Military Review

N.S. Trubetskoy "The Russian Problem" from the book "The Legacy of Genghis Khan"

We bring to your attention another article by N.S. Trubetskoy. In order not to distract the reader to historical "irritants", a small edition of the text was carried out, written from this becomes relevant, without losing its meaning today.

"Russian problem"

N.S. Trubetskoy "The Russian Problem" from the book "The Legacy of Genghis Khan"

... There are truths recognized more or less by all. The war, the revolution and the experimenters brought Russia to such utter economic disruption, from which it can get out only gradually, for a very long time and with the indispensable condition of the most active and energetic help of foreigners. The authorities, thinking primarily about self-preservation, managed to create a regime in which the hungry and disarmed population is capable, at best, only of small local riots, partly suppressed by the force, partly suppressed by an "explosion from the inside" thanks to a clever system of propaganda and provocations. Any large-scale anti-government movement is impossible without foreign support that has been actively and seriously carried out until the end. Voluntary easing of the regime is possible only on condition that the authorities will be able to guarantee their integrity in some other way, for example, by some lasting and reliable agreement with foreigners, without whose help the overthrow of this authority is still impossible. So, the establishment in Russia of any tolerable living conditions, ensuring the security and material needs of the population, is possible only with the help of foreigners, foreign intervention.

By the name of "foreigners" we mean, of course, those "great powers" who fought world wars. Who they are - we now know. The wars washed away the whitewash and the rouge of humane Roman-German civilizationand now the descendants of the ancient Gauls and Germans showed their true face to the world, - the face of a beast of prey, voraciously clanging with its teeth. This beast is a real "real politician." It is not like our "members of the public." He does not believe in a miracle, he laughs at ideas. Give him prey, food, more and more tasty. And if you don't, he will take it, - then he has technology, science and culture, and most importantly guns and armadillos.

These are the foreigners, without whose assistance the “restoration of Russia” is impossible. They fought among themselves for world domination. The world had to be divided or given entirely to one winner. However, neither was achieved. Huge Russia, constituting the sixth part of the world, remained a “draw”. Until it is shared or given away to one of the Romano-Germanic animals, world war can not be considered finished. This is the essence of the "Russian problem" for the Romano-Germans. The latter look at Russia as a possible colony.. The huge size of Russia does not confuse them at all. In terms of population, India is larger than Russia, and yet all of it is captured by England. Africa surpasses Russia in size, and yet all of it is divided among several Roman-German powers. So it should be with Russia. Russia is a territory in which this and that grows, in which there are such and such minerals. It is unimportant that there is a population in this territory: ethnographers will take care of it; Politics is mainly interested in the territory and the native population only as a labor force.

Is it possible to imagine that these same foreigners, who helped Russia "recover" and stand on its feet, will kindly worship and step aside? In order of a miracle, such a picture can be drawn for oneself, but if one is to stand on the point of view of real possibilities and probabilities, one must admit that such a turn of affairs is definitely excluded. Those Romano-German powers that will help Russia, more precisely, will assist Russia, for assistance is needed for a long time, they will, of course, not for philanthropic reasons, and will try to put things in such a way that in exchange for this help get Russia as their colony. It is difficult to foresee which of the Romano-German powers will play this role, whether it will be England, Germany, America or a consortium of powers that will divide Russia into "spheres of influence". We can only say with certainty that it is not possible to fully incorporate Russia into one or another power, or to include it entirely in the official list of any power’s colonial possessions. Russia will be given a shadow, the appearance of independence, it will be planted some unconditionally submissive foreigners governmentwhich will enjoy the same rights as the government of Bukhara, Siam or Cambodia used to. It makes no difference whether this government will be a Social Revolutionary, Cadet, Bolshevik, Octobrist or rightist. The important thing is that it will be fictitious..

Here is the really possible perspective, which is drawn with an impartial look at the situation that has been created. The restoration of Russia is possible only at the cost of losing its independence.

The authorities can not ignore the inevitability of a foreign yoke. The whole policy of foreigners in relation to Russia in general boils down to the fact that foreigners hope to create the aforementioned obedient Russian government; the government is playing in the giveaway, it releases the claws. Due to this process is delayed. It is certainly more profitable for foreigners to “tame” any power than to overthrow it and replace it with a new one, and they will begin a decisive overthrow only when they are convinced that it is impossible to “tame” the power. That is why the power of their ambiguous tactics gains time. But no matter how slow the process is, there are still only two prospects ahead - either turn into a government submissive to foreigners, like the government of Cambodia or Bukhara, or leave, giving its place to the same submissive government, composed of other representatives.
... Socialism, liberalism - the essence of the generation of the Roman-German civilization. They presuppose certain conditions of a social, economic, political and technical nature that exist in all the Romano-Germanic countries, but do not exist in the countries of the "backward", that is, they did not have time to become completely like the Romano-Germanic countries. They will continue to "set the tone" and occupy a dominant position. Russia, which squandered its last forces on the attempts to implement socialism (later - liberalism) under the most adverse conditions and in the absence of the necessary socio-economic and technical prerequisites for this, will be completely subordinate to these "advanced" states and will be subjected to their most shameless exploitation.

... The page of history that reads "Russia is a great European power" turned upside down once and for all. From now on, Russia has entered a new era in its life, in an era of loss of independence. Future Russia is a colonial country similar to India, Egypt or Morocco.

This is the only real opportunity that exists in the future for Russia, and any real politician should be considered only with this opportunity, unless a miracle happens.

Russia's entry into the family of colonial countries takes place under fairly favorable conditions. The prestige of the Romano-Germans in the colonies has been falling noticeably lately. Despicable "natives" everywhere gradually begin to raise their heads and be critical of their masters. Romano-Germans, of course, themselves to blame. During World War II, they conducted propaganda in foreign colonies, discrediting each other in the eyes of the "natives." They trained these natives in military affairs and forced them to fight at the front against other Romano-Germans, accustoming the natives to victory over the “master race”. They hatched among the natives the class of intellectuals with European education and at the same time showed to these intellectuals the true face of European culture, in which it was impossible not to be disappointed. Be that as it may, the desire for liberation from the Roman-German yoke is now evident in many colonial countries, and if in some of them this desire manifests itself in meaningless, easily suppressed armed uprisings, in others there are signs of a more serious and deep national movement.

... In the foggy distance, it is as if the prospects for the future liberation of oppressed humanity from the yoke of the Roman-Germanic predators open up. It is felt that the Romano-Germanic world is aging, and that its old gnawed teeth will soon be incapable of tearing and chewing tidbits of enslaved colonies.

Under such conditions, the entry into the environment of the colonial countries of the new colonial country, the vast Russia, which used to exist independently and look at the Romano-Germanic states as values ​​that are more or less equal to it, can be a decisive impetus to the emancipation of the colonial world from the Romano-German oppression . Russia can immediately become the head of this world movement. And it must be admitted that the Bolsheviks, who by their experiments undoubtedly eventually led Russia to the inevitability of becoming a foreign colony, at the same time prepared Russia for its new historical role as leader for the liberation of the colonial world from the Roman-German yoke.

... In the minds of a significant part of "Asians", Russia was firmly associated with the ideas of national liberation, with a protest against the Roman-Germans and European civilization. This is how Russia is viewed in Turkey, in Persia, in Afghanistan and in India, partly in China and in some other countries of East Asia. And this view prepares the future role of Russia, Russia is no longer a great European power, but a huge colonial country, standing at the head of its Asian sisters in their joint struggle against the Romano-Germanic and European civilization. In the victorious outcome of this struggle - the only hope for the salvation of Russia. In the past, when Russia was still a great European power, it was possible to say that Russia's interests converge or disagree with the interests of one or another European state. Now such talk is meaningless. From now on, the interests of Russia are inextricably linked with the interests of Turkey, Persia, Afghanistan, India, and perhaps China and other Asian countries. "Asian orientation" becomes the only possible for a true Russian nationalist.

But if the consciousness of the population of a significant part of Asian countries is prepared to accept Russia in its new historical role, then the consciousness of Russia itself is by no means prepared for this role. The Russian intelligentsia in its mass continues to slavishly bow down before European civilization, to look at itself as a European nation, to reach out for the natural Romano-Germans and to dream that Russia is culturally in all respects like the real Romano-Germanic countries. Conscious desire to dissociate from Europe is the lot of only individual personalities. If some of our refugees and immigrants are disappointed in the French and the British, in most cases this depends on a purely personal resentment against the "allies", who had to be insulted and humiliated during the evacuation and during their lives in refugee camps. Quite often, this disappointment in the "allies" immediately turns into an exaggerated idealization of the Germans; thus, the Russian intellectual still remains in the orbit of the worship of the Romano-Germans (not so differently), and the question of a critical attitude towards European culture does not arise in it.

Under such conditions, the foreign yoke may prove fatal for Russia. A significant part of the Russian intelligentsia, introducing the Romano-Germans and looking at their homeland as a backward country, which "should learn a lot" from Europe, without a twinge of conscience will go to the service of foreign enslavers and will help the cause of enslavement not for fear, but for conscience and oppression of Russia. Let us add to this all the fact that at first the arrival of foreigners will be associated with some improvement in the material conditions of existence, further, that on the external side Russia's independence will remain as if unaffected, and finally, that the fictitiously independent, unconditionally submissive to foreigners the government at the same time will undoubtedly be extremely liberal and advanced. All this, to a certain extent closing the essence of the matter from some parts of the philistine mass, will facilitate self-justification and transactions with the conscience of those Russian intellectuals who will give themselves to serve the enslaved foreigners. And this way you can go far: first, jointly with foreigners help to the starving population, then service (of course, in small roles) in the offices of foreign concessionaires, in managing a foreign “control commission over Russian debt”, and there also in foreign counterintelligence and t .d

This service to foreigners in itself is not yet so dangerous and not so deserving of condemnation, especially since in many cases it will simply be inevitable. The most harmful is, of course, the moral support of foreign rule. Meanwhile, with the modern trend of the minds of the Russian intelligentsia, one has to admit that such support from the majority of this intelligentsia will undoubtedly be rendered. This is the worst thing. If the foreign yoke will be morally supported by the majority of the Russian intelligentsia, who continue to bow to European culture and see in this culture an unconditional ideal and model to be followed, then Russia will never be able to throw off the foreign yoke and realize its new historical mission - the liberation of the world from the power of the Roman-German predators. The implementation of these tasks is possible only under the condition that the consciousness of the whole Russian society will undergo a sharp change towards the spiritual separation of oneself from Europe, the confirmation of one’s national identity, the striving for original national culture and the rejection of European culture.

If such a change occurs, victory is assured and no service to foreigners, no physical subordination to the Romano-Germans is terrible. If this does not happen, Russia will face an inglorious and final death.


Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dzerzhinets
    Dzerzhinets 1 June 2013 10: 52
    Excellent analytical material .., shelf life of 100 years, completely fresh only 87 years on the shelf, the first freshness of sturgeon ... The author can be forgiven for peremptory language, he wrote about a sore, torn heart and wounded soul. Honestly, reading was started in the third paragraph, and in the middle there came a bifurcation point, seeing the date of the material, let off steam ... I sat and thought EVERYTHING ACTUALLY, MODERN AND Pragmatic .., HARD AND FIRST, THIS MATTER AND THE YEARS WERE NOT CHANGED ...
    1. soldat1945
      soldat1945 1 June 2013 22: 09
      I disagree with you on the following grounds: the author’s mediocrity Russia is an independent civilization, there is no need to focus on anyone, it was thought up by liberal politicians inside Russia and because of this, Russia has such big problems in the historical context, by the way, in my opinion, the author is an emigrant divorced from historical realities since in the year 26 the formation of Russia began anew as an independent state, Russia had a rise under rulers tuned inside Russia: Vyatoslav, Ivan IV, Catherine II, Stalin, while everyone was trying to find a dialogue with Europe, Russia was in decline, Nikolai II, Khrushchev, Gorbachev, etc., even Peter 1, taking a lot of good from the west and giving the industrial leap to the country, split inside and the consequences hitherto, we are a strong state in a civilizational sense, and Asia with its cunning and Europe with its liberal values ​​is nobody to us, our strength is inside us! I apologize for the pathos, but with whom of my colleagues I didn’t talk to everyone, they don’t give a damn about their neighbors, they all want to see the order inside, maybe in Moscow over the years there is a different opinion there everyone shouts about human rights democracy but Moscow is not all Russia, but people got tired of it !
      1. evfrat
        1 June 2013 23: 32
        If you read the article to the end, you would understand that the author writes about this ...
        1. soldat1945
          soldat1945 3 June 2013 21: 43
          You apparently didn’t carefully read it yourself, the author indicates that you need to abandon the European focus and during the article talked about the advantages of the Asian one, and we repeat, we don’t need another civilization ourselves!
  2. rJIiOK
    rJIiOK 1 June 2013 13: 30
    ... And then Stalin brought our country to the forefront.
    If now, in the same situation, we do not have a powerful national leader who will again pull out our country, then there is nothing to rely on.
  3. Fidain
    Fidain 1 June 2013 13: 35
    Let everybody read and re-read all the liberals and all those who want America or England to seize democracy in RF. But I justify the power, but any power catori care about national interests is better than foreign "benefactors".
  4. omsbon
    omsbon 1 June 2013 13: 38
    How many years have passed, but nothing has changed in relation to Russia.
    I want to take the liberty and try to sign photos that are so successfully inserted into the text of the article.
    So, what happened:
    1 - "actor and clown";
    2 - "two idiots: a drunkard and a loser womanizer";
    3 - "I don't believe you - I don't believe you either";
    4 - "boa constrictor and stuffed rabbit";
    5 - "let's live together";
    6 - "chew x_y - chew yourself";
    7 - "jackal and hyenas";
    8 - I do not know who it is
    9 - RUSSIA
    1. rJIiOK
      rJIiOK 1 June 2013 13: 54
      It turned out well with the signatures)
    2. Gari
      Gari 1 June 2013 14: 21
      Quote: omsbon
      I want to take the liberty and try to sign photos that are so successfully inserted into the text of the article.

      + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
      that's just the first one you can add
      1. actor and recruited clown (Judas)
    3. baltika-18
      baltika-18 1 June 2013 15: 24
      Quote: omsbon
      8 - I do not know who it is

      Bykov, it seems, is a poet. According to dad, Zilbeltrud, an impudent Jewish mug.
      1. Sour
        Sour 1 June 2013 17: 50
        What kind of poet is he? ...
        So rhyming is cheap. Language does not turn to call him a poet.
  5. rexby63
    rexby63 1 June 2013 14: 41
    either turn into a government obedient to foreigners, like the government of Cambodia or Bukhara, or leave, leaving its place to the same obedient government

    And yet - what time period did Nikolai Sergeevich himself mean?
  6. IllI4
    IllI4 1 June 2013 16: 27
    And please, a link to the article without a "small text revision", if possible.
    1. evfrat
      1 June 2013 18: 15

  7. Marek Rozny
    Marek Rozny 1 June 2013 22: 35
    If Trubetskoy had lived in our time, then he would have been eager for him to become our (Kazakhstani) foreign minister or Russian. A person with an absolutely clear understanding of "who is who" in the world.
  8. biglow
    biglow 2 June 2013 09: 37
    Prince well done. In isolation from the homeland, such a good vision of the role of Russia and its future.
  9. deman73
    deman73 2 June 2013 19: 41
    An interesting article can be gleaned a lot of cognitive for our time.
  10. dmb
    dmb 3 June 2013 16: 23
    So what did the current co-author want to say? That the Bolsheviks strove to establish a foreign yoke. And who is this co-author? He hid rather bashfully behind Trubetskoy, and it seems that not much remained of the latter's thoughts. If anyone contributed to the foreign yoke, it was the supporters of the "United and Indivisible", who promised the invaders for help in the Caucasus and the Far East. Actually for this reason, many officers and went over to the side of Soviet power. The fact that it was the Bolsheviks who kept Russia within its borders as much as possible was recognized even by the tsar's relatives. Returning to the co-author, I would like to ask, what does he offer today, if socialism and capitalism (and liberalism is just a kind of the latter) do not suit him. Instead of answering such questions, living co-authors either promise to answer later and do not fulfill their promises, or they begin to vaguely wander about Orthodoxy, forgetting that our state is secular, and faith does not at all determine who owns the main means of production.
    1. evfrat
      4 June 2013 01: 06
      Read the original and compare the above link in the comments. The article removes chronological features for what you would just see: what the author accused of power in the 20 years can be attributed to the period of the last 28 years. Therefore, the text is given in the wording, so as not to embarrass some who are late to be born in the revolution. Calm down, co-author Ilyich did not touch the udder and did not add his thoughts, it makes no sense, because everything was said by the great minds of Russia, with which you and I can not compete.
      1. dmb
        dmb 4 June 2013 11: 58
        You see, dear, I did not read the original in electronic form, but in electronic form this is most likely in the presentation of Mr. Dugin. The meaning of my comment was reduced not so much to criticism as to trying to hear the answer to my questions. To my deep regret. everything, as always, ended with an assessment of the minds in the terminology of the hippodrome.
  11. Evrepid
    Evrepid 4 June 2013 16: 55
    The article seemed somewhat ambiguous to me. There is a third world and leadership at the same time.