Is Russia capable of confronting the United States in a hybrid war

53

The global confrontation between the Soviet Union (Russia) and the collective West and, in recent decades, with its leader, the United States, has never stopped. The West, convinced that it was impossible to defeat the Soviet Union and Russia in a direct military confrontation, switched to another form of global confrontation - the cold and then hybrid war.

Hybrid war strategy


The Americans have worked out the strategy and tactics of hybrid wars and tested them in various parts of the world, having achieved impressive success. If in a classic war the main goal is the defeat of the enemy and the occupation of his territory, accompanied by the destruction of infrastructure and mass death of the population, then in a hybrid war it is a form of a hidden conflict proceeding in the form of an integrated political, financial, economic, informational, cultural and ideological confrontation carried out by non-military means.

At the same time, a complex hybrid system is being formed that makes it possible to place the country under external control through concentrated pressure in the administrative-political, socio-economic and information-psychological spheres. Without a formal declaration of war, information technologies attack the state, economic, information and law enforcement structures of the state.



State administration is disorganized and a puppet government is brought to power. In the final stage, armed clashes may unfold with the participation of local rebels and mercenaries supported by cadres, weapons and finance from abroad and domestic oligarchic, nationalist and pseudo-religious structures. In some cases, a military occupation may also begin.

In hybrid wars, a conceptual civilizational confrontation occurs not in the ideological, but in the cultural and worldview sphere. At the strategic level, hybrid warfare operations encompass domestic and foreign policy, the country's finances and economy, the information and communication sphere, the morale of the army and the population, and other factors that affect a nation's ability to resist.

The main goal of such a war is to create chaos, defeat and subjugate the enemy by non-military means. Hybrid wars can be successful and unsuccessful due to factors of accidents, ignorance of circumstances, local specifics and stability of power. An example of successful implementation of such operations is the destruction of the Soviet Union and a coup d'etat in Ukraine, and unsuccessful ones are an attempt at a putsch in Belarus.

The global hybrid war of the United States and its allies against Russia consists in the elimination of Russian statehood, the fragmentation of the country and the transfer of its individual parts under external control. This is a mental war, the Americans directly admitted that the Russians cannot be defeated by force, they need to impose other people's values, and they will defeat themselves. This is what the strategy and tactics of a hybrid war against Russia are based on today.

External and internal factors


For the successful conduct of a hybrid war, it is necessary to have external and internal factors, the combination of which makes it possible to apply a complex of hybrid measures to destroy the state.

External factors include the presence of an aggressor state, ready and capable of carrying out a hybrid attack on the target state.

Internal ones include the weakness and instability of the government, a split in the ruling elite, the presence of an aggressive opposition, popular discontent with the current government and a willingness to support its overthrow. The weakness of the government is characterized by its inability to convince the population of its legitimacy, to ensure economic stability and to use the force of coercion to suppress protests.

In the success of a hybrid attack, it is of no small importance that the state has a value-setting goal, provided for by the state ideology, which determines the goal the state is striving for.

For example, the goal of the United States, as stipulated in the official national security strategy, is to achieve world leadership in the military, economic and values ​​spheres. For this, the necessary means and tools (technologies) have been developed to achieve the goal. Everything is clear and understandable, and this true goal is covered by propaganda about "promoting democracy."

If we take the Russian state, then there is no goal-setting, moreover, any ideology is prohibited in the Constitution. It is well known that in the absence of an ideology and goal of the state, they strive to impose the values ​​of the enemy on it, which has been happening for decades. In addition, Russia, unlike the Soviet Union, does not put forward any global counter-ideology, as opposed to the imposed liberal Western ideology, and such a state at the mental level is easy to defeat.

Of the internal factors, the presence of driving forces and a social base in society, ready to accept and support the conditions of a hybrid attack, is of fundamental importance, without which it is impossible to win this war.

The driving force behind the demolition of power, as a rule, is a part of the political, administrative, military, informational and creative elite, dissatisfied with the existing system of power and striving, due to various circumstances, to destroy the system. It is represented by several groups:

- opinion leaders who deny the current political system, history and the originality of the state and the population and consciously ready to hand it over to a hybrid aggressor;

- comprador careerists dissatisfied with their position in the power structure, striving to occupy a higher position;

- grabbers who set the goal of redistributing property in their own interests;

- agents of influence working for Western intelligence services;

- a comprador business focused on the aggressor, and not on the development of their own state.

These groups, defending their selfish interests, together with the aggressor, purposefully form and finance "field" structures that are implementing a plan to break down state governance. These include:

- parties and public organizations discrediting statehood and imposing Western values;

- engaged media and network structures that disseminate false information discrediting the state and the authorities;

- a network of foreign non-profit organizations;

- groups of provocateurs and militants for organizing riots.

The social basis for supporting a hybrid attack that imitates the mass character of popular protest can be ideological opponents of the existing system, citizens deceived by propaganda and thirsting for change, strata of society dissatisfied with their economic and social situation, youth and ethnic groups, paid provocateurs and lumpenized scum of society.

A well-planned and foreign-directed propaganda campaign through controlled media, NGOs, network structures and bloggers can systematically and purposefully corrupt society, discredit the government, erode the state's value basis and impose its values.

Massive propaganda forms the image of an enemy in society in the person of the current government and creates the impression that the majority of society adheres to the imposed ideologeme. The majority begins to solidify with the opinion of an active minority and get involved in support of the upcoming putsch, creating a massive popular protest.

At the final stage, trained groups of militants and provocateurs come into play, who organize clashes with law enforcement officers in order to cause forceful opposition and casualties among the protesters. If necessary, the aggressor's special operations forces are connected with the penetration of sabotage groups into the country. Massacres are organized among the protesters, accusing the authorities of this, key objects and weapons are seized, and the formation of irregular formations from among the militants and criminals for armed confrontation with the security forces begins. The coup d'etat in Ukraine in 2014 followed exactly this pattern.

With such a development of the situation, the stability of the power and security structures is of great importance. Powerful political and administrative structures are always heterogeneous: there are ideological supporters of the current regime, established careerists and opponents of the regime, working to destroy it.

Ideological supporters will defend the regime to the last, because if it falls, they will lose everything. Careerists, as soon as they see the instability of the regime and the possibility of its fall, will immediately begin to defect to the side of the enemy and offer their services.

Opponents will initially work for the fall of the regime, the coming to power of their like-minded people and integration into the new government in leading positions.

Thus, the stability of the government will be determined by the ratio of its ideological supporters and opponents, who at a decisive moment can tip the political scale in one direction or another.

Without the support of the power structures, no power can be held, they are guided by political forces that ensure the stability of the state, since this is a guarantee of their position in society. The siloviki are also represented by different groups: senior command personnel, middle management and rank-and-file employees. The upper echelons are oriented towards the authorities, since they owe it their careers and position in society, and some are burdened with corrupt ties. The middle management and rank and file carry out orders and, if the power is stable, they are its support.

With the growth of local protests, local security officials may refuse to comply with orders and, when the protests exceed their operational capabilities, they will begin to think about whom to rely on and be guided by. During mass demonstrations, when the authorities stagger, some of the security forces may go over to the side of the protesters or take a neutral position.

The top echelon understands perfectly well that their subordinates represent society with all its problems, and if something happens, instead of following orders, they can come for the arrest or liquidation of the leadership. So the siloviki are the backbone of the government, when it is strong and stable, with its weakening, their loyalty will fall sharply.

Russian specificity


The presented scheme of the beginning of a possible hybrid war, as well as the probable scenarios for its development, is also typical for Russia. She was and remains the geopolitical enemy of the West, a hybrid war has always been waged against her with varying success, and attacks from the West and the inner fifth column are inevitable. Attempts to undermine the government with the help of "white tape" workers from Bolotnaya Square and recent protests for Navalny have been successfully repelled, but the war did not end there.

In this regard, the question arises whether the Russian government is capable of fending off inevitable threats, and how stable is it? If we consider the driving forces of hybrid war, then they are in Russia. The current political system is imperfect and does not correspond to the tendencies and sentiments that require changes in society, and they are trying to preserve the system.

The ruling class is split and characterized by the confrontation between elite groups, they are heterogeneous and sometimes pursue diametrically opposed interests. The patriotic wing seeks to strengthen the state and its role in the international arena. They are rallied around the president, mainly the siloviki, heads of state corporations and national capital adhering to the same line.

Pro-Western liberals, who have seized command posts in the financial and economic bloc and are blocking investments in the restructuring of the Russian economy, are trying to maintain their positions and prevent the dismantling of the system that developed in the 90s. They are in power and do not hide their goals, for example, recently Kudrin said the need to start a new stage of privatization, and this despite the fact that Chubais has not yet been fully asked about the previous predatory stages, which he is demonstratively proud of.

A powerful group of comprador big business, top and middle bureaucrats, oriented to the West and keeping their capital there, will immediately go over to the enemy at the slightest weakening of the power structures. So, in the case of hybrid aggression, a split of the elite is inevitable. The ruling party, with formally high support, does not enjoy the authority of the population; everything rests on the president. The opposition is toothless and subordinate to the authorities; there are no influential patriotic forces.

At the same time, the overwhelming part of society is united in rejection of the liberal model established in the 90s with colossal social stratification and the appropriation of a significant part of the national wealth by a small handful of greedy compradors. The society is dominated by ideological tendencies to ensure social justice, national-sovereign identity and sovereignty of Russia and readiness to defend it.

It should be noted that the “field” structures of the aggressor have been largely cleaned up. Western NPOs and their Russian agents have been taken under control and work mainly from abroad. The domestic media are under state control, but there are quite a few "sleeping" supporters of the aggressor, who are gradually conducting pro-Western liberal agitation and inciting hybrid warfare.

Nationalist, pro-fascist and liberal movements are marginalized, unsupported and unable to become a real field driving force. The militants are harshly suppressed, and they are practically nonexistent, mainly on the national outskirts there are marginal nationalist structures fed from abroad.
The siloviki are loyal to the oath and are ready to defend the state, and are able to suppress local anti-state protests, but with massive popular discontent with the government, they are unlikely to go to suppress it.

All this suggests that the pro-Western liberal elite has no opportunity to seize power on its own; it can try to do this only with the hybrid support of the West. In this case, to organize an effective confrontation of the probable hybrid aggression, it will be necessary to consolidate all the healthy forces of society, including the patriotic part of the elite, law enforcement agencies and national business, on which a significant part of society will be guided.

For such consolidation, a common ideological compromise platform is required, around which Russian patriots of different political views can unite on the basis of a clear ideological and ideological program of the social structure and restoration of the country with the rationale for what kind of society we are going to build and disclosing the image of the future Russia.

There is no such platform today, it will have to be developed and unified by patriotic circles, proving to society that it is precisely such an ideology that meets the image of Russia's future and the aspirations of its people.

Only in this case can Russian society and the patriotic elite consolidate, remove the comprador heritage of the 90s in the person of the pro-Western liberal elite and successfully resist Western hybrid aggression.
53 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +2
    23 September 2021 05: 10
    leaders of public opinion who deny the current political system, the history and identity of the state and the population and are consciously ready to hand it over to a hybrid aggressor

    Bam, and the author mixed opponents of the political system, no matter how nasty it was, and opponents of history (isn't it about some members of the top?) And the country's identity (not the state, the author mixes concepts here too).

    Ideological supporters will defend the regime to the last, because if it falls, they will lose everything.
    It's generally good here, ideological for that and ideological that they are driven by an IDEA! And if anything falls, the IDEA remains!
    1. +12
      23 September 2021 07: 34
      It is represented by several groups:

      - leaders of public opinion who deny the current political system, the history and identity of the state and the population and are consciously ready to hand it over to a hybrid aggressor;

      - comprador careerists dissatisfied with their position in the power structure, striving to occupy a higher position;

      - grabbers who set the goal of redistributing property in their own interests;

      - agents of influence working for Western intelligence services;

      - a comprador business focused on the aggressor, and not on the development of their own state.

      These groups, defending their selfish interests, together with the aggressor purposefully form

      Tell me, and which of the groups described is not in our bondage power? Doesn't it seem that our government itself is stricken with illnesses, which the opposition blames?

      Yes, we have no opposition either. The non-systemic is defeated, and the systemic one does not represent an opposition. Everything is like under a dictatorship. But here is a double-edged sword. The dictatorship controls society, but does not control itself. There is no one to answer to. And it gradually degenerates. No matter how tight the rope twists, the end is always the same.
      1. +9
        23 September 2021 10: 23
        I will go further, in my opinion, everything that the author wrote may well fit into his definition:
        - grabbers who set the goal of redistributing property in their own interests;
        And there is an ideology, few people talk about it out loud, but it exists, it is the cornerstone ideology of capitalism - money, at any cost. All intrigues, the struggle for power, any "creativity", boil down only to this. The tool has become a goal and an ideology!
      2. 0
        23 September 2021 11: 05
        You are absolutely right. The most dangerous enemy of our government is the government itself. 500 million, yes million, preferential mortgages.
      3. +2
        23 September 2021 11: 38
        Hello Stas!

        Which of the groups described is not in our bondage government? Doesn't it seem that our government itself is stricken with illnesses, which the opposition blames?

        It seemed to me that the author was talking about this, albeit not directly.

        Everything is like under a dictatorship.

        Who is the dictator? Supreme power? No, it cannot implement its own decrees. Oligarchs? Also no, their diktat ends on their own financial / property appetites and, in part, on the control of the legislative process. Ideological (or paid) promoters of liberal values? These dictatorships are only in their media, although this is not a trifle. They are just a tool, not a player. The structures that form the financial and credit policy? These are more like a dictatorship that does not advertise itself in this capacity and is limited in the means of achieving political goals.
        But if the oligarchy can firmly pull up the Bank of Russia (for example, using both legislative and corruption resources), then such a dictatorship will turn out that it will seem to us like a sheepskin ...

        Best regards,
        Michael
        1. 0
          23 September 2021 12: 58
          it’s a strange dictatorship, everyone is yelling about it, but as a question “who’s a dictator” it’s so fuzzy, and if you ask for examples and really sit down to analyze them, then in general everything is exactly the opposite.

          In general, in my opinion, we have a state ideaology, only it is not popularized (which is probably correct, because there are no excesses) and this ideology has been promoted by Putin for many years, if you describe it in your own words, it can be called either "pro-state ideology" or " general state ideology ", that is first of all, there are projects that are beneficial for all subcommunities within the community (state) and not to the detriment of the supercommunity (humanity), let somewhere through Ж; somewhere they start, it doesn't work, and they quit, later starting from scratch; but the essence is always the same.
        2. +7
          23 September 2021 14: 07
          Quote: OldMichael
          Who is the dictator? Supreme power?

          Our tsar is the dictator with his indisputable vertical of power. He crushed the Constitution and all the media under him. He put his executive branch of power over the judicial and electoral. Increased his term of office to the point of indecency. I cleaned the polling field and invented voting on stumps ...

          Quote: OldMichael
          cannot implement its own decrees

          It's true. You're right. Dictators are often weak when it comes not to their own (absolute) power, but to success in the economy and the welfare of the people. hi
          1. +1
            23 September 2021 15: 34
            Dictators are often weak when it comes not to their own (absolute) power, but to success in the economy and the welfare of the people.

            Then this is not a dictatorship, but something feudal ...
            hi
            1. +1
              23 September 2021 15: 59
              Why? Dictatorships can very well be both effective and ineffective.
              And then this concept is purely subjective.
              For example, why is the dictatorship of some African Mugabe ineffective?
              Is it that his slaves live at the level of the Papuans of the Stone Age? And if he does not care about the Papuans, and the goal is power and personal enrichment? From this point of view, his dictatorship is quite effective.
              1. 0
                23 September 2021 18: 17
                Dictatorships can very well be both effective and ineffective.
                And then this concept is purely subjective.

                It seems that the issue is not about efficiency. Dictatorship implies absolute power, sweeping away opponents by any violent means, including terror.
                And if a dictatorship is looking for a consensus with someone (not with external opponents, but with internal political forces), then it is no longer a dictatorship.
            2. +1
              24 September 2021 00: 13
              Quote: OldMichael
              , but something feudal ...

              F-at the heart of which lies property of feudal lords to land and other means of production, to peasant farmers, located in serfdom, as well as the right of feudal lords to exercise state power on its territory.
              doesn't fit request
              D - unlimited power, a form of government in which power is concentrated in the hands of one person, group of persons, clique or party, monopolizing it.
              dictatorship we have IMHO
          2. +1
            23 September 2021 19: 38
            Quote: Stas157
            Our tsar is the dictator with his indisputable vertical of power. He crushed the Constitution and all the media under him. He put his executive branch of power over the judicial and electoral. Increased his term of office to the point of indecency. I cleaned the polling field and invented voting on stumps ...
            Disagree, colleague! And there is no vertical of power either, there are many groups of interests in cutting public funds. I am talking about the highest echelon, in which there is not and will not be unity. Why does the GDP need a dictatorship if it has given everything to the performers? Name at least one program he voiced and executed by his subordinates! But the subordinate can burp on the air such that under Stalin he would immediately sit down for a long time. The eternal boy Kiriyenko, among other things, does things that only compromise the GDP without adding to its popularity in any way. If there was a dictatorship, how much would the dictator tolerate the Eternal Redhead? No, colleague, not everything is as simple as you think. There are many pitfalls and currents with which the Darkest simply does not want to fight for reasons known only to him.
      4. 0
        24 September 2021 22: 12
        Stagnation equals death. And to pay for everything for us and our children ... to be honest, it becomes scary for our children ...
  2. +1
    23 September 2021 06: 43
    We can resist, but we can't win, we seem to be embarrassed!
    1. +5
      23 September 2021 07: 01
      It is difficult to hold on without hesitation when the Fabergés of the smallest old fighters were put into the western pawnshop back in the 90s under the strict control of the overseas regional committee. Maybe only in the next generation of power there will be a courageous and resolute patriot free of bail, but for now, yes, we are shy. It is only the author who does not hesitate to poke around in a heap of a known substance, looking for a state caramel there. lol
      1. +5
        23 September 2021 10: 25
        Maybe only in the next generation of power there will be a brave and resolute patriot free from bail, but for now, yes, we are shy.
        There will not be. Patriots of a different kind survive there - patriots of their own pocket. Others, at the top, do not survive.
        1. +10
          23 September 2021 10: 28
          Alexander, do not drive you into melancholy at all. At least dream. And of course, it has been said a long time ago.
          1. +3
            23 September 2021 10: 36
            Alexander, do not drive you into melancholy at all. At least dream. And of course, it has been said a long time ago.
            The most sad. It's just that the author poured so much analytics there (I do not argue, quite competently and clearly), where it was possible to get by with a few words.
    2. +2
      23 September 2021 11: 27
      The basis, the foundation of hybrid war is the idea. The ideas of capitalism are the same everywhere -
      what is in the United States and what is in Russia now. That is, the questions are posed the same. But America has something to answer, and the Russian authorities have NO. So we are losing the hybrid
      war.
    3. -1
      23 September 2021 20: 00
      Quote: lithium17
      We can resist, but we can't win, we seem to be embarrassed!

      Duc in order to win and ideology is needed, which is constitutionally prohibited! To be measured by which capitalist system is more capitalistic is stupid, as for me. And the country, which for one century rushes from one system to another, does not really evoke trust and sympathy. This I mean that we are not waging an open war, and intrigues are not our strong side, and we have nothing special to offer - we have successfully destroyed all our own at EBN, and he will burn in hell! Only the richest resources in the world remain, for which we are fighting with everyone, while we ourselves are not really able to either extract or process them under such a government that only sells these resources and drags the loot into their pockets and sends them over the hill, if not to themselves, as if in the next world they will need it! Thank God, even though the military-industrial complex has been raised, for the health of Shoigu! Something like this.
      1. +1
        23 September 2021 21: 29
        Top ten colleague!
  3. +6
    23 September 2021 08: 25
    An interesting term is hybrid warfare. It can be understood as anything you like.
    And how to defeat someone in this "vinaigrette", what is the essence of victory?
    He said - hybrid war, and all at once all of himself is so smart, modern.
    1. -1
      23 September 2021 11: 28
      The essence of victory is the elimination of the enemy. For example, the USSR. And now Russia.
    2. +2
      23 September 2021 12: 03
      Hello Vlad!

      An interesting term is hybrid warfare. It can be understood as anything you like.
      And how to defeat someone in this "vinaigrette", what is the essence of victory?


      In my opinion, the author has sufficiently fully disclosed the essence and goals of hybrid war, and the ways to achieve them.
      it is a form of latent conflict proceeding in the form of an integrated political, financial-economic, informational and cultural-ideological confrontation carried out by non-military means.
      And further in the text.

      Best regards,
      Michael
    3. The comment was deleted.
  4. -6
    23 September 2021 09: 29
    After yesterday's conversation with the HR manager on the issue of corporate ethics, I am calm, the development of the state will be based on modern companies with modern technologies. Critics of GDP, you have already gone round. All the companies of our billionaires, all significant companies in the public sector and the military-industrial complex are not developing anymore. based on slogans.
    1. +4
      23 September 2021 09: 53
      HR manager for corporate ethics ??? Well, if we even have such positions, then everything is really very bad. And the staff, it turns out, is underdeveloped, and the management of the same level ...
      1. -5
        23 September 2021 10: 03
        44 years ago I passed the exam in Russian, thanks anyway. So for comprehension, an employee does not have to solve his everyday problems, for this there is a management. His task is to work for the development of the company. Nothing reminds me of the USSR.
        1. +2
          23 September 2021 10: 22
          In general, corporate ethics has nothing to do with the personal everyday problems of employees, and the management of enterprises and organizations always solved all production issues and without such a huge number of parasites as now. If you look at the ratio of the number of workers to the number of managers of all stripes in the Soviet Union and Russia, you will understand that the Soviet system of management was much more effective.
          1. -3
            23 September 2021 10: 31
            Well, working in the fish fleet, we had 200 managers under the USSR. And now the staff is reduced several times. I was always surprised how Western fishing companies with billions of dollars in turnover are managed by a staff of 20 30 people. The personnel development manager does not solve the everyday problems of workers, for this there are other leaders.
            1. +2
              23 September 2021 10: 33
              I am glad specifically for your office, but the situation in the country as a whole is exactly the opposite.
              1. -5
                23 September 2021 10: 50
                I no longer go to sea, but there is a tendency to decrease on the shore, where there were 5 managers, there was only one left, and he no longer plays tanks and solitaire, responsibility and salary increased.
                1. +2
                  23 September 2021 11: 04
                  But over the years I have seen a different picture. For example, the former Ministry of Railways was split into a huge number of daughters, granddaughters, etc. This was once called optimization and disposal of non-core assets. Having withdrawn the organizations from the state of the Ministry of Railways (RZD), they changed the forms of ownership and now, instead of one deputy who was in charge of this very direction, a whole team of managers was formed. And so on in each direction. The number of workers was reduced several times and the number of managers (together with accountants, economists, etc.) increased several times. In other enterprises, the situation is even more sad. More than half of them ceased to exist altogether, and the rest. operate at a maximum of 30% power. And so in most of Russia. But this is the production area. It's still sadder in non-production.
                  1. -4
                    23 September 2021 11: 13
                    Our office organized an enterprise abroad, 20 ships were under the control of these two firms. I was struck by the coordination of repairs, 5-7 minutes of conversation with the "owner."
  5. +1
    23 September 2021 09: 47
    The fact that ideology is prohibited in the Constitution does not mean anything. In the absence of a single ideology, an inflorescence of other ideologies arises. And all of them are subordinated to the absence of reality. The ideology of enrichment is not an ideology. I finished college and immediately a statement, they say, I got stuck working as a worker. It is not difficult to create a common ideology, but the involvement of a person in his country is much more difficult.
    1. 0
      23 September 2021 10: 12
      Quote: nikvic46
      ideology is prohibited in the Constitution .... In the absence of a unified ideology, an inflorescence of other ideologies arises. ..they are subject to the absence of reality. The ideology of enrichment is not an ideology ...
      Well, yes! The ideology of enrichment at any cost is the most important thing, it turns out. No punishment in sight for this. And it is understandable ---- because such an ideology. It’s as if it’s not there. But there is such a
  6. +4
    23 September 2021 10: 10
    Get up to mortal combat, there is a hybrid war with the Western horde ... smile
    Pro-Western liberals who seized command posts in the financial and economic bloc and blocking investment in the restructuring of the Russian economy,
    And how did they manage to do this? They made a coup laughing
  7. for
    +3
    23 September 2021 10: 26
    The ruling class is split and characterized by the confrontation of elite factions,

    Who is there split, there are all their own
    The patriotic wing seeks to strengthen the state
    .
    And who is this? Not to strengthen Russia, but to secure yourself.
    The main liberals are in the Kremlin.
  8. 0
    23 September 2021 11: 17
    The term "patriotism" and its derivatives is very often used.
    M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin:
    "The majority understood by the word" patriotism "something innate, almost obligatory.

    Mikhail Zhvanetsky:
    "Patriotism is a clear, clear, well-reasoned explanation that we should live worse than others."

    Liberalism, if in simple terms, is an ideology that defends the vital minimum of individual rights, which certainly includes the right to life, freedom, fair trial and private property.

    Strange, but for some reason, the essentially simple and fair demands of this ideology are met with such harsh rejection.
    1. +1
      23 September 2021 11: 32
      Quote: unaha
      Strange, but for some reason, the essentially simple and fair demands of this ideology are met with such harsh rejection.

      What's so strange about that? The modern government of Russia cannot ensure the fulfillment of these requirements and therefore is trying to discredit them, such as "liberals."
  9. +4
    23 September 2021 12: 15
    That's how much I read about "Hybrid Confrontation" it seems to me that this is a kind of modern analogue of "Psychotronic Weapon", a sort of bogey of narrow-minded people from the 90s. Of course, by the time the song about "the need to unite the nation on the domestic front" came along, the author's message immediately becomes MORE THAN CLEAR. I will not speculate here on how real internal security has grown (within the complex of what is happening), and even more so the cohesion of the nation over the past couple of decades - I will just note that, in my opinion, the main torpedoing of these things does not come from some mythical "fifth columns "and from the whole array of state propaganda, the vertical of power and the decisions made by this vertical. But on the issue of "Hybrid War" I would like to dwell in a little more detail.
    Hybrid warfare is generally nothing new. The essence is the methodical coercion to certain actions in order to change the policy of a certain state in a complex - carried out by prolonged external pressure as opposed to the concept of an offensive large-scale military operation.
    If the Hybrid War is understood approximately in this way, then any state that is in its own madness of one form or another (Pol Potovskaya Cambodia, China during Mao, Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe, South Africa during Apartheid, etc.) can say that on the part of the "international community" and its individual participants it is in a state of "Hybrid War". And this state is the steeper, the steeper the degree of inadequacy of actions taking place in a particular state. In fact, the "Hybrid War" is a legacy of globalization and informatization - people have the opportunity to choose and analyze, vote with their feet and hearts, express personal dissatisfaction with a wide range of means - and neighboring states, in turn, will be express their own dissatisfaction, and project it through their propaganda means onto a neighbor.
    It was, is and will be - just in the information age, with widespread literacy and the growth of Internet users, the ROLE of IT and INVOLVEMENT in IT grows. Those processes that are described as certain actions of the "Hybrid War" in the information space are just the tip of the iceberg, which is called Globalism. The main work here is not performed by the CIA, for example, but namely the existing and increasing differentiation of the adequacy of political and economic successes between states, as well as the colossal difference between them in the social standard of living, corruption, the degree of perfection of the legislative framework, etc. The more information occurring at point A will be recognized at point B, the greater will be the degree of influence of these factors - if at point B the conditions are objectively worse, equilibrium will tend to be established - everything is like in physics. These factors, existing by themselves, can be used, but the lion's share of the damage will not be caused by some "cunning, insidious plan of the enemy", namely, the difference between A and B, people discussing this difference and trying to find solutions for them, how to get around this difference.
    Conclusion - you can engage in prevention, or you can go under the surgeon's knife. These are two ways of solving the problem - reparation-prognostic and radical-prohibitive. It is high time for our country to change the plate and take care of internal affairs and the standard of living - otherwise the laws of physics will be relentless against us for the second time in thirty years.
    1. +1
      23 September 2021 14: 19
      As for the bogey, you got excited. Hybrid warfare is a reliable, proven tool. Yes, it contains the old, proven methods. But it has a much more thoughtful tactics and strategy of COMPREHENSIVE actions.
      And this is a very effective tool. And one more thing. Try instead of the hyped
      the term "globalism" put the simple and old Marxian "monopoly".
      This is more informative and REAL. And so I agree with you. Respectfully.
  10. 0
    23 September 2021 14: 28
    Stop fighting windmills, author.
    All non-systemic commies, libers and natsiks have already been dispersed / squeezed out / imprisoned.
    1. +2
      23 September 2021 14: 41
      And what? The birth rate has increased? The economy? Science? And these are all facets of a hybrid war. It is not necessary to plant a lot of mind.
      1. +4
        23 September 2021 15: 07
        What does hybrid war have to do with it? Are the Americans interfering with the economy and science?

        The main task of the current Russian system is to maintain its own existence and maintain the status quo.
        Economy, science, etc. are purely secondary things and donate them without any problems. They are not essential for the existence of the system.
        1. +1
          23 September 2021 15: 08
          Quote: Kitty Moore
          They are not essential to the existence of the system.

          Got it.
  11. +2
    23 September 2021 16: 05
    Article- Oil oil.
  12. 0
    23 September 2021 19: 07
    Quote: Stas157
    Quote: OldMichael
    Who is the dictator? Supreme power?

    Our tsar is the dictator with his indisputable vertical of power. He crushed the Constitution and all the media under him. He put his executive branch of power over the judicial and electoral. Increased his term of office to the point of indecency. I cleaned the polling field and invented voting on stumps ...

    Quote: OldMichael
    cannot implement its own decrees

    It's true. You're right. Dictators are often weak when it comes not to their own (absolute) power, but to success in the economy and the welfare of the people. hi


    "Crushed the media" ...
    Why do you need the media? What did you want to read there? The media are, by their very nature, the first state proclaimer of lies. Or, at least, he is a distributor of unverified facts and "opinions of the people", the place for which is to shout "the cash desk is free." Without the slightest exception. What do you have to lose if these media "undermine"?
    The period and name of the media does not even come to mind when there would be an exceptionally verified statement of facts only, without the "opinion" of the journalist.
  13. +4
    23 September 2021 19: 32
    Quote: tralflot1832
    Our office has organized an enterprise abroad

    Well, this is the meaning of your development, our development, all ours are taken abroad and develop there. And thus, our system is weakening. And of course, satisfied representatives at the trough convince us that everything is fine with us, because we are developing abroad!
  14. +2
    23 September 2021 20: 19
    Yes, in a hybrid war, Arctic shushpantsy cannot be dismissed. I just wrote about it the other day in the next branch.
  15. 0
    24 September 2021 00: 14
    Come on, hybrid wars, the CIA in Afghanistan, LGBT people in Washington - it's all bullshit. The main thing is that Biden is our man, not for money, for an idea. And when the sleeping Joe finishes his business, the world will be warm and joyful, everyone will dance around the Christmas tree set by Gazprom with the money of the national property.
  16. +3
    25 September 2021 10: 08
    The ruling class is split and characterized by the confrontation between elite groups, they are heterogeneous and sometimes pursue diametrically opposed interests.


    The interests of all elites and at all times are purely economic, patriotism and the nation are terms that have appeared not so long ago in the offices of scientists. Those who believe that the "siloviki" in the government are patriots for their military pension looks very funny. It's simple. The USSR had a practically closed production cycle and a sufficient population for a successful economy, and, taking into account the CMEA countries and the socialist camp, more than sufficient. After the collapse of the USSR, the main thing was to draw the former republics into the economy of the West, which was successfully accomplished by the collective West. Therefore, now there is not a hybrid war, but a competitive one, and what is worse is the question.
  17. +1
    28 September 2021 13: 06
    Hybrid war is when they gently take by the shoulders, turn their face to the sunset, give a day to get ready, pendel and you fly from Afgan, again, quietly squealing and tumbling. Is this a hybrid war, or what?
  18. 0
    3 October 2021 13: 06
    The war is lost. For a long time. Money and funds in the west, offshore, apartments and penthouses there. Oil and gas go there ... Voynushka with the West is only in the minds of elderly patriots ... It's funny! What are we going to fight with? Basically, we have the world's largest oligarch yacht fleet. Disgusting and disgusting.