The black myth of the "Russian threat" and "Russian occupation"
Why does the West need the myth of the “Russian threat” and “Russian occupation”? The answer seems to be that the West needs the “image of the enemy.” Moreover, the enemy is vicious and stubborn, who from century to century offends the neighboring small nations, and many still keep in captivity. In the mass of various American films, we recognize this image of the enemy - mainly Russians, North Koreans, Iranians, Arabs, Serbs, Chinese, etc. But the most popular image is the Russian “mafia”, “terrorists”, “agents” , Russian kooky "military dictator" or a general selling "nuclear secrets" and other Russian "orcs".
Quite often, negative images of Russians are woven into the thread of the picture unnoticed. Take, for example, Gavin O'Connor's sporting drama "Warrior" 2011 of the Year. The film as a whole is not bad - it appeals to family values (brotherly and fatherly love, love to family), to the development of the qualities of a winner, strength of spirit, perseverance, courage. But in passing they show the powerful Russian fighter "Kobu" (in terms of images, it is very symbolic that this is one of Stalin's pseudonyms). Moreover, the appearance of a fighter is clearly traced features of the Negroid type, which perfectly characterizes the "Russian barbarians" from the East. Naturally, one of the main characters wins the "Russian" fighter.
It should be noted, and the semantic attack of American filmmakers on the line: KGB - the agents introduced into the territory of the United States. So, in 2010, the film “Salt” was released on this topic, where the plot is twisted around the operation of the Soviet-Russian agents introduced into the US special services. In 2011, this topic was raised in the film “Double Agent”.
This is a real information war that year after year is waged against Russia and the Russian people, turning the Russians into “agents”, “terrorists”, “bandits”, “prostitutes”, “crazy military”, “bloody dictators” and other orcs.
The freedom-loving intelligentsia in the former post-Soviet republics also participates in this war. For more than 20 years (started back in the years of “perestroika”) they have been hysterical about the “Soviet (Russian) occupation”. In a number of countries, they opened “museums of occupation”, where every visitor can see exhibits with their own eyes, various “artifacts” devoted to the theme of “the horrors of Russian occupation”. A person who has a weak background of knowledge, and given the widespread decline in the level of education in the former Soviet republics, these are becoming more and more, these materials can make a depressing impression. Especially like in such museums to bring excursions of schoolchildren, students, exerting informational influence on the immature minds of young people. It is not necessary, therefore, to be surprised that in a number of republics young people are set up openly Russophobic.
But if you look at the facts stories it becomes clear that we see another "black myth". "Occupations" (from the Latin. Occupatio - capture, occupation), as such, was not. Thus, part of Georgia became part of Russia voluntarily; in 1801, in the capital of the Russian Empire, the appeal of the king of Kakheti and Kartli George XII was considered with a request to accept his lands into the Russian state. In addition, the first such requests were made as early as the 16 century - in 1586, the Georgian ambassadors beat the Russian Tsar Fyodor Ivanovich with his brow, so that he "took their people into his citizenship and saved their life and soul." According to the estimates of Russian historians, the Russian Empire, beating off the Georgian lands from the Persians, the Turks, and protecting the Caucasian highlanders from attacks, lost a total of about 130 thousand people. More on this topic can be found in the article of the Military Review: "What is forgotten in Georgia".
In Georgia, the situation with the issue of “occupation” has gone so far that not only the museums of occupation are opened there, but also the destruction of monuments to the heroes of the Great Patriotic War, as was the case with the Memorial of Glory in the city of Kutaisi. In fact, the Georgian authorities are striking at the historical memory of the Georgian people, who, like other Soviet peoples, contributed to the defeat of the Third Reich and the Nazi world order. Georgian rulers set a course for total Russophobia, and the Soviet period of history is presented to young people as one of the worst in all of Georgian history.
It is completely incomprehensible who Russia occupied in Ukraine. There was a process of reunification of the Russian lands, which were detached from it. One of the stages of this natural process was the famous Pereyaslav Rada of 1654, when a significant part of Ukraine reunited with Russia. But even then vast territories remained under the rule of Poland and Austria. There was no “Ukrainian people” at that time, there were Russians in the Russian state and Russians living in the territories seized by the Poles and Hungarians. “Ukrainians” and “Ukraine” were invented in the Vatican, Vienna, Krakow, at the end of 19 and in the 20 century this idea was supported in Berlin, in the West in general, realizing the significance of this operation to split the Russian people.
The same vagueness is in the question of the "occupied" Russian Baltic. This territory, under the terms of the Nishtad Peace Treaty, from 1721, passed to the Russian state from Sweden. The Baltic was Russian not only by right of force, but also on the basis of the agreements of that time, moreover, it was also bought.
And the actions of the "Russian and Soviet invaders" are strange. The “occupiers” did not conduct mass robbery of the occupied territories, genocide, total destruction of the bulk of the natives and the pen of the remnants of the natives on the reservation. Instead, they retained local self-government, built cities, ports, developed education, science, helped to create a national intelligentsia, and in every possible way improved the “captured” territories. “Russian invaders” did not destroy the Georgian, Estonian, etc. culture and originality, but also supported them in every way, even cultivated them. And how real invaders behave is well known from historical examples: we know how the colonizers of North, Central and South America and the islands of the Caribbean behaved. We remember that the Hitlerites and their henchmen in the Soviet territories did it.
So why do we need the black myth of the "Russian occupation" and the "Russian threat"?
First, in the West, they created and maintain the image of the enemy of all “enlightened humanity”. It will be much easier for the “orcs” and “nonhumans” to take the Russian Arctic, Russian Siberia, the Russian Far East, when the time comes for that. Russian civilization is the main enemy of the New Western World Order, which has been built for more than one century. And the stronger Russia is, the more kerosene is poured into the fire of the information war, the more severe the Russophobic hysteria.
Secondly, in this way, they influence the minds and hearts of Russian citizens, educate them with cosmopolitan haters of their homeland.
Thirdly, its integral parts are being chipped off from the Russian civilization - Little and White Russia, small peoples whose destinies are connected with the fate of Russian super-ethnos. They are educated by political elites, young people in hatred of Russia, it is quite possible that they are used for war with Russia (like Ukrainian Nazis in Chechnya or the August 2008 war of the year).
Fourth, they divert attention from their actions and crimes against humanity. For example, the British Empire destroyed so many people that Adolf Hitler is just a student of the lower grades, compared to British butchers.
Russia - prison of nations
Information