be 134, from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 – 285, from July 1, 2025 – 305.*
The document provides that the Kkg indicator for the owners of the Unified Gas Supply System will be set in the first half of 2024 at 303, for independent companies, 555, in the second half of 2024. The coefficient for Gazprom will then grow to 454, for independent companies to 706. From January 1, 2025, for Gazprom it will be 428, for independent companies, 779; in the second half of 2025, the state monopolist will receive a coefficient of 448, independent companies, 799. Finally, from January 1, 2026, the Kkg will be 464 and 863, respectively.
As a compromise to eliminate the disparity, Igor Sechin proposes to increase the MET coefficient for everyone to the level provided for Gazprom.
The head of Rosneft sees the main injustice in the fact that his company supplies gas only to the domestic market, mainly to power plants. Indexation, as previously reported by Octagon, will not affect the electric power companies at first, which means that Rosneft will not be able to become its beneficiary [by raising its gas price]. At the same time, the MET will be increased for all gas produced.
In addition to equalising all gas producers in terms of adjusting the mineral extraction tax, Sechin puts forward the idea of imposing an additional tax on companies which receive increased revenues from their gas supplies to premium export markets. In this not so veiled form, the proposal would compensate with additional tax revenue for the state treasury.
The main goal of adjusting tax legislation in its various aspects is to increase budget revenues – this has been repeatedly declared by officials. In the first nine months of this year, the federal budget received 34.5 percent (5.6 trillion rubles) less oil and gas revenues compared with the same period of last year. From the proposed increase in the mineral extraction tax, the Ministry of Finance is expecting additional revenues to the treasury in the amount of over a quarter of a trillion rubles for 2024-2026.
Source: https://www.taxnotes.com/f
Read more: https://www.forbes.com/
Source: https://www.taxnotes.com/
At the same time, the agency provides forecast estimates of the revenue that gas producers will receive from the indexation increase in tariffs. In particular, Deputy Finance Minister Alexei Sazanov has noted that Gazprom’s revenue from the increase in gas tariffs in 2024-2026 will amount to about 120-130 billion rubles per year.
It is claimed that by adjusting the MET according to the new legislative amendment, more than 90 percent of these funds will be withdrawn.
The State Duma Committee on the Budget explained the difference in the adjustment for Gazprom and other manufacturers by the fact that it is necessary to equalise the economic conditions of conducting business activities of various enterprises. If we proceed from the volume of sales, Gazprom’s contribution to the replenishment of the budget will indeed be higher than that of other companies, but how fair in actual fact the preferential taxation scheme is a moot point – power politics is what is visible here, not logic.
‘The introduction of different rules for manufacturers of the same product is a violation of the antimonopoly legislation. It is not clear what kind of alignment of conditions we are talking about. Are Gazprom’s costs higher? The corporation enjoys a monopoly right to pipeline exports, owns the pipe monopolistically so the independent producers must pay for access to it, while production conditions in the Far North and new fields are harder for the independents; that is, they incur heavier costs. But for all that, Gazprom is protected by the halo of a state system–forming company,’ Leonid Krutakov comments to Octagon; Krutakov is Associate Professor of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation.
Left, Alexei Sazanov; right, Leonid Krutakov.
According to the expert, in fact, the amount of mineral extraction tax for independent producers will be about twice as much as for the gas monopoly. It follows from this that if 90 percent of the profits to come from the gas price increase are withdrawn from Gazprom, then the rest will have to give more than 100 percent to the state.
‘That is to say, Gazprom will be able to raise its prices by only 10 percent, and independent producers will suffer additional losses – they will not just compensate for the increase in tariffs, but they will also have to pay the Ministry of Finance,’ Krutakov continues.
As a result, this measure, if implemented in its current form, will lead to an increase in prices, from which the consumer will suffer first of all, the analyst believes.
Taking into account the Russian climate, where heat and energy costs per unit of product significantly exceed European ones, a drop in domestic production is inevitable. The implementation of promising projects which Rosneft and Novatek are engaged in is also under threat.
Krutakov believes that the adoption of the controversial bill in the first reading was the result of lobbying efforts by Gazprom’s management, but now the intervention of the head of Rosneft creates a certain intrigue.
‘Will Igor Sechin’s requests be heard? Let me remind you that he is the executive secretary of the presidential commission on the development strategy of the fuel and energy sector. Accordingly, from the outcome of this story we will see whose political resource is the stronger,’Krutakov is convinced.
A session at the Kremlin of the Commission on the Strategy for the Development of the Fuel and Energy Industry, October 27, 2015, at which President Putin acknowledged the commission chairman, Igor Sechin. Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/
The last session of the commission reported by the Kremlin was on August 27, 2018; source: http://en.kremlin.ru/
The last record of Sechin discussing MET with Putin was at a one-on-one meeting they had on April 1, 2019. Putin asked if “the budget manoeuvre, an increase in the mineral extraction tax (MET) and, consequently, the so-called reverse excise tax? Is this an effective mechanism?” Sechin avoided a direct answer. “We are working with the Government on this. The Finance Ministry is looking for sources to implement this reverse tax mechanism, the so-called adjustment coefficient (ratio). But we are keeping the prices down”.
The first signals from the authorities have already arrived. On October 25, Alexei Sazanov responded to Rosneft’s appeal. He said that the Government has also received proposals from the oil company and the issue is being worked out. ‘The material balance is being looked at in order to make a final decision. Now all this is being studied,’ the official said.
The date of consideration of the bill in the second reading, judging by the information on the document page on the State Duma website, has not yet been determined.
[*] Kkg=corrected coefficient of gas. This is the resulting sum of a complex calculation of production and price variables, including amount of reserves, reserve depletion, region of production, complexity of extraction technology, viscosity and other characteristics of the oil, etc. For an outline of how the coefficient formula is calculated, read[/i]https://bcs-express.ru/novosti-i-analit ... eftianikov
https://johnhelmer.net/how-russian-demo ... more-88758
*******
Civil society and assistance to the North Military District
October 31, 15:51
Civil society and assistance to the North Military District
On November 8 at 13:00 in the conference hall of the Aurora Information Agency (Moscow, Makarenko St., 2/21, building 2, entrance 4) a round table will be held on the topic “Civil society and assistance to the North Military District”, moderated which will be presented by military expert Vladimir Orlov and politician, candidate of economic sciences Alexey Lapushkin.
Representatives of volunteer associations, companies producing ammunition, paraphernalia and high-tech equipment, invited experts will talk about aspects of their work during the special military operation. In addition, participants will develop joint solutions that will help consolidate the civil forces of society and improve the process of collecting humanitarian aid.
During the event, the following questions will be discussed:
– What difficulties do volunteers and volunteer associations that provide humanitarian assistance face? How do you get information about what you need?
– Factors contributing to the consolidation of society during the Northern Military District: why do some citizens of the Russian Federation not participate in helping the front?
– How do companies producing ammunition, paraphernalia and high-tech equipment cope with market changes? (rate of production, difficulties with components, fragmentation of requests, and so on)
– Working for the future: how can we improve the process of collecting humanitarian aid today?
– Is a federal platform needed to process requests from SBO participants? Why is there currently no unified form for collecting information about the assistance needed?
Invited participants:
Drones:
1. Group of Companies "Unmanned Systems" (LLC "Finco")
2. Group of Companies "Geoscan"
3. JSC "Concern VKO "Almaz-Antey"
4. JSC "Enix"
5. LLC "ADA UAV"
6. JSC "Aerokon"
Antidrone:
1. Kaspersky Antidrone
2. LLC "Stupor"
3. JSC SPC "ELVIS"
4. DISCOVERY ENGINEERING, Antidronetech.ru
5. JSC "YUMIRS"
Manufacturers of body armor:
1. D.Skiff
2. LLC "Broneplast" »
3. ATLAS LLC
4. ARS Arma
5. RusAr
Download press release http://veche-info.ru/wp-content/uploads ... 1.2023.pdf
For participation issues and accreditation:
- please contact us by email press@proeventmsk.ru
http://veche-info.ru/news/13357 - zinc
If there is anything interesting about this event, I will post it separately.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8738569.html
Google Translator
*******
‘Financial Times’: the stench of propaganda in today’s coverage of the Makhachkala riots is overwhelming
This morning’s Financial Times online issue of Europe Express compiled by Brussels bureau chief Henry Foy directs readers to an article about violence at the Dagestan airport of Makhachkala with the following remarkable and totally false words: “…our Russia team explains the antisemitic violence wracking the country.” Wracking the country?
The Russians have a law designating those who operate against the interests of the country whose passport they carry and in the interests of a foreign state. The term inoagenty is a mark of opprobrium that brings with it legal restrictions. This badge of dishonor should now be handed out to the FT journalists Max Seddon and Polina Ivanova, whose disgraceful four pages of lies and distortions based on press releases from the U.S. State Department are being run under the eye-catching headline “What anti-Semitic attacks in Dagestan say about Vladimir Putin’s Russia.” Contrary to what their editors think these journalists are accomplishing, the article is very telling about the death wish of UK elites, because time and again they are painting targets on their backs for the Russian missile programmers.
The lies?
First, that Putin never has criticized the Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians of 7 October. He has spoken out repeatedly against terrorism, making reference to Russia’s own domestic experience with this plague in the Caucasus in the 1990s when it was fanned by U.S. intelligence operatives. He extended his condolences to the bereaved in Israel.
Second, that Putin’s mention of outside forces, namely the United States acting with and through the Ukrainian intelligence services as those responsible for the riot in Makhachkala had no basis in fact. This is an outrageous lie because in a video interview published in Ukraine the founder of the Telegram channel that disseminated instructions to the Dagestan rioters, Ilya Ponomaryov, a former Duma deputy who treasonously went over to the other side and lives in Kiev, proudly took responsibility for this would-be pogrom. It was planned and carried out precisely so that propagandists at the FT and other Western mainstream media would assert what Seddon and Ivanova are insinuating, that Russia today is the same anti-Semitic, pogrom sponsoring land as Black Hundreds infested tsarist Russia of 120 years ago.
Vladimir Putin has made every effort to ensure that tolerance reigns among the hundreds of ethnic groups and dozens of religious faiths that constitute the Russian Federation. To say otherwise, as Seddon and Ivanova do, is to engage in vile propaganda.
Since religious fundamentalism seems to be the order of the day, I will take the plunge and set down my own special prayers: that these journalists get the company of John Kirby and other U.S. miscreants in the special zone in hell reserved for dishonest fomenters of war. Oh yes, there surely will be a nearby padded cell for the criminally insane, with reserved places for Bibi Netanyahu and Isaac Herzog. For those who have not been following closely, Herzog also has gone on air denouncing Russia for the Dagestan “pogrom.”
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2023
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2023/10/31/ ... rwhelming/
********
OCTOBER 30, 2023 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR
US seeks strategic dialogue with Russia
Almost four weeks into Hamas’ attack on Israel, Russia is in no hurry to exploit the Biden administration’s quandary over the collapse of Middle East security. The western media was unanimous that Russia was waiting in the wings to seize the opportunity once the US took its eye off the ball in Ukraine. However, no such thing happened.
Ukraine war is on autopilot. The compass has been set, the dice is cast and the calculus is holding steady with regard to the strategic objectives set by President Vladimir Putin in February last year. Russia senses that it has gained the upper hand in the war and that is irreversible.
Ukraine’s counteroffensive has failed and the fighting is presently restricted to two sectors of the frontline, as Russian forces strengthen the security of the Donetsk region and seek to regain control of territories up north in the borderlands of Donbass and Kharkov region from where they retreated for tactical reasons last September and October.
Yet, Moscow has not begun its grand offensive, as many had predicted. One plausible explanation is that Moscow is watching the maelstrom sweeping through the Middle East. Moscow is particularly sensitive about any spillover into Syria.
With an eye on the formidable US naval build-up in Eastern Mediterranean with the deployment of two aircraft carrier groups, President Vladimir Putin has publicised that Russian jets equipped with hypersonic Kinzhal missiles are roaming the skies above the Black Sea, which can strike targets 1000 kms away at Mach 9 speed, which no existing missile defence system can intercept. Suffice to say, the war in Ukraine remains attritional.
Curiously, Russia conducted a simulated nuclear strike in a drill on Wednesday overseen by Putin, hours after Russian parliament voted to rescind the country’s ratification of the global nuclear test ban treaty (CTBT). The drill needs to be seen in the broader context of global strategic stability. A Kremlin statement said, “The purpose of the training exercise was to check the level of preparedness of military command bodies, as well as the skill of the leadership and operational personnel in managing the troops (forces) under their command.” Everything, however, adds up in these extraordinary times.
At its most obvious level, the Palestine-Israel conflict is a manifestation of the growing imbalance in the existing system of international relations. New wars are emerging; longstanding conflicts are mutating (eg., Nagorno-Karabakh). Last week, Pakistan bracketed Palestine and Kashmir as the UN’s unfinished business in the post-colonial era. North Korea and Iran are flash points that have no military solution.
In the months ahead, without doubt, Washington will continue to provide Israel with military and diplomatic support but an extended Israeli operation lasting months in Gaza will mean dispersal of US resources that might be needed in other theatres. The conflict in Gaza underscores the imperative for a rethink in the US’ notions of global hegemony. The fact remains that the US, despite its self-proclaimed status as the “Indispensable Nation” (Madeline Albright) and the guarantor of “rules-based order,” failed to prevent the latest eruption of conflict in the Middle East.
Arguably, therefore, the latest US proposal for a systematic resumption of strategic dialogue with Russia can be seen as a sign of positive thinking. Unsurprisingly, Moscow has displayed a studied indifference to the US proposal. But that needn’t be taken as the last word. Historically, Soviet-American strategic dialogue brought on board into the agenda all major issues and most minor issues affecting international security.
The big question, therefore, is the timing of the US proposal. Against the backdrop of the gathering storms in the Middle East, the Biden Administration probably seeks to calm the nerves by proposing talks with Russia on global strategic balance, since the guardrails in arms control no longer exist. This is one thing.
At any rate, Russia’s “neutrality” in a Middle East conflict could also be a consideration. Equally, Western leaderships understand that the war against Russia is practically lost — although they will not admit it publicly — and engagement with Russia is needed.
Again, although the US has provided Israel with significant military and diplomatic support and keep influencing the latter not to escalate the conflict, there are variables in the situation and any big conflagration in the Middle East will require a massive concentration of material and financial resources that are limited even for a superpower, since there are other unresolved problems in the world, too.
The breakdown of trust in the Russian-American ties hurts the US interests. Fundamentally, it must also be understood that what Moscow seeks even today after nearly 20 months of battling NATO and the US in Ukraine’s killing fields is a sustained engagement with Washington and a willingness to accommodate mutual interests.
On its part, Russia is conducting itself as a responsible power vis-a-vis the crisis in Gaza. There is no shred of evidence to show that Russia has acted as a “spoiler”. On the contrary, Moscow has been projecting its credentials as a potential peacemaker who enjoys good relations with all key players — Israel, Hamas, Iran and other regional states alike.
In fact, President Biden’s recent remarks on the Gaza situation bring the US position rather close to Russia’s. Biden read out the following from a prepared text at a joint press conference with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of Australia:
“Israel has the right and, I would add, responsibility to respond to the slaughter of their people. And we will ensure Israel has what it needs to defend itself against these terrorists. That’s a guarantee…
“But that does not lessen the need for — to operate and align with the laws of war for Israeli — it has to do everything in its power — Israel has to do everything in its power, as difficult as it is, to protect innocent civilians. And it’s difficult. I also want take a moment to look ahead toward the future that we seek.
“Israelis and Palestinians equally deserve to live side by side in safety, dignity, and peace. And there’s no going back to the status quo as it stood on October the 6th. That means ensuring Hamas can no longer terrorise Israel and use Palestinian civilians as human shields.
“It also means that when this crisis is over, there has to be a vision of what comes next. And in our view, it has to be a two-state solution.”
Putin couldn’t have put this across differently. There is a sense of expectation in Moscow that in the emergent conditions in regional security, the US and its allies will “reconsider their notions of defeating Russia in the Ukraine conflict at any cost” — as an establishment think tanker wrote in the Kremlin-funded RT last week.
Trust is lacking, he concluded, “compromises without the full consideration of Russian interests” are difficult to reach, but “a pivotal stage in the (world) order … is taking shape before our eyes.”
https://www.indianpunchline.com/us-seek ... th-russia/
Well, I dunno, but that's a career diplomat for ya...
By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with
According to the rules-based order of the US and allied states now fighting their wars against Russia, Palestine, Syria, Iran, China, and North Korea, the enemy states are dictatorships by single men ruling by decree without elected legislatures, imposed by armed forces and propaganda apparatus using by terror methods. In a nutshell, the democracies versus the fascists.
In fact the opposite is the case. The US, France, and Germany are more efficiently fascist than the United Kingdom, but this is a matter of degrees. Since October 7, Israel has become more visibly fascist at the same time as it is proving less efficient, compared to its past in reputation and in fact.
When it comes to performance on the battlefield, where the fascist states must dominate in order to continue to subject their domestic populations, the power of their arms, money, propaganda is being defeated. This is happening in circumstances when the gender (he/she/they) of the dictatorship is as irrelevant as the mental competence. President Emmanuel Macron is a case of the first; President Joseph Biden a case of the second.
Every so often in the Russian press it is possible to catch a glimpse of how the domestic democracy really works. Of course, such glimpses and snippets don’t make political science, nor antidotes to the fascist ideology of the US side. They are also examples of how Russian money talks when it is at home.
Here is the touchstone question in the history of all the democracies of the west, and, incidentally, the trigger of many of their civil wars and wars of independence – who should pay tax to the state, who should decide, and how much?
During Boris Yeltsin’s regime there was a giveaway of assets, with an additional free-for-all concession scheme to foreigners investing in mining and oil and gas drilling. There were as many names for these schemes as there was ingenuity in the stealing.
To put a stop to that, recover revenues for the state treasury, and transfer the benefits from foreign corporations to local oligarchs, the individual and special-interest favouritism of the 1990s was replaced with two across-the-board or gross taxes – one on production out of the ground and a second on oil, gas and minerals exported over the border. The first of these has been called the Mineral Extraction Tax; MET for short in English, NDPI in Russian.
Since 2019 the Finance Ministry has been transferring its tax collection priority from export duty collection to MET. In the new trading blocs created by US and NATO economic warfare, this also protects the secrecy of Russian export and shipping transactions. Sanctions war is the final nail in the Yeltsin coffin of production sharing agreements (PSA) and other tax favours for western corporations.
Naturally, the Chinese interest in understanding and negotiating terms of investment and trade with Russian miners and oil and gas suppliers has grown. This is an example of recent research by the think tank of the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) to assist future calculations of investment margin and net profitability in projects CNPC is negotiating with its Russian counterparts, Gazprom, Rosneft, and Novatek.
The CNPC researchers express the purpose of their study more discreetly, and also more politically — “to investigate instability of tax regime which is one of the main concerns for decision making in asset acquisition…to reduce aboveground risk of unstable fiscal regime and boost international investment in Russia. Also, [to make] key suggestions…for international investors who are interested in oil and gas assets in Russia.” Here is their diagram of how MET operates in the larger Russian treasury scheme of revenue collection:
RUSSIAN TAX REGIME FOR OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION
DD&A = Depreciation, Depletion and Amortisation, the accounting scheme allowed by the state as a tax offset or deduction in the calculation of property and profit tax. Source: https://hal.science/
A Polish think-tank interpretation of the transfer of tax collection from export duty to MET, the so-called tax manoeuvre, can be read here. In this self-serving history of taxation during and after the Yeltsin regime, this International Monetary Fund (IMF) staff paper noticed that “the underlying problem was a lack of political will to take tough actions against politically well-connected taxpayers”.
In this news report by Octagon, published last week in Moscow, the current political contest is analysed between Gazprom and Rosneft, the leading state-controlled energy corporations. The principals named in the contest are Alexei Miller, chief executive of Gazprom, Igor Sechin, his counterpart at Rosneft, and Vyacheslav Volodin, Speaker of the State Duma.
For the back story archive on Miller, click to open; for Sechin, click; and Volodin here.
The one decision-making, power-wielding name missing from this Russian report is the name which is never missing from the foreign media – Vladimir Putin.
The Russian text has been translated verbatim without cuts or editing. Illustrations and captions have been added for clarification.
Left, Igor Sechion; right, Alexei Miller. Source: https://octagon.media/
A Harvard University propaganda outlet has attempted to discredit Octagon’s reporting as state controlled with the objective of “discrediting stories from independent newsrooms, criticizing protestors, or vilifying the Ukrainian government.”
October 26, 2023
ROSNEFT CALLS FOR DEPRIVING GAZPROM OF TAX PREFERENCE
By Anna Tavolga
The downside of the unplanned increase in the wholesale gas tariffs scheduled for the next two years will be an increase in the tax on the extraction of natural resources. The corresponding bill was adopted by the State Duma in the first reading on October 17. According to the legislators, the measure will allow replenishing the budget by withdrawing additional revenues from gas producers which they will receive from indexing.
However, the increase in the mineral extraction tax for Gazprom will be lower than for the other gas producing companies. The head of Rosneft, Igor Sechin, has called for correcting the mistake. Will the regulators and legislators acknowledge this?
A new round of confrontation between Gazprom and Rosneft in the gas field was outlined this week. Three days after the adoption of the bill providing for an increase in the MET for gas from 2024, State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin received a letter from Igor Sechin. In his appeal, referred to by Kommersant, the chief executive Officer of Rosneft points to the ‘disparity’ that will arise in the event of the adoption of the law.
Judging by the figures given in the bill, the discrepancy is quite significant. The MET rate is planned to be increased by a special coefficient (Kkg) introduced this year. From January 2023 to June 30, 2024, this is to be 134, from July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 – 285, from July 1, 2025 – 305.*
The document provides that the Kkg indicator for the owners of the Unified Gas Supply System will be set in the first half of 2024 at 303, for independent companies, 555, in the second half of 2024. The coefficient for Gazprom will then grow to 454, for independent companies to 706. From January 1, 2025, for Gazprom it will be 428, for independent companies, 779; in the second half of 2025, the state monopolist will receive a coefficient of 448, independent companies, 799. Finally, from January 1, 2026, the Kkg will be 464 and 863, respectively.
As a compromise to eliminate the disparity, Igor Sechin proposes to increase the MET coefficient for everyone to the level provided for Gazprom.
The head of Rosneft sees the main injustice in the fact that his company supplies gas only to the domestic market, mainly to power plants. Indexation, as previously reported by Octagon, will not affect the electric power companies at first, which means that Rosneft will not be able to become its beneficiary [by raising its gas price]. At the same time, the MET will be increased for all gas produced.
In addition to equalising all gas producers in terms of adjusting the mineral extraction tax, Sechin puts forward the idea of imposing an additional tax on companies which receive increased revenues from their gas supplies to premium export markets. In this not so veiled form, the proposal would compensate with additional tax revenue for the state treasury.
The main goal of adjusting tax legislation in its various aspects is to increase budget revenues – this has been repeatedly declared by officials. In the first nine months of this year, the federal budget received 34.5 percent (5.6 trillion rubles) less oil and gas revenues compared with the same period of last year. From the proposed increase in the mineral extraction tax, the Ministry of Finance is expecting additional revenues to the treasury in the amount of over a quarter of a trillion rubles for 2024-2026.
Source: https://www.taxnotes.com/f
Read more: https://www.forbes.com/
Source: https://www.taxnotes.com/
At the same time, the agency provides forecast estimates of the revenue that gas producers will receive from the indexation increase in tariffs. In particular, Deputy Finance Minister Alexei Sazanov has noted that Gazprom’s revenue from the increase in gas tariffs in 2024-2026 will amount to about 120-130 billion rubles per year.
It is claimed that by adjusting the MET according to the new legislative amendment, more than 90 percent of these funds will be withdrawn.
The State Duma Committee on the Budget explained the difference in the adjustment for Gazprom and other manufacturers by the fact that it is necessary to equalise the economic conditions of conducting business activities of various enterprises. If we proceed from the volume of sales, Gazprom’s contribution to the replenishment of the budget will indeed be higher than that of other companies, but how fair in actual fact the preferential taxation scheme is a moot point – power politics is what is visible here, not logic.
‘The introduction of different rules for manufacturers of the same product is a violation of the antimonopoly legislation. It is not clear what kind of alignment of conditions we are talking about. Are Gazprom’s costs higher? The corporation enjoys a monopoly right to pipeline exports, owns the pipe monopolistically so the independent producers must pay for access to it, while production conditions in the Far North and new fields are harder for the independents; that is, they incur heavier costs. But for all that, Gazprom is protected by the halo of a state system–forming company,’ Leonid Krutakov comments to Octagon; Krutakov is Associate Professor of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation.
Left, Alexei Sazanov; right, Leonid Krutakov.
According to the expert, in fact, the amount of mineral extraction tax for independent producers will be about twice as much as for the gas monopoly. It follows from this that if 90 percent of the profits to come from the gas price increase are withdrawn from Gazprom, then the rest will have to give more than 100 percent to the state.
‘That is to say, Gazprom will be able to raise its prices by only 10 percent, and independent producers will suffer additional losses – they will not just compensate for the increase in tariffs, but they will also have to pay the Ministry of Finance,’ Krutakov continues.
As a result, this measure, if implemented in its current form, will lead to an increase in prices, from which the consumer will suffer first of all, the analyst believes.
Taking into account the Russian climate, where heat and energy costs per unit of product significantly exceed European ones, a drop in domestic production is inevitable. The implementation of promising projects which Rosneft and Novatek are engaged in is also under threat.
Krutakov believes that the adoption of the controversial bill in the first reading was the result of lobbying efforts by Gazprom’s management, but now the intervention of the head of Rosneft creates a certain intrigue.
‘Will Igor Sechin’s requests be heard? Let me remind you that he is the executive secretary of the presidential commission on the development strategy of the fuel and energy sector. Accordingly, from the outcome of this story we will see whose political resource is the stronger,’Krutakov is convinced.
A session at the Kremlin of the Commission on the Strategy for the Development of the Fuel and Energy Industry, October 27, 2015, at which President Putin acknowledged the commission chairman, Igor Sechin. Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/
The last session of the commission reported by the Kremlin was on August 27, 2018; source: http://en.kremlin.ru/
The last record of Sechin discussing MET with Putin was at a one-on-one meeting they had on April 1, 2019. Putin asked if “the budget manoeuvre, an increase in the mineral extraction tax (MET) and, consequently, the so-called reverse excise tax? Is this an effective mechanism?” Sechin avoided a direct answer. “We are working with the Government on this. The Finance Ministry is looking for sources to implement this reverse tax mechanism, the so-called adjustment coefficient (ratio). But we are keeping the prices down”.
The first signals from the authorities have already arrived. On October 25, Alexei Sazanov responded to Rosneft’s appeal. He said that the Government has also received proposals from the oil company and the issue is being worked out. ‘The material balance is being looked at in order to make a final decision. Now all this is being studied,’ the official said.
The date of consideration of the bill in the second reading, judging by the information on the document page on the State Duma website, has not yet been determined.
[*] Kkg=corrected coefficient of gas. This is the resulting sum of a complex calculation of production and price variables, including amount of reserves, reserve depletion, region of production, complexity of extraction technology, viscosity and other characteristics of the oil, etc. For an outline of how the coefficient formula is calculated, read[/i]https://bcs-express.ru/novosti-i-analit ... eftianikov
https://johnhelmer.net/how-russian-demo ... more-88758
*******
Civil society and assistance to the North Military District
October 31, 15:51
Civil society and assistance to the North Military District
On November 8 at 13:00 in the conference hall of the Aurora Information Agency (Moscow, Makarenko St., 2/21, building 2, entrance 4) a round table will be held on the topic “Civil society and assistance to the North Military District”, moderated which will be presented by military expert Vladimir Orlov and politician, candidate of economic sciences Alexey Lapushkin.
Representatives of volunteer associations, companies producing ammunition, paraphernalia and high-tech equipment, invited experts will talk about aspects of their work during the special military operation. In addition, participants will develop joint solutions that will help consolidate the civil forces of society and improve the process of collecting humanitarian aid.
During the event, the following questions will be discussed:
– What difficulties do volunteers and volunteer associations that provide humanitarian assistance face? How do you get information about what you need?
– Factors contributing to the consolidation of society during the Northern Military District: why do some citizens of the Russian Federation not participate in helping the front?
– How do companies producing ammunition, paraphernalia and high-tech equipment cope with market changes? (rate of production, difficulties with components, fragmentation of requests, and so on)
– Working for the future: how can we improve the process of collecting humanitarian aid today?
– Is a federal platform needed to process requests from SBO participants? Why is there currently no unified form for collecting information about the assistance needed?
Invited participants:
Drones:
1. Group of Companies "Unmanned Systems" (LLC "Finco")
2. Group of Companies "Geoscan"
3. JSC "Concern VKO "Almaz-Antey"
4. JSC "Enix"
5. LLC "ADA UAV"
6. JSC "Aerokon"
Antidrone:
1. Kaspersky Antidrone
2. LLC "Stupor"
3. JSC SPC "ELVIS"
4. DISCOVERY ENGINEERING, Antidronetech.ru
5. JSC "YUMIRS"
Manufacturers of body armor:
1. D.Skiff
2. LLC "Broneplast" »
3. ATLAS LLC
4. ARS Arma
5. RusAr
Download press release http://veche-info.ru/wp-content/uploads ... 1.2023.pdf
For participation issues and accreditation:
- please contact us by email press@proeventmsk.ru
http://veche-info.ru/news/13357 - zinc
If there is anything interesting about this event, I will post it separately.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8738569.html
Google Translator
*******
‘Financial Times’: the stench of propaganda in today’s coverage of the Makhachkala riots is overwhelming
This morning’s Financial Times online issue of Europe Express compiled by Brussels bureau chief Henry Foy directs readers to an article about violence at the Dagestan airport of Makhachkala with the following remarkable and totally false words: “…our Russia team explains the antisemitic violence wracking the country.” Wracking the country?
The Russians have a law designating those who operate against the interests of the country whose passport they carry and in the interests of a foreign state. The term inoagenty is a mark of opprobrium that brings with it legal restrictions. This badge of dishonor should now be handed out to the FT journalists Max Seddon and Polina Ivanova, whose disgraceful four pages of lies and distortions based on press releases from the U.S. State Department are being run under the eye-catching headline “What anti-Semitic attacks in Dagestan say about Vladimir Putin’s Russia.” Contrary to what their editors think these journalists are accomplishing, the article is very telling about the death wish of UK elites, because time and again they are painting targets on their backs for the Russian missile programmers.
The lies?
First, that Putin never has criticized the Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians of 7 October. He has spoken out repeatedly against terrorism, making reference to Russia’s own domestic experience with this plague in the Caucasus in the 1990s when it was fanned by U.S. intelligence operatives. He extended his condolences to the bereaved in Israel.
Second, that Putin’s mention of outside forces, namely the United States acting with and through the Ukrainian intelligence services as those responsible for the riot in Makhachkala had no basis in fact. This is an outrageous lie because in a video interview published in Ukraine the founder of the Telegram channel that disseminated instructions to the Dagestan rioters, Ilya Ponomaryov, a former Duma deputy who treasonously went over to the other side and lives in Kiev, proudly took responsibility for this would-be pogrom. It was planned and carried out precisely so that propagandists at the FT and other Western mainstream media would assert what Seddon and Ivanova are insinuating, that Russia today is the same anti-Semitic, pogrom sponsoring land as Black Hundreds infested tsarist Russia of 120 years ago.
Vladimir Putin has made every effort to ensure that tolerance reigns among the hundreds of ethnic groups and dozens of religious faiths that constitute the Russian Federation. To say otherwise, as Seddon and Ivanova do, is to engage in vile propaganda.
Since religious fundamentalism seems to be the order of the day, I will take the plunge and set down my own special prayers: that these journalists get the company of John Kirby and other U.S. miscreants in the special zone in hell reserved for dishonest fomenters of war. Oh yes, there surely will be a nearby padded cell for the criminally insane, with reserved places for Bibi Netanyahu and Isaac Herzog. For those who have not been following closely, Herzog also has gone on air denouncing Russia for the Dagestan “pogrom.”
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2023
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2023/10/31/ ... rwhelming/
********
OCTOBER 30, 2023 BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR
US seeks strategic dialogue with Russia
Almost four weeks into Hamas’ attack on Israel, Russia is in no hurry to exploit the Biden administration’s quandary over the collapse of Middle East security. The western media was unanimous that Russia was waiting in the wings to seize the opportunity once the US took its eye off the ball in Ukraine. However, no such thing happened.
Ukraine war is on autopilot. The compass has been set, the dice is cast and the calculus is holding steady with regard to the strategic objectives set by President Vladimir Putin in February last year. Russia senses that it has gained the upper hand in the war and that is irreversible.
Ukraine’s counteroffensive has failed and the fighting is presently restricted to two sectors of the frontline, as Russian forces strengthen the security of the Donetsk region and seek to regain control of territories up north in the borderlands of Donbass and Kharkov region from where they retreated for tactical reasons last September and October.
Yet, Moscow has not begun its grand offensive, as many had predicted. One plausible explanation is that Moscow is watching the maelstrom sweeping through the Middle East. Moscow is particularly sensitive about any spillover into Syria.
With an eye on the formidable US naval build-up in Eastern Mediterranean with the deployment of two aircraft carrier groups, President Vladimir Putin has publicised that Russian jets equipped with hypersonic Kinzhal missiles are roaming the skies above the Black Sea, which can strike targets 1000 kms away at Mach 9 speed, which no existing missile defence system can intercept. Suffice to say, the war in Ukraine remains attritional.
Curiously, Russia conducted a simulated nuclear strike in a drill on Wednesday overseen by Putin, hours after Russian parliament voted to rescind the country’s ratification of the global nuclear test ban treaty (CTBT). The drill needs to be seen in the broader context of global strategic stability. A Kremlin statement said, “The purpose of the training exercise was to check the level of preparedness of military command bodies, as well as the skill of the leadership and operational personnel in managing the troops (forces) under their command.” Everything, however, adds up in these extraordinary times.
At its most obvious level, the Palestine-Israel conflict is a manifestation of the growing imbalance in the existing system of international relations. New wars are emerging; longstanding conflicts are mutating (eg., Nagorno-Karabakh). Last week, Pakistan bracketed Palestine and Kashmir as the UN’s unfinished business in the post-colonial era. North Korea and Iran are flash points that have no military solution.
In the months ahead, without doubt, Washington will continue to provide Israel with military and diplomatic support but an extended Israeli operation lasting months in Gaza will mean dispersal of US resources that might be needed in other theatres. The conflict in Gaza underscores the imperative for a rethink in the US’ notions of global hegemony. The fact remains that the US, despite its self-proclaimed status as the “Indispensable Nation” (Madeline Albright) and the guarantor of “rules-based order,” failed to prevent the latest eruption of conflict in the Middle East.
Arguably, therefore, the latest US proposal for a systematic resumption of strategic dialogue with Russia can be seen as a sign of positive thinking. Unsurprisingly, Moscow has displayed a studied indifference to the US proposal. But that needn’t be taken as the last word. Historically, Soviet-American strategic dialogue brought on board into the agenda all major issues and most minor issues affecting international security.
The big question, therefore, is the timing of the US proposal. Against the backdrop of the gathering storms in the Middle East, the Biden Administration probably seeks to calm the nerves by proposing talks with Russia on global strategic balance, since the guardrails in arms control no longer exist. This is one thing.
At any rate, Russia’s “neutrality” in a Middle East conflict could also be a consideration. Equally, Western leaderships understand that the war against Russia is practically lost — although they will not admit it publicly — and engagement with Russia is needed.
Again, although the US has provided Israel with significant military and diplomatic support and keep influencing the latter not to escalate the conflict, there are variables in the situation and any big conflagration in the Middle East will require a massive concentration of material and financial resources that are limited even for a superpower, since there are other unresolved problems in the world, too.
The breakdown of trust in the Russian-American ties hurts the US interests. Fundamentally, it must also be understood that what Moscow seeks even today after nearly 20 months of battling NATO and the US in Ukraine’s killing fields is a sustained engagement with Washington and a willingness to accommodate mutual interests.
On its part, Russia is conducting itself as a responsible power vis-a-vis the crisis in Gaza. There is no shred of evidence to show that Russia has acted as a “spoiler”. On the contrary, Moscow has been projecting its credentials as a potential peacemaker who enjoys good relations with all key players — Israel, Hamas, Iran and other regional states alike.
In fact, President Biden’s recent remarks on the Gaza situation bring the US position rather close to Russia’s. Biden read out the following from a prepared text at a joint press conference with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of Australia:
“Israel has the right and, I would add, responsibility to respond to the slaughter of their people. And we will ensure Israel has what it needs to defend itself against these terrorists. That’s a guarantee…
“But that does not lessen the need for — to operate and align with the laws of war for Israeli — it has to do everything in its power — Israel has to do everything in its power, as difficult as it is, to protect innocent civilians. And it’s difficult. I also want take a moment to look ahead toward the future that we seek.
“Israelis and Palestinians equally deserve to live side by side in safety, dignity, and peace. And there’s no going back to the status quo as it stood on October the 6th. That means ensuring Hamas can no longer terrorise Israel and use Palestinian civilians as human shields.
“It also means that when this crisis is over, there has to be a vision of what comes next. And in our view, it has to be a two-state solution.”
Putin couldn’t have put this across differently. There is a sense of expectation in Moscow that in the emergent conditions in regional security, the US and its allies will “reconsider their notions of defeating Russia in the Ukraine conflict at any cost” — as an establishment think tanker wrote in the Kremlin-funded RT last week.
Trust is lacking, he concluded, “compromises without the full consideration of Russian interests” are difficult to reach, but “a pivotal stage in the (world) order … is taking shape before our eyes.”
https://www.indianpunchline.com/us-seek ... th-russia/
Well, I dunno, but that's a career diplomat for ya...
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
How Karelian schoolchildren are taught to mourn the Ukrainian Nazis
October 31, 18:23
How Karelian schoolchildren are taken using the “Pushkin map” to the place of execution of Ukrainian nationalists.
Today is October 30th. Day of Remembrance for Victims of Political Repression. And so I read on social networks: “The Central Library of Kostomuksha invites schoolchildren from grades 9 to 11 to attend a bus excursion to the memorial site “Sandarmokh” (Medvezhyegorsky district). The excursion is dedicated to the Day of Remembrance of Victims of Political Repression.
We invite you to visit with us the place of memory established in honor of the people who gave their lives in those terrible and tragic years, to get to know the history of this day and this place. Payment for the ticket using the Pushkin card."
It's a long drive from Kostomuksha to Sandarmokh. The Karelian village of Rugozero will be closer, but there is also a grave of victims of political terror there. In 1921, during the so-called Karelian adventure, the whites there shot Karelians - supporters of Soviet power. Don’t these people look like “victims of political repression”? Are these the “wrong” victims?
Well, good, because in the Medvezhyegorsk district itself there is not only Sandarmokh. According to historians, in May 1919, when the Medvezhya Gora station was occupied by interventionist and White Guard troops, it became the site of massacres. A White Guard counterintelligence department operated here, and a concentration camp was created for captured Red Army soldiers, Red partisans, communists and Soviet activists. Many dozens of them died in the Medvezhyegorsk dungeons. After the liberation of the station by the Red Army, the victims of the White Terror were buried in a mass grave on the street. Kommunarov. The total number of those buried is unknown. Or are these also “wrong” victims? Or just “unpromoted”?
Unlike Sandarmokh, whose name, through the efforts of liberal propaganda, was simply hammered into the heads of a huge mass of people. Despite the fact that there are simply no six, seven and a half, and even more so nine and a half thousand people executed in Sandarmokh. This is just the opinion of Yuri Dmitriev, a defendant in a criminal case under pedophile articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. But it is in vain to try to extract from his fans at least one piece of evidence of these figures. They are silent.
Somewhere in the vicinity of Medvezhyegorsk, the so-called “Solovetsky stage” was actually shot. Now they take people there using the “Pushkin card,” which seems to have been created for the cultural education of young people. Forgetting to tell the backstory of this sad event. And forgetting to tell you that the largest category at this stage was made up of Ukrainian nationalists!
Yes, in the second year of the SVO and the fight against Ukrainian fascism, Russian schoolchildren are taken to the place of execution of “the flower of Ukrainian nationalism.” Which became one of the symbols of Bandera propaganda:
Once again I will give several examples from the list of those executed in Sandarmokh:
- Stepan Rudnitsky, author of the now popular book in Ukraine “Why we want an independent Ukraine.” It states that Ukrainians are a kind of special race, which is better not to mix with all sorts of Muscovites and Poles, and they also need their own state and living space: “...On the other hand, combinations with Poles, Muscovites, Romanians, Turko-Tatars, Jews, etc.” Who doesn’t understand now why citizen Rudnitsky faced such a fate in 1937?
- Minister of Education of the UPR Anton Krushelnitsky, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the UPR Nikolai Lyubinsky and Vladimir Chekhovsky, chairman of the Council of People's Ministers of the Ukrainian People's Republic were also shot in Sandarmokh. According to biographers, during the latter’s premiership, the UPR government approved laws on the state language of Ukraine (Ukrainian only) and on the autocephaly of the UOC. The topics are very relevant and very pressing, as if not even 100 years have passed since that time...
- Gennady Leonidovich Sadovsky. In 1919, military commandant of Zhitomir. It’s easy to find information about the events in Zhitomir on the Internet: “When Zhitomir fell into the hands of the Petliurites, they robbed, raped, tortured and killed Jews again and again. They burst into Jewish apartments shouting “Down with the communists!” or “Come on women!” Every day crowds of men were escorted to the station and there they were shot.”
Yes, on the list of those executed in Sandarmokh there are a lot of Petliura officers who in one way or another participated in the genocide of the Jewish population. (I already wrote about this topic in the publication: What’s wrong with Yuri Shevchuk’s grandfather? | Alexander Stepanov | Zen (dzen.ru)
Well, at least now there should be an understanding that inflating the topic of repression, including Sandarmokh, was not necessary to preserve in memory of that part of the repressed who suffered in vain? This was necessary for the cultivation in the vastness of Eastern Europe of new forms of fascism, the most wretched in its provincialism. So you got it... And we still take excursions there according to the “Pushkin map”... And here is a photo from the event in Sandarmokh on August 5, 2023:
You need to understand that the history of not a single modern state has passed without political repression. And it does not, as we can see this in our days in various parts of the globe. In this regard,
imagine our country as some unique "Mordor" in world history, which simply destroyed its own citizens, very stupidly. Did the new society created in our country since 1917 have real and numerous enemies? Did they. Did they themselves want to organize mass repressions against their opponents? They wanted to, there is enough evidence for this.
Consequently, the Soviet government had every right to self-defense. After all, if the Whites had won, everything would have been much worse (See the publication HOW THE BOLSHEVIKS SAVED RUSSIA FROM BLOODY TERROR).
Do you want to celebrate October 30 as the day of remembrance for victims of political repression? Okay, but then on this day mention the many thousands of victims of the white terror, then don’t forget their graves. You can even start with those killed on Bloody Sunday...
Or is it impossible to do this for ideological reasons?
https://dzen.ru/media/id/61f99f5445d7cf ... 5192bb2829 - zinc
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8738896.html
Google Translator
*******
About dislike for superiors
No. 10/86.X.2023
The other day I read an article about how Russians don’t like their bosses.
What a discovery, however, was made by Russian sociologists. We expect further discoveries from them that snow is usually white and grass is green in spring. A good illustration that sociology without Marxism is a sterile registration of facts, nothing more. However, there is something to be said about this. I would like to note the following points:
1 . The quality of bourgeois management, judging by the results of this “research,” is below par.
The fact is that in a normal and competent management setting, the manager is, first of all, an informal authority for the subordinate. But subordinates en masse do not dream of dismissing an informal authority figure—the leader’s authority, competent and competent leadership, on the contrary, help them, without stress and wasting time, do work that they may not like and even hate, but at the same time they have to do it. But in an average bourgeois enterprise it is usually the other way around. The higher the manager, the lower his competence in the actual physical work processes. Because for lower and middle management positions, the bourgeoisie can still afford the luxury of hiring based on competence, but at higher levels, only based on loyalty, regardless of real competence in matters. And this is from the moment a managerial position begins, in which it is necessary to form budgets and manage financial flows. While you are simply executing budgets, you can be a specialist, but as soon as you need to make decisions to take money from the capitalist purse, the recruitment of people begins based on personal devotion and loyalty much more than on competence - “friends and acquaintances of the Rabbit”, the winners, are appointed directors in the office championship of intrigue, diligent butt lickers, and so on. This phenomenon is systemic and indestructible in capitalist conditions - negative selection is present in almost all industries and at all enterprises.
2 . The level of exploitation is quite high and is aggravated by the incompetence of management. A capitalist manager is not required to perfectly debug processes; he is required, first of all, to achieve financial results. The easiest way to financial results is to increase the exploitation of workers; it does not require investments or knowledge of processes. For example, let's take an area known to me - a warehouse. The warehouse does not ship well, there are a lot of defects, re-grades, shortages, customers are unhappy. If you look purely at the financial result, then there is a very simple way - to compensate for the shortfalls in the salaries of employees, to fire those who have made mistakes and shift their volumes to others. But a competent boss understands that the volumes have outgrown paper technology and nothing can be done with the available forces without automation. But warehouse automation will not give you a profit, and reducing losses can pay for itself in more than one month or even a year. Here, capitalism itself blocks “doing everything wisely” with the law of profit, and the fool boss happily goes with the flow. I observed when a boss with a diploma from the Institute of Physical Education and the corresponding intelligence covered shortfalls with fines for the fact that employees sat on a chair in the warehouse. All this does not add any love to the bosses.
3 . The humiliated position of the proletarian in the production system gives rise to a corresponding attitude towards him on the part of the bourgeoisie and management striving to join the bourgeoisie. Relations in capitalist production naturally have the character of systematic humiliation on the part of the boss. What is there to spare the feelings of some cog who is “in line behind the fence”? Old Western companies have already realized that such relationships in the workplace only harm the work process (it took them more than 200 years to do this), but even their regulations cannot do anything about the spontaneous humiliations from top to bottom. The enormous power that the capitalist receives over the proletarian and which he delegates to the manager, in an exploitative society, demoralizes the manager, dehumanizes him, turns him into an asocial monster on a par with the capitalist himself.
4 . In general, this situation, which is systemic in nature, is grist for our mill. Management, instead of alleviating the proletarian's dissatisfaction with exploitation, through its actions further aggravates this dissatisfaction. Because for most proletarians, the agent of capital is not the capitalist personally, but his management. The company's policy is judged by the actions of management (even if this activity is not the policy approved by the company and objectively harms it). That is, this situation is an additional factor in rocking the boat.
5 . In the future, the dissatisfaction of the proletarians with their bosses, in addition to a positive moment in the revolutionary process, when workers see the opportunity to get rid of annoying bosses in a revolutionary way, will also have negative qualities. In the process of the revolution, there will be an active settling of old scores with the boss, and this will undoubtedly lead to both unnecessary excesses like “the workers hanged the director at the gate” and a huge wave of FALSE ALARMS in the system of combating counter-revolution, distracting it from clarifying the issue, and not written Is this denunciation against a specialist only because someone fired someone there? In the revolutionary process, not only charters will fly to countries where there is no revolution yet, but also the heads of bosses who did not care about even talking politely to their subordinates. I am more than sure that among those craftsmen and engineers whom workers took out of the gates in wheelbarrows in 1917, there were good specialists who were urgently needed in industrialization, but they, unable to lead, without irritating their subordinates, threw themselves out of production and perished in the fire Civil.
In a word, a smart manager has something to think about here: if he plays by general capitalist rules, then he actively harms both production and himself, and the only way out of the vicious circle, when he can become a really good boss in every sense, is the destruction of capitalism , transferring the economy to a planned basis, which will create an economic basis for rebuilding relations in production on the basis of social equality, that is, a friendly attitude towards everyone.
However, this factor should not be exaggerated either - the majority of proletarians, based on the same article, are ready to tolerate any kind of moral monster in management for a salary increase. But this is only for now, until a revolutionary way out of the impasse of market relations in production has become obvious. As soon as a change in the social system looms on the horizon, the attitude towards the authorities will radicalize and become even more intolerant. In addition, it would be nice for bosses who are trying to calmly rest on the fact that the proletarian is corrupt to remember that swaying inflation depreciates not only wages, but also increases to them, but the idea of \u200b\u200bdestroying capitalism to hell is not subject to inflation.
I. Bortnik
10/31/2023
https://prorivists.org/86_bosses/
Google Translator
October 31, 18:23
How Karelian schoolchildren are taken using the “Pushkin map” to the place of execution of Ukrainian nationalists.
Today is October 30th. Day of Remembrance for Victims of Political Repression. And so I read on social networks: “The Central Library of Kostomuksha invites schoolchildren from grades 9 to 11 to attend a bus excursion to the memorial site “Sandarmokh” (Medvezhyegorsky district). The excursion is dedicated to the Day of Remembrance of Victims of Political Repression.
We invite you to visit with us the place of memory established in honor of the people who gave their lives in those terrible and tragic years, to get to know the history of this day and this place. Payment for the ticket using the Pushkin card."
It's a long drive from Kostomuksha to Sandarmokh. The Karelian village of Rugozero will be closer, but there is also a grave of victims of political terror there. In 1921, during the so-called Karelian adventure, the whites there shot Karelians - supporters of Soviet power. Don’t these people look like “victims of political repression”? Are these the “wrong” victims?
Well, good, because in the Medvezhyegorsk district itself there is not only Sandarmokh. According to historians, in May 1919, when the Medvezhya Gora station was occupied by interventionist and White Guard troops, it became the site of massacres. A White Guard counterintelligence department operated here, and a concentration camp was created for captured Red Army soldiers, Red partisans, communists and Soviet activists. Many dozens of them died in the Medvezhyegorsk dungeons. After the liberation of the station by the Red Army, the victims of the White Terror were buried in a mass grave on the street. Kommunarov. The total number of those buried is unknown. Or are these also “wrong” victims? Or just “unpromoted”?
Unlike Sandarmokh, whose name, through the efforts of liberal propaganda, was simply hammered into the heads of a huge mass of people. Despite the fact that there are simply no six, seven and a half, and even more so nine and a half thousand people executed in Sandarmokh. This is just the opinion of Yuri Dmitriev, a defendant in a criminal case under pedophile articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. But it is in vain to try to extract from his fans at least one piece of evidence of these figures. They are silent.
Somewhere in the vicinity of Medvezhyegorsk, the so-called “Solovetsky stage” was actually shot. Now they take people there using the “Pushkin card,” which seems to have been created for the cultural education of young people. Forgetting to tell the backstory of this sad event. And forgetting to tell you that the largest category at this stage was made up of Ukrainian nationalists!
Yes, in the second year of the SVO and the fight against Ukrainian fascism, Russian schoolchildren are taken to the place of execution of “the flower of Ukrainian nationalism.” Which became one of the symbols of Bandera propaganda:
Once again I will give several examples from the list of those executed in Sandarmokh:
- Stepan Rudnitsky, author of the now popular book in Ukraine “Why we want an independent Ukraine.” It states that Ukrainians are a kind of special race, which is better not to mix with all sorts of Muscovites and Poles, and they also need their own state and living space: “...On the other hand, combinations with Poles, Muscovites, Romanians, Turko-Tatars, Jews, etc.” Who doesn’t understand now why citizen Rudnitsky faced such a fate in 1937?
- Minister of Education of the UPR Anton Krushelnitsky, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the UPR Nikolai Lyubinsky and Vladimir Chekhovsky, chairman of the Council of People's Ministers of the Ukrainian People's Republic were also shot in Sandarmokh. According to biographers, during the latter’s premiership, the UPR government approved laws on the state language of Ukraine (Ukrainian only) and on the autocephaly of the UOC. The topics are very relevant and very pressing, as if not even 100 years have passed since that time...
- Gennady Leonidovich Sadovsky. In 1919, military commandant of Zhitomir. It’s easy to find information about the events in Zhitomir on the Internet: “When Zhitomir fell into the hands of the Petliurites, they robbed, raped, tortured and killed Jews again and again. They burst into Jewish apartments shouting “Down with the communists!” or “Come on women!” Every day crowds of men were escorted to the station and there they were shot.”
Yes, on the list of those executed in Sandarmokh there are a lot of Petliura officers who in one way or another participated in the genocide of the Jewish population. (I already wrote about this topic in the publication: What’s wrong with Yuri Shevchuk’s grandfather? | Alexander Stepanov | Zen (dzen.ru)
Well, at least now there should be an understanding that inflating the topic of repression, including Sandarmokh, was not necessary to preserve in memory of that part of the repressed who suffered in vain? This was necessary for the cultivation in the vastness of Eastern Europe of new forms of fascism, the most wretched in its provincialism. So you got it... And we still take excursions there according to the “Pushkin map”... And here is a photo from the event in Sandarmokh on August 5, 2023:
You need to understand that the history of not a single modern state has passed without political repression. And it does not, as we can see this in our days in various parts of the globe. In this regard,
imagine our country as some unique "Mordor" in world history, which simply destroyed its own citizens, very stupidly. Did the new society created in our country since 1917 have real and numerous enemies? Did they. Did they themselves want to organize mass repressions against their opponents? They wanted to, there is enough evidence for this.
Consequently, the Soviet government had every right to self-defense. After all, if the Whites had won, everything would have been much worse (See the publication HOW THE BOLSHEVIKS SAVED RUSSIA FROM BLOODY TERROR).
Do you want to celebrate October 30 as the day of remembrance for victims of political repression? Okay, but then on this day mention the many thousands of victims of the white terror, then don’t forget their graves. You can even start with those killed on Bloody Sunday...
Or is it impossible to do this for ideological reasons?
https://dzen.ru/media/id/61f99f5445d7cf ... 5192bb2829 - zinc
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8738896.html
Google Translator
*******
About dislike for superiors
No. 10/86.X.2023
The other day I read an article about how Russians don’t like their bosses.
What a discovery, however, was made by Russian sociologists. We expect further discoveries from them that snow is usually white and grass is green in spring. A good illustration that sociology without Marxism is a sterile registration of facts, nothing more. However, there is something to be said about this. I would like to note the following points:
1 . The quality of bourgeois management, judging by the results of this “research,” is below par.
The fact is that in a normal and competent management setting, the manager is, first of all, an informal authority for the subordinate. But subordinates en masse do not dream of dismissing an informal authority figure—the leader’s authority, competent and competent leadership, on the contrary, help them, without stress and wasting time, do work that they may not like and even hate, but at the same time they have to do it. But in an average bourgeois enterprise it is usually the other way around. The higher the manager, the lower his competence in the actual physical work processes. Because for lower and middle management positions, the bourgeoisie can still afford the luxury of hiring based on competence, but at higher levels, only based on loyalty, regardless of real competence in matters. And this is from the moment a managerial position begins, in which it is necessary to form budgets and manage financial flows. While you are simply executing budgets, you can be a specialist, but as soon as you need to make decisions to take money from the capitalist purse, the recruitment of people begins based on personal devotion and loyalty much more than on competence - “friends and acquaintances of the Rabbit”, the winners, are appointed directors in the office championship of intrigue, diligent butt lickers, and so on. This phenomenon is systemic and indestructible in capitalist conditions - negative selection is present in almost all industries and at all enterprises.
2 . The level of exploitation is quite high and is aggravated by the incompetence of management. A capitalist manager is not required to perfectly debug processes; he is required, first of all, to achieve financial results. The easiest way to financial results is to increase the exploitation of workers; it does not require investments or knowledge of processes. For example, let's take an area known to me - a warehouse. The warehouse does not ship well, there are a lot of defects, re-grades, shortages, customers are unhappy. If you look purely at the financial result, then there is a very simple way - to compensate for the shortfalls in the salaries of employees, to fire those who have made mistakes and shift their volumes to others. But a competent boss understands that the volumes have outgrown paper technology and nothing can be done with the available forces without automation. But warehouse automation will not give you a profit, and reducing losses can pay for itself in more than one month or even a year. Here, capitalism itself blocks “doing everything wisely” with the law of profit, and the fool boss happily goes with the flow. I observed when a boss with a diploma from the Institute of Physical Education and the corresponding intelligence covered shortfalls with fines for the fact that employees sat on a chair in the warehouse. All this does not add any love to the bosses.
3 . The humiliated position of the proletarian in the production system gives rise to a corresponding attitude towards him on the part of the bourgeoisie and management striving to join the bourgeoisie. Relations in capitalist production naturally have the character of systematic humiliation on the part of the boss. What is there to spare the feelings of some cog who is “in line behind the fence”? Old Western companies have already realized that such relationships in the workplace only harm the work process (it took them more than 200 years to do this), but even their regulations cannot do anything about the spontaneous humiliations from top to bottom. The enormous power that the capitalist receives over the proletarian and which he delegates to the manager, in an exploitative society, demoralizes the manager, dehumanizes him, turns him into an asocial monster on a par with the capitalist himself.
4 . In general, this situation, which is systemic in nature, is grist for our mill. Management, instead of alleviating the proletarian's dissatisfaction with exploitation, through its actions further aggravates this dissatisfaction. Because for most proletarians, the agent of capital is not the capitalist personally, but his management. The company's policy is judged by the actions of management (even if this activity is not the policy approved by the company and objectively harms it). That is, this situation is an additional factor in rocking the boat.
5 . In the future, the dissatisfaction of the proletarians with their bosses, in addition to a positive moment in the revolutionary process, when workers see the opportunity to get rid of annoying bosses in a revolutionary way, will also have negative qualities. In the process of the revolution, there will be an active settling of old scores with the boss, and this will undoubtedly lead to both unnecessary excesses like “the workers hanged the director at the gate” and a huge wave of FALSE ALARMS in the system of combating counter-revolution, distracting it from clarifying the issue, and not written Is this denunciation against a specialist only because someone fired someone there? In the revolutionary process, not only charters will fly to countries where there is no revolution yet, but also the heads of bosses who did not care about even talking politely to their subordinates. I am more than sure that among those craftsmen and engineers whom workers took out of the gates in wheelbarrows in 1917, there were good specialists who were urgently needed in industrialization, but they, unable to lead, without irritating their subordinates, threw themselves out of production and perished in the fire Civil.
In a word, a smart manager has something to think about here: if he plays by general capitalist rules, then he actively harms both production and himself, and the only way out of the vicious circle, when he can become a really good boss in every sense, is the destruction of capitalism , transferring the economy to a planned basis, which will create an economic basis for rebuilding relations in production on the basis of social equality, that is, a friendly attitude towards everyone.
However, this factor should not be exaggerated either - the majority of proletarians, based on the same article, are ready to tolerate any kind of moral monster in management for a salary increase. But this is only for now, until a revolutionary way out of the impasse of market relations in production has become obvious. As soon as a change in the social system looms on the horizon, the attitude towards the authorities will radicalize and become even more intolerant. In addition, it would be nice for bosses who are trying to calmly rest on the fact that the proletarian is corrupt to remember that swaying inflation depreciates not only wages, but also increases to them, but the idea of \u200b\u200bdestroying capitalism to hell is not subject to inflation.
I. Bortnik
10/31/2023
https://prorivists.org/86_bosses/
Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
A terrible mistake has occurred..
November 2, 10:08
A terrible mistake has occurred...
Businessmen Petr Aven and Mikhail Fridman considered the decision to invest in Western countries a mistake, writes Bloomberg.
During a conversation with British police in May 2022, Aven called investment in the West a mistake, spending three hours in questioning, journalists indicated.
Russian billionaire Mikhail Fridman made a similar statement when speaking about his decision to leave the United Kingdom.
“The fact that we invested money in England looks like a colossal mistake,” journalists quote him as saying.
Earlier, Russian businessman Mikhail Fridman said that he moved to Israel from the UK, but against the backdrop of escalation in the country, he went to Moscow. This summer, the United States expanded the sanctions list for Russia, adding Aven and Fridman to it.
https://ria.ru/20231101/zayavlenie-1906698678.html - zinc
Effective owners who received part of the wealth of the plundered country again showed their best side.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8741380.html
Russian electric cars have overtaken European and American ones in sales
November 2, 12:24
Russian electric cars have overtaken European and American ones in sales
Russian electric cars – just a couple of years ago there was practically no such definition. Today, not only do they exist, but, most importantly, Russian electric cars are beginning to conquer the market.
According to preliminary statistics, electric vehicles produced in the country account for about 21% of the electric vehicle market at the end of September, surpassing European and American electric vehicles, that is, VW and Tesla, combined in terms of market share.
The leaders of the Russian electric vehicle market, naturally, are Chinese brands, taking over 65% of the market.
In total, this year the fleet of electric vehicles is expected to grow to 35,000 electric cars. Let me remind you that at the end of 2022, 23,726 electric cars were registered in Russia, and a year earlier, in 2021, there were 14,679 of them. That is, we are clearly observing a trend of rapid growth in demand for electric vehicles.
https://greenstartpoint.ru/rossijskie-e ... rikanskie/ - zinc
As I understand it, a significant part of the electric vehicles assembled in the country are also Chinese in the form of large-unit assembly, and in fact the share of Chinese electric vehicles will still be higher. But this is now a general part of the trend of replacing the Western auto industry with the Chinese, which continues to flood with direct deliveries and the deployment of production within the country, which, among other things, has led to the revival of old Soviet brands. So the headline that Chinese electric cars have overtaken Western ones in sales in Russia is more appropriate here.
On the other hand, thanks to China, the Russian Federation has quite calmly survived sanctions from the West in the automotive industry, and a number of countries providing gray imports still allow almost the entire range of Western cars to be imported to the Russian Federation (with known problems with the delivery time of components).
But I would like to see the development of purely our own production, despite all the difficulties of competition with the Chinese automobile industry.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8741670.html
Google Translator
********
It Flew.
The first flight of modernized IL-96-400M.
This is just the start, with PD-35 coming online soon and possibly wing redesigned and made composite--the most important part is that Russia preserved and now develops competencies in wide-body aircraft, which she can produce entirely out of own resources. Count on fingers of one hand how many countries can do that. I'll give you a hint--US and Russia. Airbus is an international consortium having several nations taking part.
To rub salt into the wound of Russia-Gas Stationists, in Russian--the latest expo of Russia's rolling stock. Rate of Made in Russia? Between 98 to 100%, including all systems of control and propulsion. This all is a real hi-tech. It also is already in serial production or about to start.
Yep, definitely a gas station.
http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2023/11/it-flew.html
(more, Ukraine)
*******
(This article a little long in the tooth but still very relevant given the accelerating trends is Ukraine)
A Maidan 2.0 color revolution looms in Georgia
KIT KLARENBERG·OCTOBER 6, 2023
The arrest of US regime change operatives in Tbilisi suggests a coup against Georgia’s government could be in the works. As Ukraine’s counteroffensive fails, the West appears eager to open a new front in its proxy war.
On September 29, in a disclosure ignored by the entire Western media, the US government-run Radio Free Europe’s Russian-language portal Slobodna Evropa revealed that three foreign operatives had been summoned for questioning by the Georgian Security Service, for allegedly assisting opposition elements prepare a Maidan-style regime change scenario in Tbilisi.
The operatives were staffers of the Center for Applied Nonviolent Actions and Strategies (CANVAS) and had been “temporarily staying in Georgia.” CANVAS is a US government-funded organization with close CIA ties which has trained regime change activists from Eastern Europe to Venezuela. The group’s website boasts of having cultivated over 16,000 activists in 52 countries since its founding in 2003, and “inspired” 126 “successful” political “campaigns” the world over.
Slobodna Evropa stated it was unknown whether the operatives’ presence in the country was “due to summons as part of the investigation or for some other reason.” But if CANVAS staff had been present in the country, there can be little doubt about their agenda.
The ruling Georgian dream has been portrayed in the west as a pro-Kremlin government. In reality, it’s simply reverted to a longstanding policy of balancing between East and West. For the neoconservative establishment, its true sin is being insufficiently supportive of the Ukraine proxy war. Thus Ukrainian elements are set to be involved in a possible color revolution. If such an operation succeeds, it would open a second front in that war on Russia’s Western flank.
The development seemingly confirms warnings from local security officials earlier this September. They cautioned “a coup a la Euromaidan is being prepared in Georgia,” referring to the 2014 US-backed color revolution which toppled Ukraine’s elected president and ushered in a pro-NATO government. The purported lead plotters are ethnic Georgians working for the Ukrainian government: Giorgi Lortkipanidze, Kiev’s deputy military intelligence chief; Mikhail Baturin, the bodyguard of former President Mikheil Saakashvili; and Mamuka Mamulashvili, commander of the notorious Georgian Legion.
A September 6 investigation by The Grayzone revealed that Georgian Legion chief Mamulashvili is centrally implicated in a false flag massacre of Maidan protesters, which was pivotal in unseating elected President Viktor Yanukovych. He apparently brought the shooters to Maidan Square to “sow some chaos” by opening fire on crowds, and provided sniper rifles for the purpose.
Georgian officials say that now they’ve uncovered evidence that young anti-government activists are undergoing training near Ukraine’s border with Poland to enact a similar scheme, which would feature a deadly bombing during planned riots meant to take place in Tbilisi between October and December, when the European Commission is expected to rule on whether Georgia can formally become an EU candidate country.
‘More powerful than an aircraft carrier’
The State Security Service of Georgia (SSSG) said in a statement that young activists and a “rather large group of persons of Georgian origin” now fighting in Ukraine are currently being “trained/retrained in the vicinities of Poland-Ukraine state border in a scheme being implemented by the CANVAS operatives, who allegedly sought to topple the government in a bloody coup d’etat purportedly set to unfold in late October or early November. Per the Georgian authorities, the plot would involve the creation of a “tent city” in the capital, “erection of barricades on the central avenues and near strategic objects of Georgia,” occupation and seizure of government buildings, “as well as other illegal actions containing elements of serious provocation.”
The foreign-funded operatives are accused of plotting to carry out a shocking ‘false flag’ bombing in an effort to overthrow the elected government, with Kiev’s February 2014 Maidan “revolutionary scenario” specifically cited as a blueprint.
Under the operation, “an explosive device, which the organizers of criminal acts intend to detonate, will be placed in a pre-selected tent within the territory where the rallies organized by Giorgi Lortkipanidze and Mikheil Baturin will take place, namely in the so-called “Tent city,”” the statement noted. “According to their criminal plan, the abovementioned should cause casualties among the peaceful population participating in the protests and the representatives of the law-enforcement agencies,” continued the SSSG.
From the standpoint of the regime change operatives, the bloody provocation would be useful: “in the event of a terrorist act, destructive forces hope that there will be an indiscriminate shooting between the law-enforcement officers and protestors, which will create a solid ground for further civil confrontation.”
“We would like to inform the public that it is not for the first time when the mentioned provocations are planned by the organizers against Georgia, although, they have been prevented in the past through the effective and preventive response by the law-enforcement officers,” officials added.
But they cautioned that given “the challenges of the current difficult geopolitical situation, unlike previous cases, the current plan represents a much higher risk factor that poses threat to the security of the state, as well as life, well-being, and health of the ordinary citizens of Georgia.”
The SSSG statement says that ““CANVAS” was being “used for the training purposes of the youth group who are supposed to participate in the revolutionary scenario.” As the security service notes, “the core” of is comprised of the remnants of the “organization “Otpor,”” a group which “actively participated in revolutionary processes unfolded in Serbia.”
Now, such operatives “are being regularly used in order to train young people in various countries and involve them in destructive processes,” the statement claims.
CANVAS: the global regime change specialists
The insurrectionary credentials of CANVAS aren’t in question. Wherever the organization goes, color revolutions and “peaceful” attempts to undermine if not overthrow governments inevitably follow. The Center evolved out of Otpor!, a rebellious youth movement in Yugoslavia that sought to oust Slobodan Milosevic in the late 1990s. Through a mix of civil disobedience, non-violent resistance, rock concerts, street humor, and graffiti, they galvanized public opposition to the President, and insidiously promoted a neoliberal future for Serbia.
Otpor! was assisted every step of the way by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government regime change agency that avowedly does overtly what the CIA once did covertly. Besides doling out enormous amounts of money, Otpor! was trained to undermine government authority through disruptive means, and employed “a wide range of sophisticated public relations techniques, including polling, leafleting and paid advertising” on Washington’s dime. The group’s messaging was informed by US-bankrolled polling.
Once Milosevic was removed in October 2000, Otpor leaders founded CANVAS, and began exporting their revolutionary model elsewhere, including Georgia in 2003. There, they created Kmara, which borrowed heavily from Otpor’s branding and messaging, and received sizable NED funding. The group was instrumental in the downfall of Georgia’s longtime leader Eduard Shevardnadze following the November 2003 election. It built on its regime change template in the so-called Orange Revolution triggered the following year in Ukraine. At the forefront of this operation was Pora – another US-backed youth group emulating Otpor – which aimed to install a Western allied government.
While the media has regularly fetishized the work of CANVAS in heralding an era of supposedly non-violent resistance across the globe, color revolutions usually succeed due to more seismic factors, which are often unseen and unacknowledged. For example, Milosevic’s ouster followed a decade of destructive US-funded proxy wars in the former Yugoslavia, during which time the Serbian economy was shattered by Western sanctions.
Moreover, as the Washington Post revealed in December 2000, American operatives involved in the “anti-Milosevic effort” knew the CIA was simultaneously wreaking havoc in Belgrade, “but had trouble finding out what the agency was up to.” The adjacency of CANVAS to US intelligence was amply detailed in 2011, when leaked emails exposed how Otpor leader and Center founder Srda Popovic worked closely in secret with Stratfor, a private security firm known as “The Shadow CIA”.
Among other egregious acts, the emails showed Popovic had covertly passed information to Stratfor about opposition activists in a number of countries, including individuals harmed or killed by the US-armed Bahraini government, obtained from the Bahrain Center for Human Rights during the regime’s brutal crackdown on pro-democracy protests during the Arab Spring. He also produced a guide for the company on how to unseat Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez. As an analyst explained in a May 2010 email:
“The main utility in [Popovic] is his ability to connect us to the troublemakers around the world that he is in touch with…The idea is to gather a network of contacts through CANVAS, contacts that we can then contact independently.”
In another email, the same analyst noted CANVAS were “still hooked into US funding.” He described their mission as, “basically [going] around the world trying to topple dictators and autocratic governments (ones that US does not like)”:
“They just go and set up shop in a country and try to bring the government down. When used properly, [they’re] more powerful than an aircraft carrier battle group.”
Maidan 2.0: a second proxy war front
The Georgian Dream coalition government has been under mounting pressure since last March, when Tbilisi was plagued by incendiary protests. Demonstrators poured into the streets to protest a proposed law requiring NGOs operating in the country to register as “foreign agents” if they received more than 20% of their revenue from overseas. The law would have clearly hobbled the pro-NATO political network established inside the country by Western interests.
The unrest last March seemed to escalate in direct correlation with condemnations of the legislation by US officials. Most of the groups at the forefront of the protests were recipients of NED funding. And just when the angry mobs seemed ready to storm parliament, in a repeat of the Rose Revolution that dislodged Shevardnadze two decades prior, the government changed course and promptly dropped the foreign agent law.
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Georgian Dream has been painted by Western media as a vehicle for Kremlin influence. In reality, the government has sought to strike a balance between strengthening Western ties, pushing for EU and NATO membership, and maintaining civil coexistence with its neighbors in Moscow. This act has become ever-untenable over the past 18 months, with Western pressure to impose sanctions on Moscow – one of Tbilisi’s biggest trading partners by far – and send arms to Kiev constantly mounting.
Endeavoring to comply with US and EU sanctions regimes and condemning the invasion at the UN are apparently insufficient for Washington, Brussels, and Kiev. In December 2022, Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili revealed that the Ukrainian government has repeatedly urged him to open a “second front” in the proxy war against Russia, and that his refusal to do so was not well-received.
The accused plotters may have more cynical, self-interested reasons for removing Georgian Dream from power. After being booted from office in the 2013 presidential election, their boss Mikheil Saakashvili fled Georgia. The next year, Tbilisi filed criminal charges against him, and he was subsequently convicted in absentia for ordering brutal attacks on political rivals, and helping one of his ministers cover up a horrific murder they had personally directed.
Saakashvili relocated to Ukraine to support the Maidan movement, was appointed governor of Odessa by President Petro Poroshenko’s personal order in 2015, and granted Ukrainian citizenship. He remained in the post until November 2016, when he dramatically quit, blaming Poroshenko for enabling corruption in Kiev. Thereafter, he bounced around various countries before finally returning to Ukraine in May 2019, after newly elected President Volodymyr Zelenskyy restored his citizenship.
For reasons unclear, Saakashvili announced in October 2021 he would be returning to Georgia, in advance of that year’s local elections. He was arrested the same day in Tbilisi, having illegally entered the country hidden in a truck loaded with dairy products. Ever since, he has festered in a Georgian penitentiary, his health rapidly worsening. Despite this, President Salome Zourabichvili has made clear she will “never” pardon the former leader.
A color revolution in Georgia would free Saakashvili, and install a government more willing to consider declaring war on Russia, delivering the second proxy war front long-sought by Kiev and its Western backers.
As Ukraine’s disastrous counteroffensive peters out, with only a few dozen square kilometers and tens of thousands of young men mutilated and dead to show for its efforts, the need to open a new front is more urgent than ever.
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/10/06/maid ... n-georgia/
Saakashvili. an almost cartoonish opportunist, should be sent back to Ulraine, the final touch...
November 2, 10:08
A terrible mistake has occurred...
Businessmen Petr Aven and Mikhail Fridman considered the decision to invest in Western countries a mistake, writes Bloomberg.
During a conversation with British police in May 2022, Aven called investment in the West a mistake, spending three hours in questioning, journalists indicated.
Russian billionaire Mikhail Fridman made a similar statement when speaking about his decision to leave the United Kingdom.
“The fact that we invested money in England looks like a colossal mistake,” journalists quote him as saying.
Earlier, Russian businessman Mikhail Fridman said that he moved to Israel from the UK, but against the backdrop of escalation in the country, he went to Moscow. This summer, the United States expanded the sanctions list for Russia, adding Aven and Fridman to it.
https://ria.ru/20231101/zayavlenie-1906698678.html - zinc
Effective owners who received part of the wealth of the plundered country again showed their best side.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8741380.html
Russian electric cars have overtaken European and American ones in sales
November 2, 12:24
Russian electric cars have overtaken European and American ones in sales
Russian electric cars – just a couple of years ago there was practically no such definition. Today, not only do they exist, but, most importantly, Russian electric cars are beginning to conquer the market.
According to preliminary statistics, electric vehicles produced in the country account for about 21% of the electric vehicle market at the end of September, surpassing European and American electric vehicles, that is, VW and Tesla, combined in terms of market share.
The leaders of the Russian electric vehicle market, naturally, are Chinese brands, taking over 65% of the market.
In total, this year the fleet of electric vehicles is expected to grow to 35,000 electric cars. Let me remind you that at the end of 2022, 23,726 electric cars were registered in Russia, and a year earlier, in 2021, there were 14,679 of them. That is, we are clearly observing a trend of rapid growth in demand for electric vehicles.
https://greenstartpoint.ru/rossijskie-e ... rikanskie/ - zinc
As I understand it, a significant part of the electric vehicles assembled in the country are also Chinese in the form of large-unit assembly, and in fact the share of Chinese electric vehicles will still be higher. But this is now a general part of the trend of replacing the Western auto industry with the Chinese, which continues to flood with direct deliveries and the deployment of production within the country, which, among other things, has led to the revival of old Soviet brands. So the headline that Chinese electric cars have overtaken Western ones in sales in Russia is more appropriate here.
On the other hand, thanks to China, the Russian Federation has quite calmly survived sanctions from the West in the automotive industry, and a number of countries providing gray imports still allow almost the entire range of Western cars to be imported to the Russian Federation (with known problems with the delivery time of components).
But I would like to see the development of purely our own production, despite all the difficulties of competition with the Chinese automobile industry.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8741670.html
Google Translator
********
It Flew.
The first flight of modernized IL-96-400M.
This is just the start, with PD-35 coming online soon and possibly wing redesigned and made composite--the most important part is that Russia preserved and now develops competencies in wide-body aircraft, which she can produce entirely out of own resources. Count on fingers of one hand how many countries can do that. I'll give you a hint--US and Russia. Airbus is an international consortium having several nations taking part.
To rub salt into the wound of Russia-Gas Stationists, in Russian--the latest expo of Russia's rolling stock. Rate of Made in Russia? Between 98 to 100%, including all systems of control and propulsion. This all is a real hi-tech. It also is already in serial production or about to start.
Yep, definitely a gas station.
http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2023/11/it-flew.html
(more, Ukraine)
*******
(This article a little long in the tooth but still very relevant given the accelerating trends is Ukraine)
A Maidan 2.0 color revolution looms in Georgia
KIT KLARENBERG·OCTOBER 6, 2023
The arrest of US regime change operatives in Tbilisi suggests a coup against Georgia’s government could be in the works. As Ukraine’s counteroffensive fails, the West appears eager to open a new front in its proxy war.
On September 29, in a disclosure ignored by the entire Western media, the US government-run Radio Free Europe’s Russian-language portal Slobodna Evropa revealed that three foreign operatives had been summoned for questioning by the Georgian Security Service, for allegedly assisting opposition elements prepare a Maidan-style regime change scenario in Tbilisi.
The operatives were staffers of the Center for Applied Nonviolent Actions and Strategies (CANVAS) and had been “temporarily staying in Georgia.” CANVAS is a US government-funded organization with close CIA ties which has trained regime change activists from Eastern Europe to Venezuela. The group’s website boasts of having cultivated over 16,000 activists in 52 countries since its founding in 2003, and “inspired” 126 “successful” political “campaigns” the world over.
Slobodna Evropa stated it was unknown whether the operatives’ presence in the country was “due to summons as part of the investigation or for some other reason.” But if CANVAS staff had been present in the country, there can be little doubt about their agenda.
The ruling Georgian dream has been portrayed in the west as a pro-Kremlin government. In reality, it’s simply reverted to a longstanding policy of balancing between East and West. For the neoconservative establishment, its true sin is being insufficiently supportive of the Ukraine proxy war. Thus Ukrainian elements are set to be involved in a possible color revolution. If such an operation succeeds, it would open a second front in that war on Russia’s Western flank.
The development seemingly confirms warnings from local security officials earlier this September. They cautioned “a coup a la Euromaidan is being prepared in Georgia,” referring to the 2014 US-backed color revolution which toppled Ukraine’s elected president and ushered in a pro-NATO government. The purported lead plotters are ethnic Georgians working for the Ukrainian government: Giorgi Lortkipanidze, Kiev’s deputy military intelligence chief; Mikhail Baturin, the bodyguard of former President Mikheil Saakashvili; and Mamuka Mamulashvili, commander of the notorious Georgian Legion.
A September 6 investigation by The Grayzone revealed that Georgian Legion chief Mamulashvili is centrally implicated in a false flag massacre of Maidan protesters, which was pivotal in unseating elected President Viktor Yanukovych. He apparently brought the shooters to Maidan Square to “sow some chaos” by opening fire on crowds, and provided sniper rifles for the purpose.
Georgian officials say that now they’ve uncovered evidence that young anti-government activists are undergoing training near Ukraine’s border with Poland to enact a similar scheme, which would feature a deadly bombing during planned riots meant to take place in Tbilisi between October and December, when the European Commission is expected to rule on whether Georgia can formally become an EU candidate country.
‘More powerful than an aircraft carrier’
The State Security Service of Georgia (SSSG) said in a statement that young activists and a “rather large group of persons of Georgian origin” now fighting in Ukraine are currently being “trained/retrained in the vicinities of Poland-Ukraine state border in a scheme being implemented by the CANVAS operatives, who allegedly sought to topple the government in a bloody coup d’etat purportedly set to unfold in late October or early November. Per the Georgian authorities, the plot would involve the creation of a “tent city” in the capital, “erection of barricades on the central avenues and near strategic objects of Georgia,” occupation and seizure of government buildings, “as well as other illegal actions containing elements of serious provocation.”
The foreign-funded operatives are accused of plotting to carry out a shocking ‘false flag’ bombing in an effort to overthrow the elected government, with Kiev’s February 2014 Maidan “revolutionary scenario” specifically cited as a blueprint.
Under the operation, “an explosive device, which the organizers of criminal acts intend to detonate, will be placed in a pre-selected tent within the territory where the rallies organized by Giorgi Lortkipanidze and Mikheil Baturin will take place, namely in the so-called “Tent city,”” the statement noted. “According to their criminal plan, the abovementioned should cause casualties among the peaceful population participating in the protests and the representatives of the law-enforcement agencies,” continued the SSSG.
From the standpoint of the regime change operatives, the bloody provocation would be useful: “in the event of a terrorist act, destructive forces hope that there will be an indiscriminate shooting between the law-enforcement officers and protestors, which will create a solid ground for further civil confrontation.”
“We would like to inform the public that it is not for the first time when the mentioned provocations are planned by the organizers against Georgia, although, they have been prevented in the past through the effective and preventive response by the law-enforcement officers,” officials added.
But they cautioned that given “the challenges of the current difficult geopolitical situation, unlike previous cases, the current plan represents a much higher risk factor that poses threat to the security of the state, as well as life, well-being, and health of the ordinary citizens of Georgia.”
The SSSG statement says that ““CANVAS” was being “used for the training purposes of the youth group who are supposed to participate in the revolutionary scenario.” As the security service notes, “the core” of is comprised of the remnants of the “organization “Otpor,”” a group which “actively participated in revolutionary processes unfolded in Serbia.”
Now, such operatives “are being regularly used in order to train young people in various countries and involve them in destructive processes,” the statement claims.
CANVAS: the global regime change specialists
The insurrectionary credentials of CANVAS aren’t in question. Wherever the organization goes, color revolutions and “peaceful” attempts to undermine if not overthrow governments inevitably follow. The Center evolved out of Otpor!, a rebellious youth movement in Yugoslavia that sought to oust Slobodan Milosevic in the late 1990s. Through a mix of civil disobedience, non-violent resistance, rock concerts, street humor, and graffiti, they galvanized public opposition to the President, and insidiously promoted a neoliberal future for Serbia.
Otpor! was assisted every step of the way by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a US government regime change agency that avowedly does overtly what the CIA once did covertly. Besides doling out enormous amounts of money, Otpor! was trained to undermine government authority through disruptive means, and employed “a wide range of sophisticated public relations techniques, including polling, leafleting and paid advertising” on Washington’s dime. The group’s messaging was informed by US-bankrolled polling.
Once Milosevic was removed in October 2000, Otpor leaders founded CANVAS, and began exporting their revolutionary model elsewhere, including Georgia in 2003. There, they created Kmara, which borrowed heavily from Otpor’s branding and messaging, and received sizable NED funding. The group was instrumental in the downfall of Georgia’s longtime leader Eduard Shevardnadze following the November 2003 election. It built on its regime change template in the so-called Orange Revolution triggered the following year in Ukraine. At the forefront of this operation was Pora – another US-backed youth group emulating Otpor – which aimed to install a Western allied government.
While the media has regularly fetishized the work of CANVAS in heralding an era of supposedly non-violent resistance across the globe, color revolutions usually succeed due to more seismic factors, which are often unseen and unacknowledged. For example, Milosevic’s ouster followed a decade of destructive US-funded proxy wars in the former Yugoslavia, during which time the Serbian economy was shattered by Western sanctions.
Moreover, as the Washington Post revealed in December 2000, American operatives involved in the “anti-Milosevic effort” knew the CIA was simultaneously wreaking havoc in Belgrade, “but had trouble finding out what the agency was up to.” The adjacency of CANVAS to US intelligence was amply detailed in 2011, when leaked emails exposed how Otpor leader and Center founder Srda Popovic worked closely in secret with Stratfor, a private security firm known as “The Shadow CIA”.
Among other egregious acts, the emails showed Popovic had covertly passed information to Stratfor about opposition activists in a number of countries, including individuals harmed or killed by the US-armed Bahraini government, obtained from the Bahrain Center for Human Rights during the regime’s brutal crackdown on pro-democracy protests during the Arab Spring. He also produced a guide for the company on how to unseat Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez. As an analyst explained in a May 2010 email:
“The main utility in [Popovic] is his ability to connect us to the troublemakers around the world that he is in touch with…The idea is to gather a network of contacts through CANVAS, contacts that we can then contact independently.”
In another email, the same analyst noted CANVAS were “still hooked into US funding.” He described their mission as, “basically [going] around the world trying to topple dictators and autocratic governments (ones that US does not like)”:
“They just go and set up shop in a country and try to bring the government down. When used properly, [they’re] more powerful than an aircraft carrier battle group.”
Maidan 2.0: a second proxy war front
The Georgian Dream coalition government has been under mounting pressure since last March, when Tbilisi was plagued by incendiary protests. Demonstrators poured into the streets to protest a proposed law requiring NGOs operating in the country to register as “foreign agents” if they received more than 20% of their revenue from overseas. The law would have clearly hobbled the pro-NATO political network established inside the country by Western interests.
The unrest last March seemed to escalate in direct correlation with condemnations of the legislation by US officials. Most of the groups at the forefront of the protests were recipients of NED funding. And just when the angry mobs seemed ready to storm parliament, in a repeat of the Rose Revolution that dislodged Shevardnadze two decades prior, the government changed course and promptly dropped the foreign agent law.
Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Georgian Dream has been painted by Western media as a vehicle for Kremlin influence. In reality, the government has sought to strike a balance between strengthening Western ties, pushing for EU and NATO membership, and maintaining civil coexistence with its neighbors in Moscow. This act has become ever-untenable over the past 18 months, with Western pressure to impose sanctions on Moscow – one of Tbilisi’s biggest trading partners by far – and send arms to Kiev constantly mounting.
Endeavoring to comply with US and EU sanctions regimes and condemning the invasion at the UN are apparently insufficient for Washington, Brussels, and Kiev. In December 2022, Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili revealed that the Ukrainian government has repeatedly urged him to open a “second front” in the proxy war against Russia, and that his refusal to do so was not well-received.
The accused plotters may have more cynical, self-interested reasons for removing Georgian Dream from power. After being booted from office in the 2013 presidential election, their boss Mikheil Saakashvili fled Georgia. The next year, Tbilisi filed criminal charges against him, and he was subsequently convicted in absentia for ordering brutal attacks on political rivals, and helping one of his ministers cover up a horrific murder they had personally directed.
Saakashvili relocated to Ukraine to support the Maidan movement, was appointed governor of Odessa by President Petro Poroshenko’s personal order in 2015, and granted Ukrainian citizenship. He remained in the post until November 2016, when he dramatically quit, blaming Poroshenko for enabling corruption in Kiev. Thereafter, he bounced around various countries before finally returning to Ukraine in May 2019, after newly elected President Volodymyr Zelenskyy restored his citizenship.
For reasons unclear, Saakashvili announced in October 2021 he would be returning to Georgia, in advance of that year’s local elections. He was arrested the same day in Tbilisi, having illegally entered the country hidden in a truck loaded with dairy products. Ever since, he has festered in a Georgian penitentiary, his health rapidly worsening. Despite this, President Salome Zourabichvili has made clear she will “never” pardon the former leader.
A color revolution in Georgia would free Saakashvili, and install a government more willing to consider declaring war on Russia, delivering the second proxy war front long-sought by Kiev and its Western backers.
As Ukraine’s disastrous counteroffensive peters out, with only a few dozen square kilometers and tens of thousands of young men mutilated and dead to show for its efforts, the need to open a new front is more urgent than ever.
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/10/06/maid ... n-georgia/
Saakashvili. an almost cartoonish opportunist, should be sent back to Ulraine, the final touch...
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
Reply about the creation of the party
No. 11/87.X.2023
After February 24, 2022, I wrote that the world is entering a new era of worsening inter-imperialist contradictions that threaten to develop into a global massacre. The recent flames in the Middle East - the war between Israel (an outpost of American imperialism in the region) and Hamas, the fascist bombing of the Gaza Strip, approved by the “civilized world” - shook up the entire Muslim world and not only it. And this is just the beginning. The United States is openly preparing a war in Asia, pumping weapons into Japan, the Philippines and Australia. The world will no longer be the same. The American empire is bursting at the seams, the world gendarme is gradually losing its power. The contradictions in the US ruling class have escalated to the limit, and political scientists, these Delphic oracles, are already seriously talking about the prospects of a civil war if the Trumpists come to power. And for New Rome, the only way to avoid a civil war is to start a world war.
Humanity, which has still not realized the need for communism and believes in the simplicity of its soul in the possibility of sustainable peace between market countries, is in for great shocks. And no matter how the cards lay on the geopolitical table, Russia, at least by virtue of its geography, will be involved in these upheavals in the most direct way. Or rather, she is already involved...
What about our Russian leftists? They, quite predictably, were not ready for the new era (as they say on the Internet, life did not prepare them for this) and reacted in their usual manner - they immediately split and quarreled. But still, perhaps, there is a question with which the majority of the left will agree - the need to create a strong and authoritative party capable of leading the struggle of the oppressed masses. But the question of how to create such a party, what path should be followed for this - there is no common opinion here.
There are two main points of view on how the party will be created. The first point of view: the party will be generated by Marxist circles. Second: the party will be born from the trade unions in the heat of the strike struggle. Both of these versions are erroneous and demonstrate the complete organizational helplessness of the left.
Circles, as practice has shown, are nothing more than get-togethers under the guise of studying Marxism. Over the years of its existence, the circle movement has not produced a single intelligent agitator and propagandist.
For what reasons do people usually join a circle? Firstly , because there is not enough willpower to educate yourself; secondly , they are looking for like-minded people without a specific goal, in a word, they are looking for a party for themselves. Citizens who hope that the cleansing power of the collective will help them overcome their laziness and disorganization are engaged in self-deception. Because a team is capable of educating only if the team itself is properly organized. A team can only be properly organized through joint work . If the circles had set themselves any practical goals, for example, writing serious Marxist articles for publication, then there would have been benefit. But this would impose duties and responsibilities on the members of the circle, and the thing is that those who go to circles are mainly those who are looking for an easy and pleasant pastime and are not in the mood for serious work, primarily on themselves. Therefore, “party Marxism” will never create a capable organization; it simply does not need it. The members of the circle, like a samurai, have no goal, only a path...
As for trade union activities, the left is hopelessly mired in economism. They do not know the theory of Marxism, do not know the history of Bolshevism and do not want to see things as they are. The idea that strikers are automatically more receptive to Marxist propaganda has no serious basis. In the EU countries, especially in France, trade unions are very strong, strikes occur regularly, including general strikes - but what about the influence of communists on the masses? The question is, of course, rhetorical.
Nevertheless, trade unionism is deeply ingrained in the minds of some on the left, and they are convinced that all efforts should be devoted to “stirring up” economic struggle. Allegedly, mass strikes will help “awaken” the class consciousness of the proletarians and overcome the disunity and apoliticality of the masses. And since the current regime, they say, with its repressive activities does not allow the organization of trade unions and, in general, “tightens the screws everywhere,” such leftists consider it necessary to fight for “democratic freedoms” and see their allies as liberal Navalists, who “are also for democracy.”
Many leftists are so blinded by their personal hatred of Putin that they do not want to notice the obvious: the current Russian government is quite loyal to the communists and does not interfere with the propaganda of Marxism. It’s comical to watch how the left selflessly shout about “tightening the screws,” but they themselves, not at all concerned with issues of conspiracy, run their own VK groups, where they post up-to-date maps of circles, lists of left-wing resources (making the work of FSB employees easier), conduct streamers, without fear that Uncles in uniform will break in on them.
When this text was written, by decision of the Prosecutor General’s Office the VK group “Herald of the Storm” was blocked. Of course, the left will throw another hysteria about this. However, from a sober glance it is obvious that this is a one-time event. The Vestnik website and related resources continue to work, no arrests, no searches, nothing. Because our left, like Elusive Joe from the joke, never gave in to anyone. The so-called “left movement” (I would like to say “left lying”), due to zero influence on the masses and complete organizational insignificance, does not pose any threat to the ruling class; Accordingly, there is no reason for law enforcement officers, given the activity of Ukrainian saboteurs, to waste time on leftist screamers from the Internet. If they had not so persistently shouted “no war” at every corner and had not made friends with liberal foreign agents (read: spies), then they would not have been noticed at all.
Returning to the topic of trade unions, the aspirations of the left that a party will be born from a strong trade union movement is the position of tailism, not Marxism. Let me quote my article against economism:
“Our leftists, referring to individual statements by Lenin about the need to participate in strikes, are guided by the following “logic”: 1) the success of Bolshevism occurred against the backdrop of open forms of economic struggle, 2) today workers are not becoming Marxists, 3) today workers are not on strike, conclusion - we need to use all our might to “ignite” the economic struggle and then we will be able to repeat the success of the Bolsheviks.
Opportunists ignore the fact that the economic strike from the works of V.I. Lenin is a fact of real life at that time. It arose and took place spontaneously without any participation of any political forces. The beginning of the 20th century was a period of spontaneous upsurge of the proletarian movement throughout the world, caused by merciless exploitation and the powerless situation of workers. Today the situation is radically different. The bourgeoisie learned lessons from socialist revolutions and learned to effectively “extinguish” the waves of discontent of the masses with cash handouts and resignations of politicians. The proletarians themselves are infected with bourgeois-democratic illusions, they believe that the source of their misfortunes are specific politicians, neighboring nations, etc., and they do not see anything shameful in the institution of wage slavery (“if you work well, the owner will pay you well”) or they believe that they can “open their own business” and become small-medium owners.”
I repeat, trade unions under capitalism cannot be revolutionary subjects, and now they are exclusively peddlers of trade unionism, essentially a bourgeois worldview among the proletarians. And to expect that without a party, without mass propaganda, the communists will be able to “seize” influence from the bourgeoisie in the trade unions is the height of naivety. And to expect that the proletarians themselves, in the heat of strikes, will create a Communist Party is no longer naivety, but idiocy.
So, in what way should a party be created? We, breakthroughists, propose to follow the Leninist path and create a party through the organization of a prototype central organ , that is, a Marxist publication. In the article “Where to Start,” which formed the basis of the concept of the work “What is to be done?”, Lenin wrote:
“In our opinion, the starting point of activity, the first practical step towards creating the desired organization [of the party], and finally, the main thread, following which we could steadily develop, deepen and expand this organization, should be the establishment of an all-Russian political newspaper... Without it, it would be impossible systematic conduct of fundamentally consistent and comprehensive propaganda and agitation, which constitutes the constant and main task of Social Democracy in general and a particularly urgent task of the present moment, when interest in politics and issues of socialism has been awakened in the broadest sections of the population.”
And further:
“The newspaper is not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer.”
Why exactly a political publication (newspaper, magazine, etc.)? Firstly , students of Marxism can immediately apply and consolidate their acquired knowledge, undertaking to cover this or that issue in an article or note; The articles themselves allow the editors to judge how correctly and deeply the young comrade has mastered Marxism. Secondly , the joint organization and maintenance of the work of the publication is the very practice that creates an educational team, as described above. Thirdly , a circle of devoted readers is formed around the publication, who are gradually involved in agitation and propaganda work and are co-opted into the editorial staff. In this way, both communist cadres are forged and a circle of supporters of the future organization is formed.
We call on all leftists who are disillusioned with “party Marxism” to cooperate. Despite the cries of breakthrough-phobes about a “sect,” we are always open to comradely dialogue. We do not isolate ourselves and do not suffer from petty-bourgeois competitive fuss on the principle “don’t be deceived elsewhere”! Under no circumstances do we want the reader to take our materials for granted. We want him to pass them through his mind. Therefore, dear comrades, read the classics of Marxism, read the breakthroughists, read the leftists - the truth will definitely be achieved if the researcher has a scientifically understood conscience.
R. Ogienko
3/11/2023
https://prorivists.org/87_party/
Google Translator
********
“Have pity not on the dead, pity on the living”
November 4, 15:36
“Have pity not for the dead, pity the living”: how things stand in Russia with helping military personnel with PTS
Over the entire period of its existence, Russia, like the Russian Empire, managed to take part in more than one war. Each of them was in one way or another accompanied by casualties both among the civilian population and among the military contingent itself. However, what is more significant is the physical and mental state in which those who survived returned.
The history of tragic military conflicts and confrontations not only gave birth to victories and defeats, but also left an indelible mark on the lives of many people and society as a whole. The dominance of cruelty, violence and fear is a collective trauma brought to the periphery of public consciousness. Today, when our country is once again going through a stage of armed conflict, the question of the fate of thousands of morally crippled military personnel and volunteers is being posed head-on - we are talking about post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is not enough to survive the war, the main thing is to survive after. And this is a real problem of the subsequent integration of a person who spent time and saw a lot at the front back into society. When in battle everything is decided by forced cruelty, the transfer of similar practices to civilian life after completion of service becomes commonplace. And peaceful life in this case is limited only to civilians, because what is happening in the heads of those who have returned is far from calm and tranquil.
In terms of scale and intensity, the SVO surpassed other military clashes in which Russia participated. This means that there will be many more combat veterans and they will only join the ranks of those who served in Afghanistan or participated in the Chechen War. We are already seeing a growing fire in the form of criminal and operational reports. And this is a direct sign to the state, which should have started working proactively just yesterday. Today, thousands of combatants are gradually returning to society - in civilian life, many of them are faced with a heightened sense of justice, a feeling of abandonment and undervaluation, severe psychological disorders and difficult social adaptation. This is a problem that will only get worse in the future if we leave these people to their own devices. Not everyone can independently understand what exactly is happening to them and whether it is happening in principle. It is important to understand that PTSD is a real condition that requires professional help and social support. Therefore, work in this direction should become one of the priorities for the state.
How has the approach to treating PTSD in the military evolved?
The modern approach to the problem of PTSD in its final form took shape quite late - only by the beginning of the 80s of the 20th century. Nevertheless, the history of this mental disorder is much more extensive and longer; the paradigm for its treatment has been developed over decades. For the first time, descriptions of psychological changes and psychopathological disorders among combatants appeared in the works of ancient philosophers and historians, for example, Herodotus and Lucretius. Scientific research as such began later, while information about mental disorders that arise in military personnel upon returning to civilian life was scattered and fragmentary. A comprehensive scientific description of the taxonomy of chronic military neurosis was formed by the middle of the 19th century by Abram Kardiner, who included in the clinical picture excitability, an unrestrained type of reaction, fixation on the circumstances of injury, withdrawal from reality and a predisposition to uncontrollable aggressive reactions. The industrial revolution played an important role, namely the creation of extensive transport systems (in particular, railways), and subsequently major accidents with casualties and injuries. Thus, in 1867, a monograph “On Railway and Other Injuries of the Nervous System” authored by John Erik Eriksen appeared in Philadelphia. He described in detail the neuropsychiatric disorders in people injured as a result of train crashes. So, in addition to the fact that the seriously injured as a result of railway accidents received physical injuries, the victims also experienced neurotic manifestations: insomnia, anxiety, apathy, and so on. Those who simply witnessed the incident also complained of similar symptoms.
At the same time, humanity witnessed the first major armed confrontation of the modern type, which resulted in a large number of casualties. And here we are talking about the American Civil War (1861-1865). The concept of “soldier’s heart”, proposed by Jacob Mendez Da Costa, who described changes in the psychology of former participants in the conflict, came into medical use. At that time, the symptoms were attributed to “melancholia” or “mild psychosis.” This was explained by dissatisfaction, dissatisfaction and homesickness. In principle, the syndrome described by Da Costa was similar to the current definition of PTSD. Subsequently, the psychological and psychiatric consequences of traumatic events were assessed primarily from purely syndromic positions in relation to any one, leading, psychotrauma. This is how “survivor syndrome”, “concentration camp syndrome”, “post-emotional syndrome” and others appeared.
Based on all these studies, medicine has already developed the concept of “traumatic neurosis,” which is supposed to have been introduced into use by the German neurologist Hermann Oppenheim, who actually described the symptoms of what we now call PTSD. Based on the results of the research of the mentioned scientists, modern disaster medicine was formed, including armed confrontations. The Swiss Eduard Stirlin is considered its founder. However, researchers from Russia and other parts of the former USSR also made their contribution to this direction - Lev Brusilovsky, who studied the results of the influence on the psyche of the earthquake on the Crimean Peninsula in 1929. Particular attention of researchers was paid to the effects of wartime stress on the subsequent mental state of combatants - participants in hostilities.
In principle, each new armed confrontation became a subject for the study of psychological problems and the formation of traumatic neuroses. Back in 1916, before the end of the First World War, the German psychiatrist Emil Kraepelin proved that deep mental shocks that form into psychological trauma lead to serious disorders in the future. Moreover, for the most part they remain with a person until the end of his life. Then the trench meat grinder of the First World War gave way to the Second World War, as a result of which the American anthropologist and follower of Freud Abram Kardiner conducted research on the issue of what is today called PTSD. At the time, the disorder was interpreted as a "war neurosis" and the subsequent social integration of ex-combatants into post-war civilian life. And here an important question is already raised, to which we must pay special attention, given the events of today: Kardiner concluded that the emergence and subsequent development of this neurosis is essentially the result of the failure of this very integration.
The next impetus for research in the field of PTSD was the war in Vietnam, which already gave the traumas received by combatants the name “Vietnam syndrome.” In 1970, as a result of the work of a number of psychiatrists, notably Robert Jay Lifton and Chaim Shatan, who conducted extensive interviews with Vietnam veterans suffering from so-called flashbacks, paranoia and other symptoms, the traumatic condition became widely known. Military personnel who went through the Vietnam conflict were characterized by states of alienation and indifference with the loss of usual interests, increased excitability and irritability, recurring dreams of a “combat” nature, and feelings of personal guilt. According to various estimates, Americans lost from 40 thousand to 60 thousand people killed in the Vietnam War, of which, according to the medical journal Federal Practitioner, 20 thousand suicides occurred in 1993. As a result, complexes of symptoms were developed among combatants, which at that time did not correspond to any of the previously identified diseases. So, in 1980, Mardi Horowitz and a number of researchers proposed to distinguish it as an independent syndrome called post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Subsequently, he also developed diagnostic criteria for the disease, adopted first for the American classifications of mental illnesses, and later for ICD-10 - International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision - a version of the ICD classifier developed in 1989, adopted by WHO in 1990 and replaced in 2022 by the next version of the ICD (11th revision).
In domestic psychiatry, interest in PTSD was caused by military operations in Afghanistan (1979-1989), the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (1986), the earthquake in Armenia (1988) and other social upheavals, including two Chechen campaigns. Here the so-called military psychology comes into play, which became a separate discipline at the beginning of the 20th century - in 1908, a department of military psychology was established in the St. Petersburg Society of Advocates of Military Knowledge under the leadership of Gerasim Shumakov, who is rightfully considered the founder of military psychology. Many domestic researchers worked on this topic, whose works were lost in Soviet times. At that time, science was dominated by ideology, which resulted in the confusion of the subject of study with official narratives and the replacement of scientific analysis and methodology with propaganda. In accordance with the resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks “On pedological perversions in the system of People's Commissariat of Education” of 1936, military psychological laboratories were almost completely eliminated. Only research continued in the field of studying the psychological states of pilots. It was only in the 90s that attitudes towards psychological spectrum disorders changed.
However, it is worth noting that in Europe, the USSR, and the USA, for a long time there was extensive stigmatization of military personnel with PTSD, they also created the illusion of the normality and ordinariness of such conditions. Admitting there was a problem was seen as a sign of weakness and cowardice. In the same Union, mental disorders were initially classified as various forms of shell shock. Some historians are of the opinion that this state of affairs was caused by “masking” terminology - that is, this category included not only military personnel with traumatic brain injury and damage as a result of a blast wave, but also mentally unstable soldiers who experienced psychological shock.
Afghanistan, Chechnya, Northern Military District - how the lives of soldiers developed and will develop after conflicts
According to the Justice information system, from January 2008 to March 2015, 1,177 former soldiers were on trial and were awarded various military awards. Compared to the population of our large country, this figure does not seem particularly significant, especially if we take into account the number of military personnel. However, we are not talking about those who eventually became drunkards, drug addicts, or - in the saddest version - committed suicide.
At least 620 thousand people took part in the Afghan war. Moreover, according to the Union of Afghanistan Veterans, this number is 1.5 million. According to the organization, at the end of hostilities, at least 35% of military personnel were in dire need of psychological support, and at the same time, up to 70% were ready to go back to the hot spot . According to information as of November 1989, 372 thousand of those who served experienced alcoholism of varying severity, including drug addiction. At the end of 1989, 3.7 thousand soldiers were accused in cases of murder or robbery.
At least 600 thousand military personnel fought in the two Chechen campaigns. According to the Serbsky Center for Social and Forensic Psychiatry, by 2003, 70% of veterans had PTSD, and by 2004, more than a thousand people attempted suicide. As of 2005, 13 thousand veterans of the Chechen war were registered in psychoneurological dispensaries, 100 thousand were convicted of serious crimes. Already in 2022, the Trauma Point law office announced a 4% increase in the number of murders and attempted murders. As the organization clarifies, the growth in indicators occurred for the first time in 20 years. Moreover, it is noted that this may be due to the ongoing SVO, which is in principle reasonable, given the experience of history and the impact of wars and conflicts on military personnel. However, it is worth noting that until the Ukrainian issue is resolved, it is impossible to talk about the objectivity of such data due to incomplete statistics.
According to Rosalkogolregulirovanie, compared to 2021, there is now an increase in alcohol consumption. Retail sales of strong drinks (more than 9%) in 2022 increased by 6.8%, vodka - by 5.9%, and all alcoholic products (excluding beer, mead and catering chains) - by 3.5%. Moreover, 70-80% of murders in Russia are committed while intoxicated. “Traumpunkt” sees the reason for the increase in crime among military personnel, including acquired PTSD. According to the Ministry of Health, among military personnel who took part in hostilities, the likelihood of developing this disorder is 3-11%. Among the wounded, this percentage is higher – 30%.
Readovka has already published interviews with participants in the above-mentioned hostilities. And in each of them one thesis is clearly expressed - there was no rehabilitation, it simply did not exist.
Neither after Afghanistan, nor after Chechnya, the state was not sufficiently concerned with supporting its own citizens. As a result, Russia was faced with suicides, the inability of those who yesterday overcame themselves and fought for their homeland to return to peaceful life, here and natural problems with the law.
And what should become for us, if not the main, then one of the priority tasks, is that rehabilitation and psychological assistance for military personnel appear after the military training. The war in Ukraine, where there are truly bloody battles, is now a much more significant threat, and the consequences, if nothing is done, will be even worse. As one of the fighters told Readovka, returning home is like burying a killed comrade, an equally difficult and terrible event in which you don’t know what to do.
Soon, hundreds of thousands of soldiers will begin to return to civilian life, some of them exchanging prison sentences for a trip to the front. These people were already in not the most comfortable conditions; let’s leave out the reasons why they found themselves in them; after all, this was a series of stressful events. Someone has already atoned for their guilt, someone will soon be in their native monastery, and we cannot simply abandon them to their fate. Already now, we periodically see in news reports another note about how this return to the normal world is actually happening - not as successfully as we would like. There are known cases of suicide by mobilized people who killed themselves directly at the front or in military units, or during vacation, in anticipation of returning to the Northern Military District. Moreover, relatives note that the men suffered from panic attacks and anxiety. There were also reports of murders committed by soldiers returning from the war. So, in Bataysk, a man strangled his wife and then stabbed himself. There are not isolated stories when crimes were committed while intoxicated or in the heat of conflict, as happened in a cafe in Angarsk, where a member of the Wagner PMC shot two people.
Therefore, the main thing is to create conditions for providing proper psychological assistance to those who need it. It is important to show these people that the country will not abandon them, that we care about their problems. And what’s even more important is to make it clear that asking for support is not shameful, but normal, necessary and useful. We live in a time when mass distrust of psychologists and psychotherapists is combined with society's gradual awareness of their benefits. But mental trauma is the same as physical trauma. They also require treatment and are curable. The stigma of psychological problems must be broken. When, if not now? Otherwise, we will face a repetition of the story of the once youngest English officer of the First World War, Reginald Battersby, who, already in his dying oblivion, at the age of 77, returned to the war that never let him go, shouting: “The Boches are coming!”
(c) Anastasia Yashchenko
https://readovka.news/news/168296 - zinc (follow the link for more topical interviews with veterans of Afghanistan, Chechnya and Northern Military District)
Yes, objectively there is a problem. I know from personal experience that I have encountered fighters for whom participation in hostilities left severe psychological trauma. Therefore, of course, issues of psychological support and rehabilitation must be addressed already during the war. Among my acquaintances there are already those who deal with similar issues at the regional level.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8746235.html
Google Translator
No. 11/87.X.2023
After February 24, 2022, I wrote that the world is entering a new era of worsening inter-imperialist contradictions that threaten to develop into a global massacre. The recent flames in the Middle East - the war between Israel (an outpost of American imperialism in the region) and Hamas, the fascist bombing of the Gaza Strip, approved by the “civilized world” - shook up the entire Muslim world and not only it. And this is just the beginning. The United States is openly preparing a war in Asia, pumping weapons into Japan, the Philippines and Australia. The world will no longer be the same. The American empire is bursting at the seams, the world gendarme is gradually losing its power. The contradictions in the US ruling class have escalated to the limit, and political scientists, these Delphic oracles, are already seriously talking about the prospects of a civil war if the Trumpists come to power. And for New Rome, the only way to avoid a civil war is to start a world war.
Humanity, which has still not realized the need for communism and believes in the simplicity of its soul in the possibility of sustainable peace between market countries, is in for great shocks. And no matter how the cards lay on the geopolitical table, Russia, at least by virtue of its geography, will be involved in these upheavals in the most direct way. Or rather, she is already involved...
What about our Russian leftists? They, quite predictably, were not ready for the new era (as they say on the Internet, life did not prepare them for this) and reacted in their usual manner - they immediately split and quarreled. But still, perhaps, there is a question with which the majority of the left will agree - the need to create a strong and authoritative party capable of leading the struggle of the oppressed masses. But the question of how to create such a party, what path should be followed for this - there is no common opinion here.
There are two main points of view on how the party will be created. The first point of view: the party will be generated by Marxist circles. Second: the party will be born from the trade unions in the heat of the strike struggle. Both of these versions are erroneous and demonstrate the complete organizational helplessness of the left.
Circles, as practice has shown, are nothing more than get-togethers under the guise of studying Marxism. Over the years of its existence, the circle movement has not produced a single intelligent agitator and propagandist.
For what reasons do people usually join a circle? Firstly , because there is not enough willpower to educate yourself; secondly , they are looking for like-minded people without a specific goal, in a word, they are looking for a party for themselves. Citizens who hope that the cleansing power of the collective will help them overcome their laziness and disorganization are engaged in self-deception. Because a team is capable of educating only if the team itself is properly organized. A team can only be properly organized through joint work . If the circles had set themselves any practical goals, for example, writing serious Marxist articles for publication, then there would have been benefit. But this would impose duties and responsibilities on the members of the circle, and the thing is that those who go to circles are mainly those who are looking for an easy and pleasant pastime and are not in the mood for serious work, primarily on themselves. Therefore, “party Marxism” will never create a capable organization; it simply does not need it. The members of the circle, like a samurai, have no goal, only a path...
As for trade union activities, the left is hopelessly mired in economism. They do not know the theory of Marxism, do not know the history of Bolshevism and do not want to see things as they are. The idea that strikers are automatically more receptive to Marxist propaganda has no serious basis. In the EU countries, especially in France, trade unions are very strong, strikes occur regularly, including general strikes - but what about the influence of communists on the masses? The question is, of course, rhetorical.
Nevertheless, trade unionism is deeply ingrained in the minds of some on the left, and they are convinced that all efforts should be devoted to “stirring up” economic struggle. Allegedly, mass strikes will help “awaken” the class consciousness of the proletarians and overcome the disunity and apoliticality of the masses. And since the current regime, they say, with its repressive activities does not allow the organization of trade unions and, in general, “tightens the screws everywhere,” such leftists consider it necessary to fight for “democratic freedoms” and see their allies as liberal Navalists, who “are also for democracy.”
Many leftists are so blinded by their personal hatred of Putin that they do not want to notice the obvious: the current Russian government is quite loyal to the communists and does not interfere with the propaganda of Marxism. It’s comical to watch how the left selflessly shout about “tightening the screws,” but they themselves, not at all concerned with issues of conspiracy, run their own VK groups, where they post up-to-date maps of circles, lists of left-wing resources (making the work of FSB employees easier), conduct streamers, without fear that Uncles in uniform will break in on them.
When this text was written, by decision of the Prosecutor General’s Office the VK group “Herald of the Storm” was blocked. Of course, the left will throw another hysteria about this. However, from a sober glance it is obvious that this is a one-time event. The Vestnik website and related resources continue to work, no arrests, no searches, nothing. Because our left, like Elusive Joe from the joke, never gave in to anyone. The so-called “left movement” (I would like to say “left lying”), due to zero influence on the masses and complete organizational insignificance, does not pose any threat to the ruling class; Accordingly, there is no reason for law enforcement officers, given the activity of Ukrainian saboteurs, to waste time on leftist screamers from the Internet. If they had not so persistently shouted “no war” at every corner and had not made friends with liberal foreign agents (read: spies), then they would not have been noticed at all.
Returning to the topic of trade unions, the aspirations of the left that a party will be born from a strong trade union movement is the position of tailism, not Marxism. Let me quote my article against economism:
“Our leftists, referring to individual statements by Lenin about the need to participate in strikes, are guided by the following “logic”: 1) the success of Bolshevism occurred against the backdrop of open forms of economic struggle, 2) today workers are not becoming Marxists, 3) today workers are not on strike, conclusion - we need to use all our might to “ignite” the economic struggle and then we will be able to repeat the success of the Bolsheviks.
Opportunists ignore the fact that the economic strike from the works of V.I. Lenin is a fact of real life at that time. It arose and took place spontaneously without any participation of any political forces. The beginning of the 20th century was a period of spontaneous upsurge of the proletarian movement throughout the world, caused by merciless exploitation and the powerless situation of workers. Today the situation is radically different. The bourgeoisie learned lessons from socialist revolutions and learned to effectively “extinguish” the waves of discontent of the masses with cash handouts and resignations of politicians. The proletarians themselves are infected with bourgeois-democratic illusions, they believe that the source of their misfortunes are specific politicians, neighboring nations, etc., and they do not see anything shameful in the institution of wage slavery (“if you work well, the owner will pay you well”) or they believe that they can “open their own business” and become small-medium owners.”
I repeat, trade unions under capitalism cannot be revolutionary subjects, and now they are exclusively peddlers of trade unionism, essentially a bourgeois worldview among the proletarians. And to expect that without a party, without mass propaganda, the communists will be able to “seize” influence from the bourgeoisie in the trade unions is the height of naivety. And to expect that the proletarians themselves, in the heat of strikes, will create a Communist Party is no longer naivety, but idiocy.
So, in what way should a party be created? We, breakthroughists, propose to follow the Leninist path and create a party through the organization of a prototype central organ , that is, a Marxist publication. In the article “Where to Start,” which formed the basis of the concept of the work “What is to be done?”, Lenin wrote:
“In our opinion, the starting point of activity, the first practical step towards creating the desired organization [of the party], and finally, the main thread, following which we could steadily develop, deepen and expand this organization, should be the establishment of an all-Russian political newspaper... Without it, it would be impossible systematic conduct of fundamentally consistent and comprehensive propaganda and agitation, which constitutes the constant and main task of Social Democracy in general and a particularly urgent task of the present moment, when interest in politics and issues of socialism has been awakened in the broadest sections of the population.”
And further:
“The newspaper is not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but also a collective organizer.”
Why exactly a political publication (newspaper, magazine, etc.)? Firstly , students of Marxism can immediately apply and consolidate their acquired knowledge, undertaking to cover this or that issue in an article or note; The articles themselves allow the editors to judge how correctly and deeply the young comrade has mastered Marxism. Secondly , the joint organization and maintenance of the work of the publication is the very practice that creates an educational team, as described above. Thirdly , a circle of devoted readers is formed around the publication, who are gradually involved in agitation and propaganda work and are co-opted into the editorial staff. In this way, both communist cadres are forged and a circle of supporters of the future organization is formed.
We call on all leftists who are disillusioned with “party Marxism” to cooperate. Despite the cries of breakthrough-phobes about a “sect,” we are always open to comradely dialogue. We do not isolate ourselves and do not suffer from petty-bourgeois competitive fuss on the principle “don’t be deceived elsewhere”! Under no circumstances do we want the reader to take our materials for granted. We want him to pass them through his mind. Therefore, dear comrades, read the classics of Marxism, read the breakthroughists, read the leftists - the truth will definitely be achieved if the researcher has a scientifically understood conscience.
R. Ogienko
3/11/2023
https://prorivists.org/87_party/
Google Translator
********
“Have pity not on the dead, pity on the living”
November 4, 15:36
“Have pity not for the dead, pity the living”: how things stand in Russia with helping military personnel with PTS
Over the entire period of its existence, Russia, like the Russian Empire, managed to take part in more than one war. Each of them was in one way or another accompanied by casualties both among the civilian population and among the military contingent itself. However, what is more significant is the physical and mental state in which those who survived returned.
The history of tragic military conflicts and confrontations not only gave birth to victories and defeats, but also left an indelible mark on the lives of many people and society as a whole. The dominance of cruelty, violence and fear is a collective trauma brought to the periphery of public consciousness. Today, when our country is once again going through a stage of armed conflict, the question of the fate of thousands of morally crippled military personnel and volunteers is being posed head-on - we are talking about post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is not enough to survive the war, the main thing is to survive after. And this is a real problem of the subsequent integration of a person who spent time and saw a lot at the front back into society. When in battle everything is decided by forced cruelty, the transfer of similar practices to civilian life after completion of service becomes commonplace. And peaceful life in this case is limited only to civilians, because what is happening in the heads of those who have returned is far from calm and tranquil.
In terms of scale and intensity, the SVO surpassed other military clashes in which Russia participated. This means that there will be many more combat veterans and they will only join the ranks of those who served in Afghanistan or participated in the Chechen War. We are already seeing a growing fire in the form of criminal and operational reports. And this is a direct sign to the state, which should have started working proactively just yesterday. Today, thousands of combatants are gradually returning to society - in civilian life, many of them are faced with a heightened sense of justice, a feeling of abandonment and undervaluation, severe psychological disorders and difficult social adaptation. This is a problem that will only get worse in the future if we leave these people to their own devices. Not everyone can independently understand what exactly is happening to them and whether it is happening in principle. It is important to understand that PTSD is a real condition that requires professional help and social support. Therefore, work in this direction should become one of the priorities for the state.
How has the approach to treating PTSD in the military evolved?
The modern approach to the problem of PTSD in its final form took shape quite late - only by the beginning of the 80s of the 20th century. Nevertheless, the history of this mental disorder is much more extensive and longer; the paradigm for its treatment has been developed over decades. For the first time, descriptions of psychological changes and psychopathological disorders among combatants appeared in the works of ancient philosophers and historians, for example, Herodotus and Lucretius. Scientific research as such began later, while information about mental disorders that arise in military personnel upon returning to civilian life was scattered and fragmentary. A comprehensive scientific description of the taxonomy of chronic military neurosis was formed by the middle of the 19th century by Abram Kardiner, who included in the clinical picture excitability, an unrestrained type of reaction, fixation on the circumstances of injury, withdrawal from reality and a predisposition to uncontrollable aggressive reactions. The industrial revolution played an important role, namely the creation of extensive transport systems (in particular, railways), and subsequently major accidents with casualties and injuries. Thus, in 1867, a monograph “On Railway and Other Injuries of the Nervous System” authored by John Erik Eriksen appeared in Philadelphia. He described in detail the neuropsychiatric disorders in people injured as a result of train crashes. So, in addition to the fact that the seriously injured as a result of railway accidents received physical injuries, the victims also experienced neurotic manifestations: insomnia, anxiety, apathy, and so on. Those who simply witnessed the incident also complained of similar symptoms.
At the same time, humanity witnessed the first major armed confrontation of the modern type, which resulted in a large number of casualties. And here we are talking about the American Civil War (1861-1865). The concept of “soldier’s heart”, proposed by Jacob Mendez Da Costa, who described changes in the psychology of former participants in the conflict, came into medical use. At that time, the symptoms were attributed to “melancholia” or “mild psychosis.” This was explained by dissatisfaction, dissatisfaction and homesickness. In principle, the syndrome described by Da Costa was similar to the current definition of PTSD. Subsequently, the psychological and psychiatric consequences of traumatic events were assessed primarily from purely syndromic positions in relation to any one, leading, psychotrauma. This is how “survivor syndrome”, “concentration camp syndrome”, “post-emotional syndrome” and others appeared.
Based on all these studies, medicine has already developed the concept of “traumatic neurosis,” which is supposed to have been introduced into use by the German neurologist Hermann Oppenheim, who actually described the symptoms of what we now call PTSD. Based on the results of the research of the mentioned scientists, modern disaster medicine was formed, including armed confrontations. The Swiss Eduard Stirlin is considered its founder. However, researchers from Russia and other parts of the former USSR also made their contribution to this direction - Lev Brusilovsky, who studied the results of the influence on the psyche of the earthquake on the Crimean Peninsula in 1929. Particular attention of researchers was paid to the effects of wartime stress on the subsequent mental state of combatants - participants in hostilities.
In principle, each new armed confrontation became a subject for the study of psychological problems and the formation of traumatic neuroses. Back in 1916, before the end of the First World War, the German psychiatrist Emil Kraepelin proved that deep mental shocks that form into psychological trauma lead to serious disorders in the future. Moreover, for the most part they remain with a person until the end of his life. Then the trench meat grinder of the First World War gave way to the Second World War, as a result of which the American anthropologist and follower of Freud Abram Kardiner conducted research on the issue of what is today called PTSD. At the time, the disorder was interpreted as a "war neurosis" and the subsequent social integration of ex-combatants into post-war civilian life. And here an important question is already raised, to which we must pay special attention, given the events of today: Kardiner concluded that the emergence and subsequent development of this neurosis is essentially the result of the failure of this very integration.
The next impetus for research in the field of PTSD was the war in Vietnam, which already gave the traumas received by combatants the name “Vietnam syndrome.” In 1970, as a result of the work of a number of psychiatrists, notably Robert Jay Lifton and Chaim Shatan, who conducted extensive interviews with Vietnam veterans suffering from so-called flashbacks, paranoia and other symptoms, the traumatic condition became widely known. Military personnel who went through the Vietnam conflict were characterized by states of alienation and indifference with the loss of usual interests, increased excitability and irritability, recurring dreams of a “combat” nature, and feelings of personal guilt. According to various estimates, Americans lost from 40 thousand to 60 thousand people killed in the Vietnam War, of which, according to the medical journal Federal Practitioner, 20 thousand suicides occurred in 1993. As a result, complexes of symptoms were developed among combatants, which at that time did not correspond to any of the previously identified diseases. So, in 1980, Mardi Horowitz and a number of researchers proposed to distinguish it as an independent syndrome called post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Subsequently, he also developed diagnostic criteria for the disease, adopted first for the American classifications of mental illnesses, and later for ICD-10 - International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision - a version of the ICD classifier developed in 1989, adopted by WHO in 1990 and replaced in 2022 by the next version of the ICD (11th revision).
In domestic psychiatry, interest in PTSD was caused by military operations in Afghanistan (1979-1989), the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant (1986), the earthquake in Armenia (1988) and other social upheavals, including two Chechen campaigns. Here the so-called military psychology comes into play, which became a separate discipline at the beginning of the 20th century - in 1908, a department of military psychology was established in the St. Petersburg Society of Advocates of Military Knowledge under the leadership of Gerasim Shumakov, who is rightfully considered the founder of military psychology. Many domestic researchers worked on this topic, whose works were lost in Soviet times. At that time, science was dominated by ideology, which resulted in the confusion of the subject of study with official narratives and the replacement of scientific analysis and methodology with propaganda. In accordance with the resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks “On pedological perversions in the system of People's Commissariat of Education” of 1936, military psychological laboratories were almost completely eliminated. Only research continued in the field of studying the psychological states of pilots. It was only in the 90s that attitudes towards psychological spectrum disorders changed.
However, it is worth noting that in Europe, the USSR, and the USA, for a long time there was extensive stigmatization of military personnel with PTSD, they also created the illusion of the normality and ordinariness of such conditions. Admitting there was a problem was seen as a sign of weakness and cowardice. In the same Union, mental disorders were initially classified as various forms of shell shock. Some historians are of the opinion that this state of affairs was caused by “masking” terminology - that is, this category included not only military personnel with traumatic brain injury and damage as a result of a blast wave, but also mentally unstable soldiers who experienced psychological shock.
Afghanistan, Chechnya, Northern Military District - how the lives of soldiers developed and will develop after conflicts
According to the Justice information system, from January 2008 to March 2015, 1,177 former soldiers were on trial and were awarded various military awards. Compared to the population of our large country, this figure does not seem particularly significant, especially if we take into account the number of military personnel. However, we are not talking about those who eventually became drunkards, drug addicts, or - in the saddest version - committed suicide.
At least 620 thousand people took part in the Afghan war. Moreover, according to the Union of Afghanistan Veterans, this number is 1.5 million. According to the organization, at the end of hostilities, at least 35% of military personnel were in dire need of psychological support, and at the same time, up to 70% were ready to go back to the hot spot . According to information as of November 1989, 372 thousand of those who served experienced alcoholism of varying severity, including drug addiction. At the end of 1989, 3.7 thousand soldiers were accused in cases of murder or robbery.
At least 600 thousand military personnel fought in the two Chechen campaigns. According to the Serbsky Center for Social and Forensic Psychiatry, by 2003, 70% of veterans had PTSD, and by 2004, more than a thousand people attempted suicide. As of 2005, 13 thousand veterans of the Chechen war were registered in psychoneurological dispensaries, 100 thousand were convicted of serious crimes. Already in 2022, the Trauma Point law office announced a 4% increase in the number of murders and attempted murders. As the organization clarifies, the growth in indicators occurred for the first time in 20 years. Moreover, it is noted that this may be due to the ongoing SVO, which is in principle reasonable, given the experience of history and the impact of wars and conflicts on military personnel. However, it is worth noting that until the Ukrainian issue is resolved, it is impossible to talk about the objectivity of such data due to incomplete statistics.
According to Rosalkogolregulirovanie, compared to 2021, there is now an increase in alcohol consumption. Retail sales of strong drinks (more than 9%) in 2022 increased by 6.8%, vodka - by 5.9%, and all alcoholic products (excluding beer, mead and catering chains) - by 3.5%. Moreover, 70-80% of murders in Russia are committed while intoxicated. “Traumpunkt” sees the reason for the increase in crime among military personnel, including acquired PTSD. According to the Ministry of Health, among military personnel who took part in hostilities, the likelihood of developing this disorder is 3-11%. Among the wounded, this percentage is higher – 30%.
Readovka has already published interviews with participants in the above-mentioned hostilities. And in each of them one thesis is clearly expressed - there was no rehabilitation, it simply did not exist.
Neither after Afghanistan, nor after Chechnya, the state was not sufficiently concerned with supporting its own citizens. As a result, Russia was faced with suicides, the inability of those who yesterday overcame themselves and fought for their homeland to return to peaceful life, here and natural problems with the law.
And what should become for us, if not the main, then one of the priority tasks, is that rehabilitation and psychological assistance for military personnel appear after the military training. The war in Ukraine, where there are truly bloody battles, is now a much more significant threat, and the consequences, if nothing is done, will be even worse. As one of the fighters told Readovka, returning home is like burying a killed comrade, an equally difficult and terrible event in which you don’t know what to do.
Soon, hundreds of thousands of soldiers will begin to return to civilian life, some of them exchanging prison sentences for a trip to the front. These people were already in not the most comfortable conditions; let’s leave out the reasons why they found themselves in them; after all, this was a series of stressful events. Someone has already atoned for their guilt, someone will soon be in their native monastery, and we cannot simply abandon them to their fate. Already now, we periodically see in news reports another note about how this return to the normal world is actually happening - not as successfully as we would like. There are known cases of suicide by mobilized people who killed themselves directly at the front or in military units, or during vacation, in anticipation of returning to the Northern Military District. Moreover, relatives note that the men suffered from panic attacks and anxiety. There were also reports of murders committed by soldiers returning from the war. So, in Bataysk, a man strangled his wife and then stabbed himself. There are not isolated stories when crimes were committed while intoxicated or in the heat of conflict, as happened in a cafe in Angarsk, where a member of the Wagner PMC shot two people.
Therefore, the main thing is to create conditions for providing proper psychological assistance to those who need it. It is important to show these people that the country will not abandon them, that we care about their problems. And what’s even more important is to make it clear that asking for support is not shameful, but normal, necessary and useful. We live in a time when mass distrust of psychologists and psychotherapists is combined with society's gradual awareness of their benefits. But mental trauma is the same as physical trauma. They also require treatment and are curable. The stigma of psychological problems must be broken. When, if not now? Otherwise, we will face a repetition of the story of the once youngest English officer of the First World War, Reginald Battersby, who, already in his dying oblivion, at the age of 77, returned to the war that never let him go, shouting: “The Boches are coming!”
(c) Anastasia Yashchenko
https://readovka.news/news/168296 - zinc (follow the link for more topical interviews with veterans of Afghanistan, Chechnya and Northern Military District)
Yes, objectively there is a problem. I know from personal experience that I have encountered fighters for whom participation in hostilities left severe psychological trauma. Therefore, of course, issues of psychological support and rehabilitation must be addressed already during the war. Among my acquaintances there are already those who deal with similar issues at the regional level.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8746235.html
Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
Preferred socialism
November 8, 11:36
According to sociologists of the Russian Academy of Sciences, after the start of the SVO, a peak number of citizens wishing to live under sociolism was recorded in the country - the figures exceeded the peaks of 1998 and 2012, which were accompanied by economic and political crises.
There is nothing surprising here - with the beginning of the Northern Military District, the illusions associated with the country’s march to the golden billion collapsed, and the “blessed West” exposed its Orwellian mug, which was noticed by many citizens. Hence the growing popularity of socialist ideas, against the backdrop of a long-standing trend with the growing popularity of Stalin. Moreover, obviously, this percentage includes not only supporters of the Communist Party. It is also worth noting that many adherents of the “market that decides”, after the start of the Northern Military District, happily darted to the West or took the path of national treason. What citizens also could not help but note.
And the use of quasi-Soviet political and ideological narratives by the authorities also played a role in such a sociological surge.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8753121.html
Moscow State University is curtailing the training of specialists in information warfare
November 8, 9:37
Moscow State University is curtailing the training of specialists in information warfare
It became known that next year M.V. will participate in the “Information and Hybrid Wars” program at Moscow State University. There will be no Lomonosov set. In order not to solve the problem of rebellious teachers and students left without their chosen educational programs, the management of Moscow State University decided to simply close the “problem course” right in the middle of the educational process.
The current situation raises a number of questions:
1. Is this a personal decision of the dean or other heads of the university? What is the official reason for the elimination of the only course in the country dedicated to information and hybrid warfare?
2. Does this mean that such a program is not needed in Russia today or for some reason the dean of the Faculty of Political Science A.Yu. Shutov does not personally need it? What are Dean Shutov's real motives? Commercial? Political? Is this “anti-war protest/sabotage” on Shutov’s part?
3. Can such a decision be considered as an attempt to cover up all the violations that fall under the Labor Code and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which were committed by the dean in the process of implementing this program?
4. Is management aware that the SVO is ongoing and there is an acute shortage of personnel in the profile of this program? Which as of 2023 is the only one available to students in the country.
5. A lot has been done to torpedo this program and all the actions of the head of the faculty make one think seriously about the questions formulated, which indicate the personal interest of the dean of the faculty and probably other persons who, by prior conspiracy, are engaged in the liquidation of the objectionable program.
It is quite possible that soon a dispute from a labor conflict may move into the plane of interests of law enforcement agencies, which have already uncovered a number of “groups” in different universities of the country (see stories with “anti-war teachers at St. Petersburg State University”) Purely my subjective IMHO - there is some hidden sabotage taking place
here , especially since the university environment is permeated with internal collaborators no less than the creative environment, which citizens can quite often observe in detail. There is no need to talk about serious changes in the university environment at all, everything there is basically the same as before, which brings problems now ( like this episode at Moscow State University or previous episodes at St. Petersburg State University) and will bring many more problems in the future. And I’m still silent about the mass of pre-war stories related to HSE.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8752819.html
Google Translator
*********
AP: RUSSIA OPENS A VAST NATIONAL EXPOSITION AS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION APPROACHES
NOVEMBER 7, 2023 1 COMMENT
Associated Press, 11/4/23
MOSCOW (AP) — With pointed disdain for the West, Russia on Saturday unveiled a sprawling exposition highlighting the nation’s accomplishments, which will run through the months leading to the presidential election in which Vladimir Putin is widely expected to seek a new term.
Putin issued a decree in March to hold the exposition and some observers have seen it as aimed at creating an ideological framework for his reelection. News reports had suggested he might use the opening to announce his candidacy for the March election, but his spokesman later said he would not attend the event.
Putin has led Russia as president or prime minister since 2000, and reelection would extend his term until 2030.
The event is held at VDNKh, the vast exposition grounds in northern Moscow that was established by Josef Stalin and is renowned for its collection of elaborate Soviet Gothic-style pavilions. The setting plays to many Russians’ nostalgia for the Soviet era and echoes Putin’s drive to restore Russia as a superpower.
Thematically, the exposition focuses on Russia as a country of diverse ethnic groups and cultures unified by a sense of national purpose. It includes displays from each of Russia’s regions, as well as from the Luhansk and Donetsk regions of Ukraine that Russia claims to have annexed, along with an array of presentations on industry, education and technology will be on offer.
It also draws on the view of Russia being in a civilizational battle, a concept that has been in forefront of official discourse since Russia sent troops into Ukraine in February 2022.
“Any provocations and aggressive actions directed against Russia are doomed to failure. Because we are a single people, bound by a common history, fraternal bonds of friendship and mutual understanding,” Putin said in a message marking the opening of the exposition.
In a speech at the show’s opening day, Putin’s close ally Nikolai Patrushev, head of the national security council, amplified the idea.
“In contrast to the West, Russia has offered a civilizational choice based on preserving national sovereignty, mutual respect, equal partnership, traditional family values, protection of religious foundations and the rights of believers, as well as generally accepted norms of morality, ethics and social behavior,” he said.
“Historically, Russia has always been a bone in the throat of the West, interfering with the implementation of its hegemonic plans,” Patrushev said.
https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2023/11/ap- ... pproaches/
Well and good, but Nikolai can stuff those archaic patriarchal 'values and rights'. Obviously the Soviets didn't have time to finish that job, having survival constantly on their plate. The dictatorship of the proletariat will finish the job, by and by. Gotta wonder how much of these and like sentiments expressed by various folks are sincere and how much wartime propaganda meant to cement opposition to the West.
*******
How Macron promoted EDF, Westinghouse and the French military-industrial complex in Kazakhstan
November 6, 2023
Econopocalypse
Many journalists associated the recent visit of French President Emmanuel Macron to Kazakhstan with a forced reaction to the reduction in uranium supplies from Niger against the background of the coup. Part of the visit was indeed aimed at promoting French and American nuclear energy, but they turned out to be much more complex and interesting than uranium supplies alone.
Peaceful atom
According to Macron, nuclear power makes up 63% of France's energy sector and there is huge potential for further cooperation. Kazakhstan provides about 40% of France's uranium needs.
Macron's delegation included the head of the French uranium company Orano , which already has a mine in Kazakhstan. Now we are talking about providing uranium conversion and enrichment technologies to Kazakhstani enterprises.
During the visit, the construction of the first nuclear power plant in Kazakhstan was discussed. The decision on the project must be made by referendum, which looks like a politically biased action. The contractor is to be Framatome . This is a contracting organization for the French nuclear giant EDF. Specialization – development and production of equipment for nuclear power plants.
How effective cooperation with this company can be can be judged by the Olkiluoto-3 NPP project in Finland . A Franco-German consortium of which EDF was the core began construction of the EPR-1600 reactor in 2005. More than 1,400 contractors were involved in the work. This led to many inconsistencies during construction. The nuclear power plant was launched only in January 2023 after numerous minor accidents. The station's construction period was 18 years, and the original estimate was exceeded at least five times. The problem is that EDF in general and Framatome in particular have lost most of their competence in building reactors , since over the past 20 years there have been practically no orders for their construction for EDF. And quickly restoring these competencies is almost impossible.
Therefore, Westinghouse specialists are now engaged in the repair, maintenance and construction of new reactors in France ( we talked more about the expansion of American TNCs in a large article ).
Nevertheless, Framatome became a supplier of fuel assembly technologies (FA) of the AFA 3GTM design for the FA plant of Ulba-TVS LLP. The enterprise belongs to Kazatomprom and the Chinese CGNPC-URC.
Based on the data presented, Kazakhstan will receive a relatively low-power nuclear power plant with EPR-1200 reactors (not EPR-1600). The bulk of the project will most likely be carried out by a group of businesses associated with Westinghouse, since EDF simply may not have enough resources and competencies.
Fuel assemblies based on a French design will most likely be produced in Kazakhstan at the Ulba-TVS LLP enterprise, which is partially controlled by partners from China.
Despite the relatively workable option, this project will not solve the problems of energy supply in Kazakhstan . Networks and distribution systems are worn out and require huge capital investments. Cooling reactors requires huge volumes of water, an acute shortage of which is currently observed in the region. The issue of uranium enrichment also remains open. Even with technology from Orano, it may take years to master it.
Military radars
France will supply Kazakhstan with Ground Master 400 air defense radar systems to strengthen the country’s “sovereignty.” This consolation prize promised to the Kazakh authorities for “refusing to follow the path of a vassal”[Macron quote] highlights just how profound a change is taking place in the thinking of the Kazakh leadership. Until relatively recently, the Ministry of Defense of Kazakhstan focused on purchasing Russian systems, although in recent years cooperation with Turkish suppliers has also been actively developing . The active promotion of French weapons systems in Kazakhstan once again confirms that the country is actually under the control of Anglo-Saxon TNCs, which intend to use their weapons to protect their assets and interests in the region.
Ground Master systems are manufactured by THALES in partnership with Raytheon. THALES shareholders include the DASSAULT AVIATION concern and Vanguard, which is already well known to us.
Green energy
During the visit, an agreement was signed with the French oil and gas giant TotalEnegries on the construction of a wind farm with a capacity of 1 GW. Let us remind you that TotalEnergies is participating in a large-scale project to develop the Kashagan offshore oil field . Therefore, placing several wind turbines next to existing drilling platforms will not be difficult.
This can be used to cover up the exploitation of Kazakhstan’s oil and gas resources and demonstrate vivid footage of how TotalEnegries cares about the environment. It is difficult to judge the actual efficiency of a wind farm, since generation volumes will seriously depend on weather conditions. It is also very likely that some of the energy will not enter the Kazakhstan power grid, but will be used locally to power auxiliary equipment on drilling rigs. This will reduce the costs of laying power lines and synchronizing with the energy system of Kazakhstan.
TotalEnergies, like many other companies traditionally considered French , have long been under the control of large investment funds with American capital. A list of key TotalEnergies shareholders is here . Vanguard is also among the major shareholders.
In general, the approach of the Kazakh authorities to solving the country’s purely economic problems does not look rational, but rather demonstrates a lack of control and initiative on their part. So far, everything is developing according to the classic scenario : profits go to TNCs, debts go to the state [Kazakhstan]. This scheme was tested many times in various countries, which then became enslavingly dependent on IMF loans and TNC technologies.
https://rybar.ru/kak-makron-prodvigal-e ... azahstane/
November 8, 11:36
According to sociologists of the Russian Academy of Sciences, after the start of the SVO, a peak number of citizens wishing to live under sociolism was recorded in the country - the figures exceeded the peaks of 1998 and 2012, which were accompanied by economic and political crises.
There is nothing surprising here - with the beginning of the Northern Military District, the illusions associated with the country’s march to the golden billion collapsed, and the “blessed West” exposed its Orwellian mug, which was noticed by many citizens. Hence the growing popularity of socialist ideas, against the backdrop of a long-standing trend with the growing popularity of Stalin. Moreover, obviously, this percentage includes not only supporters of the Communist Party. It is also worth noting that many adherents of the “market that decides”, after the start of the Northern Military District, happily darted to the West or took the path of national treason. What citizens also could not help but note.
And the use of quasi-Soviet political and ideological narratives by the authorities also played a role in such a sociological surge.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8753121.html
Moscow State University is curtailing the training of specialists in information warfare
November 8, 9:37
Moscow State University is curtailing the training of specialists in information warfare
It became known that next year M.V. will participate in the “Information and Hybrid Wars” program at Moscow State University. There will be no Lomonosov set. In order not to solve the problem of rebellious teachers and students left without their chosen educational programs, the management of Moscow State University decided to simply close the “problem course” right in the middle of the educational process.
The current situation raises a number of questions:
1. Is this a personal decision of the dean or other heads of the university? What is the official reason for the elimination of the only course in the country dedicated to information and hybrid warfare?
2. Does this mean that such a program is not needed in Russia today or for some reason the dean of the Faculty of Political Science A.Yu. Shutov does not personally need it? What are Dean Shutov's real motives? Commercial? Political? Is this “anti-war protest/sabotage” on Shutov’s part?
3. Can such a decision be considered as an attempt to cover up all the violations that fall under the Labor Code and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which were committed by the dean in the process of implementing this program?
4. Is management aware that the SVO is ongoing and there is an acute shortage of personnel in the profile of this program? Which as of 2023 is the only one available to students in the country.
5. A lot has been done to torpedo this program and all the actions of the head of the faculty make one think seriously about the questions formulated, which indicate the personal interest of the dean of the faculty and probably other persons who, by prior conspiracy, are engaged in the liquidation of the objectionable program.
It is quite possible that soon a dispute from a labor conflict may move into the plane of interests of law enforcement agencies, which have already uncovered a number of “groups” in different universities of the country (see stories with “anti-war teachers at St. Petersburg State University”) Purely my subjective IMHO - there is some hidden sabotage taking place
here , especially since the university environment is permeated with internal collaborators no less than the creative environment, which citizens can quite often observe in detail. There is no need to talk about serious changes in the university environment at all, everything there is basically the same as before, which brings problems now ( like this episode at Moscow State University or previous episodes at St. Petersburg State University) and will bring many more problems in the future. And I’m still silent about the mass of pre-war stories related to HSE.
https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/8752819.html
Google Translator
*********
AP: RUSSIA OPENS A VAST NATIONAL EXPOSITION AS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION APPROACHES
NOVEMBER 7, 2023 1 COMMENT
Associated Press, 11/4/23
MOSCOW (AP) — With pointed disdain for the West, Russia on Saturday unveiled a sprawling exposition highlighting the nation’s accomplishments, which will run through the months leading to the presidential election in which Vladimir Putin is widely expected to seek a new term.
Putin issued a decree in March to hold the exposition and some observers have seen it as aimed at creating an ideological framework for his reelection. News reports had suggested he might use the opening to announce his candidacy for the March election, but his spokesman later said he would not attend the event.
Putin has led Russia as president or prime minister since 2000, and reelection would extend his term until 2030.
The event is held at VDNKh, the vast exposition grounds in northern Moscow that was established by Josef Stalin and is renowned for its collection of elaborate Soviet Gothic-style pavilions. The setting plays to many Russians’ nostalgia for the Soviet era and echoes Putin’s drive to restore Russia as a superpower.
Thematically, the exposition focuses on Russia as a country of diverse ethnic groups and cultures unified by a sense of national purpose. It includes displays from each of Russia’s regions, as well as from the Luhansk and Donetsk regions of Ukraine that Russia claims to have annexed, along with an array of presentations on industry, education and technology will be on offer.
It also draws on the view of Russia being in a civilizational battle, a concept that has been in forefront of official discourse since Russia sent troops into Ukraine in February 2022.
“Any provocations and aggressive actions directed against Russia are doomed to failure. Because we are a single people, bound by a common history, fraternal bonds of friendship and mutual understanding,” Putin said in a message marking the opening of the exposition.
In a speech at the show’s opening day, Putin’s close ally Nikolai Patrushev, head of the national security council, amplified the idea.
“In contrast to the West, Russia has offered a civilizational choice based on preserving national sovereignty, mutual respect, equal partnership, traditional family values, protection of religious foundations and the rights of believers, as well as generally accepted norms of morality, ethics and social behavior,” he said.
“Historically, Russia has always been a bone in the throat of the West, interfering with the implementation of its hegemonic plans,” Patrushev said.
https://natyliesbaldwin.com/2023/11/ap- ... pproaches/
Well and good, but Nikolai can stuff those archaic patriarchal 'values and rights'. Obviously the Soviets didn't have time to finish that job, having survival constantly on their plate. The dictatorship of the proletariat will finish the job, by and by. Gotta wonder how much of these and like sentiments expressed by various folks are sincere and how much wartime propaganda meant to cement opposition to the West.
*******
How Macron promoted EDF, Westinghouse and the French military-industrial complex in Kazakhstan
November 6, 2023
Econopocalypse
Many journalists associated the recent visit of French President Emmanuel Macron to Kazakhstan with a forced reaction to the reduction in uranium supplies from Niger against the background of the coup. Part of the visit was indeed aimed at promoting French and American nuclear energy, but they turned out to be much more complex and interesting than uranium supplies alone.
Peaceful atom
According to Macron, nuclear power makes up 63% of France's energy sector and there is huge potential for further cooperation. Kazakhstan provides about 40% of France's uranium needs.
Macron's delegation included the head of the French uranium company Orano , which already has a mine in Kazakhstan. Now we are talking about providing uranium conversion and enrichment technologies to Kazakhstani enterprises.
During the visit, the construction of the first nuclear power plant in Kazakhstan was discussed. The decision on the project must be made by referendum, which looks like a politically biased action. The contractor is to be Framatome . This is a contracting organization for the French nuclear giant EDF. Specialization – development and production of equipment for nuclear power plants.
How effective cooperation with this company can be can be judged by the Olkiluoto-3 NPP project in Finland . A Franco-German consortium of which EDF was the core began construction of the EPR-1600 reactor in 2005. More than 1,400 contractors were involved in the work. This led to many inconsistencies during construction. The nuclear power plant was launched only in January 2023 after numerous minor accidents. The station's construction period was 18 years, and the original estimate was exceeded at least five times. The problem is that EDF in general and Framatome in particular have lost most of their competence in building reactors , since over the past 20 years there have been practically no orders for their construction for EDF. And quickly restoring these competencies is almost impossible.
Therefore, Westinghouse specialists are now engaged in the repair, maintenance and construction of new reactors in France ( we talked more about the expansion of American TNCs in a large article ).
Nevertheless, Framatome became a supplier of fuel assembly technologies (FA) of the AFA 3GTM design for the FA plant of Ulba-TVS LLP. The enterprise belongs to Kazatomprom and the Chinese CGNPC-URC.
Based on the data presented, Kazakhstan will receive a relatively low-power nuclear power plant with EPR-1200 reactors (not EPR-1600). The bulk of the project will most likely be carried out by a group of businesses associated with Westinghouse, since EDF simply may not have enough resources and competencies.
Fuel assemblies based on a French design will most likely be produced in Kazakhstan at the Ulba-TVS LLP enterprise, which is partially controlled by partners from China.
Despite the relatively workable option, this project will not solve the problems of energy supply in Kazakhstan . Networks and distribution systems are worn out and require huge capital investments. Cooling reactors requires huge volumes of water, an acute shortage of which is currently observed in the region. The issue of uranium enrichment also remains open. Even with technology from Orano, it may take years to master it.
Military radars
France will supply Kazakhstan with Ground Master 400 air defense radar systems to strengthen the country’s “sovereignty.” This consolation prize promised to the Kazakh authorities for “refusing to follow the path of a vassal”[Macron quote] highlights just how profound a change is taking place in the thinking of the Kazakh leadership. Until relatively recently, the Ministry of Defense of Kazakhstan focused on purchasing Russian systems, although in recent years cooperation with Turkish suppliers has also been actively developing . The active promotion of French weapons systems in Kazakhstan once again confirms that the country is actually under the control of Anglo-Saxon TNCs, which intend to use their weapons to protect their assets and interests in the region.
Ground Master systems are manufactured by THALES in partnership with Raytheon. THALES shareholders include the DASSAULT AVIATION concern and Vanguard, which is already well known to us.
Green energy
During the visit, an agreement was signed with the French oil and gas giant TotalEnegries on the construction of a wind farm with a capacity of 1 GW. Let us remind you that TotalEnergies is participating in a large-scale project to develop the Kashagan offshore oil field . Therefore, placing several wind turbines next to existing drilling platforms will not be difficult.
This can be used to cover up the exploitation of Kazakhstan’s oil and gas resources and demonstrate vivid footage of how TotalEnegries cares about the environment. It is difficult to judge the actual efficiency of a wind farm, since generation volumes will seriously depend on weather conditions. It is also very likely that some of the energy will not enter the Kazakhstan power grid, but will be used locally to power auxiliary equipment on drilling rigs. This will reduce the costs of laying power lines and synchronizing with the energy system of Kazakhstan.
TotalEnergies, like many other companies traditionally considered French , have long been under the control of large investment funds with American capital. A list of key TotalEnergies shareholders is here . Vanguard is also among the major shareholders.
In general, the approach of the Kazakh authorities to solving the country’s purely economic problems does not look rational, but rather demonstrates a lack of control and initiative on their part. So far, everything is developing according to the classic scenario : profits go to TNCs, debts go to the state [Kazakhstan]. This scheme was tested many times in various countries, which then became enslavingly dependent on IMF loans and TNC technologies.
https://rybar.ru/kak-makron-prodvigal-e ... azahstane/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
Russian political elites on their U.S. counterparts: card cheats!
Uncategorized November 9, 2023
The 19th century American showman P.T. Barnum is best known for his aphorism “There’s a sucker born every minute.” This is precisely the kind of cynical card cheat who epitomizes America’s political establishment today in the view of Russian expert observers and legislators appearing on the widely watched talk show Evening with Vladimir Solovyov. They have in their crosshairs not just what they call “the Collective Biden,” meaning the senile, disoriented fool who has his finger on the red button plus the Deep State that writes his speeches and steers him to and from his speaking engagements. It also takes in scoundrels in the U.S. Senate like Chuck Schumer, my classmate (Harvard ’67) Mike Blumenthal and the ever notorious Lindsey Graham. Their sound bites are very frequently put up on the screen for the audience to better understand what Russia’s erstwhile “partners” abroad are saying.
Those of you who had experience watching RT (Russia Today) have never been exposed to this kind of trenchant analysis and utter contempt for the American political classes. This goes much further than what you might imagine when Western mainstream media concede that ‘there is little trust between the sides.’
If we dig a bit deeper, the contempt of the Russian political commentators, many of whom hold advanced academic degrees, is built on their conviction that American politicians, like their European Union counterparts today, are poorly educated if not simply ignoramuses. By a curious irony of fate, the Americans appear to Russian sophisticates to be the conniving rubes that Americans once saw in the Soviet leaders of Khrushchev’s time in power.
We all may have had a laugh at the expense of the utterly stupid German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock who said several months ago that “Vladimir Putin must change his course by 360 degrees.” But then in Moscow the biggest laughs have come at the expense of the seemingly well-turned out, Yale-educated Jake Sullivan, National Security Adviser to the President, and his never to be lived down quote from a couple of weeks before the 7 October Hamas attack on Israel that “the Middle East is quieter now than it has been in two decades.”
However, these Russian panelists are laughing through their tears. The value of an Ivy League education, once considered the nec plus ultra by ambitious oligarch parents in Moscow, has been shown to be nil. More to the point, they see no alternative to preparedness for the worst atrocities to be unleashed by the United States against Russia’s allies, like Iran, at any moment. That is the unsubtle hint they read into the stationing of a nuclear-armed U.S. submarine in the Red Sea at present. They foresee the outbreak of direct warfare with Washington at any moment. Hence, the Russians are determined to further increase military expenditures and to boost the military industrial complex several times over in the immediate future. To put things in the perspective of Lev Tolstoy in his Epilogue to War and Peace, Vladimir Putin is the instrument of Russian elites as much or more than he is their pathfinder.
I mention all of the foregoing to help readers appreciate how the Russian political elites and the Kremlin look at the suggestions now surfacing in U.S. and Western media that the Russia-Ukraine war has reached an impasse and that it is time for the sides to negotiate a peace.
The Russians take this to mean that the United States has shifted its priorities to the conflict in the Middle East and to preparing for the coming armed confrontation with China. Kiev can now be let go without calling undue attention to America’s unreliability as defense guarantor, because global media are focused on the Hamas-Israel fight.
However, from the standpoint of Russian elites the war in Ukraine has tilted decisively in Moscow’s favor now that Kiev has largely exhausted its human and material reserves for waging war. These elites have no interest whatsoever in a Korea-like solution, in a ‘frozen conflict’ that could be warmed up again at some time in the future when Washington so decides. No, they will not sit down at a negotiating table until and unless Kiev capitulates and accepts what amounts to neutrality and removal of the neo-Nazi directed Zelensky regime. Moscow is ready to fight on ‘as long as it takes’ to achieve its objectives.
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2023
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2023/11/09/ ... rd-cheats/
*******
What Message Did Russia Send By Completing Its Planned Withdrawal From The CFE Treaty?
ANDREW KORYBKO
NOV 9, 2023
Russia has the political will to do what’s needed for ensuring its national security interests without having to depend on the discredited goodwill of its Western rivals who can no longer be trusted.
Russia completed its planned withdrawal from the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) six months after announcing its intent in early May, which the US, Poland, and Germany were responsible for as explained in this analysis here at the time. NATO then suspended its participation in that pact, after which Russia ruled out any new arms control deals with the bloc after blaming the US for failing to express any sincere interest in negotiating such in good faith over the years.
The message being sent by this move, which was preceded by Russia revoking ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) last week in order to establish legal parity with the US, is that Moscow no longer trusts the West enough to enter into strategic deals with it. National interests in these security domains will now be ensured through cutting-edge military-technical developments such as hypersonic weaponry that force this bloc to recognize the balance of power and negotiate accordingly.
This insight directly leads to those latest reports suggesting the existence of secret US-Russian talks over Ukraine, the subject of which concerns strategic security but in a different way than the CFE, CTBT, or the New Start Treaty that Russia stopping participating in shortly after the start of the year. Those three are arms control pacts regulating what each side can wield against the other, where exactly, and in which quantities, while the aforesaid conflict is a US proxy war against Russia waged by hybrid means.
The latter’s inevitable end and the consequent state of military-strategic affairs between those two nuclear superpowers could then set the basis upon which they might consider resuming arms control talks for pragmatism’s sake to retain the newfound balance between them if the political will is present. It obviously can’t be taken for granted that the US would have any such interest in doing so, but at the same time, its latest talks with China on this subject mean that it can’t be ruled out either.
The best-case scenario is that the US’ proxy war on Russia through Ukraine freezes by sometime next year, after which the US signals its sincere interest in recommencing talks with Russia over the New START Treaty prior to its expiry in February 2026, thus giving both enough time to negotiate a new one. In parallel, the US could advance its latest talks with China and ultimately try to reach a trilateral strategic arms pact with Russia or at least seriously suggest something of the sort as a goal by 2030.
In reality, however, the abovementioned best-case scenario probably won’t come to pass. It’s more likely that the proxy war will freeze, but without the resumption of US-Russian arms control talks, whether over the New START Treaty, CFE, CTBT, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty that the US withdrew from in 2019, or the Open Skies one that the US then Russia withdrew from in 2020-2021. Due to the US’ disinterest in restoring arms control pacts, the global systemic transition will remain chaotic.
Russia is prepared to defend itself in that probable scenario as evidenced by the completion of its planned withdrawal from the CFE Treaty and the recent decision to revoke its ratification of the CTBT. These moves prove that Moscow has the political will to do what’s needed without having to depend on the discredited goodwill of its Western rivals who can no longer be trusted. It would of course be best if arms control regimes returned, but Russia won’t beg for this, and it can ensure its security without them.
https://korybko.substack.com/p/what-mes ... completing
Uncategorized November 9, 2023
The 19th century American showman P.T. Barnum is best known for his aphorism “There’s a sucker born every minute.” This is precisely the kind of cynical card cheat who epitomizes America’s political establishment today in the view of Russian expert observers and legislators appearing on the widely watched talk show Evening with Vladimir Solovyov. They have in their crosshairs not just what they call “the Collective Biden,” meaning the senile, disoriented fool who has his finger on the red button plus the Deep State that writes his speeches and steers him to and from his speaking engagements. It also takes in scoundrels in the U.S. Senate like Chuck Schumer, my classmate (Harvard ’67) Mike Blumenthal and the ever notorious Lindsey Graham. Their sound bites are very frequently put up on the screen for the audience to better understand what Russia’s erstwhile “partners” abroad are saying.
Those of you who had experience watching RT (Russia Today) have never been exposed to this kind of trenchant analysis and utter contempt for the American political classes. This goes much further than what you might imagine when Western mainstream media concede that ‘there is little trust between the sides.’
If we dig a bit deeper, the contempt of the Russian political commentators, many of whom hold advanced academic degrees, is built on their conviction that American politicians, like their European Union counterparts today, are poorly educated if not simply ignoramuses. By a curious irony of fate, the Americans appear to Russian sophisticates to be the conniving rubes that Americans once saw in the Soviet leaders of Khrushchev’s time in power.
We all may have had a laugh at the expense of the utterly stupid German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock who said several months ago that “Vladimir Putin must change his course by 360 degrees.” But then in Moscow the biggest laughs have come at the expense of the seemingly well-turned out, Yale-educated Jake Sullivan, National Security Adviser to the President, and his never to be lived down quote from a couple of weeks before the 7 October Hamas attack on Israel that “the Middle East is quieter now than it has been in two decades.”
However, these Russian panelists are laughing through their tears. The value of an Ivy League education, once considered the nec plus ultra by ambitious oligarch parents in Moscow, has been shown to be nil. More to the point, they see no alternative to preparedness for the worst atrocities to be unleashed by the United States against Russia’s allies, like Iran, at any moment. That is the unsubtle hint they read into the stationing of a nuclear-armed U.S. submarine in the Red Sea at present. They foresee the outbreak of direct warfare with Washington at any moment. Hence, the Russians are determined to further increase military expenditures and to boost the military industrial complex several times over in the immediate future. To put things in the perspective of Lev Tolstoy in his Epilogue to War and Peace, Vladimir Putin is the instrument of Russian elites as much or more than he is their pathfinder.
I mention all of the foregoing to help readers appreciate how the Russian political elites and the Kremlin look at the suggestions now surfacing in U.S. and Western media that the Russia-Ukraine war has reached an impasse and that it is time for the sides to negotiate a peace.
The Russians take this to mean that the United States has shifted its priorities to the conflict in the Middle East and to preparing for the coming armed confrontation with China. Kiev can now be let go without calling undue attention to America’s unreliability as defense guarantor, because global media are focused on the Hamas-Israel fight.
However, from the standpoint of Russian elites the war in Ukraine has tilted decisively in Moscow’s favor now that Kiev has largely exhausted its human and material reserves for waging war. These elites have no interest whatsoever in a Korea-like solution, in a ‘frozen conflict’ that could be warmed up again at some time in the future when Washington so decides. No, they will not sit down at a negotiating table until and unless Kiev capitulates and accepts what amounts to neutrality and removal of the neo-Nazi directed Zelensky regime. Moscow is ready to fight on ‘as long as it takes’ to achieve its objectives.
©Gilbert Doctorow, 2023
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2023/11/09/ ... rd-cheats/
*******
What Message Did Russia Send By Completing Its Planned Withdrawal From The CFE Treaty?
ANDREW KORYBKO
NOV 9, 2023
Russia has the political will to do what’s needed for ensuring its national security interests without having to depend on the discredited goodwill of its Western rivals who can no longer be trusted.
Russia completed its planned withdrawal from the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) six months after announcing its intent in early May, which the US, Poland, and Germany were responsible for as explained in this analysis here at the time. NATO then suspended its participation in that pact, after which Russia ruled out any new arms control deals with the bloc after blaming the US for failing to express any sincere interest in negotiating such in good faith over the years.
The message being sent by this move, which was preceded by Russia revoking ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) last week in order to establish legal parity with the US, is that Moscow no longer trusts the West enough to enter into strategic deals with it. National interests in these security domains will now be ensured through cutting-edge military-technical developments such as hypersonic weaponry that force this bloc to recognize the balance of power and negotiate accordingly.
This insight directly leads to those latest reports suggesting the existence of secret US-Russian talks over Ukraine, the subject of which concerns strategic security but in a different way than the CFE, CTBT, or the New Start Treaty that Russia stopping participating in shortly after the start of the year. Those three are arms control pacts regulating what each side can wield against the other, where exactly, and in which quantities, while the aforesaid conflict is a US proxy war against Russia waged by hybrid means.
The latter’s inevitable end and the consequent state of military-strategic affairs between those two nuclear superpowers could then set the basis upon which they might consider resuming arms control talks for pragmatism’s sake to retain the newfound balance between them if the political will is present. It obviously can’t be taken for granted that the US would have any such interest in doing so, but at the same time, its latest talks with China on this subject mean that it can’t be ruled out either.
The best-case scenario is that the US’ proxy war on Russia through Ukraine freezes by sometime next year, after which the US signals its sincere interest in recommencing talks with Russia over the New START Treaty prior to its expiry in February 2026, thus giving both enough time to negotiate a new one. In parallel, the US could advance its latest talks with China and ultimately try to reach a trilateral strategic arms pact with Russia or at least seriously suggest something of the sort as a goal by 2030.
In reality, however, the abovementioned best-case scenario probably won’t come to pass. It’s more likely that the proxy war will freeze, but without the resumption of US-Russian arms control talks, whether over the New START Treaty, CFE, CTBT, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty that the US withdrew from in 2019, or the Open Skies one that the US then Russia withdrew from in 2020-2021. Due to the US’ disinterest in restoring arms control pacts, the global systemic transition will remain chaotic.
Russia is prepared to defend itself in that probable scenario as evidenced by the completion of its planned withdrawal from the CFE Treaty and the recent decision to revoke its ratification of the CTBT. These moves prove that Moscow has the political will to do what’s needed without having to depend on the discredited goodwill of its Western rivals who can no longer be trusted. It would of course be best if arms control regimes returned, but Russia won’t beg for this, and it can ensure its security without them.
https://korybko.substack.com/p/what-mes ... completing
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
On official anti-Westernism (Pt 1)
No. 11/87.XI.2023
Introduction
At the beginning of 2022, the leadership of the Russian Federation drew conclusions from the events of the previous eight years, identified the enemy and moved the confrontation with him into the active phase. On the external front, the SVO began, and on the internal front, the so-called cleansing began. liberal contingent. Now, in November 2023, the most apolitical citizen of the Russian Federation can clearly see that the result of the ongoing war will significantly affect his fate.
At such a time, the leadership is burdened with an important task: it is necessary to awaken the population, who have missed the last eight years, from peaceful market hibernation, mobilize those who have awakened to a state of self-sacrifice and direct their activities in the direction desired by the leadership. For this purpose, it is necessary to explain the reasons for the war, demonstrate the enemy in all its ugliness and the strategy for achieving victory. That is, in some way, close your eyes to Article 13.2 of the Constitution (“No ideology can be established as state or mandatory”) and begin ideological work to introduce “depoliticized patriotism” [1]. One of the results was the concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation [2] (hereinafter referred to as the “concept”), the main theses of which form the basis for the speeches of Russian officials.
Let us evaluate the consistency of such ideological work in a real military situation using the example of a free presentation of the “concept” authored by the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation N.P. Patrusheva.
1. Theses
In one sentence, the article could read like this:
“At this revolutionary [4] moment, the old Western-centric world order is collapsing, and the entire anti-Western part of humanity needs to put an end to neocolonial hegemony, for which it is necessary to unite around the anti-Western center of gravity - Russia, whose historical creative mission is to maintain a global balance of power and build a genuine multipolar democratic international system, enshrined in the international legal system.”
Let's reveal the theses.
Mr. Patrushev declares the observed global changes, that is, affecting most of the world, to be revolutionary (tectonic). Following the “concept,”
1.1. Revolutionary changeshe sees the property of revolutionism in the transition from the old unjust world order to a new, more just one. This transition is part of the “natural course of history,” and it begins with the dismantling of the colonial system “ after the Second World War under the direct influence of the achievements and victories of the Soviet Union .” Evidence of the transition is a visible shift in the center of economic activity “from the global West to countries that have hitherto been called developing countries” against the backdrop of a growing “crisis of economic globalization.” Mr. Patrushev sees the manifestation of revolutionary spirit in violence: the founding countries of the old world order are trying to restrain the “natural course of history” with the help of military domination and the neocolonial system.
1.2. Cause of upheaval. The enemy and his ideological weapon
The enemies identified are “Atlanticists”, “Westerners”, “USA and other Anglo-Saxon states” and “countries of the global West”. The history of these countries, as presented by the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, is the history of a parasite that extracts resources using a system of “colonial-imperialist” robbery carried out by force by the owners of large capital - transnational companies. These same companies carry out a policy that bypasses the authorities of these countries, a policy of “neocolonial hegemony”, trying to “preserve their benefits and privileges” through forceful domination, international terrorism and transnational organized crime, gross violation of international law, organization of military conflicts, attempts to collapse uncontrolled integration associations: ASEAN, SCO, BRICS, CIS, EAEU and others.
At the same time, throughout history, the enemy fears Russia “for its greatness and power,” and also perceives it as a constant threat due to the fact that the USSR began to dismantle the colonial system.
The enemy's main ideological weapon is his belief that
“ America’s messianic destiny is to rule the world through a strong foreign policy, without recognizing anyone’s interests.”
To achieve this, the enemy’s ideological arsenal includes: 1) “scientific racism”; 2) the ideology of their own superiority, “which they always had”; 3) reformatting the mentality and spirituality of the population of subordinate countries; 4) the idea of globalism, the complete opposite of patriotism , which (globalism) does not recognize the diversity of cultures and ways of life and is designed to forcefully drive all countries and peoples under the banner of Western consumer civilization; 5) theories of gender diversity; 6) pseudo-ecological doctrines (substantiating a radical reduction in the human population); 7) pseudoscientific concept of transhumanism; 8) reliance on inhumane, openly misanthropic ideas.
1.3. The essence of the next world order and comrades on the way to it
As an alternative to “global parasitism,” Mr. Patrushev voices the idea of “strengthening a multipolar world and preserving traditional moral values and cultural and civilizational identity.”
This idea will be brought to life by a “natural” (as a response to the pressure of Western hegemony) unification into a broad anti-Western coalition of states (“combining the potential and conscientious efforts of the entire international community based on a balance of forces and interests”), which “defend their path, hallowed by a thousand years experience and traditions of their ancestors" and are waging a "struggle for freedom." Maintaining the emerging balance and resolving problems in international relations will be ensured by the supremacy of deidealogized international law, which spells out the following principles: non-acceptance of hegemony, non-interference in the internal affairs of partners, mutual respect, as well as unconditional recognition of the right of states to choose their own path of development, their social, political and economic device. Violation of these principles, for example, “attempts by any states and interstate associations to achieve global dominance in the military sphere,” implies the forceful intervention of joint forces in order to restore the given order.
The anti-Western coalition is invited to unite around Russia, which offers an “alternative path”, the parameters of which are “reflected in the new edition of the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation.” For what reason? Russia is a distinctive state-civilization with a “creative civilizational role”, “the core of the civilizational community of the Russian world.” Russia’s historically established messianic destiny is “maintaining the global balance of power, building a multipolar international system,” making “a decisive contribution to maintaining global security and ensuring the peaceful development of states.” At the same time, the fight with Western countries is expected only until they return to pragmatic interaction with Russia:
“Russia does not consider itself an enemy of the West, does not isolate itself from it, and is ready for dialogue with the United States as one of the poles of a multipolar world based on the principles of sovereign equality, mutual benefit and respect for each other’s interests.”
2. Problems and solutions proposed by the Russian authorities
Let us formulate Mr. Patrushev’s voiced theses in the form of the problem under study and proposed solutions, and in each part of the form we will separate the observations from the analysis based on them.
2.1. Issues
Observations:
Western countries are the heirs of the colonial world order, dominating the world.
They hide their predatory essence under the guise of messianism, bringing the only possible order and goodness.
If they once had it, they have now completely lost any creative principle: they are only engaged in robbery on a planetary scale, while losing their economic advantage and ultimately causing another international crisis, up to a world war.
Politics in Western countries is formed not by government bodies elected by citizens, but by big capital.
They suppress all attempts at resistance by force and methods of inculcating an extremely anti-human ideology.
Analysis of the reasons for this behavior:
Western countries have been capital-driven agents of destruction throughout history.
They bring globalism to the world - control through a strong foreign policy, without recognizing anyone's interests. This idea grows out of the ethic of self-superiority, “which Western countries have always had.”
Such destructiveness is unnatural, since the “natural course of things” is a transition from globalism to multipolar patriotism.
2.2. Solutions
Observations:
The predatory and anti-human pressure of Western countries led by the hegemon gives rise to reaction.
Anti-Western countries are fighting for freedom and seeking to free themselves from the yoke of the hegemon.
Why are some of them already included in various alliances with the Russian Federation?
Performance analysis of the proposed solution:
Resistance to globalism is a logical proposal, since it is the “natural course of things.” At the same time, the hegemon will not become civilized through evolutionary means, so revolutionary power solutions are required.
What anti-Western states have in common is the very principle of having traditional moral values and cultural and civilizational identity, which “they have always had.”
Consequently, it is precisely these values that push towards fair unification and the development of de-ideologized international law. It is this that will become the support of multipolarity, as it will prohibit globalism and elevate mutual respect to an absolute.
Anti-Western states, due to their values, will fight with Western countries until the latter accept a multipolar way of life.
The creative civilization of Russia has a historical mission to build a peaceful multipolar international system. That is why the Russian Federation offers itself as the center of an anti-Western unification.
3. Central manipulation
Taking a closer look at the analytical part, we will find the following. Mr. Patrushev categorizes the totality of Western countries, stupefied by their own impunity, as a parasitic civilization. The reason for its gangster behavior at the present stage is quite accurately indicated in the analysis by aggressive large private capital, which shapes the policies of countries instead of the authorities elected by citizens. However, conducting a historical analysis from the pre-capitalist times of the Crusades, Mr. Secretary comes to the conclusion that Westerners have always sought to seize the resources of Russia. On the other hand, victims of Western aggression form pockets of resistance and offer solutions for peaceful coexistence. Mr. Patrushev does not indicate the capitalist essence of these states, but from the article we can conclude that they do not engage in aggressive activities because they are governed by government bodies elected by citizens that keep capital in check.
If the absence of capital does not prevent a civilization from being aggressive, and the presence of capital does not prevent a civilization from being peaceful, then, according to such an analysis, the character of the state is not related to capital, but to the ability of the elected government to establish control over it. But what exactly does such control provide? We will not find an explanation from Mr. Patrushev.
Let's take a closer look at this point. According to the materialistic, that is, scientific, understanding of the development of society, the economy is primary relative to everything in society. Capitalist relations constitute the leading content of the social life of both bourgeois sides of the confrontation, Western and anti-Western (except, of course, for socialist countries). The political superstructure in the form of a state is a way of formalizing this content, that is, control over the economic basis (relations of production), which makes it possible to maintain capitalist relations and restrain their further change by violent methods. What economic content does the bourgeois state retain? It strives for the expanded reproduction of capital, in other words, it exists within the framework of animal relations of the pursuit of profit: the exploitation of the proletariat and competition between groups of the bourgeoisie, that is, aggressive behavior both within the country in relation to the oppressed class and in relation to other countries. Thus, the subjective factor in the form of the state is limited in its actions by the content of the leading production relations that it is obliged to maintain. Simply put, materialist conditions squeeze the will of any bourgeois power into the narrow framework of two directions: to promote animal capitalist relations in every possible way, expanding the scope of their action, and to interfere with everything that seeks to change these relations. Moreover, in specific historical conditions, a number of completely materialistic reasons can push the bourgeois state to temporarily weaken the oppression of the working people and put on a mask of peacefulness and social responsibility. So, say, as was the case with the Scandinavian countries, which committed a similar deceptive maneuver in the class struggle in order to distract the proletariat from the revolutionary thoughts born of the example of the USSR.
However, in Mr. Patrushev’s universe, only Western countries fully follow the logic of the capitalist formation, but in countries of traditional values it is the will of citizens who elect bourgeois power that is able to go beyond the above framework and curb the wild laws of capital reproduction. Moreover, the will of citizens is capable of curbing the framework and laws of any formation, because the article in question, although it significantly affects the capitalist period, is not limited to it. Mr. Secretary does not indicate the origins of this ability, but since in his narrative it is not connected with the material world, then the reader can only figure out its connection with some nature of this or that community of people.
It turns out that a negative civilization is negative by its innate nature. That is why it now follows the laws of capitalism, is the bearer of “evil hypocritical globalism” and sets itself the goal of hiding behind the hypocritical mask of a zealous owner, to organize a continuous robbery of the whole world and drive it into the framework of one degenerate culture. It also turns out that a positive civilization is such due to its creative nature, which is based on traditional values. This nature allows us to curb capital, be a bearer of “good, honest traditionalism” and create a “positive” world order - a community of “traditional” states subject to “fair” international law.
However, this very nature cannot be discovered scientifically, which means that Mr. Patrushev was able to knock out a logical basis from the reader’s reasoning and instill in him some pleasant illusion of belonging to a community of people capable of doing good by their will.
In fairness, it is worth noting that when examining US government documents, a thoughtful reader will find the same observable phenomena (economic collapse, military confrontations, etc.), the empty analysis of which the authors provide with a completely reliable materialist interpretation regarding the behavior of a civilization of “evil hypocritical traditionalism” that is showing aggression to a civilization of “good, honest globalism”, which does not follow the reactionary tendencies of the capitalist formation due to its innate positive nature.
And the adherents of these two chimeras of reason will argue until they are hoarse and beat each other with facts no worse than Huguenots and Catholics, without any possibility of establishing the truth.
Consequently, we have reached a turning point in our analysis of the article - we have discovered some manipulation, with the help of which a root logical error imperceptibly appears in the reader’s head - an unprovable idealistic construction. A similar error is inherent in any argument where the author proposes to believe in something.
What does manipulation mean in the basis of reasoning? Firstly, it is often not visible to the unprepared reader, since it can be reached through seemingly completely accurate observations. Secondly, it calls into question all further conclusions and proposals for changing the situation that the author proposes based on the analysis of observations based on such shaky ground.
Manipulation of this magnitude cannot be underestimated, because the original article describes the strategy of the Russian Federation in its confrontation with a strong adversary, which means millions of lives are at stake. Many readers who have reached these lines probably wish for a peaceful sky above their heads and even to some extent agree with the smooth reasoning of Mr. Patrushev, although they cannot help but note their slight discrepancy with reality.
Next, we will analyze the nature of the underlying error and show the path to a peaceful sky.
4. Who are the judges?
Let us make a small but extremely necessary diversion from the main topic for the reader who wants to know on what basis the above is declared an error. Like, “magic or not, the centuries-old aggression of the West is evident, the rebuff from Russia is obvious, which means that Mr. Patrushev’s article is correct. And as for small mistakes, only those who do nothing make mistakes.”
Well. This same reader, having already opened this article, showed some conscientiousness: most likely, he carefully observes the events taking place and is tormented by doubts at the sight of signs of “corrosion” of the state: corruption, stratification of income in society, unemployment, the consequences of the commercialization of medicine and education, slop the film industry, the constantly deteriorating international and domestic situation, the inconsistent behavior of superiors in the conduct of hostilities, and others. That is, there is no longer only aggression and resistance, but also internal contradictions. How can we understand them if Mr. Patrushev doesn’t say anything about them?
Also, with a little more curiosity, the reader may discover another contradiction: how is it that his neighbor on the planet from the USA believes in some other kind of magic? And how to find out which magic is “stronger”, “more truthful”?
Before discussing these topics, we invite our reader to ask himself a question: on what basis does he make his own judgments? Is it not based on the so-called “common sense” or “critical thinking” - everyday logic developed by his education, work experience, reading the news and the opinions of those around him? Is the reader sure that this reason is sufficient, especially in light of the fact that the reasoning about magic does not seem to him to be something deeply erroneous?
There is no need to rush to answer: the question is more complicated than it seems. No matter how great the intelligence of a particular individual, it is still formed by society, which means that regarding the correctness of thinking, as, in fact, on any issue in general, it is necessary to turn to social practice. Humanity can boast a record of continuous progressive practice throughout known history. This practice is quite amenable to study, comprehension, derivation of laws and their application to study the current situation. In other words, in order to find solutions to problems, especially on the scale of all humanity (and this is precisely the task Mr. Patrushev sets himself), it is necessary first of all to come down to earth, that is, to discard all magic and approach the issue scientifically . The latter is impossible without quality thinking.
If the reader really considers himself a patriot who wants to understand the essence of the problems and defend his Motherland, then he needs to reconsider the foundations of his worldview.
First, it is necessary to rid thinking of magic, that is, of subjective and objective idealistic methods of understanding the world. Through the efforts of philosophers, humanity painfully got rid of idealistic tinsel. It took hundreds and hundreds of years for society to come to the understanding that only a materialistic view of the world makes it possible to speak about truth scientifically, that is, to raise the question of how correctly a person reflects the laws of motion of matter, our world. Once you leave the crumbs of idealism and unscientificness in yourself, you can say goodbye to dreams of understanding something, much less progressively changing it.
The next step is to accept the fact that errors in thinking lead to unconscious bad activities, and error-free thinking is not something automatically inherent in every person. This means that we need to study and understand the logical apparatus that we use. It may seem that formal logic will be enough, but this is only one of the early stages in the history of the study of logic in general, that is, the principle of how thinking works. Humanity has long gone further and reached the understanding of the highest method of thinking - dialectical logic. First, philosophers from the time of Aristotle found it and began to develop it, then G.V.F. Hegel carefully formulated it in an idealistic manner, and later K. Marx and F. Engels put it on a materialist basis. Since the world itself is dialectical in the diversity of interconnected development, only thinking that corresponds to it can be objectively correct. Dialectical logic is a logic that allows one to find the content of living, developing truth. Logic that allows one to find the essence of phenomena through the study of their interrelations, development and unity of internal opposites. Logic that allows its owner to think scientifically: to master the categorical apparatus and, on its basis, to deepen all acquired concepts.
Yes, it may seem that this is too deep and abstruse, but, as practice shows, a person who does not master dialectics, going beyond the boundaries of everyday and narrow professional activities, is not able to think qualitatively and notice logical flaws in others. In the lower sections we will specifically draw attention to errors in the logic of Mr. Patrushev’s presentation.
Without understanding these two points, which converge in the science of dialectical materialism, the reader will continue to see a magical world filled with illusions, not connected with the real one. This means that in his reasoning he will not be able to go beyond empirical observations and, as a result, will not get to the essence of the events taking place.
The last step in building a scientific worldview is to abandon any attempts to judge modern events until the science of society has been mastered. You need to have a firm understanding of what a person is and how society shapes him; it is necessary to absorb a diamatic understanding of history: the formational principle of the development of society, the reasons for the division of society into classes and the historically developed class antagonism of bourgeois society, built around the right of private ownership of the means of production.
In a word, it is necessary to master Marxism in its entirety and then begin a theoretical study of the current situation and the practical activities resulting from it. An extremely brief and simplified description of the scientific basis is available in a separate article [6].
A person who has not adequately mastered Marxism is the owner of a low-quality worldview, a victim of the upbringing of an exploitative society. Such a person is always the bearer of certain illusions, one of which - the illusion of bourgeois national patriotism - we, in fact, examine in this work.
5. Classification of the embedded error and the randomness of its occurrence
Mr. Patrushev adopted the civilizational theory of human development, which postulates the uniqueness and originality of the development path of each community of people that falls under the definition of civilization. This stupidity is used by the majority of modern bourgeois states, despite the fact that there is not a single scientific work that could define civilization.
This theory is based on an illusion: the endowment of the property of unconditional progressiveness to some objectively existing social group, for example, a certain people. A detailed analysis of this illusion is given in a separate article [5].
From the height of Marxist understanding, it is easy to identify the type and cause of the central error in Mr. Patrushev’s article. In relation to Western imperialism, he allows the primitive use of the class approach to strengthen his own civilizational argument, but limits it by not applying it to anti-Western countries. This speculation is not accidental. Behind the loud words about the solidarity and unity of the people, these same people should not see that they are objectively divided into two antagonistic interacting parts: owners of private property in the means of production and owners of labor power.
(Continued on following post.)
No. 11/87.XI.2023
Introduction
At the beginning of 2022, the leadership of the Russian Federation drew conclusions from the events of the previous eight years, identified the enemy and moved the confrontation with him into the active phase. On the external front, the SVO began, and on the internal front, the so-called cleansing began. liberal contingent. Now, in November 2023, the most apolitical citizen of the Russian Federation can clearly see that the result of the ongoing war will significantly affect his fate.
At such a time, the leadership is burdened with an important task: it is necessary to awaken the population, who have missed the last eight years, from peaceful market hibernation, mobilize those who have awakened to a state of self-sacrifice and direct their activities in the direction desired by the leadership. For this purpose, it is necessary to explain the reasons for the war, demonstrate the enemy in all its ugliness and the strategy for achieving victory. That is, in some way, close your eyes to Article 13.2 of the Constitution (“No ideology can be established as state or mandatory”) and begin ideological work to introduce “depoliticized patriotism” [1]. One of the results was the concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation [2] (hereinafter referred to as the “concept”), the main theses of which form the basis for the speeches of Russian officials.
Let us evaluate the consistency of such ideological work in a real military situation using the example of a free presentation of the “concept” authored by the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation N.P. Patrusheva.
1. Theses
In one sentence, the article could read like this:
“At this revolutionary [4] moment, the old Western-centric world order is collapsing, and the entire anti-Western part of humanity needs to put an end to neocolonial hegemony, for which it is necessary to unite around the anti-Western center of gravity - Russia, whose historical creative mission is to maintain a global balance of power and build a genuine multipolar democratic international system, enshrined in the international legal system.”
Let's reveal the theses.
Mr. Patrushev declares the observed global changes, that is, affecting most of the world, to be revolutionary (tectonic). Following the “concept,”
1.1. Revolutionary changeshe sees the property of revolutionism in the transition from the old unjust world order to a new, more just one. This transition is part of the “natural course of history,” and it begins with the dismantling of the colonial system “ after the Second World War under the direct influence of the achievements and victories of the Soviet Union .” Evidence of the transition is a visible shift in the center of economic activity “from the global West to countries that have hitherto been called developing countries” against the backdrop of a growing “crisis of economic globalization.” Mr. Patrushev sees the manifestation of revolutionary spirit in violence: the founding countries of the old world order are trying to restrain the “natural course of history” with the help of military domination and the neocolonial system.
1.2. Cause of upheaval. The enemy and his ideological weapon
The enemies identified are “Atlanticists”, “Westerners”, “USA and other Anglo-Saxon states” and “countries of the global West”. The history of these countries, as presented by the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, is the history of a parasite that extracts resources using a system of “colonial-imperialist” robbery carried out by force by the owners of large capital - transnational companies. These same companies carry out a policy that bypasses the authorities of these countries, a policy of “neocolonial hegemony”, trying to “preserve their benefits and privileges” through forceful domination, international terrorism and transnational organized crime, gross violation of international law, organization of military conflicts, attempts to collapse uncontrolled integration associations: ASEAN, SCO, BRICS, CIS, EAEU and others.
At the same time, throughout history, the enemy fears Russia “for its greatness and power,” and also perceives it as a constant threat due to the fact that the USSR began to dismantle the colonial system.
The enemy's main ideological weapon is his belief that
“ America’s messianic destiny is to rule the world through a strong foreign policy, without recognizing anyone’s interests.”
To achieve this, the enemy’s ideological arsenal includes: 1) “scientific racism”; 2) the ideology of their own superiority, “which they always had”; 3) reformatting the mentality and spirituality of the population of subordinate countries; 4) the idea of globalism, the complete opposite of patriotism , which (globalism) does not recognize the diversity of cultures and ways of life and is designed to forcefully drive all countries and peoples under the banner of Western consumer civilization; 5) theories of gender diversity; 6) pseudo-ecological doctrines (substantiating a radical reduction in the human population); 7) pseudoscientific concept of transhumanism; 8) reliance on inhumane, openly misanthropic ideas.
1.3. The essence of the next world order and comrades on the way to it
As an alternative to “global parasitism,” Mr. Patrushev voices the idea of “strengthening a multipolar world and preserving traditional moral values and cultural and civilizational identity.”
This idea will be brought to life by a “natural” (as a response to the pressure of Western hegemony) unification into a broad anti-Western coalition of states (“combining the potential and conscientious efforts of the entire international community based on a balance of forces and interests”), which “defend their path, hallowed by a thousand years experience and traditions of their ancestors" and are waging a "struggle for freedom." Maintaining the emerging balance and resolving problems in international relations will be ensured by the supremacy of deidealogized international law, which spells out the following principles: non-acceptance of hegemony, non-interference in the internal affairs of partners, mutual respect, as well as unconditional recognition of the right of states to choose their own path of development, their social, political and economic device. Violation of these principles, for example, “attempts by any states and interstate associations to achieve global dominance in the military sphere,” implies the forceful intervention of joint forces in order to restore the given order.
The anti-Western coalition is invited to unite around Russia, which offers an “alternative path”, the parameters of which are “reflected in the new edition of the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation.” For what reason? Russia is a distinctive state-civilization with a “creative civilizational role”, “the core of the civilizational community of the Russian world.” Russia’s historically established messianic destiny is “maintaining the global balance of power, building a multipolar international system,” making “a decisive contribution to maintaining global security and ensuring the peaceful development of states.” At the same time, the fight with Western countries is expected only until they return to pragmatic interaction with Russia:
“Russia does not consider itself an enemy of the West, does not isolate itself from it, and is ready for dialogue with the United States as one of the poles of a multipolar world based on the principles of sovereign equality, mutual benefit and respect for each other’s interests.”
2. Problems and solutions proposed by the Russian authorities
Let us formulate Mr. Patrushev’s voiced theses in the form of the problem under study and proposed solutions, and in each part of the form we will separate the observations from the analysis based on them.
2.1. Issues
Observations:
Western countries are the heirs of the colonial world order, dominating the world.
They hide their predatory essence under the guise of messianism, bringing the only possible order and goodness.
If they once had it, they have now completely lost any creative principle: they are only engaged in robbery on a planetary scale, while losing their economic advantage and ultimately causing another international crisis, up to a world war.
Politics in Western countries is formed not by government bodies elected by citizens, but by big capital.
They suppress all attempts at resistance by force and methods of inculcating an extremely anti-human ideology.
Analysis of the reasons for this behavior:
Western countries have been capital-driven agents of destruction throughout history.
They bring globalism to the world - control through a strong foreign policy, without recognizing anyone's interests. This idea grows out of the ethic of self-superiority, “which Western countries have always had.”
Such destructiveness is unnatural, since the “natural course of things” is a transition from globalism to multipolar patriotism.
2.2. Solutions
Observations:
The predatory and anti-human pressure of Western countries led by the hegemon gives rise to reaction.
Anti-Western countries are fighting for freedom and seeking to free themselves from the yoke of the hegemon.
Why are some of them already included in various alliances with the Russian Federation?
Performance analysis of the proposed solution:
Resistance to globalism is a logical proposal, since it is the “natural course of things.” At the same time, the hegemon will not become civilized through evolutionary means, so revolutionary power solutions are required.
What anti-Western states have in common is the very principle of having traditional moral values and cultural and civilizational identity, which “they have always had.”
Consequently, it is precisely these values that push towards fair unification and the development of de-ideologized international law. It is this that will become the support of multipolarity, as it will prohibit globalism and elevate mutual respect to an absolute.
Anti-Western states, due to their values, will fight with Western countries until the latter accept a multipolar way of life.
The creative civilization of Russia has a historical mission to build a peaceful multipolar international system. That is why the Russian Federation offers itself as the center of an anti-Western unification.
3. Central manipulation
Taking a closer look at the analytical part, we will find the following. Mr. Patrushev categorizes the totality of Western countries, stupefied by their own impunity, as a parasitic civilization. The reason for its gangster behavior at the present stage is quite accurately indicated in the analysis by aggressive large private capital, which shapes the policies of countries instead of the authorities elected by citizens. However, conducting a historical analysis from the pre-capitalist times of the Crusades, Mr. Secretary comes to the conclusion that Westerners have always sought to seize the resources of Russia. On the other hand, victims of Western aggression form pockets of resistance and offer solutions for peaceful coexistence. Mr. Patrushev does not indicate the capitalist essence of these states, but from the article we can conclude that they do not engage in aggressive activities because they are governed by government bodies elected by citizens that keep capital in check.
If the absence of capital does not prevent a civilization from being aggressive, and the presence of capital does not prevent a civilization from being peaceful, then, according to such an analysis, the character of the state is not related to capital, but to the ability of the elected government to establish control over it. But what exactly does such control provide? We will not find an explanation from Mr. Patrushev.
Let's take a closer look at this point. According to the materialistic, that is, scientific, understanding of the development of society, the economy is primary relative to everything in society. Capitalist relations constitute the leading content of the social life of both bourgeois sides of the confrontation, Western and anti-Western (except, of course, for socialist countries). The political superstructure in the form of a state is a way of formalizing this content, that is, control over the economic basis (relations of production), which makes it possible to maintain capitalist relations and restrain their further change by violent methods. What economic content does the bourgeois state retain? It strives for the expanded reproduction of capital, in other words, it exists within the framework of animal relations of the pursuit of profit: the exploitation of the proletariat and competition between groups of the bourgeoisie, that is, aggressive behavior both within the country in relation to the oppressed class and in relation to other countries. Thus, the subjective factor in the form of the state is limited in its actions by the content of the leading production relations that it is obliged to maintain. Simply put, materialist conditions squeeze the will of any bourgeois power into the narrow framework of two directions: to promote animal capitalist relations in every possible way, expanding the scope of their action, and to interfere with everything that seeks to change these relations. Moreover, in specific historical conditions, a number of completely materialistic reasons can push the bourgeois state to temporarily weaken the oppression of the working people and put on a mask of peacefulness and social responsibility. So, say, as was the case with the Scandinavian countries, which committed a similar deceptive maneuver in the class struggle in order to distract the proletariat from the revolutionary thoughts born of the example of the USSR.
However, in Mr. Patrushev’s universe, only Western countries fully follow the logic of the capitalist formation, but in countries of traditional values it is the will of citizens who elect bourgeois power that is able to go beyond the above framework and curb the wild laws of capital reproduction. Moreover, the will of citizens is capable of curbing the framework and laws of any formation, because the article in question, although it significantly affects the capitalist period, is not limited to it. Mr. Secretary does not indicate the origins of this ability, but since in his narrative it is not connected with the material world, then the reader can only figure out its connection with some nature of this or that community of people.
It turns out that a negative civilization is negative by its innate nature. That is why it now follows the laws of capitalism, is the bearer of “evil hypocritical globalism” and sets itself the goal of hiding behind the hypocritical mask of a zealous owner, to organize a continuous robbery of the whole world and drive it into the framework of one degenerate culture. It also turns out that a positive civilization is such due to its creative nature, which is based on traditional values. This nature allows us to curb capital, be a bearer of “good, honest traditionalism” and create a “positive” world order - a community of “traditional” states subject to “fair” international law.
However, this very nature cannot be discovered scientifically, which means that Mr. Patrushev was able to knock out a logical basis from the reader’s reasoning and instill in him some pleasant illusion of belonging to a community of people capable of doing good by their will.
In fairness, it is worth noting that when examining US government documents, a thoughtful reader will find the same observable phenomena (economic collapse, military confrontations, etc.), the empty analysis of which the authors provide with a completely reliable materialist interpretation regarding the behavior of a civilization of “evil hypocritical traditionalism” that is showing aggression to a civilization of “good, honest globalism”, which does not follow the reactionary tendencies of the capitalist formation due to its innate positive nature.
And the adherents of these two chimeras of reason will argue until they are hoarse and beat each other with facts no worse than Huguenots and Catholics, without any possibility of establishing the truth.
Consequently, we have reached a turning point in our analysis of the article - we have discovered some manipulation, with the help of which a root logical error imperceptibly appears in the reader’s head - an unprovable idealistic construction. A similar error is inherent in any argument where the author proposes to believe in something.
What does manipulation mean in the basis of reasoning? Firstly, it is often not visible to the unprepared reader, since it can be reached through seemingly completely accurate observations. Secondly, it calls into question all further conclusions and proposals for changing the situation that the author proposes based on the analysis of observations based on such shaky ground.
Manipulation of this magnitude cannot be underestimated, because the original article describes the strategy of the Russian Federation in its confrontation with a strong adversary, which means millions of lives are at stake. Many readers who have reached these lines probably wish for a peaceful sky above their heads and even to some extent agree with the smooth reasoning of Mr. Patrushev, although they cannot help but note their slight discrepancy with reality.
Next, we will analyze the nature of the underlying error and show the path to a peaceful sky.
4. Who are the judges?
Let us make a small but extremely necessary diversion from the main topic for the reader who wants to know on what basis the above is declared an error. Like, “magic or not, the centuries-old aggression of the West is evident, the rebuff from Russia is obvious, which means that Mr. Patrushev’s article is correct. And as for small mistakes, only those who do nothing make mistakes.”
Well. This same reader, having already opened this article, showed some conscientiousness: most likely, he carefully observes the events taking place and is tormented by doubts at the sight of signs of “corrosion” of the state: corruption, stratification of income in society, unemployment, the consequences of the commercialization of medicine and education, slop the film industry, the constantly deteriorating international and domestic situation, the inconsistent behavior of superiors in the conduct of hostilities, and others. That is, there is no longer only aggression and resistance, but also internal contradictions. How can we understand them if Mr. Patrushev doesn’t say anything about them?
Also, with a little more curiosity, the reader may discover another contradiction: how is it that his neighbor on the planet from the USA believes in some other kind of magic? And how to find out which magic is “stronger”, “more truthful”?
Before discussing these topics, we invite our reader to ask himself a question: on what basis does he make his own judgments? Is it not based on the so-called “common sense” or “critical thinking” - everyday logic developed by his education, work experience, reading the news and the opinions of those around him? Is the reader sure that this reason is sufficient, especially in light of the fact that the reasoning about magic does not seem to him to be something deeply erroneous?
There is no need to rush to answer: the question is more complicated than it seems. No matter how great the intelligence of a particular individual, it is still formed by society, which means that regarding the correctness of thinking, as, in fact, on any issue in general, it is necessary to turn to social practice. Humanity can boast a record of continuous progressive practice throughout known history. This practice is quite amenable to study, comprehension, derivation of laws and their application to study the current situation. In other words, in order to find solutions to problems, especially on the scale of all humanity (and this is precisely the task Mr. Patrushev sets himself), it is necessary first of all to come down to earth, that is, to discard all magic and approach the issue scientifically . The latter is impossible without quality thinking.
If the reader really considers himself a patriot who wants to understand the essence of the problems and defend his Motherland, then he needs to reconsider the foundations of his worldview.
First, it is necessary to rid thinking of magic, that is, of subjective and objective idealistic methods of understanding the world. Through the efforts of philosophers, humanity painfully got rid of idealistic tinsel. It took hundreds and hundreds of years for society to come to the understanding that only a materialistic view of the world makes it possible to speak about truth scientifically, that is, to raise the question of how correctly a person reflects the laws of motion of matter, our world. Once you leave the crumbs of idealism and unscientificness in yourself, you can say goodbye to dreams of understanding something, much less progressively changing it.
The next step is to accept the fact that errors in thinking lead to unconscious bad activities, and error-free thinking is not something automatically inherent in every person. This means that we need to study and understand the logical apparatus that we use. It may seem that formal logic will be enough, but this is only one of the early stages in the history of the study of logic in general, that is, the principle of how thinking works. Humanity has long gone further and reached the understanding of the highest method of thinking - dialectical logic. First, philosophers from the time of Aristotle found it and began to develop it, then G.V.F. Hegel carefully formulated it in an idealistic manner, and later K. Marx and F. Engels put it on a materialist basis. Since the world itself is dialectical in the diversity of interconnected development, only thinking that corresponds to it can be objectively correct. Dialectical logic is a logic that allows one to find the content of living, developing truth. Logic that allows one to find the essence of phenomena through the study of their interrelations, development and unity of internal opposites. Logic that allows its owner to think scientifically: to master the categorical apparatus and, on its basis, to deepen all acquired concepts.
Yes, it may seem that this is too deep and abstruse, but, as practice shows, a person who does not master dialectics, going beyond the boundaries of everyday and narrow professional activities, is not able to think qualitatively and notice logical flaws in others. In the lower sections we will specifically draw attention to errors in the logic of Mr. Patrushev’s presentation.
Without understanding these two points, which converge in the science of dialectical materialism, the reader will continue to see a magical world filled with illusions, not connected with the real one. This means that in his reasoning he will not be able to go beyond empirical observations and, as a result, will not get to the essence of the events taking place.
The last step in building a scientific worldview is to abandon any attempts to judge modern events until the science of society has been mastered. You need to have a firm understanding of what a person is and how society shapes him; it is necessary to absorb a diamatic understanding of history: the formational principle of the development of society, the reasons for the division of society into classes and the historically developed class antagonism of bourgeois society, built around the right of private ownership of the means of production.
In a word, it is necessary to master Marxism in its entirety and then begin a theoretical study of the current situation and the practical activities resulting from it. An extremely brief and simplified description of the scientific basis is available in a separate article [6].
A person who has not adequately mastered Marxism is the owner of a low-quality worldview, a victim of the upbringing of an exploitative society. Such a person is always the bearer of certain illusions, one of which - the illusion of bourgeois national patriotism - we, in fact, examine in this work.
5. Classification of the embedded error and the randomness of its occurrence
Mr. Patrushev adopted the civilizational theory of human development, which postulates the uniqueness and originality of the development path of each community of people that falls under the definition of civilization. This stupidity is used by the majority of modern bourgeois states, despite the fact that there is not a single scientific work that could define civilization.
This theory is based on an illusion: the endowment of the property of unconditional progressiveness to some objectively existing social group, for example, a certain people. A detailed analysis of this illusion is given in a separate article [5].
From the height of Marxist understanding, it is easy to identify the type and cause of the central error in Mr. Patrushev’s article. In relation to Western imperialism, he allows the primitive use of the class approach to strengthen his own civilizational argument, but limits it by not applying it to anti-Western countries. This speculation is not accidental. Behind the loud words about the solidarity and unity of the people, these same people should not see that they are objectively divided into two antagonistic interacting parts: owners of private property in the means of production and owners of labor power.
(Continued on following post.)
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
6. Analysis of issues from Mr. Patrushev’s article
6.1. Mr. Patrushev and “revolutionary” changes in the international arena
With the loss of Marxist literacy in the leadership, the activities of the CPSU could not help but end in a bourgeois counter-revolution. The bourgeois world celebrated the collapse of the USSR as a great victory, considering that the end of history and the eternal “capitalist paradise” under the leadership of the United States had come. History is not without a sense of humor, and Stolypin’s dreams of twenty years of peace have almost come true, but only for the United States and its satellites. True, already in 2008, the “world community,” almost undistracted by what happened in Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq and other countries, suddenly began to suspect something was wrong, so far only in the real estate markets. By 2023, the bubble of the “capitalist paradise” ideology remained only in history books. Suddenly, for the US, their global plans went down the drain. A direct economic competitor has risen in the form of Communist Party-ruled China; so-called The Arab spring did not produce the expected results, and a number of states, including the Russian Federation, began to play at independence, uniting under the guise of three-, four- and five-letter economic and military abbreviations. The economies of the United States and its satellites began to falter, and military power ceased to be as frightening and bring such dividends as it was twenty years ago.
This state of affairs lies on the surface, and it will be described in approximately the same way both by Mr. Patrushev and by an official from any other country.
In fact, there is nothing revolutionary in such changes. In this situation, only the movement of a small number of countries, in which China and the DPRK stand out especially, can be called revolutionary and progressive, along the path to communism, but Mr. Patrushev cannot say about this without destroying his civilizational ideologies. In the actions of other states one can see only the protection of the interests of their private property, which, firstly, contradicts the progress of the entire society, secondly, does not contain actual revolutionism, that is, a radical change in the content of production relations between people, and, therefore, thirdly , is just an attempt at an international political coup. This means that the majority of participants in modern politics operate within the framework of the usual competitive capitalist structure, that is, they strive with all their might to repeat the same path that they already took on the eve of previous world wars.
6.2. Mr. Patrushev and the evil West
Horrific descriptions of “Anglo-Saxon” colonialism have long been the property of history textbooks in non-Western countries. Much less described in them is the recent history of the United States and its satellites, with its “invisible” to the media growing horror of the existence of an exploited population and with quite visible arenas of bloody massacre unleashed by the hegemon in various parts of the planet.
Mr. Patrushev fills this gap for us, with cold fury describing the suffering of the inhabitants of the Congo or, say, Libya and explaining this course of history and the behavior of the “Atlantists” with an innate ethic of superiority and anti-human globalism. In contrast, the “Westerners” themselves explain their actions by the savagery of the population they encounter on the planet and the “burden of Western man,” which must free the planet from human rights violations, totalitarian dictators and bloody communists.
Western countries were the first to enter the bourgeois era of industrial revolutions and realize their historical advantage in competition with less developed countries located in exploitative formations. The further development of productive forces and competition could not but lead first to colonialism, and then, as technology spread across the planet, to world wars and fascism. This was carried out not by abstract countries, but by specific classes consisting of specific capitalists who wrested power from the feudal lords as a result of bourgeois revolutions and consolidated it in their governing superstructure - the bourgeois state. The USSR, being the first progressive state under the leadership of a competent communist party, successfully waged a class war and was able to defeat Hitler, raised by the Western bourgeoisie, which curbed its bloody ardor for the next few decades. With the collapse of the USSR, the system of restraining bourgeois savages was dismantled and after a short pause, according to the absolute materialist law of development of capitalist production, the law of production of surplus value (profit), they again fell into an inevitable economic crisis and continued to kill each other with triple force.
Mr. Patrushev’s part of the article, which is critical of Western imperialism, is quite consistent, but in the absence of a formational approach, the reasons why history received such and not another development eludes.
Any country that has developed into a capitalist formation will implement murderous laws in accordance with its capitalist content, and the form and degree of “evility” of this implementation will be determined only by historical circumstances. The latter allows us to compare bourgeois countries in terms of the level of degeneracy and reactionaryness. At this historical stage, the records of bloody “achievements” in unleashing conflicts around the world belong to the bourgeoisie of Western countries. But, firstly, these “achievements” do not make these countries eternally reactionary either in the direction of the past or in the direction of the future, otherwise it would be necessary to invalidate both the scientific truth about the movement and development of matter and the objective prerequisites for eliminating the division of society into classes. And secondly, these “achievements” do not in any way transform less reactionary bourgeois states into progressive ones, no matter how hard Mr. Patrushev tries to spell them out. After all, his “sacred” fight against globalism does not consist in the elimination of its anti-progressive basis - the capitalist system of exploitation of man by man and private property relations. His struggle is the whining of a hyena, which a starving, mangy tiger decided to devour. Because as long as the tiger was well-fed, it was quite possible to be friends with him in the “holy nineties”, build partnerships at the beginning of the millennium, not pay attention to the bloody partition of Yugoslavia and Libya, play the Minsk agreements, and so on.
The degradation of the cultural superstructure that accompanies this phase of capitalism was also not ignored by Mr. Patrushev. A single global power really requires the implantation of a single set of pseudo-values in place of the various “traditional” ones, and humanity has already encountered this phenomenon at a time when religion acted as such a binding cultural phenomenon. But if the Middle Ages required a hoax to bring the population into submission, then in the modern world, full of complex technical devices, the masses of the population already have some kind of education, which means they have to invent something pseudoscientific. Something that can hide the only real value of bourgeois society - the value of serving the expanded reproduction of profit to the detriment of the expanded reproduction of society.
The degree of degradation of the formation, when the productive forces already have a broad social character and can no longer correspond to production capitalist relations with their private nature of appropriation, directly affects the degree of degradation of the superstructure, the degree of anti-humanity of culture and the degree of anti-science of social consciousness. All the theories of gender diversity, pseudo-ecological doctrines, and concepts of transhumanism mentioned by Mr. Patrushev are really the basis of the degenerate Western culture that is aggressively implanted throughout the world. However, he deliberately loses sight of the fact that the “traditional” values of bourgeois society - religion, “real” democratic values, patriotism, patriarchy and others - firstly, due to their idealistic basis, are not progressive, and secondly , being considered in development, are larvae that easily turn into the values of “globalism” as the “traditional” country enlarges and monopolizes, just in a slightly different form.
7. Analysis of solutions from Mr. Patrushev’s article
7.1. Mr. Patrushev and united multipolarity
Is it possible to assert, following Mr. Patrushev and “the majority of countries in the world, who are aware of the destructive nature of the global policy of the United States and its satellites,” that “the development of humanity directly depends on the strengthening of the multipolar world”?
First of all, let's designate the progressive coordinate system.
The development of humanity depends primarily on how revolutionary social practice is. The practice of any bourgeois state is predominantly conservative, since relations in it are structured in such a way that the working people - the basis of the developed productive forces covering virtually all of humanity - are exploited by a small group of representatives of the bourgeois class for the purpose of producing and appropriating surplus value. Exploitation is carried out through the force-imposed right of private ownership of the means of production. The production of surplus value is possible only on the basis of the expanded reproduction of material carriers of value - things in the form of goods. With value relations, human reproduction, his life itself, become secondary in relation to the production of goods. Capitalist society itself is not interested in fundamentally solving the problems of crime or war only insofar as they do not interfere with and even contribute to the continued production of goods and profit-making. The task of humanity is to move from expanded production of goods to expanded reproduction of society, that is, communism. Everything that brings us closer to this goal is a revolutionary practice, which and only which we can call progressive.
With the development of productive forces, objective conditions arise for the breakdown of capitalist relations. Since the time of the Paris Commune, humanity has entered the era of communist revolutions. The final victory of communism did not come only insofar as the subjective factor in the person of a sufficient number of competent Marxists united in the vanguard of the class struggle - sufficient to defeat the reaction of bourgeois society - had not yet developed.
In the designated coordinate system behind the form of the approaching new world war, we can now see the confrontation between progressive and conservative social practices, occurring for objective reasons and in accordance with the laws of social development. This confrontation has two components.
The first component is the confrontation between capitalist and communist states. Between countries led to slaughter by big US capital, and defending China, North Korea and their sympathizers. In this confrontation, our duty is not simply to express warm support for communist states, but also to study the living practice of class struggle.
The second component is the confrontation between blocs of capitalist countries for the redivision of the world. Countries with stronger, monopolized and imperialized capital are pursuing a course of domination and “eating” weak competitors, which means that the confrontation is not just between capitalist countries, but between capitalist countries of varying degrees of power and reactionaryness. Weaker countries want a “fair multipolar world based on international law” as opposed to those who strive for “world hegemony.”
The study of this confrontation allows us to identify a number of factors that play into the hands of the communist movement. Firstly, the very course of the inter-bourgeois squabble forces representatives of the exploiting class to be distracted from the fight against the communists. Secondly, the inevitable growing conflict, which cannot be resolved within the framework of the capitalist world order, throws the impoverished masses out of balance and pushes the dynamics and brightness of events to study the objective laws of the structure of society, which is an important prerequisite for the emergence and development of the subjective factor that should create history. This is exactly how the capitalist, in the new conditions, prepares his gravedigger, who previously, in peacetime, with the stupidity of a sheep, reproduced capitalist relations, thereby participating in the preparation of the future world slaughter. Thirdly, the weakening of the ultra-reactionary imperialist Western regime, led by the most powerful detachment of the bourgeoisie and seeking to forcibly unite the entire bourgeois class into a single organized fist, is progressive regardless of whose hands it is carried out. If weaker bourgeois states, driven either by the pursuit of regional influence, as in the case of Turkey, or by the desire to free themselves from the yoke of the hegemon, as in the case of the Russian Federation, are successful, then the result will be that same multipolar world, that is, an unstable world of competing countries. average reactionary predators, the world of a weakened and divided bourgeoisie. And fourthly, one cannot help but welcome the just national liberation struggle of the peoples of the world, as for example in the case of Donbass or Palestine.
The combination of these factors gives reason to welcome the concept of a multipolar world and encourage Mr. Patrushev and the representatives of the Russian bourgeoisie behind him to actively implement it. At the same time, it is important to understand that multipolarity does not solve the main problem of the outbreak of wars, which are a natural part of the capitalist structure. This means that when greeting, one should not stand in solidarity and should not be inactive. Let the “multipolar” bourgeoisie wage its ineffective struggle against the “global” one, and in the meantime the communists need to work within the framework of their tasks.
Thus, the answer to the question posed in this section is this: the development of humanity directly depends on the strengthening of a multipolar world only until the communist movement strengthens, because in itself the liberation of humanity from wars is not a solution.
7.2. Mr. Patrushev and multipolarity, united on the basis of peaceful coexistence of traditions
The article under study, following the “concept,” is replete with references to the dominant importance for the worldview and life of the state of traditional moral values, thousand-year traditions, spiritual and moral guidelines, etc. This worldview allows Mr. Patrushev to assert that the path to peace is the unification of “good » bearers of traditional values in the fight against “evil” bearers of neoliberal values.
From which we can conclude that the content of traditional values dictates to its bearer a model of behavior, the essence of which is peaceful coexistence with others. Consequently, a society of bearers of traditional values is a society of peace and prosperity.
Such a thesis is scientifically untenable, as we will show later. Worse, this thesis is untenable even in the worldview system presented by the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, and we will start from this moment.
7.2.1. Traditional values in national-patriotic philosophy
First, let's look at the traditional values within the state. Traditional value itself represents a certain benchmark that residents should follow. Failure to comply with values is possible because people are imperfect, but the main thing is that the benchmark is fixed by the state as a goal. At the state level, any alternative to traditional values is a destructive ideology.
Let's give an example. Mr. Patrushev's article, like the "concept", only mentions values, but does not bother to define their content. Let's call on the current President of the Russian Federation for help:
“Traditional values include life, dignity, human rights and freedoms, patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate, high moral ideals, strong family, creative work, priority of the spiritual over the material, humanism, mercy, justice, collectivism, mutual assistance and mutual respect, historical memory and continuity of generations, the unity of the peoples of Russia” [7].
He tells us that
“ideological and psychological influence on citizens leads to the inculcation of a system of ideas and values that is alien to the Russian people and destructive to Russian society (hereinafter referred to as destructive ideology), including the cultivation of selfishness, permissiveness, immorality, denial of the ideals of patriotism, service to the Fatherland, the natural continuation of life, the value of strong family, marriage, large families, creative work, Russia’s positive contribution to world history and culture, the destruction of the traditional family through the promotion of non-traditional sexual relationships” [7].
We will omit the religious component, because Mr. Patrushev does not focus on it, and the President of the Russian Federation only mentions the historical role:
“Orthodoxy plays a special role in the formation and strengthening of traditional values” [7].
Thus, we are told that within the country the content of value is of great importance, one might say existential. Now let's look at traditional values at the interstate level, where they should guarantee peaceful coexistence. However, this is where miracles begin with their content.
The concept of traditional values states that different states can have different traditional values and still live in peace. From the text of the article under study it follows that this is possible under three conditions.
The first condition is the ongoing struggle against anti-traditional values:
“Ensuring respect and protection of universal and traditional spiritual and moral values (including ethical norms common to all world religions), neutralizing attempts to impose pseudo-humanistic and other neoliberal ideological guidelines leading to the loss of traditional spiritual and moral guidelines and moral principles by humanity” [ 3, clause 19.9].
Thus, the first new value was implicitly revealed in the narrative - “the fight against anti-traditional values that turn nations into aggressors.” To begin with, it is possible to determine the content of something anti-traditional only through the content of the traditional. If you carefully examine the values of the Russian Federation, you will find not only their declarative nature, but also the fact that some of these declarations are also present in Western countries:
clearly present: “life, dignity, patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate, humanism, mercy, historical memory and continuity of generations, creative work, collectivism (as the unity of the nation)”;
definitely missing: “strong family”;
interpreted in a completely different, incompatible way: “human rights and freedoms”;
interpreted differently: “justice, high moral ideals, priority of the spiritual over the material, mutual assistance and mutual respect.” All this has the same meaning as in traditional values, but is aimed at protecting other “human rights and freedoms”;
let’s discard: “unity of the peoples of Russia”, since this is a special case of the condition below.
Consequently, “anti-traditional” in terms of the values of the Russian Federation is one who does not respect a strong family and has a neoliberal understanding of human rights and freedoms (gender diversity, democratic standards, etc.).
However, the countries of the modern West not so long ago relied very firmly on traditional family values and did not indulge in any neoliberalism. Which completely equalizes their list of values with the list of the Russian Federation, which means that the content of traditional values does not play any role in turning the country into an aggressor and, therefore, cannot prevent wars. The reader, of course, can arrange a scholastic debate about the fact that the content of “human rights and freedoms” during, say, the 18th century of the Russian Empire (hereinafter referred to as RI) and colonial England are somewhat different. Then let’s take any wars between neighbors professing “traditional” values. Let's say, today we hear about Armenia and Azerbaijan. If we compare their lists of values, we will be surprised at their identity. So where does the centuries-old enmity come from? And again, the reader can arrange a scholastic argument that the content of “human rights and freedoms” differs due to, for example, different religious denominations. Okay, then let’s take Rus' from the time of feudal fragmentation; we can’t think of anything more identical and traditional. And again it turns out that the content of values has nothing to do with ending wars.
Second condition:
“Reliance on a single spiritual and moral guideline for all the world’s traditional religions and secular ethical systems” [3, paragraph 18.7].
Some universal traditional values emerge here. I would like to see them in UN documents, but “non-traditional values”, having gained a foothold in Western countries, invariably began to penetrate the UN charters, to begin with, under the guise of fighting discrimination (for example, on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity). Moreover, as the representative of Norway put it when voting against resolution 21/3 on traditional values of 2012:
“In international law there is no unambiguous definition of such concepts as “traditions” and “values”. These concepts can be used to the detriment of human rights. If desired, “traditional values” can be found in such phenomena as domestic violence and slavery.”
However, even the words of the President of the Russian Federation are enough for us to define some universal values. What bourgeois country would refuse to proclaim “life, dignity, human rights and freedoms, patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate, the priority of the spiritual over the material, humanism, mercy, justice”?
Thus, the second new value was implicitly manifested - “the desire to develop common traditional values.” General means that some of them should intersect with the traditional values of the Russian Federation. However, as we found out above, even if all the values intersect with the list of the Russian Federation, peaceful existence is impossible. The content of traditional values in the second condition is again unimportant.
Third condition:
“Refusal of all states from imposing their development models, ideological and value systems on other countries” [3, paragraph 18.7].
Here the content of traditional values has finally developed to the point that... it has become unnecessary for the authors of this construct themselves. The Russian Federation is quite ready to get along with the Mayan and Aztec tribes with their sacrifices, as long as they are not imposed.
This is how the third new value was implicitly revealed: “don’t impose your values on me.”
So, thinking purely in terms of the national-patriotic worldview, among all three conditions for the peaceful coexistence of “traditional” states, we did not find a single one in which the content of values would play at least some role. However, during the study, we identified one new value, which, according to national patriots, is capable of stopping wars: “don’t force your values on me.” Only it remained for our consideration after squeezing out the water and logical inconsistencies from Mr. Patrushev’s reasoning about values; it alone underlies his proposed solution to the problems described. And everything would be fine, but the entire history of mankind shows that this does not happen, and in order to explain this, you need to stand on a scientific foundation.
7.2.2. Traditional values in scientific consideration
A gross logical mistake is an attempt to think of some idealistic essence and, with the help of it, change material reality. Standing on the ninth floor in front of an open window, you can imagine that this is a portal to another world, but a step forward will give the same result in the form of a corpse on the asphalt.
Mr. Patrushev showed two portals in his reasoning.
The first portal is moral guidelines that so attract ignorant ordinary people. The idealism of this construction, due to its empty essence, cannot but produce a lot of logical errors. For example, the average person has to literally ignore historical development and turn a blind eye to the fact that it is countries with traditional values that are turning into neoliberal aggressor countries. Or we have to invent new idealistic entities, for example, in attempts to explain how our “good” patriotism differs from their “bad” one.
In fact, the values that can actually be observed among a community of people are formed in society as a result of certain social relations. In a class society, they directly arise from class contradictions, contradictions between production relations and productive forces. In capitalist relations, when the leader in class antagonism is the bourgeois class, which forcibly maintains these relations in the form of a bourgeois state, the dominant values are violence, careerism, commodity fetishism, unbridled accumulation, and so on. The bourgeoisie solves the problem of subjugating the proletariat using two methods: force, through police, specialized and military structures, and ideological, through solidarity, that is, imaginary general class interests. It is here that the real values of bourgeois society are replaced by a beautiful dummy. The ideological method works only for a limited period of time, because the material interests of the two classes are antagonistically opposed and imaginary constructions in the form of spiritual traditions and moral patriotism ultimately cease to hide the real state of affairs. People then say that the refrigerator defeated the TV. Marxism easily reveals the lies of the so-called. traditional values. Thus, “patriotism” is only an instruction to the proletarian to die for the interests of the oligarch; “creative labor” is the labor of the proletarian, creating surplus value for the oligarch; “collectivism” is a union of labor and capital, and “the priority of the spiritual over the material” is only a limitation on the prohibition of private ownership of the means of production. So it turns out that part of the population, the bourgeois class, never themselves follows the declared values, which, however, the population itself always notices.
The second portal is the essence of the concept of peaceful coexistence, “don’t impose your values on me,” which we discovered in the previous section. We saw that the content of values in the interethnic world does not play any role, however, perhaps the principle of non-interference itself will work? No, it will not. As K. Marx shows:
“Value thus becomes self-moving value, self-moving money, and as such it is capital.”
Capital cannot stop in its movement, which means that capitalist countries cannot stop competing, even if their officials wrote beautiful words on paper. Trade, the movement of capital, labor and goods are the main factors in the propagation of values. Economic competition develops into monopoly, which is ensured politically - by the power of the state. One capitalist state seeks to suppress another capitalist state in order to provide the most favorable conditions for its capital, including through the implantation of values.
Therefore, “don’t force your values on me” is an attempt by several weak capitalist countries to briefly suspend their feuds and unite in the fight against a major imperialist, which is a progressive action at this historical period. If this goal is achieved, their subsequent military squabble and desire to turn into a new hegemon with their own set of essentially degenerate values will only be a matter of time.
It is also worth noting that while supporting the concept of multipolarity and non-intervention, China (or other communist country) is also pursuing the progressive goal of fighting the largest imperialist. Another thing is that in case of victory and while maintaining a high scientific level, the CPC will simply continue to wage class struggle against the bourgeoisie both within and in other countries. And this can also be perceived as the spread of “Marxist values.”
7.3. Mr. Patrushev and creative civilization
The Russian Federation in the article under study is shown as a country with a creative civilizational role, which, as opposed to Western parasites, offers an alternative path, fulfilling a historically unique mission to maintain the global balance of power and build a multipolar international system.
Meanwhile, any schoolchild knows that Western parasites were seen in all sorts of creative endeavors: they successfully explored the planet during the period of the Great Geographical Discoveries, created great works of art, created the industrial revolution, moved science forward, etc., etc. On the other hand, the schoolchild does not may not remember that Russian creators throughout history have been marked by parasitism. The nobles after Peter and right up to the Great October Socialist Revolution oppressed the people in such a way that the honored writers of the Republic of Ingushetia were horrified, talentedly capturing it on the pages of their works. Since the abolition of serfdom, these same people were flogged, their uprisings were crushed by the army, they were shot with machine guns, and even the Tsar-Father himself organized Bloody Sunday.
“Over seven decades, NATO members have become participants in more than 200 military conflicts around the world,” the Secretary of the Russian Security Council tells us.
Does he remember how many conflicts the Republic of Ingushetia has caused in at least 200 years, starting from the times of Peter the Great? Does he remember the division of Poland, does he mourn the national liberation bourgeois movements suppressed by the “gendarme of Europe”, has he forgotten the wars with Turkey, Sweden, Iran, France, is he aware of the colonial claims to Korea and the imperialist plans for dividing the territories of China and the subsequent Russian-Japanese war? war? Does he finally admit that during the First World War the Republic of Ingushetia played a far from creative role, in full accordance with the instructions given by His Serene Highness Prince A.M. Gorchakov’s vector for defending national interests, adjusted by 1914 by the Entente countries in connection with the subordinate international economic position of the Republic of Ingushetia?
So in the mathematics of finding the relationships between parasitic and creative moments, our bourgeois official can get confused. Although, of course, it cannot be denied that in terms of parasitism, cruelty, and cannibalism, Europeans and Americans have no equal and never will.
Above, in the section “Mr. Patrushev and the evil West,” we have already discarded the parasitic-creative terminology as the fruit of an inflamed national-patriotic mind and moved on to the scientific study of historical events. Then several points became clear.
Firstly, before 1917, the Republic of Ingushetia and Western countries differed only in the level of development of exploitative formations, that is, according to the terminology of the article under discussion, they were parasites of different calibers. This is an important point in determining the degree of reactionaryness of a particular exploitative state: for example, one must understand that the First World War was started by Western states, while the Republic of Ingushetia only joined the inevitable massacre.
Secondly, Mr. bourgeois official must understand that he could observe the absolute level of progressive in the history of Russia only during the period of the USSR until 1953, because in his own words
“The dismantling of the colonial system began after the Second World War under the direct influence of the achievements and victories of the Soviet Union.”
The transition from the Republic of Ingushetia to the USSR occurred as a result of the successful revolutionary struggle of the Communist Party, led by V.I. Lenin, with an exploitative feudal-bourgeois heritage. This was Russia’s transition to a new quality, from an exploitative to a post-exploitation formation. The revolutionary struggle did not end there, and the confrontation with the bourgeoisie continued both on the internal front and on the external one, which took its highest imperialist fascist form of “crusade against communism” during the Second World War and the Cold War.
Thirdly, as a result of the decline in scientific competence, the Communist Party, in fact, ceased to be such and allowed a bourgeois counter-revolution, which threw Russia back in development to a lower quality, to a capitalist system. The country immediately began to experience concomitant “parasitic” corrosion, similar to that in the Republic of Ingushetia. Pockets of separatism appeared in the country; the general monstrous stratification returned; an incompetent government built a flawed economy on the plunder of the USSR's heritage and the sale of natural resources; the population began to decline; price increases have become systematic; the bloody initiative to collapse Libya was supported; a catastrophic loss of political influence began along the perimeter of the Russian Federation; preparations for war were overwhelmed; The fascist regime of Ukraine was recognized as legitimate, and for eight years Donbass was given over to be torn to pieces by this monster for the sake of attempts at “peaceful coexistence” with the West. In other words, the weak bourgeois state again began to oppress its own population internally, and outside, instead of an uncompromising struggle, it began to play geopolitics with a stronger enemy. And even now:
“Russia does not consider itself an enemy of the West... and expects that in the future, states belonging to the Western community will realize the futility of their confrontational policies and hegemonic ambitions... and will return to pragmatic interaction with Russia...” [3, 13].
That is, I am ready to make peace and stop noticing the fascist essence of the United States at the moment when they promise to give up attempts to consume the Russian Federation as food and give the opportunity to resume trade in natural resources, albeit as a junior partner.
Thus, the creation eternally inherent in Russia is only an illusion, that is, a non-existent property, which in the article under consideration is endowed with a completely materially existing country.
Only a philosophically and socially ignorant person can make a logical mistake and become an idealist, a bearer of illusion, which is the norm in a bourgeois state. A convinced national patriot is forced to protect his illusion, diligently remaining on the surface of reasoning and ignoring a lot of facts from the practice of mankind. When a fact that diverges from his bad ideas about reality can no longer be ignored, for example, when his so creative country begins to exploit him more and more mercilessly or trade with a sworn enemy right in the middle of a war, then such an idealist begins to look for reasons in completely unexpected places: in the divine machinations or in the heads of individual bad individuals.
7.4. Mr. Patrushev and international law
The jackets of dignitaries of international organizations look impressive. The jackets of the League of Nations were good, but short-lived, and the jackets of the UN are becoming less and less credible. The reader has already understood that the call for non-interference in other people's affairs does not work in connection with the material interests of classes. But Mr. Patrushev argues that if the right number of important jackets can get together and agree to insert the mantra of non-intervention into the Talmud called “international law,” then a “genuine democratic multipolar world order” will emerge.
If the Secretary of the Security Council is consistent, then he should cite the Russian Federation as an example of a country with working law. Since the Russian Federation is an ordinary bourgeois state, its legal structure and legal laws are bourgeois structure and laws. The foundation of bourgeois laws lies only one right - the right of private ownership of the means of production, which is alienated in their favor by unprincipled, cunning and strong representatives of the bourgeois class. These gentlemen-owners immediately start two things: a class struggle with the proletariat - its production exploitation for the purpose of making a profit - and an intra-class competitive struggle. In order, on the one hand, not to destroy the entire proletariat by unbridled super-exploitation, and, on the other hand, not to destroy each other in bandit feuds, capitalists are forced to organize their activities, including in the form of a bourgeois state, in a system of legal norms. The state, relying primarily on the security forces, makes it possible to create regulations that, firstly, will prevent the proletariat from accessing the means of production alienated from it and at the same time preserve the illusion that the proletariat participates in governance through democratic elections, and secondly, will allow force all capitalists to follow some centrally made rules and punish those who do not follow them. These regulations are the same bourgeois legislation that is dynamically developing to suit the current balance of power among capitalists, most of all satisfying the needs of the strongest of them.
Thus, working law in the Russian Federation is a reflection of class interests and an instrument of the political will of the ruling class; the result of gross interference , firstly, by the united bourgeois class in the life and activity of the proletariat with the aim of using it in production and robbery, and secondly, by large capitalists in the life and activity of smaller ones. If such intervention were not required, then state law would not be required. Such intervention ultimately ensures the prosperity of large capitalists, a temporary “multipolar world” between capitalists and the ever-increasing exploitation of the proletariat - the majority of the population. This is the order that is proposed by the influential jackets of the bourgeois state from among the deputies of the State Duma and other important bodies.
The bourgeoisie is trying to build a similar organization at the international level in order to ensure the intervention of the most powerful sections of the bourgeoisie. An example of the work of international bourgeois law can be peace conferences following world wars. The Paris and Washington conferences following the First World War did not even hide the fact that their goal was the redivision of the world. The result of their work for the peoples of the German bloc, driven to war, was the burden of indemnities, and for the bourgeoisie of the Entente countries that participated in the outbreak of the war - a prize in the form of German colonies. As a result of the Second World War, the Nuremberg Tribunal took place, which, of course, had significant differences, but, in fact, only punished particularly zealous executioners in uniform, leaving the instigators in the person of representatives of large capital in Germany, England, the USA and a number of other countries untouched. Despite the protests of the Soviet side. Today, the transcontinental hegemon represented by large capital, standing behind the back of the United States and its henchmen, has become so reactionary that, through direct influence and with the help of the decaying UN, it has decided to establish its own order throughout the planet. This is a natural development of the monopolizing capitalist world. Talk on the part of weaker capitalist countries about fair multipolar international law is an attempt to avoid being robbed by a leading monopolist, an attempt to establish control over competition and establish intra-class peace.
How effective is the proposed intervention? To answer this question, it is important to remember that we live in a material world that moves according to the objective laws of its development. This means, firstly, that any beautiful thought, drawn up on an equally beautiful piece of paper, can either call for changes in matter, or describe changes that have already occurred. In our case, intra-class peace can only be secured as a result of victory in the struggle and the forceful overthrow of the hegemon. Consequently, Mr. Patrushev’s references to international law are essentially a declaration of war between the Russian bourgeoisie and the US bourgeoisie. This means, secondly, that the future peace gained as a result of victory will be only a temporary truce, which will last either until the emergence of the next hegemon, or until the confrontation with the communist states.
Is it possible to talk about the progressiveness of bourgeois intra-class regulation in the form of international law? It is possible, but with the following important reservations: a) we are talking about relative progressiveness b) in conditions when the communist movement is not yet sufficiently organized, c) in the presence of an extremely aggressive reactionary hegemon, d) when the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation and a number of other countries strive to overthrow the hegemon by force and consolidation of a temporary truce in international bourgeois law.
8. What did Mr. Patrushev really want to say?
Now, having analyzed the parts of the article under study, let’s look at it as a whole.
8.1. Step one: the actual content of the article
Science would not be needed if the essence of phenomena could be understood directly from their form.
Mr. Patrushev's article is smooth in form, but as soon as you scratch the surface a little, logical errors immediately begin to appear. You can get to the essence only by carefully freeing the text from errors.
Firstly, the author of the article under study correctly reflects the changes taking place in the world: “a shift in the center of economic activity” and the resistance of Western countries to this. In the process of their analysis, the author allows himself to make a number of logical errors: a distorted understanding of the laws of development of matter, complete disregard for the categories of measure and leap. This technique makes it possible to give non-existent qualities to phenomena: to an ordinary international political coup - the quality of progressiveness and revolutionism (although a radical reorganization of social relations does not occur), and to the organizers of the coup - to absolutize the progressiveness of their role (although their exploitative essence does not change).
Secondly, the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation quite accurately reflects the degree of reactionaryness of Western countries, which is significantly higher than in the Russian Federation. When analyzing this point, the following logical errors were made: idealism, distortion of the laws of development of matter in the form of its invariably inherent properties (metaphysics). As a result, the author missed the reasons for development and ignored the study of identity and the struggle of opposites. This technique makes it possible not only to hide the real reason for the current state of affairs - private ownership of the means of production - but also to solidify the proletariat with the bourgeois power, to raise it to fight against whomever this power points at.
To achieve this effect, first Mr. Patrushev reveals in detail the truly reactionary practices of Western countries during the times of capitalism, pointing out the big capital behind it. The first manipulation occurs when he also points to the aggressive policy of Western countries towards Russia and to the pre-capitalist formation, but simply points out the reasons for their inherent aggression. This is the first step towards placing in the reader’s mind the reactionary role of Western countries, absolutized to the level of “eternal evil,” which is a metaphysical perception and a logical error. The second manipulation occurs when Mr. Patrushev omits the role of capital in the actions of the Russian Federation, implying that the government legally elected by the will of the people is capable of curbing capital due to its positive nature, unlike the United States. Thus, the relatively progressive role of the Russian Federation in comparison with the enemy is absolutized by it to the level of “eternal creative good,” and the bourgeois essence is hidden.
Strengthening the effect, Mr. Patrushev resorts to the concept of traditional values - a certain selective set of very generally defined traits, some of which can be called progressive and truly inherent in the culture and psychological makeup of the community of people of the Russian Federation. In the reasoning about them there are not only the same logical errors - idealism and metaphysics - but also simple dishonesty of observations. In addition to hiding the bourgeois essence of the Russian Federation, the use of meaningless “traditional” values makes it possible to endow not only the Russian Federation with the non-existent property of absolute progressiveness, but also a number of states that agree to enter into an alliance of struggle against the “anti-traditional” alliance, united by no less empty “democratic” values.
Thirdly, the author of the article under study correctly describes the germs of the progressive struggle against the large capitalist aggressor in the Russian Federation itself and throughout the world. In the process of analyzing the struggle, the author makes a new logical mistake - the loss of relationships when considering the identity and struggle of opposites. This technique opens up space for two manipulations. The first hides the law of competitive struggle that occurs within any group of the bourgeoisie. This allows the author to focus the reader’s attention only on the antagonism of less reactionary and more reactionary states (“traditional” and “anti-traditional” in his terminology) and at the same time declare the alliance of “traditional” states stable and indestructible, which in fact, being in a competitive struggle, cannot stop the internecine struggle. The second manipulation hides the law of class struggle. This allows the author to focus the reader’s attention only on the confrontation within the bourgeois class and announce a temporary solution, the support of his bourgeois “traditional” state in conditions of disorganization of the proletariat as the only possible way of struggle, and a permanent solution, the creation of a working class capable, under the leadership of the vanguard, of waging an organized struggle against bourgeois class, simply removed from the narrative as non-existent.
Mr. Patrushev strengthens his distorted understanding of the struggle with a proposal to institutionalize it, that is, to implement the norms of international law on non-interference in sovereign affairs. Within the framework in which the bourgeoisie is generally capable of relatively progressive activity, such an initiative is appropriate, but its failure is beyond doubt due to two logical errors made by the author during the analysis. The first is idealism again: the author is able to hide from the reader the insurmountable competitive confrontation of bourgeois (including “traditional”) states with the idealistic assertion that the good will itself, recorded in the Talmud of international law, will allow states to coexist peacefully. The second mistake is a simple forgery, where under the beautiful phrases about “non-interference in sovereign affairs” the essence of bourgeois law is hidden, which was invented precisely in order to force all subjects of this law into compliance.
Having freed the text under study from errors, we receive a statement from the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation about the desire to retain the right to exploit the population and resources of the territory of the Russian Federation and to fight for this in alliance with other states against an extremely reactionary hegemonic monopolist who tramples this right .
8.2. Step two: feasibility of the proposed solution
The bourgeoisie in its activities is guided by only one interest - the interest in the ever-increasing extraction of profit from the use of labor power, that is, simply put, animal interest. For someone with this level of motivation, full-fledged diamatic thinking is not only unnecessary, but also harmful. The statement of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation, which we were able to isolate from Mr. Patrushev’s message, also does not have a desire for progress guided by a conscious scientific necessity; it is only the result of the work of animal instinct, a spontaneous reaction to an obvious attack by the aggressor.
Having scientifically studied the degree of reactionaryness of the participants both theoretically, through a comparison of the level of organization of bourgeois detachments, and practically, through consideration of historical development and the current state, we came to the conclusion that the behavior of the Russian Federation in current realities can be classified as a defensive reaction. The need to fight the aggressor does not raise any doubts, but truly progressive successful activity is possible only on the basis of diamatic thinking, and the methods of struggle proposed by the leadership of the Russian Federation are developed by the same animal instinct. Their extreme ineffectiveness and fragility is expressed in the following points.
Dispersion of forces. The dominant detachment of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation is forced to wage a war on three fronts: against competing detachments of the bourgeoisie of other states, the intra-class struggle between detachments of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation and the class struggle against the proletariat, which spontaneously resists its exploitation.
Scattering of resources. In any production, including military production, the bourgeoisie always pursues two goals: the production of consumer value, that is, in fact, things, and the production of surplus value, that is, the constant extraction of profit. Such dispersion makes defense ineffective. This is typical for any bourgeois state, but in absolute terms the volume of possible loss of profit in the USA is much greater than in the Russian Federation; you just need to compare their defense budgets.
Failed preparation. The bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation is poorly organized due to competition, and therefore its strategic goal-setting is at a low level. Since December 1991, the Russian Federation, being in a non-military situation, managed to build an ineffective raw material resource model and lose all influence in virtually the entire post-Soviet space, because it was guided by immediate material interests. Simply put, the profits from cutting up the legacy of the USSR blinded the eyes of the newly-minted capitalists, and the more experienced Western enemy was able to prepare for war, easily distracting the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation with financial handouts. According to Pushkin’s gold-damask maxim, while Gollum of the “elite” of the Russian Federation was running around with his golden ring and trying to “buy everything,” his opponents were forging armor and weapons to appropriate the treasure and the life of the stupid hobbit.
Borders of struggle. Despite the spontaneous resistance that has begun, the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation does not fully understand the essence of the antagonism and therefore does not give up hope of “agreeing”, outlining the boundaries of the struggle in the “concept”. No matter how much the United States and its satellites are scolded, “Russia does not consider itself an enemy of the West.” At any hint that the golden ring will be left alone, the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation will act on the principle “I myself am glad to be deceived”: they will again bring the liberal wing onto the stage, pretend that instead of a struggle there was a small quarrel between “their own, bourgeois” and will fulfill any accompanying conditions, including preparations for war with China. It is interesting that in this situation, the Menshevik Communist Party of the Russian Federation will fully support the bourgeois government with any of its treacherous agreements with the enemy because it has chosen the path of denying the class struggle: soft conciliation in domestic policy (reformism and opposition within the framework of the bourgeois parliamentary system) and complete conciliation in foreign policy .
The temporary nature of a peaceful solution. If the current situation is successfully resolved, the coming peace will be overshadowed by a brewing new war. The law of development of capitalist production, the need for ever-increasing profit extraction, will not disappear anywhere. This means that the bourgeoisie will continue its class struggle and will inexorably attack the rights of the proletariat, constantly worsening its life and causing spontaneous resistance. This also means that the intra-class struggle between groups of the bourgeoisie will continue, and the multipolar world, based on the policy of violent coercion enshrined in international law, will turn a blind eye to regional conflicts, and with the emergence of a new hegemon, it will stop working altogether.
It is this helplessness, the inability to offer an effective and lasting peaceful solution, that the bourgeoisie in the person of Mr. Patrushev is forced to hide by wrapping its statement of struggle in a huge ball of logical nonsense. In this form, the proletariat, poorly educated in social science, should feel that it is necessary to identify with the bourgeoisie and thus stand on the side of good, which is about to defeat evil and bring eternal peace. In fact, having repelled the attack of the aggressor together with the bourgeoisie, the proletariat will receive a short respite, overshadowed by the hard everyday life of exploitative oppression, which will last exactly until the next war.
(Continued in following post.)
6.1. Mr. Patrushev and “revolutionary” changes in the international arena
With the loss of Marxist literacy in the leadership, the activities of the CPSU could not help but end in a bourgeois counter-revolution. The bourgeois world celebrated the collapse of the USSR as a great victory, considering that the end of history and the eternal “capitalist paradise” under the leadership of the United States had come. History is not without a sense of humor, and Stolypin’s dreams of twenty years of peace have almost come true, but only for the United States and its satellites. True, already in 2008, the “world community,” almost undistracted by what happened in Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq and other countries, suddenly began to suspect something was wrong, so far only in the real estate markets. By 2023, the bubble of the “capitalist paradise” ideology remained only in history books. Suddenly, for the US, their global plans went down the drain. A direct economic competitor has risen in the form of Communist Party-ruled China; so-called The Arab spring did not produce the expected results, and a number of states, including the Russian Federation, began to play at independence, uniting under the guise of three-, four- and five-letter economic and military abbreviations. The economies of the United States and its satellites began to falter, and military power ceased to be as frightening and bring such dividends as it was twenty years ago.
This state of affairs lies on the surface, and it will be described in approximately the same way both by Mr. Patrushev and by an official from any other country.
In fact, there is nothing revolutionary in such changes. In this situation, only the movement of a small number of countries, in which China and the DPRK stand out especially, can be called revolutionary and progressive, along the path to communism, but Mr. Patrushev cannot say about this without destroying his civilizational ideologies. In the actions of other states one can see only the protection of the interests of their private property, which, firstly, contradicts the progress of the entire society, secondly, does not contain actual revolutionism, that is, a radical change in the content of production relations between people, and, therefore, thirdly , is just an attempt at an international political coup. This means that the majority of participants in modern politics operate within the framework of the usual competitive capitalist structure, that is, they strive with all their might to repeat the same path that they already took on the eve of previous world wars.
6.2. Mr. Patrushev and the evil West
Horrific descriptions of “Anglo-Saxon” colonialism have long been the property of history textbooks in non-Western countries. Much less described in them is the recent history of the United States and its satellites, with its “invisible” to the media growing horror of the existence of an exploited population and with quite visible arenas of bloody massacre unleashed by the hegemon in various parts of the planet.
Mr. Patrushev fills this gap for us, with cold fury describing the suffering of the inhabitants of the Congo or, say, Libya and explaining this course of history and the behavior of the “Atlantists” with an innate ethic of superiority and anti-human globalism. In contrast, the “Westerners” themselves explain their actions by the savagery of the population they encounter on the planet and the “burden of Western man,” which must free the planet from human rights violations, totalitarian dictators and bloody communists.
Western countries were the first to enter the bourgeois era of industrial revolutions and realize their historical advantage in competition with less developed countries located in exploitative formations. The further development of productive forces and competition could not but lead first to colonialism, and then, as technology spread across the planet, to world wars and fascism. This was carried out not by abstract countries, but by specific classes consisting of specific capitalists who wrested power from the feudal lords as a result of bourgeois revolutions and consolidated it in their governing superstructure - the bourgeois state. The USSR, being the first progressive state under the leadership of a competent communist party, successfully waged a class war and was able to defeat Hitler, raised by the Western bourgeoisie, which curbed its bloody ardor for the next few decades. With the collapse of the USSR, the system of restraining bourgeois savages was dismantled and after a short pause, according to the absolute materialist law of development of capitalist production, the law of production of surplus value (profit), they again fell into an inevitable economic crisis and continued to kill each other with triple force.
Mr. Patrushev’s part of the article, which is critical of Western imperialism, is quite consistent, but in the absence of a formational approach, the reasons why history received such and not another development eludes.
Any country that has developed into a capitalist formation will implement murderous laws in accordance with its capitalist content, and the form and degree of “evility” of this implementation will be determined only by historical circumstances. The latter allows us to compare bourgeois countries in terms of the level of degeneracy and reactionaryness. At this historical stage, the records of bloody “achievements” in unleashing conflicts around the world belong to the bourgeoisie of Western countries. But, firstly, these “achievements” do not make these countries eternally reactionary either in the direction of the past or in the direction of the future, otherwise it would be necessary to invalidate both the scientific truth about the movement and development of matter and the objective prerequisites for eliminating the division of society into classes. And secondly, these “achievements” do not in any way transform less reactionary bourgeois states into progressive ones, no matter how hard Mr. Patrushev tries to spell them out. After all, his “sacred” fight against globalism does not consist in the elimination of its anti-progressive basis - the capitalist system of exploitation of man by man and private property relations. His struggle is the whining of a hyena, which a starving, mangy tiger decided to devour. Because as long as the tiger was well-fed, it was quite possible to be friends with him in the “holy nineties”, build partnerships at the beginning of the millennium, not pay attention to the bloody partition of Yugoslavia and Libya, play the Minsk agreements, and so on.
The degradation of the cultural superstructure that accompanies this phase of capitalism was also not ignored by Mr. Patrushev. A single global power really requires the implantation of a single set of pseudo-values in place of the various “traditional” ones, and humanity has already encountered this phenomenon at a time when religion acted as such a binding cultural phenomenon. But if the Middle Ages required a hoax to bring the population into submission, then in the modern world, full of complex technical devices, the masses of the population already have some kind of education, which means they have to invent something pseudoscientific. Something that can hide the only real value of bourgeois society - the value of serving the expanded reproduction of profit to the detriment of the expanded reproduction of society.
The degree of degradation of the formation, when the productive forces already have a broad social character and can no longer correspond to production capitalist relations with their private nature of appropriation, directly affects the degree of degradation of the superstructure, the degree of anti-humanity of culture and the degree of anti-science of social consciousness. All the theories of gender diversity, pseudo-ecological doctrines, and concepts of transhumanism mentioned by Mr. Patrushev are really the basis of the degenerate Western culture that is aggressively implanted throughout the world. However, he deliberately loses sight of the fact that the “traditional” values of bourgeois society - religion, “real” democratic values, patriotism, patriarchy and others - firstly, due to their idealistic basis, are not progressive, and secondly , being considered in development, are larvae that easily turn into the values of “globalism” as the “traditional” country enlarges and monopolizes, just in a slightly different form.
7. Analysis of solutions from Mr. Patrushev’s article
7.1. Mr. Patrushev and united multipolarity
Is it possible to assert, following Mr. Patrushev and “the majority of countries in the world, who are aware of the destructive nature of the global policy of the United States and its satellites,” that “the development of humanity directly depends on the strengthening of the multipolar world”?
First of all, let's designate the progressive coordinate system.
The development of humanity depends primarily on how revolutionary social practice is. The practice of any bourgeois state is predominantly conservative, since relations in it are structured in such a way that the working people - the basis of the developed productive forces covering virtually all of humanity - are exploited by a small group of representatives of the bourgeois class for the purpose of producing and appropriating surplus value. Exploitation is carried out through the force-imposed right of private ownership of the means of production. The production of surplus value is possible only on the basis of the expanded reproduction of material carriers of value - things in the form of goods. With value relations, human reproduction, his life itself, become secondary in relation to the production of goods. Capitalist society itself is not interested in fundamentally solving the problems of crime or war only insofar as they do not interfere with and even contribute to the continued production of goods and profit-making. The task of humanity is to move from expanded production of goods to expanded reproduction of society, that is, communism. Everything that brings us closer to this goal is a revolutionary practice, which and only which we can call progressive.
With the development of productive forces, objective conditions arise for the breakdown of capitalist relations. Since the time of the Paris Commune, humanity has entered the era of communist revolutions. The final victory of communism did not come only insofar as the subjective factor in the person of a sufficient number of competent Marxists united in the vanguard of the class struggle - sufficient to defeat the reaction of bourgeois society - had not yet developed.
In the designated coordinate system behind the form of the approaching new world war, we can now see the confrontation between progressive and conservative social practices, occurring for objective reasons and in accordance with the laws of social development. This confrontation has two components.
The first component is the confrontation between capitalist and communist states. Between countries led to slaughter by big US capital, and defending China, North Korea and their sympathizers. In this confrontation, our duty is not simply to express warm support for communist states, but also to study the living practice of class struggle.
The second component is the confrontation between blocs of capitalist countries for the redivision of the world. Countries with stronger, monopolized and imperialized capital are pursuing a course of domination and “eating” weak competitors, which means that the confrontation is not just between capitalist countries, but between capitalist countries of varying degrees of power and reactionaryness. Weaker countries want a “fair multipolar world based on international law” as opposed to those who strive for “world hegemony.”
The study of this confrontation allows us to identify a number of factors that play into the hands of the communist movement. Firstly, the very course of the inter-bourgeois squabble forces representatives of the exploiting class to be distracted from the fight against the communists. Secondly, the inevitable growing conflict, which cannot be resolved within the framework of the capitalist world order, throws the impoverished masses out of balance and pushes the dynamics and brightness of events to study the objective laws of the structure of society, which is an important prerequisite for the emergence and development of the subjective factor that should create history. This is exactly how the capitalist, in the new conditions, prepares his gravedigger, who previously, in peacetime, with the stupidity of a sheep, reproduced capitalist relations, thereby participating in the preparation of the future world slaughter. Thirdly, the weakening of the ultra-reactionary imperialist Western regime, led by the most powerful detachment of the bourgeoisie and seeking to forcibly unite the entire bourgeois class into a single organized fist, is progressive regardless of whose hands it is carried out. If weaker bourgeois states, driven either by the pursuit of regional influence, as in the case of Turkey, or by the desire to free themselves from the yoke of the hegemon, as in the case of the Russian Federation, are successful, then the result will be that same multipolar world, that is, an unstable world of competing countries. average reactionary predators, the world of a weakened and divided bourgeoisie. And fourthly, one cannot help but welcome the just national liberation struggle of the peoples of the world, as for example in the case of Donbass or Palestine.
The combination of these factors gives reason to welcome the concept of a multipolar world and encourage Mr. Patrushev and the representatives of the Russian bourgeoisie behind him to actively implement it. At the same time, it is important to understand that multipolarity does not solve the main problem of the outbreak of wars, which are a natural part of the capitalist structure. This means that when greeting, one should not stand in solidarity and should not be inactive. Let the “multipolar” bourgeoisie wage its ineffective struggle against the “global” one, and in the meantime the communists need to work within the framework of their tasks.
Thus, the answer to the question posed in this section is this: the development of humanity directly depends on the strengthening of a multipolar world only until the communist movement strengthens, because in itself the liberation of humanity from wars is not a solution.
7.2. Mr. Patrushev and multipolarity, united on the basis of peaceful coexistence of traditions
The article under study, following the “concept,” is replete with references to the dominant importance for the worldview and life of the state of traditional moral values, thousand-year traditions, spiritual and moral guidelines, etc. This worldview allows Mr. Patrushev to assert that the path to peace is the unification of “good » bearers of traditional values in the fight against “evil” bearers of neoliberal values.
From which we can conclude that the content of traditional values dictates to its bearer a model of behavior, the essence of which is peaceful coexistence with others. Consequently, a society of bearers of traditional values is a society of peace and prosperity.
Such a thesis is scientifically untenable, as we will show later. Worse, this thesis is untenable even in the worldview system presented by the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, and we will start from this moment.
7.2.1. Traditional values in national-patriotic philosophy
First, let's look at the traditional values within the state. Traditional value itself represents a certain benchmark that residents should follow. Failure to comply with values is possible because people are imperfect, but the main thing is that the benchmark is fixed by the state as a goal. At the state level, any alternative to traditional values is a destructive ideology.
Let's give an example. Mr. Patrushev's article, like the "concept", only mentions values, but does not bother to define their content. Let's call on the current President of the Russian Federation for help:
“Traditional values include life, dignity, human rights and freedoms, patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate, high moral ideals, strong family, creative work, priority of the spiritual over the material, humanism, mercy, justice, collectivism, mutual assistance and mutual respect, historical memory and continuity of generations, the unity of the peoples of Russia” [7].
He tells us that
“ideological and psychological influence on citizens leads to the inculcation of a system of ideas and values that is alien to the Russian people and destructive to Russian society (hereinafter referred to as destructive ideology), including the cultivation of selfishness, permissiveness, immorality, denial of the ideals of patriotism, service to the Fatherland, the natural continuation of life, the value of strong family, marriage, large families, creative work, Russia’s positive contribution to world history and culture, the destruction of the traditional family through the promotion of non-traditional sexual relationships” [7].
We will omit the religious component, because Mr. Patrushev does not focus on it, and the President of the Russian Federation only mentions the historical role:
“Orthodoxy plays a special role in the formation and strengthening of traditional values” [7].
Thus, we are told that within the country the content of value is of great importance, one might say existential. Now let's look at traditional values at the interstate level, where they should guarantee peaceful coexistence. However, this is where miracles begin with their content.
The concept of traditional values states that different states can have different traditional values and still live in peace. From the text of the article under study it follows that this is possible under three conditions.
The first condition is the ongoing struggle against anti-traditional values:
“Ensuring respect and protection of universal and traditional spiritual and moral values (including ethical norms common to all world religions), neutralizing attempts to impose pseudo-humanistic and other neoliberal ideological guidelines leading to the loss of traditional spiritual and moral guidelines and moral principles by humanity” [ 3, clause 19.9].
Thus, the first new value was implicitly revealed in the narrative - “the fight against anti-traditional values that turn nations into aggressors.” To begin with, it is possible to determine the content of something anti-traditional only through the content of the traditional. If you carefully examine the values of the Russian Federation, you will find not only their declarative nature, but also the fact that some of these declarations are also present in Western countries:
clearly present: “life, dignity, patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate, humanism, mercy, historical memory and continuity of generations, creative work, collectivism (as the unity of the nation)”;
definitely missing: “strong family”;
interpreted in a completely different, incompatible way: “human rights and freedoms”;
interpreted differently: “justice, high moral ideals, priority of the spiritual over the material, mutual assistance and mutual respect.” All this has the same meaning as in traditional values, but is aimed at protecting other “human rights and freedoms”;
let’s discard: “unity of the peoples of Russia”, since this is a special case of the condition below.
Consequently, “anti-traditional” in terms of the values of the Russian Federation is one who does not respect a strong family and has a neoliberal understanding of human rights and freedoms (gender diversity, democratic standards, etc.).
However, the countries of the modern West not so long ago relied very firmly on traditional family values and did not indulge in any neoliberalism. Which completely equalizes their list of values with the list of the Russian Federation, which means that the content of traditional values does not play any role in turning the country into an aggressor and, therefore, cannot prevent wars. The reader, of course, can arrange a scholastic debate about the fact that the content of “human rights and freedoms” during, say, the 18th century of the Russian Empire (hereinafter referred to as RI) and colonial England are somewhat different. Then let’s take any wars between neighbors professing “traditional” values. Let's say, today we hear about Armenia and Azerbaijan. If we compare their lists of values, we will be surprised at their identity. So where does the centuries-old enmity come from? And again, the reader can arrange a scholastic argument that the content of “human rights and freedoms” differs due to, for example, different religious denominations. Okay, then let’s take Rus' from the time of feudal fragmentation; we can’t think of anything more identical and traditional. And again it turns out that the content of values has nothing to do with ending wars.
Second condition:
“Reliance on a single spiritual and moral guideline for all the world’s traditional religions and secular ethical systems” [3, paragraph 18.7].
Some universal traditional values emerge here. I would like to see them in UN documents, but “non-traditional values”, having gained a foothold in Western countries, invariably began to penetrate the UN charters, to begin with, under the guise of fighting discrimination (for example, on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity). Moreover, as the representative of Norway put it when voting against resolution 21/3 on traditional values of 2012:
“In international law there is no unambiguous definition of such concepts as “traditions” and “values”. These concepts can be used to the detriment of human rights. If desired, “traditional values” can be found in such phenomena as domestic violence and slavery.”
However, even the words of the President of the Russian Federation are enough for us to define some universal values. What bourgeois country would refuse to proclaim “life, dignity, human rights and freedoms, patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland and responsibility for its fate, the priority of the spiritual over the material, humanism, mercy, justice”?
Thus, the second new value was implicitly manifested - “the desire to develop common traditional values.” General means that some of them should intersect with the traditional values of the Russian Federation. However, as we found out above, even if all the values intersect with the list of the Russian Federation, peaceful existence is impossible. The content of traditional values in the second condition is again unimportant.
Third condition:
“Refusal of all states from imposing their development models, ideological and value systems on other countries” [3, paragraph 18.7].
Here the content of traditional values has finally developed to the point that... it has become unnecessary for the authors of this construct themselves. The Russian Federation is quite ready to get along with the Mayan and Aztec tribes with their sacrifices, as long as they are not imposed.
This is how the third new value was implicitly revealed: “don’t impose your values on me.”
So, thinking purely in terms of the national-patriotic worldview, among all three conditions for the peaceful coexistence of “traditional” states, we did not find a single one in which the content of values would play at least some role. However, during the study, we identified one new value, which, according to national patriots, is capable of stopping wars: “don’t force your values on me.” Only it remained for our consideration after squeezing out the water and logical inconsistencies from Mr. Patrushev’s reasoning about values; it alone underlies his proposed solution to the problems described. And everything would be fine, but the entire history of mankind shows that this does not happen, and in order to explain this, you need to stand on a scientific foundation.
7.2.2. Traditional values in scientific consideration
A gross logical mistake is an attempt to think of some idealistic essence and, with the help of it, change material reality. Standing on the ninth floor in front of an open window, you can imagine that this is a portal to another world, but a step forward will give the same result in the form of a corpse on the asphalt.
Mr. Patrushev showed two portals in his reasoning.
The first portal is moral guidelines that so attract ignorant ordinary people. The idealism of this construction, due to its empty essence, cannot but produce a lot of logical errors. For example, the average person has to literally ignore historical development and turn a blind eye to the fact that it is countries with traditional values that are turning into neoliberal aggressor countries. Or we have to invent new idealistic entities, for example, in attempts to explain how our “good” patriotism differs from their “bad” one.
In fact, the values that can actually be observed among a community of people are formed in society as a result of certain social relations. In a class society, they directly arise from class contradictions, contradictions between production relations and productive forces. In capitalist relations, when the leader in class antagonism is the bourgeois class, which forcibly maintains these relations in the form of a bourgeois state, the dominant values are violence, careerism, commodity fetishism, unbridled accumulation, and so on. The bourgeoisie solves the problem of subjugating the proletariat using two methods: force, through police, specialized and military structures, and ideological, through solidarity, that is, imaginary general class interests. It is here that the real values of bourgeois society are replaced by a beautiful dummy. The ideological method works only for a limited period of time, because the material interests of the two classes are antagonistically opposed and imaginary constructions in the form of spiritual traditions and moral patriotism ultimately cease to hide the real state of affairs. People then say that the refrigerator defeated the TV. Marxism easily reveals the lies of the so-called. traditional values. Thus, “patriotism” is only an instruction to the proletarian to die for the interests of the oligarch; “creative labor” is the labor of the proletarian, creating surplus value for the oligarch; “collectivism” is a union of labor and capital, and “the priority of the spiritual over the material” is only a limitation on the prohibition of private ownership of the means of production. So it turns out that part of the population, the bourgeois class, never themselves follows the declared values, which, however, the population itself always notices.
The second portal is the essence of the concept of peaceful coexistence, “don’t impose your values on me,” which we discovered in the previous section. We saw that the content of values in the interethnic world does not play any role, however, perhaps the principle of non-interference itself will work? No, it will not. As K. Marx shows:
“Value thus becomes self-moving value, self-moving money, and as such it is capital.”
Capital cannot stop in its movement, which means that capitalist countries cannot stop competing, even if their officials wrote beautiful words on paper. Trade, the movement of capital, labor and goods are the main factors in the propagation of values. Economic competition develops into monopoly, which is ensured politically - by the power of the state. One capitalist state seeks to suppress another capitalist state in order to provide the most favorable conditions for its capital, including through the implantation of values.
Therefore, “don’t force your values on me” is an attempt by several weak capitalist countries to briefly suspend their feuds and unite in the fight against a major imperialist, which is a progressive action at this historical period. If this goal is achieved, their subsequent military squabble and desire to turn into a new hegemon with their own set of essentially degenerate values will only be a matter of time.
It is also worth noting that while supporting the concept of multipolarity and non-intervention, China (or other communist country) is also pursuing the progressive goal of fighting the largest imperialist. Another thing is that in case of victory and while maintaining a high scientific level, the CPC will simply continue to wage class struggle against the bourgeoisie both within and in other countries. And this can also be perceived as the spread of “Marxist values.”
7.3. Mr. Patrushev and creative civilization
The Russian Federation in the article under study is shown as a country with a creative civilizational role, which, as opposed to Western parasites, offers an alternative path, fulfilling a historically unique mission to maintain the global balance of power and build a multipolar international system.
Meanwhile, any schoolchild knows that Western parasites were seen in all sorts of creative endeavors: they successfully explored the planet during the period of the Great Geographical Discoveries, created great works of art, created the industrial revolution, moved science forward, etc., etc. On the other hand, the schoolchild does not may not remember that Russian creators throughout history have been marked by parasitism. The nobles after Peter and right up to the Great October Socialist Revolution oppressed the people in such a way that the honored writers of the Republic of Ingushetia were horrified, talentedly capturing it on the pages of their works. Since the abolition of serfdom, these same people were flogged, their uprisings were crushed by the army, they were shot with machine guns, and even the Tsar-Father himself organized Bloody Sunday.
“Over seven decades, NATO members have become participants in more than 200 military conflicts around the world,” the Secretary of the Russian Security Council tells us.
Does he remember how many conflicts the Republic of Ingushetia has caused in at least 200 years, starting from the times of Peter the Great? Does he remember the division of Poland, does he mourn the national liberation bourgeois movements suppressed by the “gendarme of Europe”, has he forgotten the wars with Turkey, Sweden, Iran, France, is he aware of the colonial claims to Korea and the imperialist plans for dividing the territories of China and the subsequent Russian-Japanese war? war? Does he finally admit that during the First World War the Republic of Ingushetia played a far from creative role, in full accordance with the instructions given by His Serene Highness Prince A.M. Gorchakov’s vector for defending national interests, adjusted by 1914 by the Entente countries in connection with the subordinate international economic position of the Republic of Ingushetia?
So in the mathematics of finding the relationships between parasitic and creative moments, our bourgeois official can get confused. Although, of course, it cannot be denied that in terms of parasitism, cruelty, and cannibalism, Europeans and Americans have no equal and never will.
Above, in the section “Mr. Patrushev and the evil West,” we have already discarded the parasitic-creative terminology as the fruit of an inflamed national-patriotic mind and moved on to the scientific study of historical events. Then several points became clear.
Firstly, before 1917, the Republic of Ingushetia and Western countries differed only in the level of development of exploitative formations, that is, according to the terminology of the article under discussion, they were parasites of different calibers. This is an important point in determining the degree of reactionaryness of a particular exploitative state: for example, one must understand that the First World War was started by Western states, while the Republic of Ingushetia only joined the inevitable massacre.
Secondly, Mr. bourgeois official must understand that he could observe the absolute level of progressive in the history of Russia only during the period of the USSR until 1953, because in his own words
“The dismantling of the colonial system began after the Second World War under the direct influence of the achievements and victories of the Soviet Union.”
The transition from the Republic of Ingushetia to the USSR occurred as a result of the successful revolutionary struggle of the Communist Party, led by V.I. Lenin, with an exploitative feudal-bourgeois heritage. This was Russia’s transition to a new quality, from an exploitative to a post-exploitation formation. The revolutionary struggle did not end there, and the confrontation with the bourgeoisie continued both on the internal front and on the external one, which took its highest imperialist fascist form of “crusade against communism” during the Second World War and the Cold War.
Thirdly, as a result of the decline in scientific competence, the Communist Party, in fact, ceased to be such and allowed a bourgeois counter-revolution, which threw Russia back in development to a lower quality, to a capitalist system. The country immediately began to experience concomitant “parasitic” corrosion, similar to that in the Republic of Ingushetia. Pockets of separatism appeared in the country; the general monstrous stratification returned; an incompetent government built a flawed economy on the plunder of the USSR's heritage and the sale of natural resources; the population began to decline; price increases have become systematic; the bloody initiative to collapse Libya was supported; a catastrophic loss of political influence began along the perimeter of the Russian Federation; preparations for war were overwhelmed; The fascist regime of Ukraine was recognized as legitimate, and for eight years Donbass was given over to be torn to pieces by this monster for the sake of attempts at “peaceful coexistence” with the West. In other words, the weak bourgeois state again began to oppress its own population internally, and outside, instead of an uncompromising struggle, it began to play geopolitics with a stronger enemy. And even now:
“Russia does not consider itself an enemy of the West... and expects that in the future, states belonging to the Western community will realize the futility of their confrontational policies and hegemonic ambitions... and will return to pragmatic interaction with Russia...” [3, 13].
That is, I am ready to make peace and stop noticing the fascist essence of the United States at the moment when they promise to give up attempts to consume the Russian Federation as food and give the opportunity to resume trade in natural resources, albeit as a junior partner.
Thus, the creation eternally inherent in Russia is only an illusion, that is, a non-existent property, which in the article under consideration is endowed with a completely materially existing country.
Only a philosophically and socially ignorant person can make a logical mistake and become an idealist, a bearer of illusion, which is the norm in a bourgeois state. A convinced national patriot is forced to protect his illusion, diligently remaining on the surface of reasoning and ignoring a lot of facts from the practice of mankind. When a fact that diverges from his bad ideas about reality can no longer be ignored, for example, when his so creative country begins to exploit him more and more mercilessly or trade with a sworn enemy right in the middle of a war, then such an idealist begins to look for reasons in completely unexpected places: in the divine machinations or in the heads of individual bad individuals.
7.4. Mr. Patrushev and international law
The jackets of dignitaries of international organizations look impressive. The jackets of the League of Nations were good, but short-lived, and the jackets of the UN are becoming less and less credible. The reader has already understood that the call for non-interference in other people's affairs does not work in connection with the material interests of classes. But Mr. Patrushev argues that if the right number of important jackets can get together and agree to insert the mantra of non-intervention into the Talmud called “international law,” then a “genuine democratic multipolar world order” will emerge.
If the Secretary of the Security Council is consistent, then he should cite the Russian Federation as an example of a country with working law. Since the Russian Federation is an ordinary bourgeois state, its legal structure and legal laws are bourgeois structure and laws. The foundation of bourgeois laws lies only one right - the right of private ownership of the means of production, which is alienated in their favor by unprincipled, cunning and strong representatives of the bourgeois class. These gentlemen-owners immediately start two things: a class struggle with the proletariat - its production exploitation for the purpose of making a profit - and an intra-class competitive struggle. In order, on the one hand, not to destroy the entire proletariat by unbridled super-exploitation, and, on the other hand, not to destroy each other in bandit feuds, capitalists are forced to organize their activities, including in the form of a bourgeois state, in a system of legal norms. The state, relying primarily on the security forces, makes it possible to create regulations that, firstly, will prevent the proletariat from accessing the means of production alienated from it and at the same time preserve the illusion that the proletariat participates in governance through democratic elections, and secondly, will allow force all capitalists to follow some centrally made rules and punish those who do not follow them. These regulations are the same bourgeois legislation that is dynamically developing to suit the current balance of power among capitalists, most of all satisfying the needs of the strongest of them.
Thus, working law in the Russian Federation is a reflection of class interests and an instrument of the political will of the ruling class; the result of gross interference , firstly, by the united bourgeois class in the life and activity of the proletariat with the aim of using it in production and robbery, and secondly, by large capitalists in the life and activity of smaller ones. If such intervention were not required, then state law would not be required. Such intervention ultimately ensures the prosperity of large capitalists, a temporary “multipolar world” between capitalists and the ever-increasing exploitation of the proletariat - the majority of the population. This is the order that is proposed by the influential jackets of the bourgeois state from among the deputies of the State Duma and other important bodies.
The bourgeoisie is trying to build a similar organization at the international level in order to ensure the intervention of the most powerful sections of the bourgeoisie. An example of the work of international bourgeois law can be peace conferences following world wars. The Paris and Washington conferences following the First World War did not even hide the fact that their goal was the redivision of the world. The result of their work for the peoples of the German bloc, driven to war, was the burden of indemnities, and for the bourgeoisie of the Entente countries that participated in the outbreak of the war - a prize in the form of German colonies. As a result of the Second World War, the Nuremberg Tribunal took place, which, of course, had significant differences, but, in fact, only punished particularly zealous executioners in uniform, leaving the instigators in the person of representatives of large capital in Germany, England, the USA and a number of other countries untouched. Despite the protests of the Soviet side. Today, the transcontinental hegemon represented by large capital, standing behind the back of the United States and its henchmen, has become so reactionary that, through direct influence and with the help of the decaying UN, it has decided to establish its own order throughout the planet. This is a natural development of the monopolizing capitalist world. Talk on the part of weaker capitalist countries about fair multipolar international law is an attempt to avoid being robbed by a leading monopolist, an attempt to establish control over competition and establish intra-class peace.
How effective is the proposed intervention? To answer this question, it is important to remember that we live in a material world that moves according to the objective laws of its development. This means, firstly, that any beautiful thought, drawn up on an equally beautiful piece of paper, can either call for changes in matter, or describe changes that have already occurred. In our case, intra-class peace can only be secured as a result of victory in the struggle and the forceful overthrow of the hegemon. Consequently, Mr. Patrushev’s references to international law are essentially a declaration of war between the Russian bourgeoisie and the US bourgeoisie. This means, secondly, that the future peace gained as a result of victory will be only a temporary truce, which will last either until the emergence of the next hegemon, or until the confrontation with the communist states.
Is it possible to talk about the progressiveness of bourgeois intra-class regulation in the form of international law? It is possible, but with the following important reservations: a) we are talking about relative progressiveness b) in conditions when the communist movement is not yet sufficiently organized, c) in the presence of an extremely aggressive reactionary hegemon, d) when the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation and a number of other countries strive to overthrow the hegemon by force and consolidation of a temporary truce in international bourgeois law.
8. What did Mr. Patrushev really want to say?
Now, having analyzed the parts of the article under study, let’s look at it as a whole.
8.1. Step one: the actual content of the article
Science would not be needed if the essence of phenomena could be understood directly from their form.
Mr. Patrushev's article is smooth in form, but as soon as you scratch the surface a little, logical errors immediately begin to appear. You can get to the essence only by carefully freeing the text from errors.
Firstly, the author of the article under study correctly reflects the changes taking place in the world: “a shift in the center of economic activity” and the resistance of Western countries to this. In the process of their analysis, the author allows himself to make a number of logical errors: a distorted understanding of the laws of development of matter, complete disregard for the categories of measure and leap. This technique makes it possible to give non-existent qualities to phenomena: to an ordinary international political coup - the quality of progressiveness and revolutionism (although a radical reorganization of social relations does not occur), and to the organizers of the coup - to absolutize the progressiveness of their role (although their exploitative essence does not change).
Secondly, the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation quite accurately reflects the degree of reactionaryness of Western countries, which is significantly higher than in the Russian Federation. When analyzing this point, the following logical errors were made: idealism, distortion of the laws of development of matter in the form of its invariably inherent properties (metaphysics). As a result, the author missed the reasons for development and ignored the study of identity and the struggle of opposites. This technique makes it possible not only to hide the real reason for the current state of affairs - private ownership of the means of production - but also to solidify the proletariat with the bourgeois power, to raise it to fight against whomever this power points at.
To achieve this effect, first Mr. Patrushev reveals in detail the truly reactionary practices of Western countries during the times of capitalism, pointing out the big capital behind it. The first manipulation occurs when he also points to the aggressive policy of Western countries towards Russia and to the pre-capitalist formation, but simply points out the reasons for their inherent aggression. This is the first step towards placing in the reader’s mind the reactionary role of Western countries, absolutized to the level of “eternal evil,” which is a metaphysical perception and a logical error. The second manipulation occurs when Mr. Patrushev omits the role of capital in the actions of the Russian Federation, implying that the government legally elected by the will of the people is capable of curbing capital due to its positive nature, unlike the United States. Thus, the relatively progressive role of the Russian Federation in comparison with the enemy is absolutized by it to the level of “eternal creative good,” and the bourgeois essence is hidden.
Strengthening the effect, Mr. Patrushev resorts to the concept of traditional values - a certain selective set of very generally defined traits, some of which can be called progressive and truly inherent in the culture and psychological makeup of the community of people of the Russian Federation. In the reasoning about them there are not only the same logical errors - idealism and metaphysics - but also simple dishonesty of observations. In addition to hiding the bourgeois essence of the Russian Federation, the use of meaningless “traditional” values makes it possible to endow not only the Russian Federation with the non-existent property of absolute progressiveness, but also a number of states that agree to enter into an alliance of struggle against the “anti-traditional” alliance, united by no less empty “democratic” values.
Thirdly, the author of the article under study correctly describes the germs of the progressive struggle against the large capitalist aggressor in the Russian Federation itself and throughout the world. In the process of analyzing the struggle, the author makes a new logical mistake - the loss of relationships when considering the identity and struggle of opposites. This technique opens up space for two manipulations. The first hides the law of competitive struggle that occurs within any group of the bourgeoisie. This allows the author to focus the reader’s attention only on the antagonism of less reactionary and more reactionary states (“traditional” and “anti-traditional” in his terminology) and at the same time declare the alliance of “traditional” states stable and indestructible, which in fact, being in a competitive struggle, cannot stop the internecine struggle. The second manipulation hides the law of class struggle. This allows the author to focus the reader’s attention only on the confrontation within the bourgeois class and announce a temporary solution, the support of his bourgeois “traditional” state in conditions of disorganization of the proletariat as the only possible way of struggle, and a permanent solution, the creation of a working class capable, under the leadership of the vanguard, of waging an organized struggle against bourgeois class, simply removed from the narrative as non-existent.
Mr. Patrushev strengthens his distorted understanding of the struggle with a proposal to institutionalize it, that is, to implement the norms of international law on non-interference in sovereign affairs. Within the framework in which the bourgeoisie is generally capable of relatively progressive activity, such an initiative is appropriate, but its failure is beyond doubt due to two logical errors made by the author during the analysis. The first is idealism again: the author is able to hide from the reader the insurmountable competitive confrontation of bourgeois (including “traditional”) states with the idealistic assertion that the good will itself, recorded in the Talmud of international law, will allow states to coexist peacefully. The second mistake is a simple forgery, where under the beautiful phrases about “non-interference in sovereign affairs” the essence of bourgeois law is hidden, which was invented precisely in order to force all subjects of this law into compliance.
Having freed the text under study from errors, we receive a statement from the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation about the desire to retain the right to exploit the population and resources of the territory of the Russian Federation and to fight for this in alliance with other states against an extremely reactionary hegemonic monopolist who tramples this right .
8.2. Step two: feasibility of the proposed solution
The bourgeoisie in its activities is guided by only one interest - the interest in the ever-increasing extraction of profit from the use of labor power, that is, simply put, animal interest. For someone with this level of motivation, full-fledged diamatic thinking is not only unnecessary, but also harmful. The statement of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation, which we were able to isolate from Mr. Patrushev’s message, also does not have a desire for progress guided by a conscious scientific necessity; it is only the result of the work of animal instinct, a spontaneous reaction to an obvious attack by the aggressor.
Having scientifically studied the degree of reactionaryness of the participants both theoretically, through a comparison of the level of organization of bourgeois detachments, and practically, through consideration of historical development and the current state, we came to the conclusion that the behavior of the Russian Federation in current realities can be classified as a defensive reaction. The need to fight the aggressor does not raise any doubts, but truly progressive successful activity is possible only on the basis of diamatic thinking, and the methods of struggle proposed by the leadership of the Russian Federation are developed by the same animal instinct. Their extreme ineffectiveness and fragility is expressed in the following points.
Dispersion of forces. The dominant detachment of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation is forced to wage a war on three fronts: against competing detachments of the bourgeoisie of other states, the intra-class struggle between detachments of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation and the class struggle against the proletariat, which spontaneously resists its exploitation.
Scattering of resources. In any production, including military production, the bourgeoisie always pursues two goals: the production of consumer value, that is, in fact, things, and the production of surplus value, that is, the constant extraction of profit. Such dispersion makes defense ineffective. This is typical for any bourgeois state, but in absolute terms the volume of possible loss of profit in the USA is much greater than in the Russian Federation; you just need to compare their defense budgets.
Failed preparation. The bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation is poorly organized due to competition, and therefore its strategic goal-setting is at a low level. Since December 1991, the Russian Federation, being in a non-military situation, managed to build an ineffective raw material resource model and lose all influence in virtually the entire post-Soviet space, because it was guided by immediate material interests. Simply put, the profits from cutting up the legacy of the USSR blinded the eyes of the newly-minted capitalists, and the more experienced Western enemy was able to prepare for war, easily distracting the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation with financial handouts. According to Pushkin’s gold-damask maxim, while Gollum of the “elite” of the Russian Federation was running around with his golden ring and trying to “buy everything,” his opponents were forging armor and weapons to appropriate the treasure and the life of the stupid hobbit.
Borders of struggle. Despite the spontaneous resistance that has begun, the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation does not fully understand the essence of the antagonism and therefore does not give up hope of “agreeing”, outlining the boundaries of the struggle in the “concept”. No matter how much the United States and its satellites are scolded, “Russia does not consider itself an enemy of the West.” At any hint that the golden ring will be left alone, the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation will act on the principle “I myself am glad to be deceived”: they will again bring the liberal wing onto the stage, pretend that instead of a struggle there was a small quarrel between “their own, bourgeois” and will fulfill any accompanying conditions, including preparations for war with China. It is interesting that in this situation, the Menshevik Communist Party of the Russian Federation will fully support the bourgeois government with any of its treacherous agreements with the enemy because it has chosen the path of denying the class struggle: soft conciliation in domestic policy (reformism and opposition within the framework of the bourgeois parliamentary system) and complete conciliation in foreign policy .
The temporary nature of a peaceful solution. If the current situation is successfully resolved, the coming peace will be overshadowed by a brewing new war. The law of development of capitalist production, the need for ever-increasing profit extraction, will not disappear anywhere. This means that the bourgeoisie will continue its class struggle and will inexorably attack the rights of the proletariat, constantly worsening its life and causing spontaneous resistance. This also means that the intra-class struggle between groups of the bourgeoisie will continue, and the multipolar world, based on the policy of violent coercion enshrined in international law, will turn a blind eye to regional conflicts, and with the emergence of a new hegemon, it will stop working altogether.
It is this helplessness, the inability to offer an effective and lasting peaceful solution, that the bourgeoisie in the person of Mr. Patrushev is forced to hide by wrapping its statement of struggle in a huge ball of logical nonsense. In this form, the proletariat, poorly educated in social science, should feel that it is necessary to identify with the bourgeoisie and thus stand on the side of good, which is about to defeat evil and bring eternal peace. In fact, having repelled the attack of the aggressor together with the bourgeoisie, the proletariat will receive a short respite, overshadowed by the hard everyday life of exploitative oppression, which will last exactly until the next war.
(Continued in following post.)
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."
Re: Russia today
9. Are Mr. Patrushev’s mistakes random?
A patriot who has not fully understood this may assume that the errors in Mr. Patrushev’s text were made unintentionally. In this regard, such a reader will say, the right way is to unite in a bourgeois party, gain the approval of the masses and, already in the parliamentary struggle, bring into the consciousness of the ruling circles the idea of their errors. Then, without any revolutions, the power that has seen the light will itself take some path close to the communist one and begin smooth transformations of society.
Such a reader should not rush to such hypotheses. Let us remember that we are talking about the same Nikolai Patrushev, who was a member of the CPSU before its ban in August 1991; who, therefore, studied in the USSR and is familiar with dialectical logic at least in general terms.
Possessing such a logical apparatus, Mr. Patrushev could not help but understand the essence of the counter-revolutionary coup in the USSR; he chose the fate of a traitor and organically joined the system of the new bourgeois government, to begin with in the role of Minister of Security of the Republic of Karelia. Consequently, the current Secretary of the Security Council is not only familiar with the concept of class struggle, but has also successfully applied it in practice.
However, the very fact of joining the camp of traitors only indicates that he has not mastered dialectical logic deeply and is able to apply it only for personal well-being and manipulation of the ignorant masses. In a real confrontation with a strong opponent, he relies not on logic, but on animal grasping reflexes, and of rather low quality.
So, back in 2008, he entertained the honorable public with stories that “we are ready for equal, constructive cooperation with other countries, including the United States,” and in 2010 he wrote for The Guardian newspaper that “Russia and the West , once Cold War enemies, are now united in the face of a very real terrorist threat that, more than ever, requires a joint, coordinated, and determined effort to defeat it.”[9]
But Mr. Patrushev, being part of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation, could not help but understand its subordinate role in relation to the dominant detachment of the US bourgeoisie, which has already shown the world its fascist mug. However, by this time he had already lost his logical grip and, following his superiors, chose Western “gold”; and did this at the very moment when the United States is already in full swing sharpening “damask steel”, preparing the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation for slaughter right after Libya, the attack on which Mr. Medvedev supported in connection with the “disgraceful behavior that was carried out by the leadership of Libya and those crimes that were committed against their own people."
In 2015, Mr. Patrushev had already begun to suspect something, carefully talking about the “persistent desire of the West to solve almost all of its problems at the expense of others” [10], but still declaring the fictitious ideological deception of “international terrorism” as the main threat to the world. In 2016 he adds:
“The Russian Federation is not interested in confrontation with the West... We are always ready to resume equal cooperation” [11].
Later, the high official admits his mistakes:
“In 2018 we have to admit that the main area of the economy, energy, is under attack” [12], and in 2022 - that “the placement of gold and foreign exchange reserves abroad was an unjustified step” [13].
Already in 2020, Mr. Patrushev, who has seen the light, begins to actively include in his rhetoric statements about color revolutions, “the style of the Anglo-Saxons that has not changed for centuries” and the doctrine of the “golden billion”, and in 2022 he boldly declares that “the Anglo-Saxons decided to start fragmenting the Russian ethnic group from Ukraine.” .
Thus, he recognizes the existential threat, but in 2023 we see that this is not enough for an uncompromising struggle. Evidence of this is the rhetoric in the article under study that “Russia does not consider itself an enemy of the West.”
From what Mr. Patrushev himself said and did, we can conclude that the current Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, who lost his conscience, first betrayed and sold his Soviet homeland, and then, as part of the new government of exploiters, predictably led the country to a crisis. To reach this point, former comrade Patrushev, together with the entire ruling clique, had to first of all “miss” the moment when the Russian Federation was appointed as a food source, and not as a partner. Then he had to fuss for a long time in attempts to regain the former favor of the hegemon, handing over the economy in pieces, selling state interests in the post-Soviet space and turning a blind eye to the repressions of the authorities of the former Soviet republics against the Russian-speaking population, including for eight years actually not noticing the bombing of Donbass.
And at the moment when all the masks are dropped, when the opportunity to prevent war in 2014 was mediocrely missed, when preparations for war failed, when political weakness literally gave the Western aggressor the opportunity to create a Ukronazi instrument, even now Mr. Patrushev continues to squirm, leaving his foot in the door for possible restoration of relations with the enemy in case “what if they change their mind.” However, now, having messed up their preparations and got themselves into a situation unpleasant for their own well-being, the bourgeois government is forced to listen to the instinct of self-preservation, which requires using the exploited population not only as a resource for enrichment, but also as an ally. To do this, you need to sweep your incompetence under the rug and make sure that the masses awaken and their interests shift from individual petty bourgeois to common with the bourgeoisie. To this end, Mr. Secretary again shakes off the dust from his limited skills in dialectical logic and begins to fence in illusory constructions. And in these constructions there is no explanation for the proletarians that when they, having gone through bloody torment, pull out the crap hypocrite Patrushev from the hole he dug, then, in gratitude from their superiors, they will again be allowed to simply work for the owners until the next conflict.
Consequently, Mr. Patrushev is incompetent in matters of intra-class struggle and is not able to solve the problems of the ongoing conflicts of the capitalist formation in a bourgeois manner due to the non-existence of such solutions. However, he understands the issues of class struggle, and the dialectical apparatus allows him to fool the masses for a relatively long time, until the very moment when the very course of events and wars pushes ordinary people to start thinking for themselves and begin to master the scientific method of thinking.
10. What to do?
Progressive practice requires a thorough diamatic understanding of the situation, a definition of the goal and a plan to achieve it.
The article under study is helpless in determining the goal, even if it is cleared of lies - an abundance of illusions pleasing to the eye of the ignorant national proletariat. The bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation is ready to consider the treatment of symptoms as a victory in the form of forcing the hegemon to reconcile with the help of the military power of the resisting alliances. Such helplessness and falsity of Mr. Patrushev’s proposals have roots only in the fact that he, together with the entire bourgeois power, is guided not by logic, but by animal interests, the interests of capital accumulation.
Only the eradication of the cause of the conflict, that is, the elimination of the institution of private ownership of the means of production with the subsequent elimination of the bourgeois class and the construction of a communist classless society, can be considered a real victory. This includes the defeat of the hegemon, but is not limited to it, because the essence of communism is total, universal scientificism, and the essence of the struggle for communism is to direct the activities of people along the path of meaningful development of society. Such a victory is possible only if the proletarian movement is united with a scientific diamatic worldview, with Marxism.
A person who has come out of his individual shell and become concerned about what is happening in society needs to understand the following.
Firstly, you need to soberly understand the balance of progressive and reactionary in the actions of the bourgeois Russian Federation .
As we showed above, one cannot help but welcome the Russian Federation’s struggle against the aggression of Western countries, which spontaneously began as a result of animal instincts activated, despite the fragility and even some mutilation of the recipes for victory proposed by Mr. Patrushev [14]. The authorities of the Russian Federation should not interfere with these noble aspirations, while the Marxists have neither a sufficient number of competent personnel, nor sufficient organization, nor a strong connection with the masses.
At the same time, one should take into account the weakness of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation, which sooner or later will either fall under the blows of a stronger enemy, or will bring the country to a crisis by other methods. It is necessary to use the time allotted before the disaster in order to prepare an organization that can reconstruct the country on revolutionary principles.
We can say that a bad driver is sitting at the helm of a certain car, who temporarily steered onto a road acceptable to us. While he’s on it, you shouldn’t disturb him, but he won’t last long on it, and our task is to remove him from the steering wheel in time, which means, first of all, we urgently need to learn how to drive a car and choose the right road .
As an analogy, we can cite the words of V.I. Lenin from the message “To the Central Committee of the RSDLP” dated September 12, 1917:
“We will fight, we are fighting with Kornilov, like Kerensky’s troops, but we do not support Kerensky, but expose his weakness. That's the difference. This difference is quite subtle, but extremely significant and cannot be forgotten... The fact is that we are changing the form of our struggle with Kerensky. Without weakening our hostility towards him one iota, without taking back a single word spoken against him, without abandoning the task of overthrowing Kerensky, we say: we must take the moment into account, we will not overthrow Kerensky now, we will now approach the task of fighting him differently, namely: to explain to the people (who are fighting against Kornilov) the weakness and vacillations of Kerensky. This has been done before. But now this has become the main thing: this is the modification.”
One important difference of the current moment is that we do not have an organization, and therefore we simply do not stop the bourgeoisie from fighting, while pursuing the Marxist agenda.
Secondly, there is no need to urgently pick up a revolver and run to take power .
Marxism is not a dogma, but a guide to action. The counter-revolution, which began in the second half of the last century and ended with a coup at the end of the century, if not stopped, then significantly slowed down the development of Marxism and its application to the present day.
The scientific foundation that we have in our hands is already enough to understand the falsity of Mr. Patrushev’s verses, but not enough to begin large-scale revolutionary practice. There are only a few of those who are able to develop the theoretical heritage left to us, but to actualize Marxism and organize a vanguard capable of guiding the masses during a revolutionary situation, tens, hundreds, and maybe thousands are required.
Thirdly, you need to engage in self-education .
Anyone who doesn't want to learn has several options. The first way is to show solidarity with the enemy: choose the liberal path, allow yourself to be used by the bourgeoisie of Western countries, and after victory or defeat find yourself thrown into the trash heap. Another way is to identify with the bad driver, Mr. Patrushev, that is, go to the front or forge a military victory in the rear. Such people are also needed, but they must realize that their contribution will ensure only such a victory that will suit the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation, and therefore be prepared for agreements, the lack of normal support for the front, the lack of competent command and a temporary truce instead of peace. The third way is to become a leftist: not to understand the essence of Marxism, but cheerfully throw around terminology for various purposes that have nothing to do with progress. Here you can expect the defeat of your bourgeoisie; expect that the revolutionary situation itself will lead to victory; follow the factory workers, who, due to some innate qualities, will themselves be able to organize and defeat the bourgeoisie; in a word, indulge in idle dreams and monetize them to the best of your ability.
Anyone who wants to learn has only one way: engage in deep self-education. Ten people who have reached scientific heights in the knowledge and development of Marxism will form a competent printed organ around which supporters will gather. So that people who have been pushed out of their cozy philistine holes by disasters and become interested in Marxism can master it in the best and fastest way. Fifty will be able to update the theory, and a hundred will be able to organize a party of scientific centralism, which, having absorbed several hundred competent comrades-in-arms, will be able, in an objectively emerging revolutionary situation, to prepare a revolution, overthrow the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and establish the dictatorship of the working class.
There are not many people who persistently engage in self-education, but they exist; their number is growing and the quality of their knowledge is growing. For several decades now, the most important work of the Proryv team to actualize Marxism has been quietly but tirelessly going on. However, you should not rush to join any organization. First of all, you need to independently acquire scientific Marxist knowledge and only on the basis of it check whether potential comrades are not mistaken on theoretical issues. If a newly minted Marxist thinks that he has discovered a scientific truth, then he should formalize it in a scientific work and give it to the team for verification: real Marxists are always ready to admit a mistake. It is worth starting further joint activities only on the basis of conscious like-mindedness.
A novice Marxist who has chosen the path of self-education is not in complete darkness: we offer a number of articles to help him [15].
Ya. Dubov
11/14/2023
[1] Russian President Vladimir Putin believes that depoliticized patriotism is the only possible ideology in a democracy // Interfax.
[2] N.P. Patrushev. The collapse of parasitic empires // Scout Magazine.
[3] Concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation .
[4] Concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation, II.7: “Humanity is experiencing an era of revolutionary change . ”
[5] Ya. Dubov. The illusion of nationalism, or tautological friendship .
[6] Ya. Dubov. I'm not in the house .
[7] Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated November 9, 2022 No. 809 “On approval of the Fundamentals of State Policy for the Preservation and Strengthening of Traditional Russian Spiritual and Moral Values . ”
[8] Interview of the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation N. Patrushev to the newspaper Izvestia , 2008.
[9] Nikolai Patrushev. Russia and the US: a fresh Start , 2010.
[10] Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev on the main threats to the security of Russia , 2015.
[11] The Secretary of the Russian Security Council explained why Russia will not collapse like the Soviet Union , 2016.
[12] Patrushev announced problems in the energy sector due to lack of access to foreign technologies , 2018.
[13] Patrushev: Placing gold and foreign exchange reserves abroad was an unjustified step .
[14] Selection of articles on SVO // Proryvist.
[15.1] Editorial. What can I do? // Breakthrough.
[15.2] A. Redin, A. Borovykh. On the issue of self-education // Proryvist.
[15.3] A. Lbov. Club work and self-education // Breakthrough.
[15.4] A. Redin. Marxism as a hobby // Breakthrough.
[15.5] A. Redin. On the formation of Marxists in modern conditions // Proryvist.
[15.6] Editorial. Long, persistent, intense work // Breakthrough.
[15.7] A. Redin. About the struggle for communism here and now // Breakthrough.
[15.8] S. Korelsky. Difficulties of becoming a Marxist // Proryvist.
[15.9] A. Redin. About our personnel potential // Breakthrough.
https://prorivists.org/87_antipatrushev/
Google Translator
A patriot who has not fully understood this may assume that the errors in Mr. Patrushev’s text were made unintentionally. In this regard, such a reader will say, the right way is to unite in a bourgeois party, gain the approval of the masses and, already in the parliamentary struggle, bring into the consciousness of the ruling circles the idea of their errors. Then, without any revolutions, the power that has seen the light will itself take some path close to the communist one and begin smooth transformations of society.
Such a reader should not rush to such hypotheses. Let us remember that we are talking about the same Nikolai Patrushev, who was a member of the CPSU before its ban in August 1991; who, therefore, studied in the USSR and is familiar with dialectical logic at least in general terms.
Possessing such a logical apparatus, Mr. Patrushev could not help but understand the essence of the counter-revolutionary coup in the USSR; he chose the fate of a traitor and organically joined the system of the new bourgeois government, to begin with in the role of Minister of Security of the Republic of Karelia. Consequently, the current Secretary of the Security Council is not only familiar with the concept of class struggle, but has also successfully applied it in practice.
However, the very fact of joining the camp of traitors only indicates that he has not mastered dialectical logic deeply and is able to apply it only for personal well-being and manipulation of the ignorant masses. In a real confrontation with a strong opponent, he relies not on logic, but on animal grasping reflexes, and of rather low quality.
So, back in 2008, he entertained the honorable public with stories that “we are ready for equal, constructive cooperation with other countries, including the United States,” and in 2010 he wrote for The Guardian newspaper that “Russia and the West , once Cold War enemies, are now united in the face of a very real terrorist threat that, more than ever, requires a joint, coordinated, and determined effort to defeat it.”[9]
But Mr. Patrushev, being part of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation, could not help but understand its subordinate role in relation to the dominant detachment of the US bourgeoisie, which has already shown the world its fascist mug. However, by this time he had already lost his logical grip and, following his superiors, chose Western “gold”; and did this at the very moment when the United States is already in full swing sharpening “damask steel”, preparing the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation for slaughter right after Libya, the attack on which Mr. Medvedev supported in connection with the “disgraceful behavior that was carried out by the leadership of Libya and those crimes that were committed against their own people."
In 2015, Mr. Patrushev had already begun to suspect something, carefully talking about the “persistent desire of the West to solve almost all of its problems at the expense of others” [10], but still declaring the fictitious ideological deception of “international terrorism” as the main threat to the world. In 2016 he adds:
“The Russian Federation is not interested in confrontation with the West... We are always ready to resume equal cooperation” [11].
Later, the high official admits his mistakes:
“In 2018 we have to admit that the main area of the economy, energy, is under attack” [12], and in 2022 - that “the placement of gold and foreign exchange reserves abroad was an unjustified step” [13].
Already in 2020, Mr. Patrushev, who has seen the light, begins to actively include in his rhetoric statements about color revolutions, “the style of the Anglo-Saxons that has not changed for centuries” and the doctrine of the “golden billion”, and in 2022 he boldly declares that “the Anglo-Saxons decided to start fragmenting the Russian ethnic group from Ukraine.” .
Thus, he recognizes the existential threat, but in 2023 we see that this is not enough for an uncompromising struggle. Evidence of this is the rhetoric in the article under study that “Russia does not consider itself an enemy of the West.”
From what Mr. Patrushev himself said and did, we can conclude that the current Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, who lost his conscience, first betrayed and sold his Soviet homeland, and then, as part of the new government of exploiters, predictably led the country to a crisis. To reach this point, former comrade Patrushev, together with the entire ruling clique, had to first of all “miss” the moment when the Russian Federation was appointed as a food source, and not as a partner. Then he had to fuss for a long time in attempts to regain the former favor of the hegemon, handing over the economy in pieces, selling state interests in the post-Soviet space and turning a blind eye to the repressions of the authorities of the former Soviet republics against the Russian-speaking population, including for eight years actually not noticing the bombing of Donbass.
And at the moment when all the masks are dropped, when the opportunity to prevent war in 2014 was mediocrely missed, when preparations for war failed, when political weakness literally gave the Western aggressor the opportunity to create a Ukronazi instrument, even now Mr. Patrushev continues to squirm, leaving his foot in the door for possible restoration of relations with the enemy in case “what if they change their mind.” However, now, having messed up their preparations and got themselves into a situation unpleasant for their own well-being, the bourgeois government is forced to listen to the instinct of self-preservation, which requires using the exploited population not only as a resource for enrichment, but also as an ally. To do this, you need to sweep your incompetence under the rug and make sure that the masses awaken and their interests shift from individual petty bourgeois to common with the bourgeoisie. To this end, Mr. Secretary again shakes off the dust from his limited skills in dialectical logic and begins to fence in illusory constructions. And in these constructions there is no explanation for the proletarians that when they, having gone through bloody torment, pull out the crap hypocrite Patrushev from the hole he dug, then, in gratitude from their superiors, they will again be allowed to simply work for the owners until the next conflict.
Consequently, Mr. Patrushev is incompetent in matters of intra-class struggle and is not able to solve the problems of the ongoing conflicts of the capitalist formation in a bourgeois manner due to the non-existence of such solutions. However, he understands the issues of class struggle, and the dialectical apparatus allows him to fool the masses for a relatively long time, until the very moment when the very course of events and wars pushes ordinary people to start thinking for themselves and begin to master the scientific method of thinking.
10. What to do?
Progressive practice requires a thorough diamatic understanding of the situation, a definition of the goal and a plan to achieve it.
The article under study is helpless in determining the goal, even if it is cleared of lies - an abundance of illusions pleasing to the eye of the ignorant national proletariat. The bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation is ready to consider the treatment of symptoms as a victory in the form of forcing the hegemon to reconcile with the help of the military power of the resisting alliances. Such helplessness and falsity of Mr. Patrushev’s proposals have roots only in the fact that he, together with the entire bourgeois power, is guided not by logic, but by animal interests, the interests of capital accumulation.
Only the eradication of the cause of the conflict, that is, the elimination of the institution of private ownership of the means of production with the subsequent elimination of the bourgeois class and the construction of a communist classless society, can be considered a real victory. This includes the defeat of the hegemon, but is not limited to it, because the essence of communism is total, universal scientificism, and the essence of the struggle for communism is to direct the activities of people along the path of meaningful development of society. Such a victory is possible only if the proletarian movement is united with a scientific diamatic worldview, with Marxism.
A person who has come out of his individual shell and become concerned about what is happening in society needs to understand the following.
Firstly, you need to soberly understand the balance of progressive and reactionary in the actions of the bourgeois Russian Federation .
As we showed above, one cannot help but welcome the Russian Federation’s struggle against the aggression of Western countries, which spontaneously began as a result of animal instincts activated, despite the fragility and even some mutilation of the recipes for victory proposed by Mr. Patrushev [14]. The authorities of the Russian Federation should not interfere with these noble aspirations, while the Marxists have neither a sufficient number of competent personnel, nor sufficient organization, nor a strong connection with the masses.
At the same time, one should take into account the weakness of the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation, which sooner or later will either fall under the blows of a stronger enemy, or will bring the country to a crisis by other methods. It is necessary to use the time allotted before the disaster in order to prepare an organization that can reconstruct the country on revolutionary principles.
We can say that a bad driver is sitting at the helm of a certain car, who temporarily steered onto a road acceptable to us. While he’s on it, you shouldn’t disturb him, but he won’t last long on it, and our task is to remove him from the steering wheel in time, which means, first of all, we urgently need to learn how to drive a car and choose the right road .
As an analogy, we can cite the words of V.I. Lenin from the message “To the Central Committee of the RSDLP” dated September 12, 1917:
“We will fight, we are fighting with Kornilov, like Kerensky’s troops, but we do not support Kerensky, but expose his weakness. That's the difference. This difference is quite subtle, but extremely significant and cannot be forgotten... The fact is that we are changing the form of our struggle with Kerensky. Without weakening our hostility towards him one iota, without taking back a single word spoken against him, without abandoning the task of overthrowing Kerensky, we say: we must take the moment into account, we will not overthrow Kerensky now, we will now approach the task of fighting him differently, namely: to explain to the people (who are fighting against Kornilov) the weakness and vacillations of Kerensky. This has been done before. But now this has become the main thing: this is the modification.”
One important difference of the current moment is that we do not have an organization, and therefore we simply do not stop the bourgeoisie from fighting, while pursuing the Marxist agenda.
Secondly, there is no need to urgently pick up a revolver and run to take power .
Marxism is not a dogma, but a guide to action. The counter-revolution, which began in the second half of the last century and ended with a coup at the end of the century, if not stopped, then significantly slowed down the development of Marxism and its application to the present day.
The scientific foundation that we have in our hands is already enough to understand the falsity of Mr. Patrushev’s verses, but not enough to begin large-scale revolutionary practice. There are only a few of those who are able to develop the theoretical heritage left to us, but to actualize Marxism and organize a vanguard capable of guiding the masses during a revolutionary situation, tens, hundreds, and maybe thousands are required.
Thirdly, you need to engage in self-education .
Anyone who doesn't want to learn has several options. The first way is to show solidarity with the enemy: choose the liberal path, allow yourself to be used by the bourgeoisie of Western countries, and after victory or defeat find yourself thrown into the trash heap. Another way is to identify with the bad driver, Mr. Patrushev, that is, go to the front or forge a military victory in the rear. Such people are also needed, but they must realize that their contribution will ensure only such a victory that will suit the bourgeoisie of the Russian Federation, and therefore be prepared for agreements, the lack of normal support for the front, the lack of competent command and a temporary truce instead of peace. The third way is to become a leftist: not to understand the essence of Marxism, but cheerfully throw around terminology for various purposes that have nothing to do with progress. Here you can expect the defeat of your bourgeoisie; expect that the revolutionary situation itself will lead to victory; follow the factory workers, who, due to some innate qualities, will themselves be able to organize and defeat the bourgeoisie; in a word, indulge in idle dreams and monetize them to the best of your ability.
Anyone who wants to learn has only one way: engage in deep self-education. Ten people who have reached scientific heights in the knowledge and development of Marxism will form a competent printed organ around which supporters will gather. So that people who have been pushed out of their cozy philistine holes by disasters and become interested in Marxism can master it in the best and fastest way. Fifty will be able to update the theory, and a hundred will be able to organize a party of scientific centralism, which, having absorbed several hundred competent comrades-in-arms, will be able, in an objectively emerging revolutionary situation, to prepare a revolution, overthrow the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and establish the dictatorship of the working class.
There are not many people who persistently engage in self-education, but they exist; their number is growing and the quality of their knowledge is growing. For several decades now, the most important work of the Proryv team to actualize Marxism has been quietly but tirelessly going on. However, you should not rush to join any organization. First of all, you need to independently acquire scientific Marxist knowledge and only on the basis of it check whether potential comrades are not mistaken on theoretical issues. If a newly minted Marxist thinks that he has discovered a scientific truth, then he should formalize it in a scientific work and give it to the team for verification: real Marxists are always ready to admit a mistake. It is worth starting further joint activities only on the basis of conscious like-mindedness.
A novice Marxist who has chosen the path of self-education is not in complete darkness: we offer a number of articles to help him [15].
Ya. Dubov
11/14/2023
[1] Russian President Vladimir Putin believes that depoliticized patriotism is the only possible ideology in a democracy // Interfax.
[2] N.P. Patrushev. The collapse of parasitic empires // Scout Magazine.
[3] Concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation .
[4] Concept of foreign policy of the Russian Federation, II.7: “Humanity is experiencing an era of revolutionary change . ”
[5] Ya. Dubov. The illusion of nationalism, or tautological friendship .
[6] Ya. Dubov. I'm not in the house .
[7] Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated November 9, 2022 No. 809 “On approval of the Fundamentals of State Policy for the Preservation and Strengthening of Traditional Russian Spiritual and Moral Values . ”
[8] Interview of the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation N. Patrushev to the newspaper Izvestia , 2008.
[9] Nikolai Patrushev. Russia and the US: a fresh Start , 2010.
[10] Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev on the main threats to the security of Russia , 2015.
[11] The Secretary of the Russian Security Council explained why Russia will not collapse like the Soviet Union , 2016.
[12] Patrushev announced problems in the energy sector due to lack of access to foreign technologies , 2018.
[13] Patrushev: Placing gold and foreign exchange reserves abroad was an unjustified step .
[14] Selection of articles on SVO // Proryvist.
[15.1] Editorial. What can I do? // Breakthrough.
[15.2] A. Redin, A. Borovykh. On the issue of self-education // Proryvist.
[15.3] A. Lbov. Club work and self-education // Breakthrough.
[15.4] A. Redin. Marxism as a hobby // Breakthrough.
[15.5] A. Redin. On the formation of Marxists in modern conditions // Proryvist.
[15.6] Editorial. Long, persistent, intense work // Breakthrough.
[15.7] A. Redin. About the struggle for communism here and now // Breakthrough.
[15.8] S. Korelsky. Difficulties of becoming a Marxist // Proryvist.
[15.9] A. Redin. About our personnel potential // Breakthrough.
https://prorivists.org/87_antipatrushev/
Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."