Between 1991 and 2001 The West achieved the goals that it set as a maximum program during the Crimean War in 1853-1856, to drive Russia into the borders of the first half of the 17th century, that is, the last years of Michael's reign, to turn it into an isolated, continental power (at least in part, thus weaken the transcontinental), destroy the fleet, military and scientific potential. Has the information psychological war of the West against Russia stopped after this? Has Russophobia gone down? Not stopped and not gone. And that means a few things.
First, even as weak as it is now, the West continues to perceive Russia as a geostrategic and cultural-historical danger. Russia still ranks first on the list of threats to the US 1999, and now, logically, as was once done with France and Germany, Russia will be set off with China (and China with Russia) economically and militarily politically.
Secondly, the perception of Russia by the West as an Alien, apparently, will continue as long as Russia and the West exist in their current form.
Thirdly, in the long term, the West will seek to maximize the weakening - up to disintegration - of Russia (many in the West have openly said and spoken about this, including Bill Clinton’s “friend” in October 1995) to such an extent that geo-strategic quality and cultural-historical identity, socio-cultural code, in which non-classism, orientation to social justice and egalitarianism are embedded in Russia. And this is another reason why, even if the transcontinentality is removed, Russia will always be unloving the class-bourgeois world, especially its cold Anglo-Saxon core.
Two factors guarantee the relative safety of Russia in the modern world so far: nuclear weapon (and the army in general) and education. It is for these two goals that strikes are and will be inflicted.
No need to demonize the West. He seeks to remove the competitor - nothing personal. He just does his job; Russophobia, despite the fact that there are many real Russophobes in the West (but not so much), plays an instrumental role. And the answer must be symmetrical - nothing personal either.
It is not necessary to blame the West for the fact that (with our help) it has destroyed the USSR, which turned out to be in crisis, and now it wipes its legs on Russia - itself and with the help of its “sixes”. Vae victis. That's the enemy, not to regret, but to beat. Other things being equal (this is evidenced by the experience of Yugoslavia and Iraq), as soon as it becomes possible to use military means to remove Russia from history with impunity, this will be done during the “Macropolitan War”, as the West has already tried to do through the Crimean War. Moreover, now for the first time in all the centuries, the West has got a real, not comparable with the Napoleonic and Hitler variants, the ability to erase Russia with the eraser of history, to destroy it metaphysically and forever.
11 August 1984 Mr. Reagan, checking the microphone before the press conference, and maybe, really, and wanting to frighten the Soviet leadership, instead of the usual one-two-three, said the following: "Dear Americans, I am pleased to report that only that he signed the law declaring Russia out of law for all time. The bombing will start in five minutes. ” Here it is, Freudian proverb. There was no reaction from the disarranged Soviet leadership, but it was necessary to respond - whether verbally, by actions, whether asymmetrically, but necessary. Nothing personal, just an answer to the idea of the possibility of declaring Russia out of the law and “bombing the stone age”. There is no doubt that with the impunity of the possibility of “outlawing Russia”, as soon as it becomes completely weak or the need for it as a means of world games disappears, this will be done.
Ironically, the history of “erasure” can begin with a conflict provoked precisely where 150 years ago were the main theaters of the Crimean War - in the Crimea and the Caucasus, but, naturally, using ethnopolitical novelties of the end of the 20th century, for example, Kosovo. hyperboloid. The erasure in question is an integral element of the struggle to complete the establishment of Western domination, more precisely, the information and financial core of the “Western matrix” over the world. In this struggle, 200 has been Russia for years - the main stop, the main stumbling block for the West. Therefore, it is not by chance that, as soon as the “thirty-year” world “intracapitalist” wars for hegemony ended, the West, united by the new hegemon, started a fight / war against Russia - primarily psycho-historical, cold, well, and when it is possible, then the “hot” one.
What began with the aggression against Yugoslavia, continued with the war with "international terrorism" and aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq, and involves the cutting off of Russia from the Mediterranean and Central Asia and the "remnant" of the seas. There is a fundamentally new form of confrontation in which the line between peace and war is erased and all peaceful forms of influence perform, in fact, a military function. Before us is a new, “postworldly” type of struggle, and not just a “third”, “fifth”, or “en” world war. The era of world wars ended in 1945; The global cold war ended between two December 1989 and 1991. Today, even the five sixths of the world population face a different elimination strategy, other methods, another - functionally - an adversary who wants to multiply us by zero, because we are just superfluous on his holiday of life, because we can "participate" in his feast only in as bones. But I repeat once again: we must neither demonize nor blame the enemy. His experience should be studied, learn from all practically useful. If anyone is to blame, then only yourself, for the mistakes made. For not following the simple rules:
- “right or wrong is my country” (Russia);
- “if you want peace, prepare for war” (with the West, with the devil, with the devil, then they will respect, fear - but we don’t need love);
- “Do not believe, do not be afraid, do not ask” (from the West).
And we must learn from mistakes - it is better for others, but if you have your own, then on your own. The Crimean War is a good reason to think about the lessons of history. Even better - the Cold War, which is still not properly understood. After all, for one broken two unbeaten give. Therefore, it is imperative to study and analyze the reasons for our failures in the second half of the 20th century, the defeats in the Cold War, extremely mercilessly towards ourselves.
In 1944, Karl Polanyi wrote that, having suffered a defeat in 1918, Germany was able to understand both its causes and that in the 19th century, which led to them. “Something like an ominous intellectual superiority (over the adversary. - A.F.) was developed by its statesmen of the thirties, who set the task of destroying (the existing world - Versailles - order. - A.F.) war and social organization. But the same can be said about the Bolsheviks in Russia.
Learn from the dictators 1930's
I already hear indignant hysterical cries: “How ?! What ?! ”The author hints at the need to use the experience of the Bolsheviks and the Nazis, to put it at the service of the destruction of the current situation in the world, of this world itself. To begin with, in our current situation, it is important for us to study theoretically any experience in rebuilding a state after degrading defeats, followed by selective practical application of what was studied.
Raymond Aron, who hated Hitler as a Jew and a liberal, nevertheless noted in his memoirs: Hitler died at the beginning of 1938, and he would go down in history as the greatest, even greater, than Bismarck, the figure of German history, since he had eliminated degrading consequences Of Versailles peace, restored the state, the army, the economy.
The USSR was restored by the end of the 1930. Brutal price? Yes, of course, cruel and terrible. But when and where the restoration of this kind and in such a time paid not a terrible and not a brutal price? How was Peter the Great's military empire created — the only means of preserving Russia in those conditions? What was the price of the British Empire and Pax Americana? The history of social systems in general and empires in particular is a cruel thing. Only one systems and their leaders are given a historical and moral account, but others are not. It is clear why: the winners are billed - either external or internal - from positions of strength. So do not fool yourself. Is this a cynical conclusion? No, this is a cynical world.
The Bolsheviks and the Nazis outplayed their opponents in their own countries and in the world (the latter is more related to the Bolsheviks, the international socialists than to the national socialists), because before others they became the people of the twentieth century, they realized, understood and calculated the main system trends development of the century. And what exactly should be learned from the Bolsheviks, at least in the 1920-1940-s, is the analysis of the modern world and the organization of its study, despite the ideology of the latter (by the way, you might think it was not ideological in the West).
First of all, the Bolshevik leadership organized the study of the realities of the modern world; in the late Soviet and post-Soviet times, such an analysis was replaced by a study of the work (mainly extremely ideological) about this world, points of view on it, that is, secondary reality.
In a striking way, the experts on “reforming” the Soviet economy and society a la The West became mainly not those who analyzed Western reality, but those who criticized this reality and promoted its Western theories from the standpoint of Marxist-Leninist political economy and historical history. It was these people who didn’t really know their own or other’s reality, who were trying to beat some myths with the help of others (“ideological masturbation”), who lived in a doubly illusory and mythologized reality, who were used as иде fighters on the ideological front ’ -mifologizirovannoe reflection of the ideological myths, led the country to "market, capitalism and democracy." And they led on the basis of theories, on which criticism they made dissertations, careers. Truly, “values become very elastic as soon as it comes to power and benefit” (I. Wallerstein).
The lack of an adequate understanding of both the Soviet system and the West by a significant number of “reformers” coincided with a double crisis that Russian social science has been experiencing since the 1990s. First, it is the crisis of the modern (modern) science of society as an intellectual system, characterized by the loss of a holistic picture of the world, the growth of the mosaic of small families and the increasing inadequacy of the objects of study. Secondly, it is the crisis of the post-Soviet (and, in fact, canned-Soviet) form of organization of science as a power-producing organism - a relic, power-producing matrix of “historical communism”, of which it was one of the cells. Only now there are no party organization, finance and world-wide goals. There was a provincialization of science.
The current world is already collapsing, and it’s not we, but America who began to demolish it, and to survive in this world, to dodge flying debris and not to turn into fragments, we need evil, that is, ruthlessly-honest, above all towards yourself, knowledge. In 1990-s. we became too lousy and became good-natured towards both ourselves and the world, which was becoming less and less kind to us, and in and of itself. Collapsing worlds are no good.
In 1980-s. a new redivision of the world began, or, as the French historian Fernand Braudel would say, a new retake of History maps. This redistribution will last until about 2020's. and determine the course of events of the XXI century. (just like the repartition of the “long twenties” - 1914-1934 - determined the course of the twentieth century). Russia lost the first half in the war for the “Soviet legacy”: it was beaten out of the Balkans. The second half - the struggle to cut Russia off, not from the Mediterranean, but from Central Asia - began on September 11, 2001.
As a result, American bases emerged in Iraq, Afghanistan and Central Asia. The States for the first time in history climbed, infiltrated the Eurasian heartland, as if realizing the “program” of Mackinder - Brzezinski.
On the ruins of the destroyed “Yalta world” a new world arises and is being built - the “Maltese” new order. There is a process of global transformation of the present world. What? Either in the late capitalist world, in which the "hyperbourgeoisie" - "cosmocracy" rules. Whether in the post-capitalist world, where 20% of the population lives in segregated order and wealth, and 80% in chaos and poverty; a world that is much more brutal and unegalitarian and more reminiscent of the 1453-1648 era than the twentieth, nineteenth or even eighteenth century.
In fact, we live in an era of systemic crisis and the historical decline of capitalism. The collapse of communism, that is, anti-capitalism, capitalism with a minus sign, is the central symptom of this crisis and decline. The destinies of capitalism and Russia are here intimately connected. Our task is not to collapse into Tartarus Stories along with capitalism. But it is there that the West is pushing us: it does not need competitors in the post-capitalist world, it needs a final solution of the Russian question. And so far he has succeeded. Slowly but surely, Russia is crawling to the abyss, to Tartarus, repeating old mistakes. Yes, it is difficult not to be mistaken in a situation where unnatural selection acted for half a century, when there is a crisis of “natural leadership” even at an average level when there is not enough power.
So, it is necessary to use the power of the opponent - to act not according to the principle of karate, but according to the principle of aikido and judo, using his strength, weight, and energy of movement against the “opponent”. To “let it through” into the abyss (as, by the way, the Americans, who turned out to be on the edge of 1986-1987) did with the incompetent Soviet leadership, and then crawl away and take a breath.
But for the right action you need the right knowledge and understanding. Knowledge of someone else's experience of surviving under difficult conditions (moral: learn from Byzantium, China from various eras, Israel, the Moscow principality of the XIV century). Knowing how to recreate statehood from the ashes, from the ruins, as did, for example, Russia after the Smoot 1590-1610-s and 1870-1910-s. It is necessary to analyze the bitter experience of their own lesions, their causes. And most importantly, one must learn to look at oneself not by strangers, by western ones, but by one’s own eyes, not through the prism of other people's concepts and terms reflecting someone else’s social reality and interests of others.
We must study ourselves, the world and especially the potential adversary. We need to hurry with this analysis: we have little time, we have been put on a “geohistorical counter”, and the count goes on not for decades, but for years.
The Crimean War - 2 is a very real thing. Its results can be much more pitiable for Russia than those of the previous Western Russian wars and Horde domination. This is in the XIX-XX centuries. the weak were beaten. In the XXI century. - a century of globalization - the weak will simply erase. From the history. Forever and ever.