On September 19 of 2019 of the year, the European Parliament (535 of votes in favor, 66 of votes against and 52 abstained) adopted a resolution on the importance of European memory for the future of Europe.
What turned out to be important for Europe in its memory? This was eloquently stated in the resolution of the European Parliament, blaming the outbreak of World War II on fascist Germany and the Soviet Union. Europe has such a memory now, such a "independent" policy from the USA ...
The present cannot be understood without the past; you have to look back at historyas the last president of the Soviet Union used to say, who is who.
A look into the past
You will have to start from afar, mentioning the XV-XVI centuries, when capitalism was born in Holland and England, becoming the starting point of competition for leadership in the new social system. Roman politician Marcus Thulius Cicero said: "Money is the driving force of any war." In the emerging capitalism, money has become a driving force on a much larger scale. The basis of enrichment is minimum costs and maximum profit. The meaning of enrichment is influence and power.
It is no coincidence that the rapid development of capitalism began in countries actively exploiting the colonies, the leader among which was England. Capitalism began to quickly turn into a global social system, the core of consumption of which was the metropolis, and the periphery and colonies became the largest object of exploitation. Ultimately, this scheme was to give rise to the world leader of the system, and all the rest be attributed to the host colonies. The struggle for leadership gave birth to applicants who are able to challenge the rapidly growing rich UK.
With the first serious contender, Napoleonic France, England dealt in many respects with the hands of Austria, Prussia and Russia. With the second, who seriously dared to challenge the dominion of the English crown, Kaiser Germany, the issue was solved with the help of the Entente, Russia was again involved in this alliance, and after all almost all the Russian tsarina were German, and the emperors were mostly half-blood Germans. It seemed that we had to share with the Germans, why again harness ourselves to England, when it was eternal for Russia that the "English woman was shitting"? But money solved a lot, with their help it was possible to successfully rake in the heat with the wrong hands, to bribe, to plant on a loan interest, making huge profits on it, gaining world influence. In this, the treacherous Anglo-Saxons turned out to be unsurpassed virtuosos. As a result, Kaiser Germany did not just fall, but lost its colonies, fell under the restrictions of Versailles, having received sharp restrictions and bans on weapons and, in general, on the army and navy.
As a result of the First World War in Europe, one super empire remained - the British. In addition to the German one, the Ottoman, Austro-Hungarian and Russian empires fell into the flames of the First World War and sunk into oblivion.
The only owner of the system, the British crown, has matured on the planet, and their overseas “miscarriage” - the North American United States, in which large capital found loopholes inaccessible to Europe. In the United States, at the dawn of their "democracy", there was a slave trade, indigenous genocide, gangster laws of the Wild West. In the United States, almost everything was possible, for the sake of money, for the sake of gigantic profits.
The Fifth Republic, France, could no longer compete with the Anglo-Saxons, like other developed European countries.
In Europe and in the world as a whole, it turned out to be the only force that poses a threat to world capitalism. This is a young Soviet country - the USSR, with a social system independent of the West, its human morality, its own politics, its own idea.
After the abdication of Nicholas II in February 1917 of the year with the monarchists, liberals, other “right” and “left”, it was the Communists who were able to save Russia by creating the USSR and not allowing the collapse of the country. Moreover, they were able to eliminate illiteracy, carry out industrialization, and build a powerful country by the 30 years of the last century. The Soviet Union became a threat to world capitalism, and the West had to solve this problem.
The Anglo-Saxons learned to fight with the wrong hands, make money. To this end, they began to actively make anti-USSR from Germany defeated and bound by restrictions, and from Nazism - the antipode of communism. So Hitler appeared, so the Third Reich appeared.
It should be emphasized here that without the connivance of the same England and the USA, who played the main violin, the formation of the Third Reich from the defeated and bound by the restrictions of Versailles Germany in principle would have been impossible.
It should also be emphasized that the leaders of world capitalism did not need a strong and united Russia in any form, both with the monarchy, in the form of an empire (which the West itself actually destroyed in February 1917 of the year), and with any other power under which Russia would remain strong. If after the collapse of the USSR, the new liberal power went to the cosmic and nuclear superpower, with the most educated population, then Kerensky and his ilk were a completely different Russia. After the First World War, with tsarist debt on loans, with full technological dependence on the West, low education of the population to the complete illiteracy of many of the lower strata.
Would such a Russia become a superpower with pro-Western Chubais and Yeltsins already in 1917? Unlikely. It is unlikely that Russia would have been able to maintain the integrity with the active intervention of the West in governing the country. What happened after the 1991 year is evidence of this. Only the Soviet margin of safety saved the country, hurt from a superpower that tsarist Russia did not have. In addition, the monarchists and liberals could have unleashed a civil war, the rebellion of General Kornilov is an example of this.
This can not and does not want to understand how home-grown monarchists, accusing the Communists of all mortal sins, of the "collapse" of Russia, and, by and large, the current European Parliament (see above).
If the Communists were to blame for anything, it was only because the Anglo-Saxons' hopes for world hegemony did not materialize that after the First World War they had to create a continuation, the "second act" of the world massacre. The Soviet Union developed rapidly, turning into a powerful, self-sufficient power, into a new, independent and dangerous pole of power for world capitalism.
But let us return to the events of 1938 of the year when the Second World War had not yet begun and as if it should not have begun.
“I brought you peace!”
“I brought you peace!” British Prime Minister Chamberlain said in 1938, waving a piece of paper in front of the public with a promise from Hitler not to start a war with Britain.
Chamberlain then returned from the Munich Conference, where he and Daladier fed Hitler Czechoslovakia, even earlier Britain closed her eyes to the Anschluss, according to which Austria entered the Third Reich. Eyes were closed to all violations of Versailles restrictions, allowing Germany to arm himself.
Austria and Czechoslovakia, Germany was not enough for a war with the USSR, for the necessary potential the Germans were given almost all of Europe, including France. The “strange war” - only strange at first glance, is that Hitler allowed the British to evacuate from Dunkirk, stopping Tanks Guderian for almost three days, allows us to suspect that Hitler is a protege of the Anglo-Saxons, who subsequently completed his task. Let us recall what Harry Truman said: “If we see that Germany wins, then we should help Russia, and if Russia will win, we should help Germany, and so let them kill as much as possible, although I would not want to see Hitler a winner under no circumstances. ” Hitler was not supposed to be a winner, and he fulfilled his role, inflicting huge damage on the Soviet Union.
The evil of capitalism
The Second World War finally approved the Anglo-Saxons as masters of the world capitalist system, eliminating Japan in the east as an empire and yielding tremendous profits in the war. Post-war Western Europe was virtually enslaved and occupied by the Anglo-Saxons, the dollar became a world currency, gold reserves from many countries migrated to the United States for storage. However, there was one significant “but”: the main task was not solved, the Soviet Union not only survived, it had already created a whole block of socialist countries, created an independent world pole of socialism, turned into a cosmic and nuclear superpower.
Under Stalin, capitalists were never considered friends, world capitalism was understood as the antipode, the enemy with which “peaceful coexistence” is possible only on the balance of containment. That was the only thing right. Miguel de Lewis said about capitalism that capitalism is a religion where banks are churches, bankers are priests, wealth is paradise, poverty is hell, rich are saints, poor are sinners, wealth is blessed, money is God. Capitalism has reached its zenith and has become an absolute evil for mankind, turning into a planetary virus, corrupting morality, absorbing resources.
The indisputable plus of capitalism, competition, is a thing of the past. With the final establishment of transnational monopolies, competition turned into fiction, and with the disappearance of the world pole of socialism, the core of which was the Soviet Union, the external competition of the two systems also disappeared, leaving capitalism no positive for humanity in consumer morality and the cult of money.
For a jar of jam and a packet of cookies
The same monarchists in modern Russia and other bad boys who rejoiced at the bourgeois “jar of jam” and the “packet of cookies” gloatingly note that the USSR died because it was originally unpromising, initially utopian.
No, not because the Soviet Union died, not because "the menacing squad fell in battles without drawing swords,". Flirting with the West, the hope of peaceful coexistence with the antipode is the main reason that began in the era of Nikita Sergeyevich, which gave the first crack in the foundation of ideology, in the strength of morality. The era of "dear Leonid Ilyich" with the unconditional recognition of the American landing on the moon, the "cosmic triumph" of the USA made it possible to sow the seeds of worship of the West, to raise doubts about socialism in the first place among the party nomenclature itself, which became the main traitor of socialism, true Soviet achievements in space, a traitor the very idea of communism.
The Kremlin chatterbox and dreamer Mikhail Sergeyevich only completed what was started. Friendship with a deadly enemy ultimately led to the death of the Soviet Union.
Socialism did not lose because it was weaker or worse, our politicians lost to inveterate hypocrites, duplicity and hypocrisy, the vile political cheaters of capitalism. Soviet diplomats and officials were the first to become admirers of the golden calf, figuratively speaking, they sold their souls for material wealth.
We have what we have. Russia in capitalism, in the alien pole, under the rules of others. Those in power keep their treasures in foreign banks and foreign currency. There is a brisk trade in resources and the sale of Soviet military developments. Their “misfortune" is the Soviet legacy of the space and nuclear superpower. The global masters of capitalism do not need such a potential. The frank betrayal of the country, as under Boris Nikolaevich, was pleasant to the Anglo-Saxon masters, but lowered the ratings of the ruling "democracy" below nowhere.
The paradox is that the West itself pushes capitalist Russia out of its capitalist “sandbox” only because the authorities in Russia are forced to raise their rating among the people, somehow to maintain the image of a great country dependent on the West in front of the people.
The fact that Europe, which is under the heels of the Anglo-Saxons, accuses the USSR at the beginning of World War II, in one way or another, the Russian "elite" supports, renaming the Soviet street names, misinterpreting the Soviet past in television and movies, destroying many of the cynical achievements of socialism for the people reforms in the failures of health and education, science and culture.
Is there a bright future?
Is there a bright future for capitalism in Russia? Honestly, this is hard to believe.
Russia must remain strong, and when it is at a different pole, playing by the rules of others, this is impossible. It turns out that either a foreign lobby will destroy Russia as a great power, or Russia must return the second independent pole of world power, revive socialism, a renewed Soviet Union.
Capitalism is doomed. He survived his appointment, becoming a cancer of humanity, an absolute evil that Russia needs to part with, and the sooner the better.
Perhaps the Germans, with whom the Anglo-Saxons have repeatedly confronted the Russians, need to realize this (there is the experience of the GDR). Russia and Germany could create a new social system by defeating absolute evil together.