How accurate, how apt! Let me highlight a few crucial moments before you read all the interviews of our outstanding philosopher.
- “Contrary to the well-established opinion of Soviet communism collapsed not for internal reasons. Its collapse is by far the greatest victory in stories West. An unheard victory, which, I repeat, makes it possible to establish planetary power. The end of communism also marked the end of democracy. Today's era is not just post-communist, it is also post-democratic! Today, we are witnessing the establishment of democratic totalitarianism, or, if you like, totalitarian democracy. ”
“In the West, there is no more political force capable of protecting ordinary citizens. The existence of political parties is a mere formality. Every day there will be less and less difference between them. ”
- "All revolutionary coups once received support from outside."
“What conspiracy?” There is no conspiracy. The world government is governed by the leaders of well-known supranational commercial, financial and political structures. ”
- “The European Union is weapon destruction of national sovereignties. It is part of projects developed by supranational organisms. ”
“Democratic totalitarianism will surpass all previous totalitarian regimes.”
“Soviet totalitarianism has created a genuine multinational and multi-ethnic society. It was the Western democracies who made superhuman propaganda efforts to incite various types of nationalism, because the split of the USSR was considered by them as the best way to destroy it. ”
“But what about a Russian or a Frenchman who lives today?” Can he rejoice that his people are waiting for the future of American Indians? ”
Full text of the interview.
QUESTION. With what feelings do you return home after such a long exile?
ANSWER. With the feeling that he had once left a strong, respected, even awe-inspiring state, and when he returned, he discovered a defeated country, all in ruins. Unlike others, I would never leave the USSR if I had at least some choice. Emigration has become a real punishment for me.
QUESTION. Nevertheless, you were received here (in Germany. - Approx. Lane.) With open arms!
ANSWER. It's true ... But, despite the triumphal reception and the world success of my books, I always felt like a stranger here.
QUESTION. After the collapse of communism, the Western system became the main subject of your research. Why?
ANSWER. Because what I predicted happened: the fall of communism turned into the collapse of Russia.
QUESTION. It turns out that the struggle against communism covered the desire to destroy Russia?
ANSWER. Exactly. I say this because in my time I was an unwitting partner in this shameful act for me. The Russian catastrophe was wanted and programmed here in the West. I read the documents, participated in research, which under the guise of an ideological struggle actually prepared the death of Russia. And it became so unbearable for me that I could no longer be in the camp of those who destroy my people and my country. The West is not a stranger to me, but I regard it as an enemy power.
QUESTION. Have you become a patriot?
ANSWER. Patriotism does not concern me. I received international education and remain faithful to him. I can not even say, like or not Russian and Russia. However, I belong to this nation and this country. I am part of them. The current sufferings of my people are so terrible that I cannot watch them from afar. The brutality of globalization reveals unacceptable things.
QUESTION. Nonetheless, many former Soviet dissidents today speak of their former homeland as a country of human rights and democracy. And now, when this point of view has become generally accepted in the West, you are trying to refute it. Is there no contradiction here?
ANSWER. During the Cold War, democracy was a weapon in the struggle against communist totalitarianism. Today we understand that the era of the Cold War was the culmination of the history of the West. At that time, everything was in the West: an unprecedented increase in wealth, true freedom, incredible social progress, tremendous scientific and technical discoveries! But at the same time, the West quietly changed. The timid integration of the developed countries that was started at that time was, in fact, the forerunner of the internationalization of the economy and the globalization of power, which we are witnessing today.
Integration can serve to increase the general welfare and have positive consequences if, for example, it satisfies the legitimate desire of the fraternal peoples to unite. However, the integration in question was thought from the very beginning as a vertical structure rigidly controlled by supranational authority. And without a successful Russian, against the Soviets, counterrevolution, the West could not embark on globalization.
QUESTION. So, the role of Gorbachev was not positive?
ANSWER. I look at things from a slightly different angle. Contrary to the well-established opinion of Soviet communism collapsed not for internal reasons. Its collapse is undoubtedly the greatest victory in the history of the West. An unheard victory, which, I repeat, makes it possible to establish planetary power. The end of communism also marked the end of democracy. Today's era is not just post-communist, it is also post-democratic! Today we are witnessing the establishment of democratic totalitarianism, or, if you like, totalitarian democracy.
QUESTION. Doesn't all this sound a bit absurd?
ANSWER. Not at all. Democracy requires pluralism, and pluralism presupposes at least two more or less equal forces that fight each other and at the same time influence each other. During the Cold War, there was world democracy, global pluralism, within which two opposing systems coexisted: capitalist and communist. As well as unclear, but still the structure of those countries that could not be attributed to the first two groups. Soviet totalitarianism was susceptible to criticism coming from the West. In turn, the West was under the influence of the USSR, especially through its own communist parties. Today we live in a world dominated by one single force, one ideology, and one pro-globalization party. All this, taken together, began to form during the Cold War, when gradually, in various forms, superstructures appeared: commercial, banking, political and information organizations. Despite the different spheres of activity, these forces were united by their transnational essence.
With the collapse of communism, they began to rule the world. Thus, Western countries found themselves in a dominant position, but at the same time they are also in a subordinate position, as they gradually lose their sovereignty in favor of what I call super-society. The planetary super-society consists of commercial and non-profit organizations whose influence goes far beyond the borders of individual states. Like other countries, Western countries are subject to the control of these supranational structures. And this despite the fact that the sovereignty of states was also an integral part of pluralism, and therefore, democracy on a planetary scale. The current ruling superpower suppresses sovereign states. European integration unfolding before our eyes also leads to the disappearance of pluralism within this new conglomerate in favor of supranational authority.
QUESTION. But do not you think that France or Germany continue to remain democratic states?
ANSWER. Western countries have come to know true democracy during the Cold War. Political parties had genuine ideological differences and different political programs. The organs of the press were also very different from each other. All this had an impact on the lives of ordinary people, contributed to the growth of their well-being. Now this has come to an end. Democratic and prosperous capitalism with socially oriented legislation and employment guarantees was largely due to the existence of the fear of communism. After the fall of communism in the countries of Eastern Europe, a massive attack on the social rights of citizens began in the West. Today, the socialists who are in power in most European countries are pursuing a policy of dismantling the social security system, a policy that destroys everything socialist that was in the capitalist countries.
In the West, there is no more political force capable of protecting ordinary citizens. The existence of political parties is a mere formality. Every day there will be less and less differences between them. The war in the Balkans was anything but not democratic. Nevertheless, it was led by socialists, who historically were against such adventures. Environmentalists, also in power in some countries, hailed the environmental disaster caused by the NATO bombings. They even dared to assert that the bombs containing depleted uranium do not pose a danger to the environment, although the soldiers wear special protective overalls when charging them.
So democracy is gradually disappearing from the social organization of Western countries. Totalitarianism is spreading everywhere, because the supranational structure imposes its own laws on states. This undemocratic superstructure gives orders, gives sanctions, organizes an embargo, drops bombs, starves. Even Clinton obeys her. Financial totalitarianism subjugated political power. Cold financial totalitarianism is alien to emotions and feelings of pity. Compared to the financial dictatorship, a political dictatorship can be considered quite human. Within the most brutal dictatorships, at least some resistance was possible. It is impossible to rebel against banks.
QUESTION. What about the revolution?
ANSWER. Democratic totalitarianism and financial dictatorship exclude the possibility of a social revolution.
ANSWER. Because they combine a coarse omnipotent military force with the financial suffocation of a global scale. All revolutionary coups once received support from outside. From now on, this is impossible, since there will no longer be any sovereign states. Moreover, at the lowest social level, the class of workers is replaced by the unemployed class. And what do the unemployed want? Work. Therefore, they are in a less favorable position than the class of workers in the past.
QUESTION. All totalitarian systems had their own ideology. What is the ideology of this new society, which you call post-democratic?
ANSWER. The most influential Western theorists and politicians believe that we have entered a post-ideological era. This is because by the word "ideology" they mean communism, fascism, Nazism, etc. In fact, the ideology, the super-ideology of the Western world, which has developed over the past fifty years, is much stronger than communism or national socialism. The Western citizen is much more foolish than the once ordinary Soviet man through communist propaganda. In the field of ideology, the main thing is not the ideas, but the mechanisms of their distribution. The power of the Western media, for example, is incomparably higher than the strongest means of propaganda of the Vatican at the time of its highest power.
And this is not all cinema, literature, philosophy - all the levers of influence and the means of spreading culture in the broadest sense of the word work in this direction. At the slightest impulse, everyone working in this area reacts with such consistency that involuntarily thoughts arise about orders coming from a single source of power. It was enough to make a decision to brand General Karadzic, or President Milosevic, or someone else, so that the whole planetary propaganda machine would work against them. As a result, instead of condemning NATO politicians and generals for violating all existing laws, the overwhelming majority of Western citizens are convinced that the war against Serbia was necessary and fair. Western ideology combines and mixes ideas based on their needs. One of these ideas - Western values and lifestyle are the best in the world! Although for most people on the planet, these values have disastrous consequences. Try to convince the Americans that these values will destroy Russia. You will not succeed. They will continue to assert the thesis of the universality of Western values, thus following one of the fundamental principles of ideological dogmatism. Theorists, politicians and mass media of the West are absolutely sure that their system is the best.
That is why they, without any doubt and with a clear conscience, impose it all over the world. Western man, the bearer of these highest values, is thus the new superman. The term is taboo, but it comes down to this. Of course, this phenomenon must be studied scientifically. However, I dare say, in some areas of sociology and history it has become extremely difficult to conduct scientific research. A scientist who suddenly burns with a desire to study the mechanisms of democratic totalitarianism will face incredible difficulties. Out of it will make an outcast. On the other hand, those whose studies serve the dominant ideology are buried in grants, and publishing houses and the media are fighting for the right to cooperate with these authors. I experienced it in my own skin when I taught and worked as a researcher at foreign universities.
QUESTION. Isn't this not your favorite super-ideology of ideas of tolerance and respect for your neighbor?
ANSWER. When you listen to representatives of the Western elite, everything seems so pure, generous, respectful towards people. By doing this, they apply the classic rule of propaganda: cover reality with sweet speeches. However, it is enough to turn on the TV, go to the cinema, open a bestseller, or listen to popular music to make sure of the opposite: the unprecedented spread of the cult of cruelty, sex and money. Noble speeches are designed to conceal these three pillars (there are others) of totalitarian democracy.
QUESTION. And what about human rights? Isn't that what they observe most in the West?
ANSWER. From now on, the idea of human rights is also increasingly under pressure. Even a purely ideological thesis, according to which these rights are innate, not alienable, today will not withstand even the first rigorous analysis. I am ready to subject Western ideology to the same scientific analysis that I have done with communism. But this is a long conversation, not for today's interview ...
QUESTION. Does Western ideology have a key idea?
ANSWER. The idea of globalization! In other words, world domination! And since this idea is rather unpleasant, it is covered up with lengthy phrases about a planetary unity, about transforming the world into one integrated whole ... In fact, the West has now begun structural changes on a global scale. On the one hand, Western society dominates the whole world, on the other hand, it is itself rebuilt vertically with supranational authority at the very top of the pyramid.
QUESTION. World government?
ANSWER. Yes, if you want.
QUESTION. To believe in such things doesn’t it mean to be a victim of delusional fantasies about the world conspiracy?
ANSWER. What a conspiracy? There is no conspiracy. The world government is governed by the leaders of well-known supranational commercial, financial and political structures. According to my calculations, this super-society, which today governs the world, already has about fifty million people. Its center is the USA. Western European countries and some former Asian "dragons" make up its base. Other countries are dominated by tight financial and economic gradations. This is the reality. As for propaganda, she believes that the creation of a world government controlled by the world parliament is desirable, since the world is a big fraternity. All this is tales meant for the crowd.
QUESTION. European Parliament too?
ANSWER. No, since the European Parliament exists. But it would be naive to believe that the European Union was the result of the goodwill of the governments of its member countries. The European Union is a weapon for the destruction of national sovereignties. It is part of projects developed by supranational organisms.
QUESTION. The European Union changed its name after the collapse of the Soviet Union. As if to replace him, it became known as the "European Union." In the end, it could be called differently. Like the Bolsheviks, EU leaders call themselves commissars. Like the Bolsheviks, they head the commission. The last president was "elected", being the only candidate ...
ANSWER. We must not forget that the process of social organization is subject to certain laws. To organize a million people is one thing, to organize ten million is another, to organize one hundred million is the hardest task. To organize five hundred million people is a task of colossal proportions. It is necessary to create new administrative bodies, train people who will manage them and ensure their uninterrupted functioning. This is the first priority. In fact, the Soviet Union is a classic example of a multinational conglomerate headed by a supranational administrative structure. The European Union wants to achieve better results than the Soviet Union! It is quite justified. Twenty years ago I was struck by the fact that the so-called defects of the Soviet system were even more developed in the West.
QUESTION. Like what?
ANSWER. Planning! The Western economy is infinitely more planned than the economy of the USSR was once planned. Bureaucracy! In the Soviet Union, from 10 to 12% of the active population worked in the administration and administration of the country. In the United States, such workers are about 16 – 20%. However, the USSR was criticized precisely for its planned economy and the burden of the bureaucracy. The Central Committee of the CPSU worked 2 thousands of people.
The number of Communist Party apparatus reached 150 thousands of workers. Today in the West you will find dozens, even hundreds of industrial and banking enterprises, which hire many more people. The bureaucratic apparatus of the Soviet Communist Party was negligible compared to the staff of large multinational corporations in the West. In fact, it should be recognized: the USSR was poorly governed precisely because of the lack of administrative staff. It was necessary to have two to three times more administrative staff! The European Union is well aware of these problems and therefore takes them into account. Integration is impossible without an impressive administrative apparatus.
QUESTION. What you are talking about goes against the ideas of liberalism that are advertised by European leaders. Do you think their liberalism is just window dressing?
ANSWER. The administration tends to grow strongly, which is dangerous for herself. She knows about it. Like any organism, it finds its own antidotes for the continuation of normal functioning. Private initiative is one of them. Another antidote is social and individual morality. Applying them, the government is struggling with tendencies to self-destruction. Therefore, she invented liberalism to create a counterbalance to her own gravity. However, today being liberal is absurd. Liberal society is no more. The liberal doctrine does not correspond to the realities of the era of concentration of capital unprecedented in the history of mankind. The movement of colossal financial resources does not in any way consider the interests of individual states and peoples consisting of individuals.
Liberalism means personal initiative and financial risk taking. Today, any business needs money provided by banks. These banks, the number of which is gradually decreasing, pursue a policy that is dictatorial and conductor in nature. Business owners are at their mercy, because everything is subordinated to the loan, and therefore, is under the control of financial organizations. The importance of the individual — the basis of liberalism — is diminishing day by day. Today it does not matter who runs this or that enterprise, this or that country: Bush or Clinton, Kohl or Schröder, Chirac or Jospin, what difference does it make?
QUESTION. The totalitarian regimes of the 20th century were extremely cruel, which cannot be said about western democracy.
ANSWER. The main thing is not the methods, but the results obtained. Give an example? In the fight against Nazi Germany, the USSR lost 20 million people (according to the latest data of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation - 27 million - Approx. Per.) And suffered enormous damage. In the course of the Cold War, a war without bombs and guns, there was a lot more casualties in all respects! Over the past decade, the life expectancy of Russians has decreased by ten years! Mortality catastrophically exceeds the birth rate.
Two million children do not sleep at home. Five million children of school age do not go to school. 12 million drug addicts registered. Alcoholism has become universal. 70% of young people are not suitable for military service due to various physical disabilities. Here are the direct consequences of a defeat in the Cold War, followed by a transition to a Western way of life. If this continues, the country's population will first quickly fall from 150 million to 100 million, and then to 50 million. Democratic totalitarianism will surpass all previous totalitarian regimes.
QUESTION. In violence?
ANSWER. Drugs, poor nutrition, AIDS are much more effective than military violence. Although, after the colossal destruction of the Cold War, the West invented a “peacemaking war”. The Iraqi and Yugoslav campaigns are two examples of collective punishment and extremely large-scale retaliatory actions to which the propaganda machine gives the meaning of a “good cause” or a “humanistic war”. Directing the violence of victims against themselves is another technology. An example of its use is the Russian counterrevolution 1985 of the year. However, in unleashing a war in Yugoslavia, the countries of Western Europe fought a war against themselves.
QUESTION. In your opinion, was the war against Serbia also a war against Europe?
ANSWER. Exactly. Inside Europe there are forces capable of forcing it to act against itself. Serbia was chosen because it resisted all the overwhelming globalization. Russia may be next in the list. Before China ...
QUESTION. Despite her nuclear arsenal?
ANSWER. Russia's nuclear arsenal is huge, but it is outdated. In addition, the Russians are morally disarmed and ready to capitulate ... It seems to me that, by the enormity of the 21st century, everything will surpass everything that mankind has seen before. Just think about the coming global war with Chinese communism. To defeat such a densely populated country, you need to destroy not 10 – 20 of millions of people, but somewhere 500 of millions. Today it is quite possible, given the level of development of the achievements of the propaganda machine. Of course, in the name of freedom and human rights. If only some PR organization does not invent a new, no less noble reason.
QUESTION. Do not you think that people can have their own opinion that they can vote and thus express themselves?
ANSWER. Firstly, people are already voting a little, and later will be even less. As for public opinion, in the West it is formed by the mass media. Suffice it to recall the universal approval of the war in Kosovo. Remember the Spanish war! Volunteers came from all over the world to fight on one side or the other. Remember the Vietnam War. From now on, people are so aware that they react only in the way that the owners of propaganda want.
QUESTION. The USSR and Yugoslavia were the most polyethnic countries in the world, and despite this they were destroyed. Do you see a connection between the destruction of polyethnic countries, on the one hand, and the propaganda of polyethnicity, on the other?
ANSWER. Soviet totalitarianism created a genuine multi-ethnic and multi-ethnic society. It was the Western democracies who made superhuman propaganda efforts to incite various types of nationalism, because the split of the USSR was considered by them as the best way to destroy it. The same mechanism worked in Yugoslavia. Germany has always sought to eliminate Yugoslavia. Being united, Yugoslavia could resist. The essence of the western system lies in the division in order to make it easier to establish its laws to all parties at once, and to act as the supreme judge. There is no reason to assume that this technology will not be applied to the dismemberment of China in the future.
QUESTION. India and China opposed the bombing of Yugoslavia. Can they, in which case, form a pole of resistance? Still, 2 billion people - this is something!
ANSWER. The means of these countries are not comparable with the military power and technology of the West.
QUESTION. Have you been impressed by the effectiveness of the US military arsenal in Yugoslavia?
ANSWER. Not only in this case. If a decision had been made, then Serbia would cease to exist within a few hours. Apparently, the leaders of the new world order have chosen a strategy of permanent violence. One by one, local conflicts will now flare up so that the machine of the “peacemaking war”, which we have already seen in action, extinguished them.
In fact, it can be a technology to control the entire planet. The West controls most of the earth’s natural resources. Its intellectual resources are millions of times greater than the resources of the rest of the world. This overwhelming superiority causes the hegemony of the West in the field of technology, art, media, computer science, science, and hence the prevalence in all other areas. It would be too easy just to conquer the world. After all, they still need to manage! It is this fundamental problem that the Americans are trying to solve now ... Understand that at the time of Christ on Earth there were about 100 millions of people. Today, Nigeria alone has so many inhabitants!
One billion zapadoidov and people assimilated by them will rule the whole world. However, this billion, in turn, also needs to be managed. In all likelihood, two hundred million people will be required to govern the Western world. They need to pick up, train. That is why China is doomed to defeat the struggle against the hegemony of the West. This country lacks management, as well as economic and intellectual resources in order to implement an effective management apparatus, consisting somewhere of 300 million people. Only the West is able to solve the problems of world governance. He has already begun this. Hundreds of thousands of zapadoidov who are in former communist countries, for example in Russia, as a rule, occupy leadership positions there. Totalitarian democracy will also be a colonial democracy.
QUESTION. According to Marx, colonization, besides violence and cruelty, carried with it the benefits of civilization. Maybe the history of mankind is repeated on a new round?
ANSWER. Indeed, why not? But, alas, not for everyone. What contribution did American Indians make to civilization? Virtually none, since they were crushed, destroyed, erased from the face of the Earth. And now look at the contribution of Russian! And in general, I will make an important remark: the West was afraid not so much of the military power of the USSR as of its intellectual, artistic and sports potential. West saw how the USSR was full of life!
And this is the main thing that you need to destroy the enemy. That is what was done. Russian science today depends on American funding. It is in a miserable condition, since the US is not interested in financing its competitors. Americans prefer to give Russian scientists work in their home country. Soviet cinema was also destroyed and replaced by American. The same thing happened with literature. World domination is primarily manifested as intellectual or, if you will, cultural dictate. That is why in recent decades, Americans have so eagerly tried to lower the cultural and intellectual level in the world to their own, which will allow them to exercise this dictate.
QUESTION. But will not this domination result in a boon to all of humanity?
ANSWER. Those who will live through ten generations will really be able to say that everything happened in the name of humanity, that is, for their benefit. But what about a Russian or a Frenchman who lives today? Can he rejoice that his people are waiting for the future of American Indians? The term "humanity" is an abstraction. In reality, there are Russians, French, Serbs, etc. However, if the current trend continues, then the peoples who founded modern civilization (I mean the Latin peoples) will gradually disappear.
Western Europe is already flooded with foreigners. We have not yet spoken about this, but this phenomenon is not an accident and not the consequences of supposedly uncontrolled human flows. The goal is to create a situation in Europe similar to the situation in the United States. It seems to me that the French will be little happy to hear that humanity will be happy, but without the French. After all, leaving on Earth a limited number of people who would live like in paradise could be a rational project. The remaining people would certainly think that their happiness is the result of historical development ... No. What matters is the life that we and our loved ones live today.
QUESTION. The Soviet system was ineffective. Are all totalitarian societies bound to inefficiency?
ANSWER. What is efficiency? In the United States, the cost of losing weight exceeds Russia's state budget. And still the number of fat citizens is growing. There are dozens of such examples.
QUESTION. Can we say that the radicalization that is growing in the West will lead to its own destruction?
ANSWER. Nazism was destroyed during the total war. The Soviet system was young and strong. She would have continued to live if she had not been destroyed by forces from outside. Social systems do not destroy themselves. Only external force can destroy them. It's like a ball rolling on the surface: only the presence of an external obstacle can stop it. I can prove it, as the theorem proves. Today we are dominated by a country that has tremendous economic and military superiority. New nascent world order tends to unipolarity.
If, by eliminating all external enemies, the supranational government achieves this, then the unified social system can survive until the end of time. Only a person can die from his own illness. But a group of people, even a small one, will already try to survive through reproduction. And imagine a social system of billions of people! Its ability to foresee and prevent self-destructive phenomena will be unlimited. In the foreseeable future, the process of erasing differences in the world cannot be stopped, since democratic totalitarianism is the last phase in the development of Western society, which began in the Renaissance.
Curriculum Vitae of A. Zinoviev
The famous philosopher and writer Alexander Zinoviev was born in 1922 in a peasant family. After school, he entered the Moscow Institute of the History of Philosophy and Literature, from which he was expelled without the right to enter other universities in the country for speaking out against the personality cult of Stalin. He was soon arrested, fled, hiding from state security agencies. He was saved from further troubles by military service, where he left in 1940 and served until 1946. The Great Patriotic War began in a tank regiment, and completed in the assault aviation, for military merits awarded orders and medals. After the war, he graduated from the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University, while simultaneously studying in mechanics.
In the second half of the fifties for the students of the Faculty of Philosophy of the Lomonosov Moscow State University the name of Zinoviev was a symbol of new ideas, the struggle against dogmatism. In 1960, Zinoviev defended his doctoral thesis, shortly thereafter he received the title of professor and became head of the department of logic at Moscow University.
The reason for the expulsion of Alexander Zinoviev from the Soviet Union in 1978 was the sociological novel “Yawning Heights” published in the West, with which literary fame came to him. At home, Zinoviev was assigned the role of an anti-communist with all the ensuing consequences in those years: he was expelled from the party, expelled from work, expelled from the country, deprived of citizenship, all scientific degrees, titles, awards, including military ones. The atmosphere of silence was created around him. Everything was organized as if there was no such person at all.
In the West, Alexander Zinoviev published more than 40 novels translated into 20 languages, creating a new genre of a sociological novel (sociological novel) in his work, in which scientific and sociological results are presented in artistic form. Concepts, statements, partly even methods of sociology are used as means of fiction, and the latter, in turn, are used as means of science.
Returning home, Alexander Alexandrovich continued his sociological research and lectured at Moscow State University, published essays on the new Russia.