Military failures: the price of liberalism
Don't ask for whom the bell tolls
he calls for you.
he calls for you.
At what historical point are we and where will the pendulum of fate swing?
So: it is important to understand at what point stories we are located? In 1914, at the beginning of the First World War, when the whole society was on the rise and welcomed the war? In 1943, when did the turning point in the war come? Or we can slide back to 1915-1917. - when, due to failures at the fronts, rumors of betrayal began to circulate? Or once again come to the cold shower of 1941? And the current military failures - the first call?
It was categorically impossible to surrender the Kharkov bridgehead, since we caused enormous damage to the population left there and to the entire Russian world. The decision to annex the liberated territories leveled this failure, but Krasny Liman, the surrender of which raised the question of the real power of our army, showed that the systemic problem lies not only in the actions and within the army itself, but also much higher.
Can Army No. 22 push Army No. 2, or are we no longer No. 2? And the mass exodus of our conscripts, failures at the front, the lack of UAVs and electronic intelligence, the insufficient size of the army - all this is the price for the liberal course. What if they attack us from all sides? While our elites were enriching, NATO forces surrounded us around the perimeter. Ready hotbeds of conflict - Georgia, Moldova, Central Asia. And how will defense and warfare be organized then?
Tests by war are the highest test for the state. In the course of history, states are tested, and those who do not pass them are eliminated from the process. Almighty Byzantium, the Golden Horde, the Ottoman Empire are examples of this.
According to the "Challenge-Response" concept of the historian Arnold Toynbee, the survival of a civilization is determined by the ability of the ruling stratum to respond to the challenges of history (fate). The most important prerequisite for the crisis is the spiritual decline of the nation and its leaders; growth accompanies the rise of spirituality.
Do the actions of the country's leadership meet the current historical challenge? The historic decision of V. Putin on the beginning of the NWO and the annexation of new territories is in full measure. But they require huge efforts of the nation and resources! So what's next?
Our history very clearly obeys Toynbee's law: Tsarist Russia, which is unsuccessfully promoted by our liberal media, collapsed with a crash, losing in the First World War; and the USSR, which is criticized and scolded in every possible way, together with Joseph Stalin, was able to build empire No. 2, an alternative to the United States, which was able to win World War II and become the second center of the world.
The former commander of US forces in Europe, Ben Hodges, voices the goal of the West - the collapse of the Russian Federation into nation-states. In his opinion,
“…Ukraine will win this armed conflict… The Kremlin is facing a crisis of confidence of historic proportions… the weaknesses that have been exposed… are so serious that we may be witnessing the beginning of the end… of the Russian Federation.”
How familiar is it that only one of them did not want our end? The last was Germany - which had its "military" teeth knocked out forever. The victory will be ours, but the current war is a serious test for the liberal model of the state: will it survive or will another, renewed and cleansed Russia win the victory?
It is one thing to solve internal miscalculations of state policy one on one with its population using the methods of “managed democracy”, PR technologies, but a real military confrontation is quite another, where all the weaknesses of the state and defense are visible to the naked eye. And the measure of these actions is not the abstract figures of losses, which are voiced by the press center of the Defense Ministry, but the specific movements of the troops.
Now history presents us with full accounts not only for the collapse of the USSR as the main cause of the current conflict, but also for friendship with the West, and for the collapse of Russia and its army in the dashing 90s, and not only.
The most important blow to the army was the catastrophic results of the reforms, when the officer corps and the size of the army were reduced, and the military system of personnel training was dealt a blow.
All this was back in the mid-2000s, when our liberals inspired us that the West is our friend, and the army should be minimal (!). And this at a time when the former allies of the USSR along the perimeter were actively accepted into NATO. The intervention of the president stopped this catastrophe, but further measures were incomplete.
The second blow to the army was errors in strategic planning that did not allow us to prepare for a future war, starting from the period of the Syrian campaign, and also after the Minsk agreements, although all the events that were taking place indicated that a war in Ukraine was inevitable.
Our historical problem is that we poorly foresee the trouble. The West already 70 years ago had, has now and will continue to have various plans for our destruction for periods ranging from a year to tens of years. And the fact that the war in Ukraine was planned was written in the reports of the analytical companies of the US intelligence services. And we only play short!
We had at least 8 years during which we could build a powerful UAV air fleet, increase the size of the armed forces, create military reserves, and develop the latest electronic intelligence systems. But this was not done.
The problem is that in a liberal state everything is decided by money, but in an efficient state, the main thing is the goals set and their implementation. What got in the way - corruption, sabotage, bribery, treason, incompetence? Why do we have imports all around? Because our officials lobbied for the interests of transnational corporations, and the oligarchy does not need the technological development of the country, since it will quickly sweep away their power.
Where there is money, there is the devil
As Pyotr Stolypin wrote:
“Where there is money, there is the devil. The motherland demands a service so sacrificially pure that the slightest thought of personal gain darkens the soul and paralyzes the work.
Can people whose moral ideals allow the search for personal gain, and whose service to the people and the state is carried out according to the residual principle, among officials and the military achieve success in serving the state. Win, create, make? No wonder it is said: "The way of the wicked will perish."
All this can be seen in the example of our industry, as well as the space industry, which is rolling down, which has not been able to solve the problems of its own microelectronic base for all this time. During this time since the beginning of the “Crimean” sanctions, it was impossible to carry out import substitution of critically important types of products? To develop your own production of civil aircraft - what only the lazy did not write about? But even now, starting something, we are largely looking for salvation in imports, only from third countries. Gaidar's principles still guide our policy. But the US is actively closing these channels as well.
As A. Solzhenitsyn wrote about the reasons for the collapse of tsarist Russia in 1917:
“The ruling class lost its sense of duty, was not burdened by its undeserved hereditary privileges, enumeration of the rights preserved during the emancipation of the peasants ... the state consciousness left it the most.”
So who authorized all this, who saved on the army until the thunder struck? The answer is simple: liberal accountants from the Ministry of Finance, whose leaders are officially in the service of the IMF, who until recently saved on many things that are important, but let our officials get into the treasury. And really last year, when it was clear that there would be a war, it was impossible to put the military machine on the 5th speed? As Alexander III did - "The whole treasury - to the war!". Or Joseph Stalin?
We had 8 years, and in 10 years, Soviet Russia during the period of industrialization made a giant leap, turning from a backward agrarian country into the second center of the world. Industrial production in the USSR in the period 1928–1937. increased by 2,5–3,5 times, that is, 10,5–16% per year (!). And this at a time when the capitalist world was in the grip of the Great Depression! What are our growth rates since 2014 – 1-2% per year? And as liberal adherents inspired us - "this is a new economic reality."
Where is the reality - at the headquarters of the "Washington regional committee" and the world behind the scenes? We have everything to repeat the successes of the USSR, but for this we must understand what we really need and get rid of our "fifth column" - those who do not allow us to develop and win.
Cause of failures in task setting, coordination and thinking
As I. Stalin said about industrialization:
“We are 50-100 years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or we will be crushed ... "
Why was the state of I. Stalin and Peter I a tremendous success? Because they selected performers not on the basis of loyalty, but on the principle of success and kept everyone in a tight leash.
However, during the reign of Nicholas II and L. Brezhnev, and recently, this was not the case. If an official fails his direction, he will receive a new one, and so on. Another fashion is to appoint not specialized specialists to the management, but effective managers who make sure that “the money goes in the right way”. The result, as they say, is obvious. Similar problems reduced the effectiveness of army management and created personnel problems.
As the British (!) historian Isaac Deutscher wrote:
“The essence of Stalin's truly historic achievements is that he accepted Russia with a plow, and leaves it with nuclear reactors. He raised Russia to the level of the second industrialized country in the world. It was not the result of purely material progress and organizational work. Such achievements would not have been possible without a comprehensive cultural revolution, during which the entire population attended school and studied very hard.
It was difficult for Tsarist Russia to concentrate resources for waging war. It is always difficult for the rich to give money to the state. Budgetary policy then collapsed, the necessary taxes were introduced too late. The country was suffocating from unbearable payments abroad - tsarist Russia was the largest debtor in the world.
Whereas in the USSR there were no such problems - all resources were owned by the state - and it could afford any expenses within the limits of cash reserves.
The burden of war and the oligarchic system are incompatible, and we must understand this: the sooner the better. The oligarchs can throw themselves into the war - but this is not the level of solving the problem. All large commodity companies should become the property of the state.
A state in which money is the main motive will not stand. When the Germans pinned us down in 1941, the Soviet people produced so many weapons, including new as much as we needed, and we knocked over this devilish reptile. And in tsarist Russia there was a “shell hunger” and a shortage of competent officers. Military contractors in tsarist Russia profited from rising prices, there were not enough weapons, they bought them abroad.
And now we see how private firms inflate the prices of equipment and other military equipment. We cannot control this. "They're trying to cash in." "Nothing personal just business". This is capitalism. All the supply of the army, the entire military-industrial complex must be transferred to the public sector. This is not the production of televisions or telephones: there is competition there - not here. Private contractors will increase prices, while the state-owned enterprises of the USSR during the war showed an increase in efficiency: labor productivity and lower prices.
During the times of the USSR, in its best time, we had a single society. Although at that time there was already hazing in the army, most of the youth honestly served. But during the “blessed market”, the scale of evasion from service increased, including on a corrupt basis. And the situation in the army worsened.
Another most unpleasant manifestation of liberalism is that society is losing Russian collectivism and gaining Western individualism. Now among the youth who do not know what the USSR is, there is a layer in which there is apoliticality, cosmopolitanism, anti-patriotism, lack of understanding of personal duty to society. There are unemployed people who do not create families.
In Soviet times, there was no such picture - society was generally healthy, although it was limited in complete freedom. The main danger of liberalism is that it splits our society and elites. And trust and unity are now the main factor of victory and the most important element of the army's motivation.
The crowds at the borders are the fledglings of liberalism. Most likely, those who made good money here are leaving. And not all of them would have been drafted. But the question is different. These people are without a Russian core - they took everything from the country, but did not want to give anything to it. Nothing personal just business. Their homeland is where there is money and comfort, but there is no responsibility. And if we didn’t have people of the old school who absorbed patriotism with mother’s milk and the upbringing of fathers and grandfathers, our state would collapse like a colossus with feet of clay, repeating the fate of tsarist Russia.
Fate tests us in confrontation with the West in order to save our identity and fulfill our historical mission - to be the antipode of the West. And if Russia yields, the world will plunge into chaos caused by the social and moral decay of the world system of liberal capitalism. Ukraine and Europe are waiting for the collapse of the economy and a cold winter, and world markets - another collapse of the markets and a new Great Depression.
World status of Russia
Another historical task is to restore the world status of Russia to the status of the USSR, to gather the Russian world and create a broad anti-Western coalition. But can we fulfill this historic task? Or will we follow the path of tsarist Russia? Think about it, if it were not for 1917, having the trends of that time, could it resist fascism in 1941?
Having made a historical loop, we have largely recreated the phantom of pre-revolutionary Russia with all its shortcomings, and the similarity is very great. But then we ran into a wall. And the reason is very simple - the colossal positive experience of the USSR was rejected for class (!) reasons. But fate decisively pushes us forward, despite the resistance of the pro-Western elites.
Only a comprehensive anti-liberal restructuring will save the country and give victory. Maybe we will finally heed the recommendations of the left-wing parties - the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and A Just Russia, which have quite effective recipes for us?
We have annexed new territories - and we must build an effective economy there so that people can feel the difference.
Moscow - Third Rome. But Victory is given only to the worthy! And Victory will come when we show our new face to the world by building an advanced model of a mixed economy, taking all the best from our historical heritage and, most importantly, throwing liberalism into the dustbin of history. And this will become the center of gravity of the Russian world and the anti-Western coalition.
Without a large-scale purge of elites, officials, a change in the economic course and reform of the army, this war cannot be won.
Information