Military Review

Why does Ukraine need statehood and who is its enemy

92

Image: lesechos.fr


The phenomenon of the Ukrainian state raises many questions - how did one of the three branches of the Russian superethnos break away from Russian civilization and build the most hostile Russophobic state in the post-Soviet space? In whose interests was it created, and why, thirty years later, was it under external control in such an unattractive and dilapidated state?

Any statehood determines the system of governing society in a particular territory with the help of state institutions that ensure the implementation of domestic and foreign policies aimed at improving the welfare of society and strengthening the power and security of the state.

Adopting a false national idea and choosing allies


It should be noted that the formation of any state and the vector of its development is determined not by the masses, but by the elite, which takes control of the energy of the masses and directs it in the right direction for itself. Ukraine received its statehood not as a result of a fierce struggle of the masses for "independence", but as a gift to the party nomenklatura during the collapse of the Union. The latter, having seized power and subordinated it to a narrow group of interested persons, began to build an oligarchic state "for itself" to satisfy the interests of the ruling class in order to convert power into capital.

In order to legitimize their power, the newly-minted Ukrainian elite had to, firstly, offer the society a national idea, for the sake of which it was necessary to separate from the metropolis, and, secondly, find allies ready to support their desire to plunder a piece of the Soviet empire and provide a place for withdrawal stolen capital.

In order to form a new national identity with a different national self-consciousness, instead of communist semantic blocks, the Galician nationalist idea of ​​a separate Ukrainian people, oppressed by Russians for centuries, and its historical place in a more prosperous Western civilization, was purposefully driven into the worldview of the masses, ready to accept the “oppressed” with open arms.

The choice of an ally was made in favor of the collective West, since Russia, as a metropolis, was too serious a competitor in the emerging robbery and would not allow to roam freely in the controlled territory. The West had its own interest - to weaken Russia and put pressure on it through its former compatriots, so it supported the “independents” with a predatory grip and took them under its wing. This is how the alliance of the Ukrainian comprador elite with Western allies, directed against Russia, was formed.

At that stage, Russia had enough of its own problems and the entire post-Soviet space was left at the mercy of the West, which began to develop it and subordinate it to its interests. Similar processes took place in all post-Soviet republics, everywhere elites came to power under nationalist slogans and built nation-states, seeking to leave the Russian sphere of influence. So Ukraine was no exception, but it turned out to be the tidbit for the West in the southwestern underbelly of Russia.

As a result, not the people, but the comprador elite made their civilizational choice and imposed it on the whole society, and the population, like sheep, followed the elite and took a step towards recognition historical enemies as allies, and natural allies as enemies.

Despite the unity of the three branches of the Russian people that has developed over the centuries, the Ukrainian elite deliberately cut off the connection with its umbilical cord - Russian civilization, and instead of maintaining and deepening political, economic, ethnic and spiritual integration, purposefully destroyed the Russian civilizational code of the people and destroyed the foundations of the great Russian culture, imposing a miserable surrogate from small-town peasant folklore, newspeak in the form of ukromova and myths about the "great Ukrainians".

Having seized the cultural and information space, the elite took control of the psychological sphere of citizens and, through propaganda, quite successfully inspired them with a destructive nationalist idea and a murderous vector for the development of the state. Having introduced a monopoly on the only true and indisputable national idea after the coup d'état, the state mercilessly suppressed all attempts at dissent.

"Western Paradise" turned out to be a bluff


In an effort to protect themselves from Moscow, the elite rushed into the arms of the West, while all these years there was a struggle not for equal integration into European civilization, but entry on any terms, “at least a stuffed carcass” with pleas almost on their knees begged to accept and protect her.

The elite, having taken control of a vast territory with tens of millions of literate and industrious people and a fairly successful economy, instead of building an independent state that provides acceptable living standards for the population, began to build a small-town farm with all its attributes for their own selfish interests, rapidly fencing off Moscow and building under the Euro-Atlantic umbrella.

Thirty years of drifting towards the West showed the complete futility of becoming full-fledged members of the Western community, Ukraine was not even allowed into the dressing room there. With the support of Western allies, Ukraine lost almost all of its economic potential, left the Soviet system of division of labor, and was not taken into the West. As a result, the economy collapsed, stimulating the degradation of the country. The West, luring Ukraine, initially did not set the goal of making it a part of the Western world, which the countries of Eastern Europe became, at best, it was destined for the role of an informal periphery and a zone of pressure on Russia and bargaining with it.

In Kiev, they can’t understand and assimilate in any way that in the West they are strangers, they are viewed as defectors from a hostile camp who can be used as a tool against their former compatriots, and they have absolutely nothing to put on the contentment of impudent and poor freeloaders.

Why Ukraine did not become a strong state


One may wonder whether Ukraine could become a strong and independent state? For objective reasons, this was impossible. Taking into account its geographical location and international environment, it is a typical limitrope at the junction of Russian and Western civilizations, seeking to ensure their civilizational interests. The limitrophe, as an independent and sovereign entity, cannot exist in this zone, and it will still have to go under the full control of one of the warring parties and decide to whom and under what conditions to give its sovereignty.

The choice of the overlord by the Ukrainian elite also determined the further vector of Ukraine's development. She feels confident only if the West needs it, and when such a need disappears, the limitrophe is one of the first to be sacrificed and no one is interested in its future. So the fate of Ukraine is unenviable, she chose the overlord, who needs it as a bargaining chip in the confrontation with Russia, and the moment of such an exchange is rapidly approaching.

Ukraine differs from societies with established statehood, which have a long history of existence of an independent state, traditions of state administration that have developed over centuries, a national elite nurtured by generations, and well-established rules for conducting domestic and foreign policy that ensure the continuity and development of the state. Ukraine has never had its own statehood and attempts to conduct its statehood from the “Cossack republic”, for which the independent Zaporizhzhya Sich, which did not recognize any statehood, or from fake “states” of the times of the Civil War, do not withstand any criticism, no states there are even close It was.

In addition, the Ukrainian farming elite, which has become the heir to the Soviet nomenklatura, is overcome by envy of an ever-increasing Russia, an inferiority complex and phantom pains about former greatness. She considered that the delights of recognizing a great state would extend to the Ukrainian misunderstanding. It turned out that this is far from the case.

In this regard, the highest and indisputable value in Ukraine today is Ukrainian statehood and independence, subtly hammered into the heads of gullible citizens. At the same time, no one bothers to explain why statehood is so dear to this territory to its population and what it gives them. The Ukrainian elite and Galicia clung to this value with their teeth, while the South-East and the Center treated this indifferently at the first stages, but the situation gradually changed.

Targeted propaganda aimed at shaping and cultivating the image of the Russian enemy in society could not pass without leaving a trace. As a result, Ukraine has turned into a Russophobic reserve, the goal-setting and raison d'etre of which was a fierce confrontation with Russia, leading to the self-destruction of Ukrainian statehood. These ideas could hardly develop successfully if they did not express the interests and aspirations of certain forces and strata in society. Since Ukraine was a complex state with a different ethnic composition of the population (Western Ukrainians, Rusyns, Little Russians - Ukrainians, Russians), different levels of economic development of the regions, different religious denominations - Orthodox and Greek Catholics, different ethno-cultural codes and views on their future - mainly the Russian South-East is for integration with Russia, the Center and Galicia are for integration into Europe, it was torn apart and is being torn apart by fundamental ethnic, economic, religious and civilizational contradictions that have become a catalyst for political and social upheavals that have split society.

Instead of responding to the basic challenges and finding a compromise between ethnic groups, the elite all these years tried to form the Ukrainian nation by forcibly Ukrainizing all ethnic groups living in the state and uniting society under the mythical pretext of protecting the country from the “Russian aggressor”. In society, it was possible to form a significant layer of mutants “ukrov”, regardless of ethnic origin, supporting the formation of an ethnocratic state, filled with fierce hatred for Russia and seeing the West as their ally and savior. It should be emphasized that there are quite a lot of ethnic Russians among the Ukrainians who have come to the defense of the social position achieved by “overwork” and the opportunity to snatch their piece of the state pie.

For the Ukrainian political class, the formation of the image of the main enemy from Russia has become a significant factor in uniting society. The massive brainwashing of the population has yielded results, a demonic image of Russia has formed in society, and a significant part of the population is ready to fight it. According to opinion polls in December 2021, 49,2% of the population believes in the reality of an attack by the "aggressor country", and 33,3% are ready to defend Ukraine with weapons in the hands (in the west 39,7%, and in the east only 25,6%), while 21,7% are ready to protest or express civil disobedience.

Prospects for Ukrainian statehood


The evolution of Ukrainian statehood did not lead to the formation of a powerful state, but to the creation of a mechanism for plundering the resources of the Soviet empire, the cynical exploitation of the population and the emergence of an overweight Ukrainian oligarchy class. Ukraine naturally lost its internal and international subjectivity, fell under the external control of the West and became in its hands an instrument and springboard for pressure and weakening Russia and drawing it into an armed conflict.

For the population of Ukraine, this state did not become a source of prosperity, and as a result of the confrontation with Russian civilization and the rule of a parasitic elite, it brought only hardships and misfortunes, up to the unleashing of a civil war. The breakaway province, having gone over to the camp of enemies, could not successfully resist the mother country, withered and turned into a pitiful quasi-state, feeding from the hand of its master and cheering him on in everything.

The legislative consolidation in the Ukrainian constitution of the desire for an alliance with the West looks like a mockery and a mockery of statehood, since the serf begs the owner to consider him equal to himself, and he only mocks his humiliation.

Returning to the question of who is an ally and who is an enemy of the established Ukrainian statehood, we can state that for the Ukrainian elite the West is a natural ally and protector, contributing to its strengthening, prosperity and the formation of an ethnocratic state that opposes Russia. And for the population of Ukraine, the West is a sophisticated enemy, which, together with the elite, cynically breeds it with its fairy tales about a happy future and purposefully destroys the economic base of the state.

For Russia, the Ukrainian state could be allied or neutral, becoming the second Russian state, like two German ones - Germany and Austria. But today's Ukraine is the antipode of such statehood. The presence on the Russian borders of a Russophobic state, controlled by a geostrategic enemy and ready to resort to any provocation, is unacceptable for Russia. Such statehood should be reformatted within the framework of the Russian civilizational space or disappear from the political map of the world.

The people of Ukraine must draw conclusions about what a rotten brain they have today in the face of the comprador elite, assess where and for what purpose it is leading them, and figure out who are natural allies and enemies. Without a reassessment of the imposed values, liberation from the illusions of "independence" and a return to their historical roots, this territory and population are doomed to degradation and dissolution in the camp of their enemies.
Author:
92 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mouse
    Mouse 17 January 2022 11: 05
    +1
    look for figli on the side ... let them rummage around, they are their own enemy ....
    1. Civil
      Civil 17 January 2022 13: 25
      -9
      The latter, having seized power and subordinated it to a narrow group of interested persons, began to build an oligarchic state "for itself" to satisfy the interests of the ruling class in order to convert power into capital.

      And in what post-Soviet republic, except for the Baltic states, is it not so? Everywhere is the same.
      The presence on the Russian borders of a Russophobic state, controlled by a geostrategic enemy and ready to resort to any provocation, is unacceptable for Russia.

      So probably this is true to varying degrees to all the neighbors of the Russian Federation, except for Mongolia, probably.
      Why annex Ukraine? Where's the answer? Maybe it's better to throw efforts, for example, on the ever-memorable Kurgan region, where the population is declining at a terrible pace? What to feed, how many are still left, 20-30 million Ukrainians? What else is the territory for, if there is no one to look after the one that is?
      1. Sergej1972
        Sergej1972 17 January 2022 18: 08
        +3
        Kurgan region is best united with Chelyabinsk or Tyumen or divided between them.
        1. Vladimir Mashkov
          Vladimir Mashkov 17 January 2022 22: 21
          +6
          The article is good and almost accurate. Basically I agree with Yuri Mikhailovich. Except for one thing: that the majority of the population of Ukraine are Russophobes. It is not true! Since 1991 and until now, despite increased pressure and attempts to reformat people, MOST The population of Ukraine is NOT Russophobic and loyal to Russia and the Russians!

          As an example, I will cite an incident that happened the other day, which I was a witness to. The Russian city of Novorossia, temporarily located in the composition and under the authority of the current Ukraine. There are eight people in line at the ATM, talking lazily in Russian. An old lady with a wand comes up and starts to ask without a queue. We skip. The old woman receives the money, moves away, counts, folds, puts it in her pocket. He turns to the queue and ... in Ukrainian he begins to scold the Russians with the last words! I can’t cite her speech because I was banned for less. There were words in her speech for "m", and for "k", and for "p", and for "g". The queue is crazy! A young man asks: "Grandma, did you overeat henbane or did you watch TV?" The grandmother in the same expressions expresses everything that she thinks about him, his relatives, ancestors, mother and adds: "They want to take our land and killed my nephew!" The man says to her: "Ahhh ... So you are a Bandera girl from a Bandera kuble ..." The queue loses interest in the grandmother and begins to talk among themselves. Grandmother, leaning on a stick, proudly retires.
          Only if her nephew or his brothers were in place of the grandmother, the matter would not end peacefully. There would be insults, calls to the police or a fight.
      2. antiaircrafter
        antiaircrafter 17 January 2022 20: 52
        -1
        Quote: Civil
        What else is the territory for, if there is no one to look after the one that is?

        For land is no longer produced.
      3. Silhouette
        Silhouette 18 January 2022 08: 46
        +1
        If the thesis "Ukraine received its statehood not as a result of a fierce struggle of the masses for "independence", but as a gift to the party nomenklatura during the collapse of the Union" is taken as the basis for reasoning, then today's Russia received its independence in exactly the same way and is no different from Ukraine and in the same way is under external control, because the Russian and Ukrainian elites are no different from each other.
  2. Dimy4
    Dimy4 17 January 2022 11: 07
    +6
    The enemy of the statehood of Ukraine is Ukraine itself. And no one else.
    1. Andrei Nikolaevich
      Andrei Nikolaevich 17 January 2022 12: 52
      -4
      Ukraine does not need statehood. And nobody needs Ukraine, not even Russia. Let the citizens of Ukraine roam like gypsies. They honestly deserve it.
    2. Doccor18
      Doccor18 17 January 2022 14: 34
      +7
      Quote: Dimy4
      The enemy of the statehood of Ukraine is Ukraine itself. And no one else.

      I absolutely agree.
      But I disagree with the author.
      One may wonder whether Ukraine could become a strong and independent state? Due to objective reasons, this was impossible... she is a typical limitrope...

      It is very doubtful to call a territory (the largest in Europe) with a population slightly smaller than that of France, with developed industry and agriculture, with advanced science and education, and, as a result, with a literate population, a "typical limitroph". Of course, the highly developed Ukrainian SSR was in close connection with the Union, and after the rupture of all established ties, many problems appeared. But who rushed to solve them? They rushed to snatch whoever had time ... And who is to blame for the fact that after the formation of the CIS, the established ties were completely broken in a strange way, contrary to common sense and economic benefits? Of course, Ukraine could take place as an independent state, but for this it needed to have a nationally (in the best sense of the word) minded leadership, which would see its only task as the development of the country, the modernization of a huge industrial base, trade with both European countries and Russia . The size of Ukraine and the laid Soviet foundation made it possible to do this. It is clear that it was unrealistic to reach the level of France / Germany, but it was very possible to maintain the state integrity and confidence of the people in the future ...
    3. Xnumx vis
      Xnumx vis 17 January 2022 21: 25
      +2
      Quote: Dimy4
      but as a gift to the party nomenklatura during the collapse of the Union.

      The main thing in this article is "but as a gift to the party nomenklatura during the collapse of the Union." And therefore, everything was done to stay with money and profits. Hence the "Ukraine is not Russia", glory to Bandera, who is not the jump of that Muscovite. and other actions of the former, party economic nomenklatura. There were no fools there, natural nomenklatura selection, but there were enough and enough villains.
  3. My address
    My address 17 January 2022 11: 10
    +15
    I have a question for the author. What did the Russian authorities do, incl. Foreign Ministry, when did Ukraine slide into Russophobia?
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Denis812
        Denis812 17 January 2022 12: 38
        +1
        You probably live in some kind of parallel universe. :)
        Please tell me, when did the Russian government support Russophobia in Ukraine?
    2. Cron
      Cron 17 January 2022 11: 39
      -3
      Quote: My address
      What did the Russian authorities do, incl. Foreign Ministry, when did Ukraine slide into Russophobia?

      Politics is about opportunities, not about someone's Wishlist.
    3. DNS-a42
      DNS-a42 17 January 2022 12: 03
      +17
      Quote: My address
      I have a question for the author. What did the Russian authorities do, incl. Foreign Ministry, when did Ukraine slide into Russophobia?

      She was engaged in "useful" things: exposing Stalinism, searching for Lenin's bombs, and rehabilitating the White Guards.
    4. Nyrobsky
      Nyrobsky 17 January 2022 12: 05
      +9
      Quote: My address
      I have a question for the author. What did the Russian authorities do, incl. Foreign Ministry, when did Ukraine slide into Russophobia?

      Don't you guess? Russia, after Yeltsin's - "Take as much sovereignty as you want" - was also on the verge of collapse with the prospect of the formation of several "independent" quasi-states + waged a war against terrorists in the Caucasus, in which, with the support of the USA, Great Britain, Qatar, S. Arabia, Turkey and etc., people from a dozen Arab countries + Natsiks of dill like Sashko Bily participated against Russia. While the situation inside Russia was stabilized, Ukraine, under the slogan "Ukraine is not Russia," cultivated its anti-Russian ideology. Well, and then, Russia's possibilities in terms of influencing the Ukrainian political elites were already seriously limited, since they were almost completely under the control of the West and promoted the policy it needed. Something like that...
      1. sevryuk
        sevryuk 17 January 2022 12: 55
        +4
        Russia, after Yeltsin's - "Take as much sovereignty as you want" - was also on the verge of collapse


        Russia (Soviet) collapsed in 1991. The Russian Federation is a piece of historical Russia.
        1. Nyrobsky
          Nyrobsky 17 January 2022 14: 50
          +3
          Quote: sevryuk
          Russia, after Yeltsin's - "Take as much sovereignty as you want" - was also on the verge of collapse


          Russia (Soviet) collapsed in 1991. The Russian Federation is a piece of historical Russia.

          Russia is Russia, but Ukraine is really a piece of historical Russia.
          1. sevryuk
            sevryuk 23 January 2022 00: 38
            -1
            RF - partly Russia. Maidanist UR - too.
    5. viktortarianik
      viktortarianik 17 January 2022 12: 27
      +8
      Nothing. And even Chernomyrdin, who seemed to be a smart business executive, being an ambassador, only drank vodka with Kui and talked about the wisdom of the Ukrainian people. In short, Russia, being preoccupied with its own problems, let everything take its course. And the "elite" of Ukraine, almost all of which grew out of the Communist Party, turned out to be the main enemy of the people.
    6. Knell wardenheart
      Knell wardenheart 17 January 2022 14: 06
      +1
      They slept)) believed that "the situation is under control."
  4. rocket757
    rocket757 17 January 2022 11: 14
    +3
    Why Ukraine did not become a strong state

    Prospects for Ukrainian statehood

    And who made a big mess, who are those guys???
    Look at them, what, did someone see the creators in them ???
    There, one to one, destroyers and thieves ... oh yes, even crazy independentists, which is also called a creative force, it’s only to make people laugh.
    1. frog
      frog 17 January 2022 11: 39
      +10
      Don't you know? One is a member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, the other worked at Yuzhmash, where he became the secretary of the party committee ....
      A significant part of those who launched this bagpipe are no less loyal Leninists, staunch fighters for a cause interesting to all participants in the enterprise, fiery party members. While it was profitable .... And then ... Then we know)) Like the vast majority of all such public repeat
      1. carpenter
        carpenter 17 January 2022 11: 55
        +6
        Quote: frog
        A significant part of those who launched this bagpipe are no less loyal Leninists, staunch fighters for a cause interesting to all participants in the enterprise, fiery party members.

        They were fiery "party members" when they were given power from Moscow, and as soon as Moscow stopped giving power, everyone became "ardent" nationalists (as in all 15 republics of the USSR).
        1. frog
          frog 17 January 2022 12: 56
          +2
          That is, the so-called "personnel issue" in the great and mighty, was simply not resolved. Since everything happened like that .... More precisely, it was decided the other way around wink, "top" got just such. ICHSH, in Russia itself it was the same. Bad luck .... As a result, a funny picture turned out, as soon as the baton disappeared - everything fell apart overnight. And after that they try something else there for the prospects to argue, if it were not for the terrible superman who, with the wave of a finger, broke the great state ...
          1. carpenter
            carpenter 17 January 2022 13: 48
            0
            Quote: frog
            More precisely, it was decided on the contrary, just such people got "upstairs". ICHSH, in Russia itself it was the same.

            Well, you yourself know who the "good lad" Kravchuk was, and the man who removed the Russian Kolbin from the First Secretary of Kazakhstan, and others whom many do not know, and especially. pre-war.
            1. frog
              frog 17 January 2022 15: 15
              0
              I know. As well as I know who many others were. But the laments of many on this subject are somewhat .... surprising wink
            2. Sergej1972
              Sergej1972 17 January 2022 18: 12
              +1
              Kolbin was removed by the same person who recommended him for the post of First Secretary. And he recommended him for the post of Chairman of the USSR People's Control Committee.
  5. Pavel73
    Pavel73 17 January 2022 11: 14
    +2
    The phrase "like sheep" should be removed. For the rest, I agree completely.
    1. NDR-791
      NDR-791 17 January 2022 11: 30
      +1
      Quote: Pavel73
      The phrase "like sheep" should be removed.

      Maybe just remove the union "how"?
      1. Dimy4
        Dimy4 17 January 2022 12: 04
        +2
        Don't hate sheep.
  6. Roman Efremov
    Roman Efremov 17 January 2022 11: 26
    +8
    Ukrainian statehood had one chance to exist: friendship with Russia and complete cultural and economic orientation towards Russia. Nobody needs Ukraine without Russia and is doomed to degradation (like Belarus, by the way). Well, in the current state of affairs, it is all the more doomed - Russia will not endlessly put up with the fact that it has at its side, on its gas and oil communications, there is an openly hostile, evil non-state.
    1. Ashes of Claes
      Ashes of Claes 17 January 2022 12: 32
      -1
      Quote: Roman Efremov
      on her There is a frankly hostile evil non-state in gas and oil communications.

      Since when did the GTS of Ukraine belong to Russia?
      1. Roman Efremov
        Roman Efremov 17 January 2022 16: 38
        +4
        Well, I’ll put it differently: on the territory through which our energy resources transit to Europe, an openly hostile, thieving and mischievous state has formed laughing
    2. Denis812
      Denis812 17 January 2022 12: 43
      +5
      Yes, Russia does not need someone to be "friends" with it. States have no friends.
      Is the United States, for example, Germany a friend? Of course not. Otherwise, the United States would not have been listening to Merkel and not hindering the economic projects of her "friend" in every possible way.

      We do not need Ukraine as some kind of "friend"
      We just need a normal relationship.
      It's just normal to live nearby, trade, not host the military infrastructure of a bloc that openly considers the Russian Federation its enemy and not infringe on the rights of Russians on its territory.
  7. your vsr 66-67
    your vsr 66-67 17 January 2022 11: 29
    +2
    In Kiev, they can’t understand and assimilate in any way that in the West they are strangers, they are viewed as defectors from a hostile camp who can be used as a tool against their former compatriots, and they have absolutely nothing to put on the contentment of impudent and poor freeloaders.
    Traitors have never been loved or trusted anywhere!
    1. frog
      frog 17 January 2022 11: 42
      +2
      What are you talking about???? Just as long as they were needed - everything was fine. Then it all ended a little, because the so-called. strong Ukraine has flattened few people. With t.z. economy - in the very West, and so everything is. With t.z. politicians - there are enough of their bawlers. Well, who needs it? And to become strong ourselves is to work hard. Well, sometimes think with your head at least wink
    2. Andrey Moskvin
      Andrey Moskvin 17 January 2022 11: 59
      0
      That's what the article says about it.
  8. Orel
    Orel 17 January 2022 11: 31
    -3
    The presence on the Russian borders of a Russophobic state, controlled by a geostrategic enemy and ready to resort to any provocation, is unacceptable for Russia. Such statehood should be reformatted within the framework of the Russian civilizational space or disappear from the political map of the world.


    Now it is a non-recognition of the right to exist of another state. We heard this, just following the example of Germany and Austria in the 30s of the XX century. This is a dangerous road.
    1. frog
      frog 17 January 2022 11: 44
      0
      I won’t put a picture known to everyone wink But it is she who is very useful here .... Because duplicity and double standards are the norm of life. See the central channels, various ardent fans of anything on the networks, and so on.
    2. Denis812
      Denis812 17 January 2022 12: 53
      +3
      If the existence of another state is a direct and obvious threat to the existence of your state, then, of course, this "other" state must be destroyed.

      But no one is saying that Ukraine needs to be turned into an asphalt skating rink by strikes from the Russian Strategic Missile Forces :)
      As the commentator wrote, we need to "reformat" it in a way that is more convenient for us.
      Change power, for example.
      The United States removed Yugoslavia from the map of the Earth - they removed it.
      In Libya and Iraq, the regime was forcibly changed and plunged the countries into chaos.
      They invaded Afghanistan (although they merged with their tail between their legs, in the end).
      Vietnam, Nicaragua. There are dozens of such cases on the conscience of Americans.
      This is where we need to be tough.
      When necessary, change modes. And when necessary - to protect those regimes that are more useful to us.
      (Belarus, Kazakhstan, Syria)
      Thank you wise Western teachers :)
      1. Ashes of Claes
        Ashes of Claes 17 January 2022 13: 11
        -4
        Quote: Denis812
        If the existence of another state is a direct and obvious threat to the existence of your state, then, of course, this "other" state must be destroyed.

        I'm embarrassed to ask - is it just enough to declare a "direct and obvious threat" and you can start destroying?
        Quote: Denis812
        The United States removed Yugoslavia from the map of the Earth - they removed it.

        In my opinion, Yugoslavia itself enthusiastically "removed". This is if you look closer.
        1. SlavaP
          SlavaP 17 January 2022 18: 39
          +1
          Alas, I do not agree. The Americans first created and nurtured vicious nationalist elites in all parts of the b. Yugoslavia, then they gave them weapons and pretended that they had come to "defend". The same scenario is repeated over and over again.
    3. sevryuk
      sevryuk 17 January 2022 12: 57
      0
      So the FRG did not recognize the existence of the GDR, did it turn out to be very dangerous for it?
      1. Denis812
        Denis812 17 January 2022 13: 13
        +4
        In the end - no. But if you remember, the GSVG was deployed just on the border of the GDR and the FRG.
        And ~ 50 years there was, to put it mildly, not very calm. And things could have ended very differently, by the way.
        Looking into the past, it is very convenient to assess who was right where and who was wrong.
        But we don't have the same convenience for the future.
        Therefore, there is a threat - it is necessary to assess and respond. You can't just sit and wait for it to go away on its own. Because it might not work out :)
    4. Andrey Zhdanov-Nedilko
      Andrey Zhdanov-Nedilko 17 January 2022 13: 51
      +3
      More about Austria. Unclear.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Liam
          Liam 17 January 2022 22: 16
          -1
          Quote: Weddinger
          where does the RE-unification (Wiedervereinigung) come from?

          Watch the events of 1918-1922 German Austrian Republic
          1. sevryuk
            sevryuk 21 January 2022 11: 57
            0
            Not a repeat, but a RECONNECT.
    5. Mikhail Sidorov
      Mikhail Sidorov 17 January 2022 14: 29
      +2
      Are you trying to compare Russia with Nazi Germany?
  9. tatra
    tatra 17 January 2022 11: 44
    +2
    Why did the Bolsheviks, after the October Revolution, not begin to divide the country among themselves, and the enemies of the Bolshevik-Communists, after their counter-revolution in Perestroika, divided the USSR among themselves?
    Why did the Bolsheviks-Communists and their supporters in the republics of the USSR coexist calmly and amicably, and their enemies, after they seized the republics of the USSR, spread anger against each other?
    But because the enemies of the Bolshevik-Communists hate each other, and did not want to live together in one country.
    1. yuriy55
      yuriy55 17 January 2022 12: 05
      -2
      Quote: tatra
      But because the enemies of the Bolshevik-Communists hate each other, and did not want to live together in one country.

      Iron logic! good
      Assumption. The enemies of the Bolshevik-Communists, like wolves in a pack, have no feelings for each other: only instincts and submission to brute force. The strong oppress the weak. The weak do what "the elder said"...
      1. Ashes of Claes
        Ashes of Claes 17 January 2022 14: 15
        -5
        Quote: yuriy55
        like wolves in a pack, they have no feelings for each other: only instincts and submission to brute force. The strong oppress the weak. The weak do what "the elder said"...

        Mowgli, are you????
    2. sniperino
      sniperino 18 January 2022 09: 49
      -1
      Quote: tatra
      Why the Bolsheviks did not divide the country among themselves after the October Revolution
      The Bolsheviks divided the country not among themselves, but with the Germans (see the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk). Land in exchange for power.
  10. samarin1969
    samarin1969 17 January 2022 11: 56
    -3
    Here again is the eternal tale about the evil "lords" (the elite). The collapse of the Union was held with the active support of the peoples of the 14 "SSR". For 70 years, the core was removed from the "superethnos", so the "new community of peoples" fell down. Not "overwhelming", but the MOST of Ukrainian citizens were for "independence". And they did it quite consciously. "Sheep" is not there and never was. Another thing is that few people were going to quarrel and fight.
    ps The myth of "class solidarity" brought a lot of grief to Russia even at 41 and now obscures the minds of many "Russians". In history, the class "friendship of peoples" existed only in the minds of dreamers or swindlers. In 1991, all the "working masses" of Eastern Europe and Central Asia shied away in unison in their "apartments". This is an obvious fact. Outside of Russia, only loners regret the collapse of the "socialist camp".
    1. tatra
      tatra 17 January 2022 12: 24
      -1
      Well, who dismembered the USSR, and de facto, centuries-old Russia? Supporters of the USSR, or YOU, enemies of the USSR?
    2. Denis812
      Denis812 17 January 2022 12: 59
      -3
      You are partially right.
      They do not regret at all about the Soviet Union, but about the common military-political and economic space.
      And I think millions and millions of gasters who are breaking into the Russian Federation are very sorry that they have all this hemorrhoids with passports, visas, permits and other things.
      Well, yes, there is a particle of people who went to demonstrations of workers in their childhood and so on. People remember some good times, yes. But it's like nostalgia. In childhood, when the grass was allegedly greener. But of course it wasn't :)

      And the collapse of the Union did not take place with the support of the "peoples". And about them in fact inaction. An empty refrigerator didn't give much time to think, "What's going on in Belovezhskaya Pushcha? Why don't I go outside and call the authorities to account?"
      Everyone stupidly wanted to eat and thought, well, OK, the USSR will disappear and "The West will help us."
      And in fact - shish without oil :)
    3. Mikhail Sidorov
      Mikhail Sidorov 17 January 2022 14: 39
      +8
      The collapse of the Union was held with the active support of the peoples of the 14 "SSR
      What kind of support for the collapse of the USSR are you talking about? See the March 1991 referendum data.
      1. Weddinger
        Weddinger 17 January 2022 21: 38
        -4
        The Soviet people voted not in a single referendum, but in other places:

        For example, when Yugoslav boots (women's) were "thrown away", for some reason a huge queue appeared, and no one rushed to the products of the local factory

        Ordinary jeans, in which half of the men now walk, were not on sale - and that's good - I'm scared to imagine how many victims there would be in the crowd at the store

        The USSR was a weak and backward state-tion and kept only at the expense of the "Iron Curtain". It was only a little bit to open the borders and everything collapsed. Almost the entire industry died at the time of the appearance of competition - and the "anti-Soviet" - ordinary Soviet people destroyed it, starting to take only imports

        There are many other states with a low standard of living, but the freedom to travel abroad stabilizes them - all active people go to work and break the state
  11. Andrey Moskvin
    Andrey Moskvin 17 January 2022 11: 58
    +4
    Some kind of Middle Ages.
  12. Ashes of Claes
    Ashes of Claes 17 January 2022 12: 28
    -2
    Such statehood should be reformatted within the framework of the Russian civilizational space or disappear from the political map of the world.


    Did the author of this passage, by chance, draw inspiration not from Hitler's speech to the generals in May 1938?
    "Czechoslovakia must disappear" was said. After, of course, the "reformatting" of the Sudetenland.
    1. The leader of the Redskins
      The leader of the Redskins 17 January 2022 12: 38
      -5
      The author writes only on two topics:
      Bad Ukraine and
      The collapse of tank building in Ukraine. Everything!
      From what he was "asked", that's what he writes about.
      1. Ashes of Claes
        Ashes of Claes 17 January 2022 13: 02
        -2
        Quote: Leader of the Redskins
        The author writes only on two topics:
        Bad Ukraine and
        The collapse of tank building in Ukraine. Everything!

        It is necessary to move on to the topic of Ukrainian cuisine. The topic is fresh, not hackneyed. There, too, presumably, the collapse and dominance of the damned Big Mac.
        In particular, I was touched by the pathos of the last paragraph. Ukraine, it turns out, has the only "natural" ally. It's so sweet... There was neither a seven-year mess in the Donbass, nor the Crimea, which crossed out this "naturalness", but these are trifles.
      2. Avior
        Avior 17 January 2022 13: 07
        -3
        The author is vehemently offended by fellow countrymen from Kharkov. It makes sense to consider all his articles with this factor in mind.
    2. Undecim
      Undecim 17 January 2022 12: 51
      +2
      Did the author of this passage, by chance, draw inspiration not from Hitler's speech to the generals in May 1938?

      No, the author draws inspiration directly from Mein Kampf:
      "Deutschösterreich muß wieder zurück zum großen deutschen Mutterlande" (German Austria must return to the great German homeland).

      Apukhtin almost word for word, even more "terrible":
      "Such statehood must be reformatted within the framework of the Russian civilizational space or disappear from the political map of the world."
      .
      So the author, in his propaganda frenzy, has already surpassed Hitler.
      1. Ashes of Claes
        Ashes of Claes 17 January 2022 13: 15
        0
        Quote: Undecim
        The author, in his propaganda frenzy, already draws inspiration from Hitler.

        The Duce had a similar thing about Abyssinia, emnip. Mussolini, it must be said, had more imperial pathos. The author would like
    3. sevryuk
      sevryuk 17 January 2022 13: 01
      0
      If Hitler had stopped at the Sudetenland and Austria, he would now have monuments in every city in Germany.
      1. Avior
        Avior 17 January 2022 16: 48
        +3
        A large concentration of power in one hand leads to the fact that a person cannot stop in time.
  13. tatra
    tatra 17 January 2022 12: 29
    +1
    All 104 years of the Soviet and their anti-Soviet-Russophobic periods, the enemies of the Bolshevik-Communists, with everything they did, said and wrote, proved that they, with a manic fix idea, were eager to take the country from the Bolshevik-Communists and their supporters, and all these 104 years they proved that they are not able to GIVE anything good to their country and people, only to take away, destroy, destroy, rob the country and people, kill, unleash wars, instill anger and hatred as the ideology and history of the country and people.
  14. sen
    sen 17 January 2022 12: 40
    0
    Why does Ukraine need statehood and who is its enemy

    Statehood is ostentatious. Ukraine is a US colony. Russia, too, almost became, but God saved.
  15. nikvic46
    nikvic46 17 January 2022 13: 17
    +2
    When they start from the wrong place, don’t expect anything good. If a guy and a girl start dating from bed, then we can say one hundred percent that they will not have a future. Ukraine had enough sovereignty at the time of the collapse. Betrayal literally struck all the republics of the USSR. Sovereignty is recognized by the UN. They wanted more. And they got what they got. Recently, a State Duma deputy called for a nuclear strike on the United States. They say all the republics illegally left Russia. But who supported this? President of the Russian Federation. That's what the people need to explain who is responsible for the collapse. As for the nuclear strike on the United States. The USSR immediately showed the United States that any nuclear strike on our territory would mean the beginning of a war with the United States. Whoever hit. And it worked.
  16. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 17 January 2022 13: 54
    -1
    Why does Ukraine need statehood and who is its enemy
    This formulation can be applied to Poland as well. Here is the Wild Field, there is a frenzied gentry. request The result will be one.
  17. north 2
    north 2 17 January 2022 14: 11
    -2
    words were uttered that the collapse of the USSR was the biggest catastrophe. And that's it. But the consequences of the disaster remained. Moreover, such consequences came out that Russians brought up in the USSR did not even suspect in fantasy and fairy tales about the friendship of peoples and fraternal peoples that such consequences could be. The main consequence of this catastrophe is the myth of the continuity of the Baltic States to restore independent states, and not the reality of creating new independent states on the results of the generosity of Russia and the Russians who gave them independence in 1991. The Ukrainian SSR immediately took advantage of this and began to create a lie that some kind of Ukraine, it turns out, had existed before the USSR for almost a thousand years.
    But without a historical failure, the consequences of the catastrophe for the Russians and for Russia would not have been so terrible. And the failure was that Soviet historiography forbade focusing on the fact that the Baltic States and Poland, together with the tribes from the Outskirts of Russia, always wished Russia to die, they betrayed Russia and served the enemies of Russia. So there is only one conclusion. The catastrophe after the collapse of the USSR was that these eternal nests of Russophobia and the lairs of Russia's enemies received their statehood in 1991.
    Question . Is Russia going to eliminate the consequences of this biggest catastrophe?
    1. Avior
      Avior 17 January 2022 16: 29
      +1
      One of the first declarations of independence was adopted by the RSFSR under the leadership of Yeltsin on June 12, 1990.
      Most of them just pulled out. This is such a disaster:
      1. Sergej1972
        Sergej1972 17 January 2022 18: 22
        +3
        It was the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the RSFSR, not of independence. I have always been an opponent of this document and do not consider June 12 to be any kind of holiday. But in fairness, this document did not mention independence and secession from the USSR.
        1. Avior
          Avior 17 January 2022 20: 32
          +1
          Sovereignty is what independence is.
          Sovereignty (through German Souveränität from French souveraineté [1] - supreme power, supremacy, domination [2]) - the independence of the state in external affairs and the supremacy of state power in internal affairs [3].

          It spoke about the creation of citizenship of the RSFSR, that the USSR would have powers only those that the RSFSR would transfer to it.
      2. north 2
        north 2 17 January 2022 20: 19
        0
        Quote: Avior
        One of the first declarations of independence was adopted by the RSFSR under the leadership of Yeltsin on June 12, 1990.
        Most of them just pulled out. This is such a disaster:

        so after all, it is not the statehood of an independent Russia that is the consequences of this catastrophe. The consequences, from which these events of 1989-1993 were called a catastrophe, is the creation of states in the eternal lairs of Russophobia and enemies of Russia, which the dreamers of the friendship of peoples called the Baltic Republics of the USSR and the Ukrainian SSR. Yeltsin was an ordinary communist functionary. People like the devil were afraid to study the history of the Russian state. And there it is written in black and white how the Baltic states and the tribes on the outskirts of Russia have always served the enemies of Russia.
        1. Avior
          Avior 17 January 2022 20: 35
          +2
          so after all, it is not the statehood of an independent Russia that is the consequences of this catastrophe.

          After Yeltsin's statement about the sovereignty of the RSFSR, it made no sense for everyone else to hold on to the Union; in a couple of months, everyone also declared sovereignty. After that, the Union had no chance to survive. :(
  18. prior
    prior 17 January 2022 14: 41
    0
    What Hitler planned to do with the USSR, the modern West has done with Ukraine.
    With her full approval. Voluntary slavery, disguised as supposedly democracy with Ukrainian flavor.
  19. Shiden
    Shiden 17 January 2022 19: 03
    -2
    Hello, the author, look at what is happening in the Russian Federation, the chief infantryman in the Caucasus is already deciding to take land from his neighbors, because you see someone was offended that he hugged him. And in the State Duma and Sofdef they took water in their mouths, and in the Kremlin they are silent like partisans during interrogation. And you give an assessment to Ukraine, well, it’s not funny. And you think that Russia is an established state if it cannot straighten the brains of one person who spit on the laws of the Russian Federation.
  20. tank64rus
    tank64rus 17 January 2022 19: 28
    0
    Here, as in one film, "Own among strangers, a stranger among his own."
  21. Alexander Lubomirsky
    Alexander Lubomirsky 17 January 2022 20: 30
    -1
    Why does Ukraine need statehood? To be honest, I don't think so.
  22. north 2
    north 2 17 January 2022 21: 34
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    One of the first declarations of independence was adopted by the RSFSR under the leadership of Yeltsin on June 12, 1990.
    Most of them just pulled out. This is such a disaster:

    You're not right ! The Lithuanian SSR declared a declaration of independence on March 11, 1990, the Latvian SSR declared independence on May 4, 1990, and the Estonian SSR declared sovereignty as early as November 1989. And the RSFSR declared a declaration of independence only in June 1990.
    1. Avior
      Avior 17 January 2022 22: 22
      +1
      besides them, before the RSFSR, declarations were adopted by Azerbaijan and Georgia.
      But all this did not have a serious meaning - they did not have the opportunity to really get out, no one took their declaration seriously, Estonia adopted the declaration back in 1988, but this had no real consequences.
      But immediately after the Yeltsin declaration of independence of the RSFSR, the rest fell sharply and the situation changed radically: ((
      1. north 2
        north 2 17 January 2022 23: 09
        +1
        In April 1990, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR adopted the Law on the procedure for resolving issues
        associated with the exit of the union republics from the USSR. So, the law itself allowed the republics to secede from the USSR, only it was necessary to follow the procedure for secession from the USSR. But since the withdrawal was allowed, which was the beginning of the agony of the USSR, it would be naive to hope that this agony would be stopped by some other procedure for the secession of the republics from the USSR. In fact, the separatists in the republics were not brought up and they did not observe the order that they were asked to observe in the death throes of the dying USSR. If this law had not been passed by the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, the KGB would have packaged the separatists in the republics, including the separatists in the RSFSR. After all, this law was for the RSFSR. And immediately the Baltic states announced their withdrawal from the USSR, and only then did the RSFSR declare independence. So they were all given real opportunities to leave the USSR and the declarations were accepted as fait accompli and legal acts, only without respect for decorum in the agony of the dying USSR embraced by agony.
        And how many communists sat in the Supreme Soviet of the USSR in April 1990, which adopted this law? 95 percent at least.
        1. Avior
          Avior 18 January 2022 00: 23
          -1
          Formally, according to the Constitution, all the republics were independent states and there was no ban on secession from the USSR.
          Article 72 Each Union Republic retains the right to freely secede from the USSR.

          Another thing is that it was really impossible to leave, and the law on exit did not change anything - it was impossible to really use it to exit, like the Constitution, no one left in accordance with this law, including the Baltic states. That is, formally, the possibility was, in fact, no, a complex and unrealizable exit procedure was prescribed there.
          The Declaration of Independence changed the most important article of the Constitution - Article 74
          In the event of a discrepancy between the Law of a Union Republic and the All-Union Law, the Law of the USSR shall apply.

          The declaration was the other way around.
    2. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 18 January 2022 10: 20
      +2
      Not about independence, but about state sovereignty, the Declaration was adopted on June 12, 1990.
  23. Maks1995
    Maks1995 17 January 2022 23: 15
    -1
    Thought on wood? without a single number?
    And not tired?

    In many proposals, he will replace Ukraine with Russia - the result will be close.
  24. alex51217
    alex51217 18 January 2022 06: 17
    0
    Well written, almost everything is true. And it’s not weak to write about Russia
  25. Yurix
    Yurix 18 January 2022 12: 17
    -1
    Zbigniew Brzezinski has always been an agent of the Kremlin. He advised tearing Ukraine away from Russia, assuring that Russia would die without it. But in fact, it turned out that Russia became stronger, and Ukraine was bent.
  26. tank64rus
    tank64rus 22 January 2022 14: 12
    +1
    All they achieved was washing toilet bowls and harvesting Polish gentlemen in lace knickers. What is the difference between the approaches of the West to the elites of Ukraine and Russia. It is no secret that after betraying the USSR, the elites all rushed to the West. There they were licked to begin with. Well, then the looting of the "saints of the 90s" began. In this case, Ukraine was "lucky", because all the "partners" rushed to rob the richest Russia. Therefore, in Ukraine, the oligarchy had more freedom for its "little hands" and could row money without the supervision of "partners". Well, then in Russia, GDP came to power with a team and energy prices jumped up, which he took advantage of. Russia has left the noose of the IMF. Slowly, the economy began to revive, although the "chicks of the Gaidar nest" harm wherever they can, not bypassing education with the help of their master Comrade Soros. But for some time now the Russian elite has been shown that they are not welcome in the West. The first bell sounded when Sarkozy put the oligarch Prokhorov in cold weather for three days in Courchevel. Well, more to come. With the exception of the specially elected, the Russian "elite" has no confidence in their wealth. The example of Gadaffi and Saddam is quite remarkable. Well, in Ukraine, after 14 years, the attitude towards the elite has changed, they decided to use it in a big game against Russia. Having failed with the Crimea, they decided to do the same with the rest of Ukraine. It's more expensive, but the end justifies the means. They invested in nationalist propaganda. re-education of the oligarchy, showing who is the boss on the mountain. Well, in Russia everyone hoped for old connections. As a result, for eight years the reformatting of the people has been very successful. Convinced of this, they began to seriously engage in the army itself. The fear that, as in the Crimea, the army will simply go over to the side of the Russian world is no longer scary. Well, then it will be possible to deal with bases and the placement of weapons. NATO, why should the Americans pay dues for Ukraine. There are enough freeloaders without her. And weapons can be placed without a piece of paper. Like this. Wait and see.
  27. Vadim Krymov
    Vadim Krymov 22 January 2022 14: 47
    -3
    "...having seized power and subordinating it to a narrow group of interested persons, she began to build an oligarchic state "for herself" to satisfy the interests of the ruling class in order to convert power into capital... ".
    Very accurate quote about modern Russia!
  28. place
    place 25 January 2022 15: 21
    0
    The word "elite" means "selective", "selected". The elite grows up among the people and, even under absolute Monarchy, it generates and selects the people in accordance with their traditions. So the author's clumsy attempt to present the people as in no way responsible for their History is an attempt to declare the people incomplete. In fact, everything is simple; what is the "state-forming", such is the state. Just like everywhere else in the world.

    As for the term "party nomenklatura", it was invented by the former party functionary and traitor - defector Voslensky back in the 79s. In fact, what kind of "nomenklatura" can there be in the party, where all positions are elected through and through according to the charter and are accountable to meetings? Interestingly, how else should the party charter turn inside out so that the "gentlemen, comrade communists" actually begin to fulfill their statutory duties?
    Again, we come to the obvious: what are the rank and file members of the party, such will be the party ..... How were we taught in the Soviet school? The people themselves are the creator of their history. Now let's add: he also disentangles this story to the fullest, which is very, very fair.
  29. Sychev Vitalii
    Sychev Vitalii 14 February 2022 21: 23
    0
    The author asks a very stupid question about statehood. Apparently counting on narrow-minded chauvinist commentators. However, let him answer the question, but why does she need Russia?