Military Review

Why Hitler was nourished in the West, and Japan was provoked in the East

77

From Dusk Till Dawn. The brutal contrast of Quentin Tarantino's plot is somewhat close to the topic I want to talk about.


To begin with, we will have to recall the First World War, in the unleashing of which there are several reasons for interstate contradictions and one reason. The main and common cause was developing capitalism, in which the struggle for primacy in world hegemony intensified, and Great Britain and Germany turned out to be the main rivals.

Therefore, all other reasons were grouped either in the Entente or in the Triple Alliance, led by the British and Germans. The war was inevitable, and anyone would have found a reason for it, with or without a shot from Gavrilo Princip.

It is strange that the Russian autocracy, in which most of the queens were German, and the emperors were "half-breeds", by the First World War seemed to have forgotten how the "Englishwoman crap", finding herself in alliance with the Anglo-Saxons, literally on the eve (not without the influence of the British), having experienced the shame of Tsushima.

The deadly First World War claimed over 10 million soldiers' lives and over 11 million civilian lives. Russia suffered the greatest losses.

At Versailles on June 28, 1919, an international document was signed, known as the Treaty of Versailles (or the Treaty of Versailles), which was the final point of the First World War. There are six main points in the agreement.

1. Germany and the Triple Alliance were declared the only culprits in the outbreak of war.

2. Reparations were imposed on Germany in favor of the victors.

3. The German armed forces were greatly reduced. Have modern military equipment, especially combat Aviation, Tanks and submarines, Germany was generally banned.

4. On different terms, Germany was torn away from her colonial possessions.

5. The territory of Germany itself was curtailed (including in favor of new states, for example, Poland and Czechoslovakia).

6. Economically developed regions, such as the Ruhr and Saar, were transferred under the control of representatives of the Entente.

With Kaiser's Germany and its allies, it seemed, and with the further possibility of such wars, was done away with. For this, the League of Nations was created by the Treaty of Versailles with the best wishes. The League was supposed to promote the "Eternal Peace", dealing with issues of disarmament, preventing hostilities, ensuring collective security, settling disputes between countries through diplomatic negotiations, as well as improving the very quality of life on the planet.

One of the main winners in the First World War was Great Britain, profited from the war and its former overseas colony, the United States, in which before the English capital in many respects found something that was not allowed in the metropolis, also grew stronger.

There is nothing surprising in the fact that after the genocide of the indigenous population of America, the slave trade and racism, the United States for Britain became a kind of free overseas enclave, through which it was possible to solve many world affairs, remaining in the shadows.

So why did the Third Reich subsequently emerge, and the even more monstrous Second World War broke out?

As shows история, Russia was needed by the British crown only when England needed to rake in the heat with someone else's hands, and never as a strong Russian state.

In this, the February Revolution, the abdication of Nicholas II, and the pro-Western Provisional Government were undoubted blessings for Great Britain. But instead of the Gaidars and Chubais of that era, a new force arose in Russia, the Soviet government, which was not controlled by world capital.

Therefore, Germany was already demanded to break all the agreements concluded earlier with Russia, in particular the Brest-Litovsk Treaty, in order to organize a predatory intervention by the Treaty of Versailles.

The intervention, like the civil war itself, did not destroy the Bolsheviks, the very integrity of Russia, the construction of a powerful workers 'and peasants' state was gaining momentum.

This had to be reckoned with, and this problem had to be solved by the powers that be.

The “antidote”, Hitler's Nazism, was directed at the emerging Soviet Union and the communists, and anti-USSR was created from the wounded and defeated Germany.

The Anglo-Saxons, who have a wealth of experience in political hypocrisy, duplicity and meanness, again decided to play off the Germans and Russians in order to solve their problems in this way, to cash in on the war again. Without the permission of England and the United States, without actually ignoring the requirements of Versailles, Hitler would not have built the Third Reich, he hardly ever came to power.

The new war was supposed to decide the fate of the Soviet Union for the sake of the world domination of the Anglo-Saxons, simultaneously putting an end to the last large empire in the East, Japan.

Hitler was systematically moved to power and helped to create him the economic power of the Third Reich.

To obtain the necessary potential, Nazi Germany was allowed to swallow Austria, treacherously gave up Czechoslovakia, and in the "strange war" subsequently practically all of Western Europe.

All for the sake of the main thing - the acquisition of military and economic power from Hitler, for an attack on the USSR.

In the photo below, Chamberlain after the Munich Agreement: "I brought you peace!"


Of course, one must distinguish between ordinary people, even individual politicians who sincerely and courageously fought against Nazism, and behind-the-scenes political puppeteers, the big capital lobby behind the governments of Great Britain and the United States.

Speaking about the role of the United States, it is necessary to highlight several main stages in the formation of Nazi Germany.

1.From 1919 to 1924: preparing the ground for massive American financial injections into the German economy.

2. From 1924 to 1929: taking control of the German financial system and financial support for National Socialism.

3. From 1929 to 1933: provoking and unleashing a deep financial and economic crisis and ensuring the Nazis come to power.

4.From 1933 to 1939: financial cooperation with Nazi Germany and support for Hitler's expansionist foreign policy aimed at preparing and unleashing a new world war.

Initially, the main levers for ensuring the penetration of American capital into Germany were military debts and the closely related problem of German reparations.

Already in the summer of 1924, at the London conference, a project would be adopted, known as the Dawes plan, which provided for halving the payment of reparations and decided on the sources of their coverage.

The main task was to provide favorable conditions for American investment, which was possible only with the stabilization of the Deutsche mark. For this, a large loan was envisaged for Germany - in the amount of $ 200 million. At the same time, the Anglo-American banks established control over both the transfer of German payments and the budget, the system of monetary circulation, and to a large extent the lending system itself.

American industrial corporations and banks, taking advantage of the situation, bought up the assets of most of Germany's key enterprises.

The financing of Hitler himself and his party was originally carried out through Swiss and Swedish banks, and from 1926 the financing of the Nazis began to be carried out directly through banks and industrial concerns in Germany.

In the fall of 1930, the United States was visited by the head of the German Reichsbank, Hjalmar Schacht, who directly negotiated with representatives of American business.

In private negotiations, Schacht spoke about the version of Adolf Hitler's coming to power in Germany, about his concept of the country's development, the strategy of combating Bolshevism.

After a series of economic metamorphoses on lending to the Weimar Republic, the Nazi National Socialist Workers' Party had a fabulous success - in September 1930, as a result of large donations, the Hitlerite party received 6,4 million votes. At the same time, the Nazis take second place in the Reichstag, after which new generous injections from abroad are activated. The main link between the largest German industrialists and foreign financiers is the same Hjalmar Schacht.

At the very beginning of January 1932, a meeting of the largest English financier Montagu Norman with Adolf Hitler and Franz von Papen took place, where a secret agreement was concluded to finance the Hitlerite party. Already on January 14, 1933, Adolf Hitler met with Kurt von Schroeder, Franz von Papen and Wilhelm Kepler, where Hitler's program was fully approved.

It was here that the issue of transferring power to the Nazis was finally resolved. On January 30, 1933, Hitler becomes Reich Chancellor.

On the eve of World War II, US corporations and banks invested a huge amount at that time, $ 800 million, in the industry and financial system of Nazi Germany. Of these, the top four from the United States invested about $ 200 million in Hitler's militarized economy. Standard Oil $ 120 million, General Motors $ 35 million, ITT's investment was $ 30 million, and Ford's $ 17,5 million.

Historical fact: even after the United States entered World War II on December 11, 1941, American corporations continued to actively fulfill orders of enemy firms, to support the activities of their branches in Germany.

The richest clans of Great Britain and the USA, their banks, also tarnished themselves in this case. For example, Morgan, Rockefeller, Rothschild and many others. These financial tycoons promoted the shares of the German IG Farbenindustrie and many other chemical plants of the Reich through their banks, and later completely began to control them.

One could say that nothing personal, just a business for which money does not smell. After all, the United States also helped the USSR, in particular under Lend-Lease, nevertheless, such a famous industrialist as Henry Ford had openly Nazi positions for a long time.


Ford received the "Order of Merit of the German Eagle", which was not a standard state award, but was a party order, for the disposition of the Hitler regime to this or that person, Henry Ford was also personally mentioned by Adolf Hitler in "Mein Kampf".

Received this award in 1937 and Thomas Watson, founder and owner of the now world famous company IBM.

Watson was awarded for invaluable assistance in equipping the Gestapo with computers when, in 1934, Dehomag, a subsidiary of IBM, won a tender for the supply of counting and cataloging machines for the German Reich Security Administration. In 1935 Thomas Watson visited Berlin and presented to the chief of the Gestapo the new Dehomag mod.1935 counting machine.

In general, sympathy for Nazism was observed even in the British royal family.

Oddly enough, but Adolf Hitler, in turn, already bowed before England, the success of the Anglo-Saxons in world influence and plunder of many countries gave Hitler a reason for envy.

At the same time, it is easier to understand why it was Hitler who was brought to power, whose order he had to fulfill, turning Germany and the Germans into cannon fodder against Bolshevism. Why did Hitler stop the offensive for three days, allowing the British troops to take their feet from Dunkirk, to have time to evacuate to his island? The propaganda operation "Sea Lion" remained a screen for the main purpose of Hitlerite Germany, the "Barbarossa" plan.


Here it is no longer "Germany above all else", but the British crown with its secret power over the world.

As for American aid to the USSR during World War II, it is useful to recall another politician, Harry Truman. Subsequently, Truman will express: “If we see that Germany is winning, then we should help Russia, and if Russia is winning, then we should help Germany, and thus let them kill as many as possible, although I would not like to see Hitler as the winner. under what circumstances. None of them keep their word. "

In this famous statement, the whole quintessence of the tactics of the Anglo-Saxons.

Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, as two antipodes, should have, if not destroyed each other, then weakened so that it was no longer difficult to finish off the survivor. Particularly touching in the text is the emphasis on "does not keep his word", said by a representative of a country that did not fulfill its guarantees to comply with the restrictions of Versailles, moreover, that directly nurtured German Nazism, the main winners of which in the United States after themselves are ranked. The keeping of the word by the politicians of the United States generally needs to be discussed separately.

The future "main victors" of Hitler had to prepare their own public to enter the Second World War. Here we have to remember about the Land of the Rising Sun, which at one time was armed by England and the United States, urging on Russia, which led to the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. Japan also remained the last major empire to be reckoned with in the East and which also interfered with the plans of the Anglo-Saxons for world domination.

So, on the morning of December 7, 1941, Japanese aircraft struck an American the fleet at his main base in the Pacific.


Pearl Harbor (Pearl Harbor), already an American version, but not as unambiguous as Hitler's attack on the USSR ...


If the leadership of the Soviet Union tried with all its might, if not to avoid, then to delay the start of the war, then the US government with all its might needed to convince the American society of the need for the United States to enter the war. How can this be done if the American people resolutely did not want to go to the front to die, to get involved in the slaughter? There is no way without enemy treachery and sacred sacrifice.

How did an attack by Japan become possible, if many Japanese politicians and the military understood the doom of hopes of winning a war against an American economic colossus?

The clash of American and Japanese interests began long before December 7, 1941: the imposition of an embargo on the supply of crude oil by the United States in July 1941 already provoked Japan's aggression, since Japan received 80% of the necessary oil from Mexico and the United States. Nevertheless, it was the "Hull note" transmitted to Japan by the US Secretary of State on November 26, 1941, and became the last straw for Japan, an ultimatum leaving no choice.

For example, the Hull's note demanded that Japan should be deliberately impossible, namely, the withdrawal of troops from China and withdrawal from the Triple Pact concluded by Japan, Germany and Italy in September 1940. It is quite predictable that the Japanese side perceived the note as a demonstration of the US unwillingness to continue negotiations, as the inevitability of a military clash.

American bankers, industrialists, and politicians needed a war, and they got it.

As a result of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the opinion of the American public changed in one day to the exact opposite. Righteous anger demanded revenge.

Now about the “sacred sacrifice”. How could a surprise attack happen if from the end of 1940 the Americans knew the diplomatic codes of Japan and all Japanese diplomatic correspondence was not a secret for the United States? In addition, the British leadership had access to classified information from the Japanese naval forces and would hardly have hidden the strike plans from their closest allies.

It must be assumed that instead of the expected farce in the Japanese "unexpected" and desired by the American leadership attack, the United States got an unplanned tragedy. This could have been due to a misconception in the United States of the British attack by the Italian fleet in Taranto (November 11, 1940).

Many British torpedoes then, because of the shallow depths, simply buried themselves when dropped into the bottom of the harbor, although the British tried to preliminarily modify torpedoes for their carrier-based aircraft in this.

In Pearl Harbor, the depths were even shallower, besides, Japan was not armed with heavy armor-piercing bombs, which could pose a serious threat to the decks of US battleships, while the Americans removed the aircraft carriers from the base in advance.

The fact is that the Japanese also paid attention to the British attack on the Italian base and made the right conclusions about the possibility of destroying the enemy's fleet with one blow.

The heavy armor-piercing bombs were obtained after modification with parts of artillery shells from battleship cannons.


Aircraft torpedoes were equipped with additional, improved wooden stabilizers, allowing torpedoes to be used at shallow depths.


In addition, the Japanese were well prepared by training their pilots specifically on the intended targets at Pearl Harbor.

The attack was played out like clockwork. Aircraft "Nakajima" B5N2 in the first wave caused the main damage to the American fleet.


These 89 vehicles from the air groups of the 1st and 2nd divisions of Japanese aircraft carriers dropped 40 aircraft torpedoes (45% of hits) plus 49 armor-piercing 800-kilogram bombs (24,5% of hits), not counting numerous close explosions, which also caused damage to targets.

The main task of the Japanese strike, which was to neutralize the main forces of the US Pacific Fleet for a period of at least 6 months, was mainly completed even before dive bombers and torpedo bombers from the second wave appeared over Pearl Harbor, adding several more ships to the list of American losses ...


In total, 4 battleships sunk by the Japanese, 4 seriously damaged ships, plus 10 more ships that were either sunk or received damage incompatible with the possibility of recovery, fell into the "sacred sacrifice" for the United States.

At the airfields, 349 American aircraft were destroyed or damaged. The number of killed and wounded was 3581 military personnel and 103 civilians.

Such was the price of the United States entering World War II.

The irony of fate is that the Americans did not expect such losses, and the Japanese such luck, which very soon will have to turn their backs on them, and it is quite natural. Initially, Japan did not have a chance of winning the war, as did Hitler. The Germans and the Japanese, each in their own way, worked out the bloody order, where the tycoons of world capital made huge profits, gained world influence. The armies and peoples played the role of fighting dogs, ready to die for those who made their bets on them and made their own profit. Germany and Japan are still not only actually occupied territories by the Anglo-Saxons, but also their political "six". These “sixes” have already forgotten how their victorious masters burned alive not only the population of German Dresden, but also set up two nuclear crematoria, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, without feeling at all like criminals in such a genocide.

The main task of the Anglo-Saxons after the Second World War was not fulfilled, the Soviet Union not only withstood, but later became a nuclear and space superpower, gaining world authority in the victory over Nazism and with success in space exploration. A powerful bloc of socialist countries was also created, the world ceased to belong to one big capital.

But it was after World War II that London and Washington became the de facto leaders and monopoly masters of the entire world capitalist system. In this, their goal was achieved, and they did not intend to stop, unlike the same Nikita Sergeevich, Leonid Ilyich and even more so Mikhail Sergeevich, who wanted to find peaceful coexistence with a mortal enemy. Capitalism, on the other hand, knew how to dress in sheep skins, to make concessions when it felt strength.

Our grandfathers and fathers fought with a very powerful enemy, defeated Hitler, saved, raised the country. But the mighty Soviet Union fell before the evil British dwarf "Chernomor" and its overseas "beard", slain not in open battle, but by the meanness and hypocrisy of the Anglo-Saxons, by the betrayal inside the country of those who should have been in the forefront, in defense of the humane Soviet ideology and the USSR itself.

The dollar has become the world currency, capitalism is the only pole of power on the planet, the Anglo-Saxons are the leaders and masters of this pole. Everything they dreamed of: world domination, explicit and secret. The renegade traitors are now puffing out their cheeks, eating up the Soviet reserve of strength, talking about a "multipolar world", but keeping their treasures with Russia's enemies and briskly selling off its wealth. The cold hearts of the rich, the dragon that conquered the souls is in the morality of consumers and the cult of money.

What will happen to the Motherland and to us? What are the conclusions?

The already established transnational monopolies make competition a fiction. Disposable goods with quality for the duration of the guarantee and imposed services are the nearest prospect in the dictates of monopolies.

Eternal debtors, liquidation of cash, total control of deposits - the desired goal of bankers. Wars and epidemics, other troubles of mankind - to reset the world economic pyramid of capitalism, to write off the debts of its owners and new income. Tightening the screws and infringement of rights, digitization of society, new electronic slavery.

From dusk to dawn and from dawn to dusk under bloodsuckers, ready to preserve their power and super-profits for any crimes.

"The devil's greatest trick is to convince you that he doesn't exist." The glossy charms of capitalism are praised, the Soviet past is smeared with mud.

Are there really few of those now for whom the abundance of dry beer and the availability of a foreign car are the main criteria for the quality of life? And they see nothing more.

How long will those who are obsessed with billions, with complexes and manias parasitize on ordinary people of the East and West, will there be their own aspen stake for these ghouls?

Probably, their time cannot last forever, otherwise nothing good will shine for our civilization, only "zombieland". Presumably, capitalism has exhausted its positive in the development of society, turning our path to degradation and degeneration.

For Russia, the era of "supernap" would have ended better (like a vaccination against the planetary virus of capitalism). Having absorbed all the best, a renewed socialism could save not only Russia, but our entire planet.


Of course, this is only my personal opinion, which does not have to coincide with the opinions of other people, and even more so those who were obliged to have the necessary opinion.
Author:
Photos used:
warspot.ru, yandex.ru/images
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. pytar
    pytar 1 October 2020 12: 16 New
    +1
    Socialism, in the form in which they tried to build it in the USSR and other socialist countries, was essentially a modification of feudalism. A totalitarian society with a complete concentration of power, economic and ideological resources in the hands of a privileged clan. Instead of a classless society, a caste society was created. Socialism in its form was doomed.
    1. iouris
      iouris 1 October 2020 12: 37 New
      +1
      Quote: pytar
      Instead of a classless society, a caste society was created. Socialism in its form was doomed.

      Well, that means the US is doomed. I hoped so.
      1. pytar
        pytar 1 October 2020 13: 11 New
        +3
        I do not know if the US is doomed, but I have no doubt that major shocks await them. Too many controversies have accumulated in American society. hi
    2. parusnik
      parusnik 1 October 2020 12: 45 New
      +8
      And the article is not about this, which you are writing about ... But about the next one .. Having absorbed all the best, the renewed socialism could save not only Russia, but our entire planet.
      1. pytar
        pytar 1 October 2020 13: 23 New
        +1
        And the article is not about this, what you are writing about ...

        The article has subtext, suggestion, just about what I am writing.
        Having absorbed all the best, the renewed socialism could save not only Russia, but our entire planet.

        There are at least two options here:
        1.Positive:
        1.1 Socialism takes the best of capitalism and democratizes.
        1.2 Capitalism takes the best of socialism and becomes social.
        Similar forms are obtained, close to communism.
        2.Negative:
        2.1 Socialism takes the worst from capitalism and de-socializes.
        2.2 Capitalism takes all the worst of socialism and goes to a total dictatorship.
        The result is neo-feudal societies.
        Socialism / of the Soviet type / no longer exists, so only 1.2 and 2.2 remain. hi
    3. tatra
      tatra 1 October 2020 12: 49 New
      -5
      Stupidity with a claim to the truth. Socialism differs from capitalism, first of all, in that under socialism, the country and the people live as the officials want and can, and the development of the country, making money for the country and the people, is their duty, and under capitalism, as they want and can businessmen. And business is cosmopolitan, selfish, inhuman, and it is only interested in making money at the expense of the country and the people. And all of you, enemies of socialism in the West, in Europe, on the territory of the USSR, have proved that you are fierce totalitarians who hate dissidents.
      1. pytar
        pytar 1 October 2020 13: 26 New
        +2
        Stupidity with a claim to truth.

        There is no claim to truth or to "first instance". And I do not call any other opinion "stupidity". bully
        And all of you, enemies of socialism in the West, in Europe, on the territory of the USSR, have proved that you are fierce totalitarians who hate dissidents.

        Well, looking at how the "knife" some meet a different opinion, another question is who is the "fierce totalitarian" and "hates the dissidents"! laughing
        I respect other people's opinions, no matter how much it differs from mine. hi
        1. tatra
          tatra 1 October 2020 13: 33 New
          -6
          Ha, you do not have an opinion, but a manifestation of the essence of the enemies of socialism, who are NOT capable of proving that you have done at least something better for the country and the people than the supporters of socialism have done, therefore you are trying at the expense of lies, slander, maniacal criticism of everything, what they did, make them look bad in order to make themselves better than them. Opinion is when they offer their own alternative to what and what against whom and against whom. And for the enemies of socialism on the territory of the USSR, all 103 years after the October Revolution for their country and people there is only stupid, evil, irrational AGAINST everything Soviet.
          1. pytar
            pytar 1 October 2020 13: 46 New
            +5
            you have not an opinion, but a manifestation of the essence of the enemies of socialism, who ...

            Excuse me, but when they answer something like that, I lose interest. You have a black and white mindset with no room for discussion. For me, to enter into an argument in this way is a waste of time. Good luck to you. hi
            1. tatra
              tatra 1 October 2020 13: 50 New
              -5
              Well, the cowardly twisting began. None of the enemies of socialism is capable of honest, objective, adequate discussions about the history of their country, about WHAT and WHO is better for their country and people.
              1. pytar
                pytar 1 October 2020 14: 17 New
                +3
                Well, the cowardly twisting began. None of the enemies of socialism is capable of honest, objective, adequate discussions about the history of their country, about WHAT and WHO is better for their country and people.

                Irina, in vain you are trying to provoke me ... in vain ... laughing When dealing with people of your kind who initially consider each different opinion "enemy", and the person who expressed it "enemy", oh no "honest, objective, adequate discussions" and there can be no question. I recently spoke with an individual who fanatically believes that "The earth is flat"... He reacted to the arguments with growing aggression. And I realized that this person really lives on a flat Earth, his thinking is limited in a two-coordinate system of X / Y. There he does not have X / Y / Z / t, he is unable to imagine something that goes beyond the ego of representation. This concludes our "dialogue" with you. yes
      2. tacet
        tacet 1 October 2020 17: 24 New
        +2
        Ask yourself a question - what is the percentage of officials in any political system who, forgetting their personal interests, will vigilantly guard the interests of their country and people? Or are you planning to educate those?
      3. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 2 October 2020 13: 36 New
        0
        Quote: tatra
        under socialism, the country and the people live the way the officials want and can, and the development of the country, making money for the country and the people, is their duty, and under capitalism, the way businessmen want and can

        It's like that.
        Quote: tatra
        business is cosmopolitan, selfish, inhuman, and it is only interested in profit at the expense of the country and the people.

        But officials are usually holy people and they do great. Actually, any country from which officials managed to expel businessmen is confirmation of this. Venezuela, the DPRK in the old days (now there is something like NEP), etc.
    4. Bogatyrev
      Bogatyrev 1 October 2020 22: 40 New
      +4
      Well, again.
      How was socialism in the USSR similar to feudalism?
      There is not a single sign other than non-economic coercion and motivation. But this in itself is not yet a sign of feudalism, since this property in GENERAL of any formations other than capitalism.
      And where is the system of feuds?
      Where is the land for service?
      Where is the vassalage?
      Where is the feudal staircase?
      Where is the homage?
      Where are the hereditary titles?
      Without all this, this is not feudalism. What kind of feudalism can we talk about?

      Castes, you say? What castes? All around were people from the bottom.
      There were majors, but they occupied positions of bread. Only the stubborn children from the provincial proletarians made a real career. With luck.
      There was no caste as a system.
      1. pytar
        pytar 1 October 2020 23: 22 New
        +2
        You obviously lived under some other, unfamiliar to me in reality "socialism". Speaking of feudalization, I do not mean literally, after all, the 20th century ... But there were completely feudal orders! For example, forms of serfdom, such as restrictions on residence / registration, compulsory registration /, dwellings were distributed according to lists and we could not change them independently. The person did not have freedom of movement, even within his own country. In the USSR, until 74, the villagers did not have passports at all, and could not go anywhere without a certificate from the collective farm authorities. Violators were punished with fines or jail time! An ordinary person could not work where he wanted, there was a so-called. "distribution". Compulsory labor is practically free - labor service, brigades, construction battalions / we spent more time in the barracks with shovels and concrete than with machine guns /, compulsory work on the stand / we have 3 months / upon receiving a dwelling, no difference from the profession. Doctors, teachers, etc. took unpaid leave from their main job and worked / extremely ineffectively / on construction sites. Moreover, it was necessary to wait 10-15-20 years for a dwelling, and we bought them with loans for life. They were discriminated against, did not have the right to study at the university, but they could not advance into work, people with "wrong" class backgrounds. Due to the chronic commodity shortage, money was not so important, exchange in kind and personal ties and kinship were used. We went to the obligatory praising events, glorifying the party and the leader! All this did not belong to the privileged caste. The highest party elite! They and their offspring lived in another world, where everything was in abundance, and the law did not apply to them. As they joked with us, "they built communism, but only for the party class"... Almost always, they inherited privileges there. These people were special. We also joked that "under socialism, everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others ..."... About hereditary titles - well, just look at the titles themselves, and also at the party bosses' chests hung with medals. They were like medieval velmages! How they carried so much metal I don't know! Until a complete transition to hereditary titles, it came all the same in rare cases, but in North. Korea, the dream of the highest socialist aristocrat has come true! A communist dynasty! And there was much more feudalistic.
        1. Bogatyrev
          Bogatyrev 2 October 2020 21: 52 New
          0
          Perhaps all this is bad, but this is not all feudalism. Feudalism is a system with exactly the features that I have named above.
    5. Baron pardus
      Baron pardus 2 October 2020 02: 18 New
      +6
      Until the age of 17, I lived in the USSR, Kiev, Nikolskaya Borshagovka district. Rodoki is not at all elite from the word at all. Father is a musician in the Kiev Kamerny, mother is a native of the Russian language and a librarian. In the USA since 1991. 6 years of service in the US Armed Forces. So, of course, in the USSR there was an elite, party functionaries, the beginning of the trust and others like them. Do you think everyone has equal opportunities in the US? A kid from Des Plaines, far from the worst area, will NEVER reach the heights open to people from Wilmette and Glenview. The wrong connections, different schools, well, the wrong money, and if so, then the wrong universities, which means the wrong acquaintances and connections. So over the 29 years of my life in the USA, I became convinced that for all my problems, socialism, especially the Stalinist type, is much preferable to the "invisible hand of the market" and the terrible combination of plutocracy with bydlocracy, which for some reason is called a democratic republic. Why would it be a blockade? Here's an example: today I'm making a money transfer for $ 876. The store does not make transfers more than 500 bucks. Assistan manager, by the way, white, 35 years old, makes a transfer for 500 bucks, and how much is needed for the second (876-500) cannot be calculated without a calculator. And such I can vote, along with nerks, drunks, Welfer parasites and all the other rabble and canals. What do you think, having money and the ability to buy media, how easy is it to wash out what, in theory, should be the brain of this contingent? The one that I do not believe in capitalism, or in market relations, or in an illusion called "freedom" or in a farce called democracy.
      1. pytar
        pytar 2 October 2020 12: 35 New
        +2
        Dmitry, everything is mixed up with you!
        Do you think everyone has equal opportunities in the USA?

        No, and I never said that. And what does the USA have to do with it ?! Are they a model, or what? They have a specific socio-political system. You are confusing two different things! Capitalism and Democracy!
        So over the 29 years of my life in the USA, I became convinced that for all my problems, socialism, especially of the Stalinist type, is much preferable to the "invisible hand of the market" and the terrible combination of plutocracy with bydlocracy ...

        These are two different totalitarian forms. For me, the same are not acceptable. Capitalisms, democracies, autocracies are very different! You can't think in white and black colors!
        ... which for some reason are called a democratic republic.

        What does the name have to do with it ?! It and the Pol Pot slaughterhouse was called Democratic Kampuchea!
        The manager's assistant ... can't do it without a calculator. And I can vote like that, along with nerks, drunks, Welfer parasites and all kinds of other rabble and canals ...

        Democracy is imperfect, but it has the ability to evolve. For example, we are now discussing proposals to amend the Constitution and the electoral law in order to limit the right to vote for people who have not completed their basic education.
        What do you think, having money and the opportunity to buy media, how easy is it to wash out what, in theory, should be the brain of this contingent?

        Well, totalitarian dictatorships have propaganda monopolized by the authorities. It can be seen that the situation is highly dependent on the mentality of a particular population. Examples - Switzerland, Scandinavian countries and some others. The population there is clearly smarter, more intelligent, conscious, so democracy works.
        The one that I do not believe in capitalism, or in market relations, or in an illusion called "freedom" or in a farce called democracy.

        In your opinion, if you don't know how to build a house, it turns out to be a curve, you have to stay in the caves! And under dictatorships you have nothing to strain to think, from above to decide everything for you. And who they are there, how they ended up gnawing their throats between themselves, you are not interested! Well bravo! You have no choice, although there are actually many options!
        1. Baron pardus
          Baron pardus 2 October 2020 17: 52 New
          +2
          1. About the "evolution" of democracy - thank you, laughed for a long time. Democracies do not evolve, they degenerate. See ancient Greece and Rome. See what your favorite Scandinavia has become. The "democratically" elected representatives voted and: they let in "refugees" from all kinds of Africa and the Middle East, caved in under homosexuals and feminists, and the egg-headed professors (by the way, about people with higher education) openly and seriously began to push the legalization of pedophilia using the templates that imposed "tolerance "to homo and trans sexually and society quickly began to rot.
          2. Capitalism with a human face is a myth. Yes, in the capitalist countries, social programs have been introduced as a countermeasure to the ideology of communism. By the way, the best social programs before WWII were in Fascist Italy, Hitler's Germany and Francoist Spain. And the middle class, when a worker at a factory could not strain too hard to buy a house in the suburbs, appeared precisely in the 50s. But now the communist "threat" disappeared and these social programs quickly began to curtail, only the parasites of the welders are increasing it, and the hard workers are getting worse. Honey insurance is wildly expensive, but it covers less and less, vacations are shortened, if you don't like it, you will always find more desperate "to take your place. Your capacity decreases. Over 29 years, the average income has grown from 55000 to 68000, and gasoline has risen in price 2.5 times, along with milk, education podokozhe 5 times, housing twice. I feel better, I am a veteran and I have excellent medical insurance, especially thanks to Trump. Damage in Europe in the needy, cutting social programs, the influx of "refugees" who give nothing but crime, velfer like vampires, and breed like rats, at the same time we will destroy the traditional family and norms of behavior, the triumph of homosexuality and militant feminism, and .. The decline in living standards, although the "Soviet threat" seems to have disappeared and is spent on the defense industry from the "vicious Bolshevik Buryat airborne cavalry "is not necessary. But the stratification of society is growing. The middle class, and social programs as propaganda of the success of capitalism and democracy are no longer needed and they are getting rid of it. Ma is rapidly sliding down. in neo-feudalism, where the elite live in protected gated communities, and the rest where they have to.
          3. On one point I agree with you that there is no ideal, but if I had been given a choice, I would have chosen Stalin's Socialism. Although, to be honest, even Italy during Mussolini's time is preferable to the situation in the modern United States and Europe. Crime, destruction of norms, morals and traditions, decline in culture and living standards (compare books and films that were made in the United States in the 50s and 70s and now, hordes of parasites of welfarers, an influx of strangers who do not want to assimilate, do not want to work, but the rights are pumped. And all this is done for a reason, since money is spent on it. And Bismerck, Frederick the Great, Plato and Churchill spoke about democracy best of all. I do not understand at all as a person who survived the 90s and has the opportunity to compare the standard of living in the USSR under the "evil commies" with the level of life in modern Russia and the Ukrainian, can even say a word in defense of democracy and capitalism. And the Belarusians in general should pray to the Old Man, after him, you will have your 90s, the sky will seem like a sheepskin and you will taste "imperial love" and without Vaseline ...
        2. Baron pardus
          Baron pardus 2 October 2020 17: 52 New
          0
          1. About the "evolution" of democracy - thank you, laughed for a long time. Democracies do not evolve, they degenerate. See ancient Greece and Rome. See what your favorite Scandinavia has become. The "democratically" elected representatives voted and: they let in "refugees" from all kinds of Africa and the Middle East, caved in under homosexuals and feminists, and the egg-headed professors (by the way, about people with higher education) openly and seriously began to push the legalization of pedophilia using the templates that imposed "tolerance "to homo and trans sexually and society quickly began to rot.
          2. Capitalism with a human face is a myth. Yes, in the capitalist countries, social programs have been introduced as a countermeasure to the ideology of communism. By the way, the best social programs before WWII were in Fascist Italy, Hitler's Germany and Francoist Spain. And the middle class, when a worker at a factory could not strain too hard to buy a house in the suburbs, appeared precisely in the 50s. But now the communist "threat" disappeared and these social programs quickly began to curtail, only the parasites of the welders are increasing it, and the hard workers are getting worse. Honey insurance is wildly expensive, but it covers less and less, vacations are shortened, if you don't like it, you will always find more desperate "to take your place. Your capacity decreases. Over 29 years, the average income has grown from 55000 to 68000, and gasoline has risen in price 2.5 times, along with milk, education podokozhe 5 times, housing twice. I feel better, I am a veteran and I have excellent medical insurance, especially thanks to Trump. Damage in Europe in the needy, cutting social programs, the influx of "refugees" who give nothing but crime, velfer like vampires, and breed like rats, at the same time we will destroy the traditional family and norms of behavior, the triumph of homosexuality and militant feminism, and .. The decline in living standards, although the "Soviet threat" seems to have disappeared and is spent on the defense industry from the "vicious Bolshevik Buryat airborne cavalry "is not necessary. But the stratification of society is growing. The middle class, and social programs as propaganda of the success of capitalism and democracy are no longer needed and they are getting rid of it. Ma is rapidly sliding down. in neo-feudalism, where the elite live in protected gated communities, and the rest where they have to.
          3. On one point I agree with you that there is no ideal, but if I had been given a choice, I would have chosen Stalin's Socialism. Although, to be honest, even Italy during Mussolini's time is preferable to the situation in the modern United States and Europe. Crime, destruction of norms, morals and traditions, decline in culture and living standards (compare books and films that were made in the United States in the 50s and 70s and now, hordes of parasites of welfarers, an influx of strangers who do not want to assimilate, do not want to work, but the rights are pumped. And all this is done for a reason, since money is spent on it. And Bismerck, Frederick the Great, Plato and Churchill spoke about democracy best of all. I do not understand at all as a person who survived the 90s and has the opportunity to compare the standard of living in the USSR under the "evil commies" with the level of life in modern Russia and the Ukrainian, can even say a word in defense of democracy and capitalism. And the Belarusians in general should pray to the Old Man, after him, you will have your 90s, the sky will seem like a sheepskin and you will taste "imperial love" and without Vaseline ...
          1. pytar
            pytar 2 October 2020 18: 36 New
            +1
            I'm glad you have fun! good Me too, even though we laugh at different things ... laughing

            Nobody canceled the law of evolution. But for it to work, there must be competition! In biology, so, in public life, too! Degradation occurs when there is a monopole. Monopole is characteristic for authoritarian systems / in politics /, and under socialism and in economics. Democracy means competition in politics, capitalism, competition in the economy. Evolution worked because the system wallpapers were competing! If socialism were victorious all over the world, total stagnation and degradation would ensue! And since capitalism has won, competition has remained only within this system. Therefore, they begin to curtail social rights and democratic values. There is a retreat back! But this is a dynamic system, the movement does not stop in it! I don’t know which way humanity will develop further. Above, somewhere I described two of the most likely options.
            You say that you would choose a Stalinist model! The key word here is "choice"! Podruzomeevaetsya that everyone should have the right to choose, that is - democracy! Accordingly, if they do not like it, then they would have the right and the opportunity to change their choice further! The Stalinist model, and indeed all authoritarians, do not give the right to choose. In no country in the world, our "socialism" did not come and did not exist on the basis of the free choice of peoples. Therefore, it collapsed so easily. Systems sharpened for one super-leader are inherently unstable. As soon as he falls into senile marasmus or goes crazy / under dictators this usually happens /, the whole system begins to collapse!
            I have lived half my life in such a society. I will say categorically - never again, never!

            PP: I am Bulgarian - I am writing from Bulgaria. I have my own opinion about Belarus, but I don't want to stir up disputes here. I consider the real Belarusian flag BCHB. This is the end of the conversation with you, we have completely different perceptions. I wish you and your loved ones health and good luck! hi
    6. Baron pardus
      Baron pardus 2 October 2020 02: 18 New
      +1
      Until the age of 17, I lived in the USSR, Kiev, Nikolskaya Borshagovka district. Rodoki is not at all elite from the word at all. Father is a musician in the Kiev Kamerny, mother is a native of the Russian language and a librarian. In the USA since 1991. 6 years of service in the US Armed Forces. So, of course, in the USSR there was an elite, party functionaries, the beginning of the trust and others like them. Do you think everyone has equal opportunities in the US? A kid from Des Plaines, far from the worst area, will NEVER reach the heights open to people from Wilmette and Glenview. The wrong connections, different schools, well, the wrong money, and if so, then the wrong universities, which means the wrong acquaintances and connections. So over the 29 years of my life in the USA, I became convinced that for all my problems, socialism, especially the Stalinist type, is much preferable to the "invisible hand of the market" and the terrible combination of plutocracy with bydlocracy, which for some reason is called a democratic republic. Why would it be a blockade? Here's an example: today I'm making a money transfer for $ 876. The store does not make transfers more than 500 bucks. Assistan manager, by the way, white, 35 years old, makes a transfer for 500 bucks, and how much is needed for the second (876-500) cannot be calculated without a calculator. And such I can vote, along with nerks, drunks, Welfer parasites and all the other rabble and canals. What do you think, having money and the ability to buy media, how easy is it to wash out what, in theory, should be the brain of this contingent? The one that I do not believe in capitalism, or in market relations, or in an illusion called "freedom" or in a farce called democracy.
  2. mr.ZinGer
    mr.ZinGer 1 October 2020 12: 20 New
    +8
    I couldn't read it to the end.
    The financial interests of America, the torpedoes and the prospects for a brighter future are mixed in a heap.
    1. pytar
      pytar 1 October 2020 12: 42 New
      +4
      Yes. And it was difficult for me to finish reading all this compote. hi But the first picture and the last one look funny ... The author obviously wanted to suggest something, but it turned out unsuccessfully. lol
  3. Pavel57
    Pavel57 1 October 2020 12: 33 New
    0
    There is no new alternative model to capitalism, and the old one has discredited itself and is inoperable in many ways.
    1. pytar
      pytar 1 October 2020 12: 56 New
      +1
      Capitalism naturally replaced feudalism, in accordance with the law of evolution. Since nothing is eternal, and it has a limit of development. As expected, he tries to evolve into a non-soft following form. Socialism according to the Soviet model was a dead-end branch, it died like the dinosaurs became extinct. What development is possible further? In my humble opinion, there are two most probable scenarios: 1. Further concentration / monopolization and a departure from democratization, complete control over the masses, which in fact is also a return to feudalism, but to a new, more technological level. China and some US mayor are following this path. 2. The transition to a super-social society / guaranteed income per all /, democracy / referendums on all important issues / and all this is based on the development of technologies, which is already being experimented with in some countries / Switzerland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, etc. /. What essentially is such capitalist communism. True, technologies make it possible to replace a person in an ever increasing degree, respectively, and 1. and 2. become possible. They will likely cohabit and compete in parallel.
      1. Nehist
        Nehist 1 October 2020 18: 03 New
        +2
        China is following the direct path of National Socialism. No need to explain what this is to Kam. Incidentally, at one time South Africa was a typical National Socialist state. But here's how National Socialism ended then from the advanced African country South Africa is now in full, as they say ...
  4. parusnik
    parusnik 1 October 2020 12: 44 New
    +9
    I do not quite agree with what is written in the article, but with this
    Having absorbed all the best, the renewed socialism could save not only Russia, but our entire planet.
    on 100%
    1. A1845
      A1845 1 October 2020 12: 52 New
      +4
      Quote: parusnik
      Having absorbed all the best, renewed socialism could save
      business is small - you just need to "absorb all the best"
      1. tatra
        tatra 1 October 2020 13: 04 New
        0
        But while the manic critics of socialism own Russia, it is doomed to degradation, impoverishment, and the extinction of the Russian people.
    2. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 1 October 2020 13: 06 New
      +3
      And this eyesore prevents this!
  5. forty-eighth
    forty-eighth 1 October 2020 12: 45 New
    +5
    The author chose convenient facts that support his theory, “forgetting” about other facts. However, nothing new.
  6. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 1 October 2020 12: 54 New
    0
    Of course, this is only my personal opinion, which does not have to coincide with the opinions of other people, and even more so those who were obliged to have the necessary opinion.
    fool You are the only one, you have an honest opinion, or maybe on the contrary, it is you who signed up to have an ordered opinion, for a fraction of a small. request
  7. Ravik
    Ravik 1 October 2020 13: 10 New
    0
    Germany was not defeated, but betrayed in 18.
    WW1 veterans - the Germans did not forget this shame.
    20 years later, they hammered their humiliation into the brains of their sons after a shameful world ...
    It remains to find a charismatic personality and she was found - Schicklgruber.
    His ideas fell on fertile soil ...
    Of course, this is not the only reason for the outbreak of the world massacre, but also not the last nuance in this puzzle.
    The main culprit is England. Lover of raking in the heat with someone else's hands.
  8. Pavel57
    Pavel57 1 October 2020 13: 22 New
    +2
    Quote: pytar
    What development is possible further?

    A variant of neo-feudalism is more likely.
    1. pytar
      pytar 1 October 2020 13: 42 New
      0
      A variant of neo-feudalism is more likely.

      Perhaps it is. After all, those elites who hold in their hands technologies, resources / economic, intellectual, etc. / are the essence of the future path. In all cases, they will do what suits their best interests! And here an interesting question arises - what is in their interests? Oddly enough, the answer is not so unambiguous ... Local experiments have shown that the introduction of some communist practices, for example, a guaranteed income by all means, lead to the prospect of increasing the efficiency of the economy, while sharply reducing the contradictions in society! Democratization, with increasingly implicit control by the elites, has this effect too! Under neo-feudalism, the cost of keeping the system in relative stability is greater. So ... for the elites, the "nothing personal, just business" approach has a place to be. bully
  9. Maks1995
    Maks1995 1 October 2020 13: 46 New
    +3
    What a long opinion that.
    And in principle it is true.
    However, the dev is in the details. And that the author lumps everything into one heap and paints everything in one color.
    The vinaigrette. - what is wrong
  10. Petrik66
    Petrik66 1 October 2020 14: 38 New
    +5
    They invested money in the Geramanic industry to make money, try to think from this point of view at least once. Adik was a handshake in decent society, but Stalin became Joe's uncle only after the outbreak of the war. England supported Germany as opposed to France - classic Brit policy.
    With Japan, the facts are twisted: the plan for the attack by the carrier group on the parking lot at Pearl Harbor was developed a year before the attack on the Italians. The army was in the corral because of the failure on the Halkin goal, where it shook off to the fullest and because of the transition of the war with the Chinese into a sluggish massacre with an obscure outcome. In 1941, before the attack on Hawaii, the world situation looked somewhat different than in 1945.
    Again I read about good Germans, whom the insidious London and Washington confused and forced to arrange a mega-Kyrgan for the whole planet. Why do we think that the Germans potentially treated us very well and are treating us now ??????? Germany was and will be our enemy. For reference - Who conceived and carried out the coup in Ukraine? There, after all, the Germans stirred up everything, and then their Americans simply moved and turned the situation to their liking. And Navalny flew to Washington? or was there not enough kerosene?
  11. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 1 October 2020 15: 14 New
    +5
    In my opinion, the author is in captivity of socialist dogmatic clichés, adjusting little related events to these images.
    Japan's participation in a new world war was a natural consequence of its policy almost at the beginning of the 20th century. Having impressed successfully, but not abundantly enough in the First World War, the Japanese got a taste and caught the main meaning - the action will repeat after a while, and in order to grab a sweeter and larger piece, you just need to prepare in advance for Act number 2. The main difficulty was that even then it was clear that in BB2 Japan would have to come into conflict with the Western powers and / or harass its Asian neighbors. These were interrelated things that the Japanese have painstakingly prepared for since the 1920s. They simply could not help but prepare in reality, being the most developed Asian empire, surrounded by loose colonies and backward neighbors.
    Their calculation was made at a sharp entrance, seizure of the initiative, overturning expansionism and the conclusion of peace at the peak of their power and achievements, they imagined their "entrance" into BB2 as a kind of "Russo-Japanese War 2.0". But they did not calculate the trends of time and technology, the amount of free resources of the United States, etc.

    When I read that "Hitler was prepared" I am moved by the fantasies of the one who invented it. Germany got into the First World War at the peak of a nationalist impulse, the post-war complication of its situation could only slow it down, but not completely extinguish it. The figure of a player based on these feelings and revanchism itself could not but arise, because the European fortification was laid in the very structure of the German state after Bismarck. Using civilized methods within the framework of capitalism of the first half of the 20th century - there was basically no way to overcome this) It was impossible to spread the Germans around the surrounding states and wait for them to look at each other like a wolf - and in one state they were too educated, hardworking and selfish, so that what happened does not happen.
    Having limited their aspirations as a single nation within the framework of the external pressure of capitalism of France / Britain / USA and the conditions of the shameful peace - it was foolish to expect that they would say "Well, Okay."
    There were a couple of such Hitlers in every pub, and although he was a good orator, for quite a long time he looked like a kind of freaky character who would never find a common language with German high society and bankers. When he became a larger figure - the German leftists breathed in the back of the NSDAP, and conditionally "overwhelming" him meant that soon another speaker would come to his place (and there were still enough of them in the NSDAP), or the communists would turn around. The British were scared to death of the German left, because they were more articulate and washed-out opponents of Britain than their Soviet counterparts, to put it mildly, divorced from understanding European aspirations and living standards.
    Hitler quickly grasped this and integrated into the scheme, "selling" this product until the moment when he finally took hold in the minds of the nation.

    This is how dictators are often formed - outside forces see them as quite compromise "passing" figures against the background of their opponents.
    1. Knell wardenheart
      Knell wardenheart 1 October 2020 15: 34 New
      +4
      And yes - about socialism as opposed to capitalism.

      When one involuntarily ponders "which was better" - you come to such a moment - there was capitalism and fought against socialism. About 70 years. During this time, capitalism has raised the standard of living of the population. countries, the level of their education, corrected his line on environmental issues, and besides that, he still had resources for technological dominance in most items of civilian products, and well, even if it is great to underestimate half of military products.
      During the same time, the socialist states raised the standard of living of their population by a smaller number of points (China's breakthrough after the collapse of the USSR was due to symbiotic ties with the capitalist countries and abundant, cheap labor force, and not at all the successes of socialism), the planned economy, with all the huge experience all the same, it constantly failed and created a deficit / insufficient quality - most of the goods in the trash were losing to capitalist counterparts (in terms of purchaseability and payback, and often in quality).
      In matters of expanding the rights and freedoms of citizens, socialism also almost immediately missed the initiative to capitalism - social. states were unable to provide their residents with a sufficient level of comfort in work, leisure and living, which created an ever-increasing trim of their outflow to the capitalist state.
      In matters of coverage of activities and the quality of propaganda, they lost to the dry capital countries, which, in fact, resulted in the collapse of the Warsaw Dog and the USSR.

      All this is impossible not to notice if you look at the question without illusions. But it is worth sharing the understanding of the issue itself - there is a kind of struggle of "good and evil", considering it as a near-religious dogma and far from the nature of things as they are, and there is the concept of "evolutionary struggle" - in which good or evil does not win, but a more diversely organized system wins , or a more sharpened system occupies "its" niche. Socialism in most states turned out to be neither more perfect than capitalism, nor more "sharpened" - that is, not effective. Everything on top of this is the theorist.
      1. tacet
        tacet 1 October 2020 21: 57 New
        +3
        "For 70 years, capitalism has raised the standard of living" (at the expense of education - I do not agree) and further in the text. But for what reason? Is it because there was an alternative to him and in order not to lose everything, he had to give a part? I proceed from the fact that over the past 30 years, capitalism has significantly reduced the standard of living of the population of its countries (the EU and the USA, I mean). In my opinion, this happened due to the lack of a competitive system.
        1. Knell wardenheart
          Knell wardenheart 1 October 2020 22: 51 New
          +2
          Let's take a look at the technological advances in the United States. It is customary in our country to criticize Western education and glorify Soviet education - and this is partly justified, but it does not fit well into the overall picture as a "strong thesis". In practice, the West launched the Internet, and not ours (our OGAS gave birth for a long time and painfully, in the end it all ended in nothing), in the West, a practical implementation of first a transistor and then a microcircuit was born, in the West they first created a nuclear weapon and a working nuclear reactor ( if we consider the so-called Chicago woodpile as such), as well as a computer, it was also first created in the west (even if we take not the USA but fascist Germany with the developments of K. Zuse)
          This I am now considering a pure large-scale - technological innovations concerning everyday, small things and created / implemented at the same time in the West - are generally incalculable.
          Starting from a variety of synthetic fabrics and dyes, the first antibiotics, to powerful hydroacoustic technology, encryption units, high-precision machines and production lines. In terms of the depth and breadth of training - yes, perhaps the Soviet specialist exceeded the foreign one by a head. But this was more than offset by opportunities for additional education, the breadth of career opportunities and an order of magnitude better organization of labor in the capital. countries, which more effectively distributed the levels of really capable people and those who did not differ in this. So if we talk about the letter in this matter - yes, education in the USSR was good.
          But not everyone - and having graduated enough good specialists in the exact sciences, we also graduated incompetent management, economists, planners and, in general, our managing staff were terrible.

          The same Von Braun, when he directed cosm. the US program - relied in this program on an increasingly (the closer to "Apollo") an insignificant% of German specialists - and an increasing% of American specialists graduated from this very "weak" education of capitalists.

          As for the alternative, I completely agree! It was the USSR and Co. that made the bourgeoisie in the West comb and crumble - but in the end they gave birth to a consumer society, in general - in my opinion, even a worse option than the predatory colonial capitalism of the early 20th century. However, if we consider the standard of living in terms of the breadth of access to opportunities, in this regard, capitalism has everything OK as before. True, with the proviso that Capitalisms are now different (which did not exist before World War II) - the same European, Scandinavian, American, Asian and Russian - these are completely different things, with different efficiency and degree of people's access to goods.

          The current American is certainly decadent. I wouldn't say that about European ..
          1. Nehist
            Nehist 2 October 2020 00: 24 New
            +2
            Expanded, efficiently and well-arranged. Yet socialism is very different. I have already written above about the success of National Socialism, which is now being demonstrated in every possible way by China and the so-called Arab monarchies where double National Socialism is flourishing in some places, supported by Islamic fundamentalism. That from the point of view of Marx is incapable
            1. Knell wardenheart
              Knell wardenheart 2 October 2020 01: 32 New
              +3
              I suspect that an overly practical perception of Marx is harmful - after all, Marx is a pure theorist. Deep theorists like great mathematicians or existential philosophers are a specific breed of people who are difficult (very often) to be called 100% normal from the point of view of an ordinary person.
              Marx lived in an era of national-industrial upsurges and, accordingly, sang about it - it was EASY for him to perceive the potential rapprochement of personalities for the sake of a common goal, the environment that gave birth to him saturated at the same time with German romanticism and German perception of order. Both that and another were also things ahem ... specific, not very suitable for exactly "Implementation" somewhere, except for Germany in those years or, possibly, Great Britain.
              Like Campanella, he, as a utopian theorist, shoved all the dirty work under the rug, leaving these fabrications to the implementers of his ideas in practice. And they improvised. In Lenin, in Stalin, in Mao Zedong, etc. Or they buried themselves very deeply in the letter of the text and interpretation, sometimes recalling the interpreters of the Torah or the Koran. At least that's how I see it ..

              Of course, the question of an effective socio-economic system is an open and interesting question. But it always comes down to looking at extraction and stimulation methods. Capitalism answers these questions - buy, rent, hire. Socialism in the form in which they tried to build it responds - to take away, powder the brain and take away, coerce. And if in the cap. In the (modern) system, excess pressure from the employer is regulated by market mechanisms and free migration of labor force, forcing to find some compromises between the employee-employer-state, then in the case of most socialisms, a person was essentially considered as a figure devoid of independence because OBLIGED. Don't get me wrong - I myself was captivated by socialist ideas in my youth, but a sober deepening into history and the observation of permanent successes created discord with tension for these successes and the difference of facts and interpretations that grew over time (until the collapse of the USSR)

              I think that the very social. the idea is still not bad, but it is desirable for her to lose this mossy dogmatism, and rely neither on Marx and Lenin, but on modern information technologies, high and sober professionalism and adequate planning, in which a person will definitely NOT be abstract and free and constructive discussions will be the norm for finding the perfect compromise. Now our society is INFINitely far from this, not to mention the socialists themselves ..
  12. Pavel57
    Pavel57 1 October 2020 15: 50 New
    +1
    Quote: A1845
    Having absorbed all the best, renewed socialism could save
    business is small - you just need to "absorb all the best"

    It sounds utopian, those who have the resources for this are definitely not interested.
  13. NF68
    NF68 1 October 2020 16: 18 New
    0
    Even then, the Americans were not bad at fighting with someone else's hands. Japan in Southeast Asia, Germany in Europe should have weakened the BI for the United States, and the Americans did it very well, although the Americans themselves were not very comfortable at times. BI wanted to use Germany as a counterweight to France, whose army after WWI was considered the strongest in the EU. As a result, the British overdid it and their empire soon after WWII began to rapidly collapse, and the United States took over its tidbits.
  14. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 1 October 2020 16: 23 New
    +1
    Wealthy capitalist states can afford some form of socialism.
    The first kindergartens were created in Germany in the middle of the 70th century. The first state pension system was also created in Germany at the end of the XNUMXth century. It was created on the initiative of the "iron chancellor" Otto von Bismarck for those "who cannot work because of their age" - then people left for a well-deserved rest after XNUMX years.
    In 1916, despite the war, the retirement age in Germany was reduced to 65 years and remained so for almost 100 years.
    Following Germany, in 1891, Denmark introduced the pension system, in 1898 New Zealand, in 1908 Great Britain, and in 1910 France. It introduced compulsory pension insurance of employees for old age, disability and loss of breadwinner.

    Only in 1930, the USSR adopted the “Regulation on Pensions and Benefits for Social Insurance”, and in 1932, the legislatively established age for retirement was 55 years for women and 60 for men. Finally, the pension system in the Soviet Union was established only in 1956, together with the adoption of the law "On state pensions."

    I'm not talking about the notorious American food stamps - food stamps that are issued to citizens who have no income or have low income. This program worked in the 30s and 40s and began to work again in 1961 and is valid to this day.

    The classics of Marxism-Leninism taught us that "progressive socio-economic formations, as a result of the growth of the level of productive forces and the struggle of antagonistic classes, must replace the obsolete ones."
    This theory worked great. It was called "five-member" and according to the number of formations, in accordance with the prevailing production relations and forms of ownership, it was divided into:
    primitive communal;
    slaveholding;
    feudal;
    capitalist;
    communist.
    (In the five-term formational scheme, socialism was considered as the first phase of the highest — communist — social formation.)

    Indeed, the primitive communal system was replaced by a slave system. Spartacus could boldly lead his troops under the slogan "Long live feudalism - the bright future of mankind!", Because feudalism is more progressive than slavery, and so on. For the time being - for the time being, everything was in order.
    During the parallel coexistence of the capitalist and socialist systems, the latter positioned itself as an alternative to capitalism, was even attractive and had followers around the world. However, since the end of the 80s of the last century, this theory has been in a state of crisis, for capitalism theoretically should have been replaced by socialism, and then communism, but alas ...
    In other words, socialism rested in the Bose, communism was never born, and capitalism is doomed to indefinite decay, because today there is no real replacement for it, alas ... request

    Socialism, of course, can also be cultivated by poor states if they close their borders and their population agrees to work for a guaranteed ration. But by and large, beggars cannot build socialism. As previous commentators have already written here, such socialism degenerates into some kind of exaggerated forms of feudalism:
    Quote: pytar
    Socialism, in the form in which they tried to build it in the USSR and other socialist countries, was essentially a modification of feudalism. A totalitarian society with a complete concentration of power, economic and ideological resources in the hands of a privileged clan. Instead of a classless society, a caste society was created. Socialism in that form was doomed.
    hi
  15. nikvic46
    nikvic46 1 October 2020 16: 35 New
    +3
    Now we have every mouthpiece of the era. Here at hand he talks about the caste society of the past country. Either he casts a shadow on the fence, or he never lived in the USSR. Now we have, of course, a casteless society. But where did the untouchable homeless come from. Without a document, you can't go out into the street. Anyone who does not have a medical policy will not dare to go to the doctor. And even those who have it, look, if the term of its use has passed. Is this not a division into castes? In his time in 1948, Adenauer said that boundless capitalism served the rise to fascism. Although an enemy, he said for sure.
  16. yehat2
    yehat2 1 October 2020 17: 09 New
    0
    The author of the article voiced the well-established versions that are popular in our country and there is some truth in them, but not all.
    Nobody was preparing Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt's calculation was for much smaller incidents, and preferably in China. Besides, people should not be considered idiots. Back in 27, Stalin voiced what we all read here. And he was not the only one who was so smart. I would also like to touch upon the one who won the pwm. England didn't win nifiga. Yes, she had the status of a winner, but she simply changed a competitor - a German business for an American one. France suffered catastrophic losses. The only real winner in PMV is the USA. It's the same in World War II The only state that remains in real gain is the United States. The USSR acquired territory, technology and international prestige, but at such a cost that it is obvious that a peaceful move would have been much better.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 2 October 2020 09: 46 New
      0
      Quote: yehat2
      Nobody was preparing Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt's calculation was for much smaller incidents, and preferably in China.

      In the Philippines: Isabelle, Lanikai, Molly Moore.
      Yes, I think that bait. And could bring evidence. But I will not do it. And you do not try either.
      © Admiral Hart
      Moreover, according to the pre-war plans, the Philippines was already "written off." No, of course, the army men were ordered to retreat to Bataan and sit there until the arrival of the fleet ... only the fleet, even with the best development of events, would appear in the Philippines no earlier than mid-1943.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 3 October 2020 02: 38 New
        -1
        Quote: Alexey RA
        No, of course, the army men were ordered to retreat to Bataan and sit there until the fleet approached ...

        Judging by the activities of the Marshal in those days, as well as by the lost B-17s, which were in short supply in December 41, this is too smart a plan for the American army of 41.

        It is much more likely that Marshal and MacArthur did not know about the plans of the fleet at all and didn't want to know.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 5 October 2020 18: 32 New
          0
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          It is much more likely that Marshal and MacArthur did not know at all about the plans of the fleet and did not want to know.

          Judging by the activities of MacArthur in the morning of December 7 - he is about the plans of the army didn't know at all and didn't want to know... For the lost army B-17s are entirely on his conscience.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 5 October 2020 22: 34 New
            0
            Come on you.

            Even people are depressed, it happens. I caught the sad girl.

            Then he generally said "marry it all with a horse" and drove off aimlessly.
    2. Cherry Nine
      Cherry Nine 3 October 2020 02: 40 New
      -1
      Quote: yehat2
      The USSR acquired territory, technology and international prestige, but at such a cost that it is obvious that a peaceful move would have been much better.

      Not understood. The USSR acquired, you write correctly. In the end, it turned out to be a plus, so what's the talk about price?
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 3 October 2020 15: 46 New
        0
        no, I do not think that the USSR has come out on top.
        half of the country has been burned out, minus, roughly speaking, 20 million, stocks are at zero, trading on a large scale is possible only with hostile England and the United States. The United States is making plans for a total nuclear bombing of the country. Somehow it doesn't look like an acquisition. Yes, thanks to Stalin and the efforts of many people, the USSR received a lot for all this, but much less than
        if there was no war at all.
        1. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 3 October 2020 18: 05 New
          +1
          Quote: yehat2
          received a lot for all this, but much less than
          if there was no war at all.

          If there were no war at all, then the western border of the USSR would pass along the Pskov-Dniester line, and from the West and the East - the enemies of the USSR, with whom the cold war from time to time turns into a hot one. After WWII, the western border (control) of the USSR passed along the Lubeck-Trieste line, Soviet agents played a leading role in the governments of France and Italy, enjoyed influence in Britain and the United States, there was an urgent threat of the coming to power of the Communists in Japan, which was actually stopped by the introduction one-party system. If we take Mao's victory in China as a result of WWII, then the Stalinist empire, as a result, turned from Denmark to the Philippines.

          The territories conquered in the West were much richer than the old ones, the conquered population was much better. Even if we forget about the Soviet control of Europe, the population of the USSR itself increased during the WWII. 1936 census - 162 million people, operational data for 1945 - 172 million people.

          We should not allow the late Soviet liars to habitually replace the Second World War and WWII. The Second World War was not very successful, but in WWII the USSR won without loss.
  17. fa2998
    fa2998 1 October 2020 17: 31 New
    +1
    Quote: pytar
    I do not know if the US is doomed, but I have no doubt that major shocks await them. Too many controversies have accumulated in American society. hi

    And we have solid prosperity, peace and quiet! The Americans, with all the problems, have the right to choose (choose the lesser evil). And we have AUTHORITY. hi
  18. nikvic46
    nikvic46 1 October 2020 18: 53 New
    +1
    I do not know what the new socialism will be. Let us take into account all the mistakes of the old. But it collapsed not only because of mistakes. The human factor also cannot be ignored. Or, as they say, "birthmarks of capitalism." This is servility, common cronyism or nepotism , bribery.We today acquired such human traits that a Soviet person did not have. There was a story "The Blue Boy". I can imagine that everyone thought about this little boy. And everything is simple. This kid got run over by a car. And the description of what he saw in com. We have been spoiled by being. And we are striving for socialism in such high spirits.
  19. Aleks2000
    Aleks2000 1 October 2020 20: 13 New
    +2
    Long and chaotic.
    Putin and the Kremlin have clearly explained: the Communists have ruined everything, planted a bomb, there will be no return, but there will be democracy, liberalism, development 2010,20,30, and "well, you understand, you can't touch the Chubais" (literally).

    And by the way, here on the site there were articles with scans of the editorials of the USSR newspapers, where exactly aggressive Poland attacked peaceful Germany
    1. Niel-le-Calais
      Niel-le-Calais 1 October 2020 21: 13 New
      -1
      Quote: Alex2000
      And by the way, here on the site there were articles with scans of the editorials of the USSR newspapers, where exactly aggressive Poland attacked peaceful Germany

      The USSR did not have its own reporters in Europe.
      Information from the European ones was reprinted. Well, depending on the fluctuations of the party lines
      Before the pact, there were fascists, after the Germans and England and France, the arsonists.
      About Poland
      The general tone of Soviet newspapers was rather negative towards Poland and neutral towards violators of the state border.
      Leading publications of the country published on their pages excerpts from the appeal of Adolf Hitler to the military in the Reichstag, where he super-cynically accused Poland of unleashing hostilities. The Fuhrer tried to make the most of the so-called Gleiwitz incident on August 31, when German soldiers dressed in Polish uniforms seized a radio station and, allegedly on behalf of the Poles, broadcast an anti-German appeal.
      Here is his appeal. It was reprinted
      “The Polish state refused to settle the conflict peacefully, as I wanted, and took up arms. The Germans in Poland are subjected to bloody terror and driven out of their homes. Several cases of border violations, which are unbearable for a great state, prove that Poland does not intend to respect the borders of the Reich. To end this madness, I have no choice but to continue to oppose force from now on. The German army will fight for the honor and life of a reborn Germany without hesitation. I expect that every soldier, true to the eternal German military tradition, will always remember that he is a representative of the Great National Socialist Germany. "
      Nothing special. The party line simply changed after the pact with Hitler.
      As for the author and his article, he always has poor Russia, everyone wants to destroy her, everyone feeds her enemies, everyone uses her for her own destruction .. And she herself, poor unfortunate, does not affect anything.
      Bredyatina with conspiracy theory.
      RI / USSR are very influential countries, which themselves created many of their interests. Sometimes they did not coincide with Europe, for which there was competition.
      If the author lived in France, for sure, his passion for England would have reached the climax of creative writing.
      Everything was normal. The usual competition between countries. And conspiracy theory just with RenTV.
  20. Polymer
    Polymer 1 October 2020 20: 19 New
    +2
    the renewed socialism could save not only Russia, but our entire planet.

    Quote: nikvic46
    I don't know what the new socialism will be like.

    This is the problem that no one knows. I just haven't heard of such people. Basically, the supporters of socialism all boil down to criticism of the current capitalist system, opposing it with the Stalinist model of socialism. But today production relations are already very different from the Stalinist time, therefore that model is not applicable now.
    On the other hand, on the eve of October 1917, the Bolsheviks also did not have a ready-made concept of state structure. They did not even think about building a socialist state. If anyone remembers, Marx denied the possibility of building a communist society in a single country - only a world revolution, which was to begin in a country with the most developed capitalist system - England, Germany, France. Almost until the end of 1918, Lenin was also convinced of the possibility of the victory of communism only through a world revolution. It was only after the defeat of the revolution in Germany that it became clear that it was necessary to build a state - not to give power back to the liberals. It should be noted that they did not give up before new challenges.
    So, the Bolsheviks did not have a ready-made model of a socialist state, but there were still partial intelligible proposals: power to the Soviets, land to peasants, factories to workers, etc. Now there are no intelligible proposals from anyone at all. Perhaps it is the development of these proposals that should be dealt with in the first place?
    PS And the power of the Soviets, as a result, was transformed into the dictatorship of the Bureaucracy. And this discredits the basic ideas of Marxism-Leninism to the greatest extent.
  21. Unknown
    Unknown 1 October 2020 21: 05 New
    +1
    German National Socialism did not grow from scratch; it has been cultivated in Germany since the time of Bismarck. so that the soil for Hitler was heavily fertilized with ideas of German exceptionalism. and rightly noted about Britain .. the rules and rules there, the Hanoverian dynasty, which quietly renamed the Windsor dynasty with the beginning of WWI, so as not to irritate the country, and still try not to advertise this as much as possible. but ties with the historical homeland remained. The authority of the monarchy in Britain is high, and any politician must reckon with it. thanks to the Soviet regime, we now have clever people who say that the government was bad and we live badly because the thief was not needed, and capitalism is better, and they put Europe as an example. but at the same time they forget that compulsory primary education was introduced in the same Prussia in 1717, and in Russia after the VOR. 200 years difference ?! the first university such as Bologna, founded in 1088, and in Russia in 1755 in Moscow. feel the difference. It was only during the Soviet era that higher educational institutions began to grow like mushrooms after rain. Even now, there are institutes in every regional center, or even several. In Russia, not when they did not live, as in Europe. .....
    ..... but they have ........
    ..... no need to compare our mentality is completely different. only in Russia they say ,, life is a penny ,,. they have ,, time is money ,,. under Soviet rule, in the late sixties, and before perestroika, the peasants lived well. and now it is scary to look at what the villages have become, in Pskov, Novgorod, Kaluga, and all of central Russia. like after the war. this is such capitalism.
    1. yehat2
      yehat2 4 October 2020 03: 20 New
      -1
      when people compare "we have them," they forget that Europe has unique economic conditions, which is why it has been a technological leader for centuries. Let's start with the population - a billion people can live there without a deficit. And this is not only the climate - the logistics are extremely convenient, the distances are small.
      When capitalism came, Europe was ideally suited for the concentration of capital and started like a rocket.
      However, it is worth recalling that the source of capitalism's profit is only external expansion.
      If capital is everywhere, the total profit is zero and the cannibalism of those who are weaker begins - you all see how the United States is devouring the weak. So in the future, it is possible that concentration in Europe will no longer give them natural advantages.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 4 October 2020 06: 22 New
        +1
        Quote: yehat2
        Let's start with the population - a billion people can live there without deficit

        Some kind of crazy argument. A billion people can live anywhere. Urbanized Netherlands, waterless Israel are large agricultural exporters.
        Quote: yehat2
        the logistics are extremely convenient, the distances are small.

        Why do you think so? Large and sparsely populated European countries: Sweden, Finland. The climate, by the way, is still the same. I remember that I once went to Sweden for May, I froze like a dog, I even got sick.

        Outside Europe: Canada, Australia. Yes, any large country in fact - the United States, China, even Japan and Germany - several urbanized zones and a huge almost empty space - taiga, mountains, deserts.
        Quote: yehat2
        the source of capitalism's profit is only external expansion.

        Pure delirium. You are confusing capitalism with a horde of nomads.
        1. yehat2
          yehat2 4 October 2020 21: 35 New
          -2
          Why did you start a silly sophistry?
          Even the most stubborn historians did not consider the Scandinavian peninsula as the basis of Europe.
          a billion lives in India, but HOW does it live? Europeans in a similar territory can afford many times more consumption. Only a part of China with its two harvests per year is comparable to Europe, but they have an ambush with a number of basic resources - coal, metal, etc. and really fertile and comfortable land is less.

          Well, and the third point, you did not prove anything at all - you said that it was nonsense, period.
          Nomads - it's like you - just croaked that he was right and type enough.
          Let me remind you, if you don't understand, capital makes a profit from the sale of goods. An unsold item is an empty space. If capital is everywhere, profit can only be made if someone goes bankrupt.
          It is not such a miracle that finances are mined out of nowhere, as crypto is trying to present.
          As a result, the whole fairy tale about capital comes down to what is happening now - growing corporations destroy all competition and then die themselves, because without competition, they simply turn into a fascist instrument of oppression and destroy the very basis of trade in their niche. Worse still, the most mobile and vicious capital in the struggle is financial and speculative. In principle, they contradict real production and it is this part of capital that crushes everyone under itself, in fact, squeezing the real material benefits of society.
          And if you, the eccentric from mmm, want to argue with me what I said, first study the issue, and do not write nonsense.
          According to what you have written, you do not understand ANYTHING in the economic structure.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 4 October 2020 22: 52 New
            0
            Is the economic structure Malthusian in retelling for mentally disabled people?

            The wealth of the citizens of Western countries - in general - is constantly growing. The wealth of people on Earth - in general - is constantly growing. Malthusianism is an apocalyptic heresy.
            1. yehat2
              yehat2 5 October 2020 09: 22 New
              -1
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              The wealth of the citizens of Western countries - in general - is constantly growing.

              Were you out of zombie school yesterday? Read if you don't know
              for example, the average US citizen from 1948 to 1998 became twice as poor.
              there is such an expression - official statistics. No, have not heard?
  22. Pavel57
    Pavel57 1 October 2020 23: 18 New
    0
    Quote: pytar
    Under neofeudalism, the costs of maintaining the system in relative stability are greater

    Now the question is not about the costs of the system, but about the preservation of power.
  23. sleeve
    sleeve 2 October 2020 05: 04 New
    0
    In principle, the system and the ideology are two big differences. And the system and organization of the state are "two big differences-2". The principle of socialism is clear through the redistribution of surplus value. And the ideology of "justice" is not new either. And if you look at the basis of Marx, then it is better not to have what is written in the tablets.
    In fact, the factor of communism changed only the goal. Now only destruction, not submission. But in general, everything is the same, territory, wealth, a little population for servants. That's all the plans. Hitler spearheading the attack? Of course. But if the empire had survived and survived, then 200% would have received "its own Hitler" in about the same 40-41.
  24. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 2 October 2020 09: 55 New
    +1
    Now about the “sacred sacrifice”. How could a surprise attack happen if from the end of 1940 the Americans knew the diplomatic codes of Japan and all Japanese diplomatic correspondence was not a secret for the United States?

    The diplomatic correspondence does not contain plans for the Army and Navy. Even knowing the date and time of the strike, it is impossible to determine the force and location of the strike by correspondence from the Foreign Ministry.
    In addition, the British leadership had access to classified information from the Japanese naval forces and would hardly have hidden the strike plans from their closest allies.

    Then the British leadership should have known about the Japanese torpedo bombers at Kuantan.

    By the way, to the question about American intelligence:
    The first rumors about a new Japanese fighter began to arrive from China back in 1940. Imagine the astonishment of the US Naval Attaché Aviation Assistant, Lieutenant Commander Stephen Jurika, when he, attending the annual military sports festival in January 1941 (where the Japanese navy and army traditionally measured the length of their barrels), discovered this newest aircraft, as they say, in nature.
    And not just put on public display (and with the opportunity to inspect even the cockpit), but also kindly provided with a plate with the main flight performance characteristics, including weight, engine power and speed indicators. The diplomat with the pilot's "wings" on his jacket conscientiously rewrote all the numbers, visually estimated the dimensions of the fighter and the wing area, assessed the armament, skin structure, instruments in the cockpit, and then also observed the car in action when it competed in the sky with army fighters. Then he sent a detailed report to the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI).
    However, Stephen Jerica experienced even greater amazement a couple of months later when he received a response from ONI to his report. As he later recalled - the first and last response in his entire two-year service in Tokyo. The angry superiors strongly advised the Lieutenant Commander to no longer send such nonsense and misinformation to Washington. American aviation experts unanimously stated that a machine with such a set of characteristics simply cannot exist in nature (especially with regard to the ratio of dimensions and weight, as well as the declared flight range). Even more absurd they found the very idea that "backward Asians", capable at best of producing deteriorated copies of obsolete Western aircraft, were able to build a fighter superior to the latest machines of the US Navy. Likewise, reports from China about the performance of the A6M were subsequently ignored (for example, the report that the nearly 6-meter wing of the downed Zero was so light that two people could lift it).
    © Nikolay Kolyadko
    1. Per se.
      2 October 2020 11: 10 New
      0
      Good afternoon, Alexey, not a fan of creating a "dissertation defense" from a publication, but you would like to answer.
      Quote: Alexey RA
      The diplomatic correspondence does not contain plans for the Army and Navy. Even knowing the date and time of the strike, it is impossible to determine the force and location of the strike by correspondence from the Foreign Ministry.
      Diplomatic correspondence always reflects preparations for war, especially since Japanese diplomats had to pass a declaration of war to the United States before the attack on Pearl Harbor, but it turned out later, to the delight of American politicians, to Japanese treachery.

      The Americans knew about a possible attack on Pearl Harbor, moreover, from the very beginning. In general, the plan for war with Japan, called "Rainbow", was approved by the joint council of the US Army and Navy on July 30, 1939. In accordance with it, preparations for war were carried out, the plan unconditionally confirmed the extraordinary importance of the Hawaiian Islands as a base for the US Navy. The position of the United States at that time was determined by one goal - to get involved in the war in any way, and in the Far East, and not in Europe, where the Third Reich and the Soviet Union were to mutually destroy each other.

      Now, about "Connection Z", it is hardly correct to compare the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the sunken "Repals" with "Prince of Wales", which were tied to Singapore. The Japanese itself spotted the British squadron even on the transition in the Indian Ocean, the sides were already fighting with each other, the British, by definition, could not expect an attack.

      As far as I remember, we have already talked about the Pacific Ocean, whether Japan could win. I then said that only in one case, when having gained dominance at sea, I would have carried out a landing on Alaska and the Aleutian Islands, with a further advance along the coast to California. Ideally, even during the capture of Pearl Harbor, when the attack with the aircraft carrier would be followed by assault forces from battleships, cover ships and troop transports.
      Then, perhaps, the brave Yankees, if they had not capitulated, then signed a peace, such as what our tsarism had to do after Tsushima. You were in favor of a classic plot in history, and, as you know, it was unpromising for Japan.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 2 October 2020 11: 36 New
        0
        Quote: Per se.
        Diplomatic correspondence always reflects preparations for war, especially since Japanese diplomats had to pass a declaration of war to the United States before the attack on Pearl Harbor, but it turned out later, to the delight of American politicians, to Japanese treachery.

        Right. But diplomatic correspondence is unlikely to contain phrases like "after transmitting this note, Nagumo's compound will strike Pearl Harbor". smile
        So the time is known. But the Pacific Ocean is big. And the most likely place of impact was the Philippines. Although there, MacArthur failed everything - having managed to expose his Air Force under attack, already having information about the raid on P-X.
        Quote: Per se.
        The Americans knew about a possible attack on Pearl Harbor, moreover, from the very beginning.

        In theory. That is why they tyrannized the local air defense exercises throughout the fall of 1941.
        But in practice, this was only one of the possible options. If the Americans knew 100% about the blow to P-X, they would not bind Short and Kimmel hand and foot with style directives "not to increase combat readiness - this could provoke Japan to terminate negotiations“In the end, a successfully repelled strike on the main fleet base is still an act of unprovoked aggression from Japan and an excellent casus belli.
  25. Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 2 October 2020 14: 54 New
    -1
    I see some kind of conspiracy competition has begun.

    Samsonov is no longer the king of the topper's history, now he is the first among equals.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 2 October 2020 17: 03 New
      0
      Quote: Cherry Nine
      I see some kind of conspiracy competition has begun.

      Samsonov is no longer the king of the topper's history, now he is the first among equals.

      I'm still waiting for someone to write that Truman was a Soviet agent - because only thanks to him the USSR got back the Kuril Islands and South Sakhalin, and also significantly strengthened its positions in China. smile
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 2 October 2020 18: 03 New
        0
        Generally speaking, Truman's achievements in helping the USSR are a capitulating "doctrine of containment" and China's surrender. The achievements you mentioned are the results of Yalta, that is, Roosevelt. Chronologically, Truman can be blamed for the transfer of a large part of the German nuclear and missile programs to the USSR, but this is the merit of Eisenhower, and to a lesser extent Marshall. Truman avoided such questions.

        In general, the viola story is, of course, interesting. Only unfinished. The Arkhangelsk-Astrakhan line along it is the maximum that the USSR can count on. But the configuration of Europe without the Reich and without the USSR is, of course, interesting. What did a newspaper close to the Polish Foreign Ministry offer there? AND Odessa Will Chernomorsk be declared a free city? I demand an alternative about the Black Sea Hansa! Brian, hello !?
  26. Radikal
    Radikal 3 October 2020 15: 00 New
    +1
    Quote: pytar
    Well, the cowardly twisting began. None of the enemies of socialism is capable of honest, objective, adequate discussions about the history of their country, about WHAT and WHO is better for their country and people.

    Irina, in vain you are trying to provoke me ... in vain ... laughing When dealing with people of your kind who initially consider each different opinion "enemy", and the person who expressed it "enemy", oh no "honest, objective, adequate discussions" and there can be no question. I recently spoke with an individual who fanatically believes that "The earth is flat"... He reacted to the arguments with growing aggression. And I realized that this person really lives on a flat Earth, his thinking is limited in a two-coordinate system of X / Y. There he does not have X / Y / Z / t, he is unable to imagine something that goes beyond the ego of representation. This concludes our "dialogue" with you. yes

    Before you teach someone, sort it out in yourself, in Bulgaria. Where did your industry go, and what happened to agriculture, but on the other hand, you have the opportunity to "objective, adequate discussions". lol wassat
  27. Radius
    Radius 5 October 2020 06: 07 New
    0
    Quote: Knell Wardenheart
    and rely neither on Marx and Lenin, but on modern information technologies, high and sober professionalism and adequate planning, in which a person will definitely NOT be abstract and free and constructive discussions will be the norm for finding an ideal compromise. Now our society is INFINitely far from this, not to mention the socialists themselves ..

    Exactly! It remains only to develop a model and "run" it.