Military Review

Geopolitics are more exciting than chess

Revolutions, wars, conflicts and crises - all these are only the fruits of a geopolitical game that has been played on the world stage since time immemorial. Russia has been actively “playing” for just over 300 years. Since the time of Peter the Great. Nothing has changed during this time. The same geopolitics, the same rivals, having the same goals as three centuries ago.

We spoke about this with the journalists of the Latvian magazine Patron.

The first part of the interview dealt with the opposition of the Russian and Anglo-Saxon civilization. About who feeds and raises "our" revolutionaries for centuries.

Geopolitics are more exciting than chess

(The text of the interview from the February magazine came to me just the other day! I publish it immediately upon receipt).

“The current color revolutions in the East are not a scenario invented today. He is run in by the author, the British Empire, at least a century. In order to dominate the planet, she conducted countless coups, many revolutions (including the year’s 1917 in Russia), launched two world wars and is now preparing a third one. The well-known Russian publicist Nikolai Starikov is convinced of this, whose books on stories read in one breath. An economist by training, he considers any fact from the point of view - “who pays for it? who benefits? ” And - at once the inconsistency of the official versions included in the textbooks is obvious, and in the events that happened at different times and in different parts of the planet, one conductor is guessed. “The USA is the body and the brain is Britain. She is the force that rules the world to this day. ”

Accepts more English

- If you remember offhand with whom the Russians have always fought, the Swedes, the French, the Turks, the Germans immediately come to mind. And in your books you prove that Britain has always been the first enemy of Russia. How to explain this inconsistency, Nikolai Viktorovich?

- The favorite policy of Britain is not to fight face to face, but to stand behind someone else’s back and set off states. What she did well for centuries. If you do not take this into account, many facts in history do not understand. Take the Nishtad Peace Treaty of the Year. If we read it, we will be very surprised. Imagine: Russia fought with Sweden for almost 1721 years and won. But then, for some reason, she paid off the money to Sweden - in fact, she bought the lands that she won weapons. What is the historical incident? And the reason is simple: behind the back of weakened Sweden, on the territory of which our army was already landing, there was a powerful power - Great Britain. She by all means prevented Russia's access to the sea. When the Swedes failed to hold Russia with their hands, British diplomats began to put pressure on Peter I in order to end the conflict in a more advantageous way for Sweden and less advantageous for Russia. And the charter to fight with Sweden, realizing that in the case of intransigence, a war with Great Britain threatens, Peter concluded the Nishtadt peace in such a strange way, when the winner pays for the victory.

Take any opponent of the Russians, look behind him - and you will certainly find British intelligence there. The Anglo-Saxon civilization always played great combinations on the world political arena and only in extreme cases took a personal part in wars, preferring to rake in the heat with someone else's hands.

- How long has it started - the opposition of the Anglo-Saxon and Russian civilizations?

- The whole history of mankind is an attempt by one civilization to dominate all the resources on the planet: natural, human. In this sense, the modern world and the one that was thousands of years ago are no different. Open clashes between the Anglo-Saxon and Russian civilizations began after the end of the Napoleonic wars, when Russia became the most powerful European power. But even before that, Britain did everything to keep out of land Russia to the sea. That is why she always supported Turkey, Persia (Iran) in the wars with the Russians. After Russia established itself on the Black Sea, the UK set the following task - not to let the Russians go to the Mediterranean. After all, the Black Sea is, one can say, an internal lake. And access to the ocean expanses goes through the winding straits of the Dardanelles. And the Bosphorus, on which stands Constantinople. The Russian Empire was not able to solve this task precisely because of the powerful financial, diplomatic and military support that Britain provided to our opponents. In the Turkish and Persian armies were British military advisers.

In order for the modern reader to better understand the situation, let us recall the USSR and the USA. Was there a standoff between them? It was. Direct military clashes were? Were not. However, when the Americans were in Vietnam, the Soviet Union fought with the Americans by the hands of the Vietnamese partisans. When the Soviet army was in Afghanistan, the United States fought with the Soviet Union with the hands of the Afghan Mujahideen. The same applies to regional conflicts in Latin America and Africa. These are not individual freedom fighters who fought against governments supported by either Moscow or Washington. No, it was a war between the USA and the USSR. As previously, the British Empire and the Russian Empire fought among themselves. Nothing new. What we saw in the 20 century was in both 19 and 18 centuries.

- What are we so different: the Anglo-Saxons and the Slavs? What is the principal reason for the rejection of each other?

- I would not reduce Russian civilization only to the Slavic world. The uniqueness of the Russian civilization lies in the fact that it was founded by the Russian people, but as the country expanded, it included other peoples, many of which do not have Slavic roots. That did not stop everyone from getting along well with each other. None of these peoples lost their national identity. Many precisely within the Russian Empire or precisely within the USSR acquired the national intelligentsia, their writing, their writers, poets, thinkers. This is the fundamental difference between Russian civilization and Anglo-Saxon, which, wherever it appears, destroys the national characteristics of the indigenous population, and often destroys the indigenous population itself. What happened to the Indians in America. America is a very telling example, because it was not only the English who colonized it. First the Spaniards founded the colonies there, then the Portuguese, then the French, and only then the British. What do we see? Where the French were - modern Canada, the Indians there are well preserved, most of the geographical names - Indian. Where were the Portuguese and the Spaniards, the indigenous population was not exterminated at all, they all mixed up, they got married - and a new ethnos was formed, which was later joined by black slaves. Another thing - the territory in which the Anglo-Saxons commanded. There, the Indians were subject to total extermination, there the whites and blacks were not mixed at all. This fundamental difference of the Anglo-Saxon civilization is not to absorb another's culture, but to destroy it. So it was in India, so it was everywhere. And so it continues today: Anglo-Saxon culture, which dominates in the West, is trying to erase other people's national characteristics, exporting itself and its values ​​to new territories.

Urgently required rioters

- None of the historians still can not clearly explain why the mighty Russian Empire collapsed overnight. Why does a handful of Bolsheviks, who have been living abroad for years in oblivion, suddenly take power and, hated by all, hold it? Your version is very unexpected: the 1917 revolution of the year is a brilliant operation of British intelligence. Tell me, why should the British make a revolution in Russia?

- It is impossible in the interview to retell the arguments to which I dedicated two thick books. But let's extrapolate this situation today - and get the main mystery. Let's imagine that Boris Berezovsky arrived in Moscow and right at the station made a call for the overthrow of the existing system. What do you think, how much time he would have stood on an armored car, apron, car, or anywhere else? I think seconds. Or, if the head of al-Qaeda came to Washington and called right to the White House for a holy war against the infidels, how long would he have lingered there? Moments. We see an amazing situation when Lenin and a whole group of revolutionaries drove through the territory of Germany, with which Russia at that moment officially fought. We arrived at the St. Petersburg station, and no one arrested them. Moreover, they were greeted by an orchestra and flowers. And on the spot, Lenin called for a new revolution, that is, for the overthrow of power. And in the conditions of world war. What does this mean?

The fact that the then Russian government was the Provisional Government for some reason decided not to oppose those who opposed it, the state itself and called for a new phase of the revolution. Why does the government have such blindness during the war? After all, in order for the picture to be complete, let's imagine that Boris Berezovsky did not come to a calm, well-fed modern Moscow, but arrived in Moscow on September 41 of the year and urged that the advancing German troops surrender it, because “the bloody Stalinist regime cannot cope with the defense of the Russian people. " Then the analogy is complete. What should have been done with such a person? Arrest, judge by martial law and shoot very quickly. But no! Nobody prevented Lenin from conducting propaganda, the Bolsheviks released their newspaper in huge print runs, began to decompose the army.

- But the fact that Lenin and a group of comrades freely passed through the territory of Germany isn’t it an argument that the Bolsheviks are a German project? Created to end the war against the Germans.

- Well, let's imagine the situation from the German side. You are the head of the German General Staff. A certain revolutionary comes to you, say, Parvus, and proposes a brilliant idea: we take revolutionaries, put them on the train, give them a lot of money and send them by train to Russia to change power. Again, the analogy with September 41. A train with Trotskyists, White Guards, emigrants, monarchists to Moscow 1941 would have arrived. What does it matter how much money they have! The station would be cordoned off; all gentlemen, monarchists and the comrades of the Trotskyists, would be arrested and very quickly eliminated. Directing Lenin and the group into the warring Russia was on the part of the Germans a sheer gamble - a notorious failure. No, Lenin's passage was patronized by someone else. Who! There is a fact that historians do not like to talk about, because it spoils the whole picture for them. Lenin and his companions did not travel by rail all the time. They traveled from Switzerland through Germany to the port of Sassnitz, where they boarded a ferry and sailed to Sweden. In Sweden, they traveled by train to Stockholm, where they came to the Russian embassy and received money from the Provisional Government and tickets for further travel.

- That is, as? The interim government itself paid the fare to those who came to overthrow him ?!

- Exactly. And after Lenin's, in a month, two more “sealed” trains arrived in Russia, filled with revolutionaries of all stripes. In total - about three hundred people. And again, the authorities "do not notice." Also, Leon Trotsky and his colleagues are sent home from the USA. In Canada, he was removed from the steamer and arrested by the British authorities, but then very quickly released. Why? Because it asked about it ... The Provisional Government, which Lev Davydovich went to overthrow!

Why would the Provisional Government dig its own grave? Only a puppet power can do this, executing the orders of the master. If the Provisional Government helps Lenin, then it is a question of one project with one owner. Who is this Germany? At first glance, it seems that - yes, because Lenin comes out with the slogan to end the war, and this is beneficial to the Germans. However, the puppet Provisional Government, on the contrary, declares its determination to wage war to the bitter end. This means that the owner is different and more difficult. Its goal is not to stop the war between Russia and Germany. Its goal is to destroy Russia itself in a revolutionary way. And then in the same way destroy Germany.

Let's see what the Provisional Government is doing, barely taking power. Releases all prisoners from prisons, abolishes the police, eliminates counterintelligence and gendarmerie, announces freedom of political propaganda among the troops, abolishes the entire administration: governors and vice-governors. That is accurately and quickly ruining the country. Who can afford to order this? And, most importantly, who can afford to pay such a large-scale order? Germany, which has already been exsanguinated, is practically broken and dreams of one thing - to jump out of this war as soon as possible in order to start licking your wounds ?!

No, only England can afford such an order. It was she, and not at all Germany over the past two hundred years has been Russia's main geopolitical rival. At first, Britain’s subversive role was in diplomatic intrigues and wiles. Then the methods of struggle changed. And British intelligence began to create the Russian revolutionary underground.

The truth about carrot tea

- Have you ever wondered what money the Russian revolutionaries lived in emigration? Lenin, Krasin, Zinoviev, Bukharin, Trotsky and so on? All this fraternity never worked and did not produce anything. However, she lived in the most expensive cities of Europe, eating, drinking, dressing in something. And so for years! There were hundreds of these revolutionaries, but none of them died of hunger, and in their memoirs there are no sentimental stories about life under the Parisian bridges and Brussels fences. So, money came from somewhere.

Read Lenin's letters, where he writes that her sister, Maria Ilyinichna, would be nice if she came to him - “we would then ride together to Italy ... I would be in Brussels for three days, and then I would come back here and think to roll to Italy. Why should not Mitya (talking about his brother, Dmitriy Ilyich) come here? He must rest too ... I now hope to earn a lot. ” Very curious: where did the future leader of the world proletariat expect to earn? He had only two legal ways: transferring other people's books and writing his own. His most famous work, written in exile before the First World War, is “Materialism and Empirio-Criticism”. Already from the title it is clear that such a book can not become a bestseller with millions of copies. The golden rain could not fall and when Ilyich translated works of Engels or Kautsky from German into Russian.

However, his habits are the lifestyle of a rich person. After all, the whole of Europe has traversed Vladimir Ilyich! And this epic continued with short interruptions from 1900 to 1917! He traveled not alone, but with his wife and mother-in-law - they lived together. Going to the boarding house to rest, they grabbed the sister of Ilyich. Housing was rented good: let's say, in Paris, it was a four-room apartment with water and gas, which is rare for the beginning of the 20th century.

And in European capitals, Lenin did not live alone. Take at random several revolutionary biographies — the Mensheviks, Bolsheviks, or Social Revolutionaries. Everywhere we will see the same picture: fighters for people's happiness freely eat Western European bread for unknown money. And yet there are congresses and conferences! For example, the Second Congress of the RSDLP opened in Brussels, and had to finish it in London, as the Belgian police became interested in what was happening. All delegates took and moved to the British capital: more than 40 people. Where are the nowhere working Democrats funds for group travels in Europe? How much money did they rent a room for the congress? Who paid them hotels and issued a travel allowance for meals?

- Answer of biographers: there were membership fees, there were donations from millionaires, like Savva Morozov.

- As for membership fees - in the extremist parties of that time consisted of a maximum of several thousand people. These contributions do not pay for many years of living abroad heaps of idlers. As for donations, their magnitude is insanely bloated. As the state of Savva Morozov. Here are the words of Gorky: “Someone wrote in the newspapers that Savva Morozov was spending millions on the revolution — naturally, this is exaggerated to the size of a camel. Millions personally Sawa was not, his annual income - in his words - did not reach one hundred thousand. He gave on the publication of Iskra, it seems, twenty-four thousand a year. ”

- And eksy? Robbery of banks for the sake of the high ideals of the revolution?

- A wave of expropriation swept over Russia only at the end of the first revolution and took place over two and a half years. But Lenin abroad lived on short visits from 1895 to 1917 g ... Plekhanov generally spent 37 years abroad, his two daughters could hardly speak Russian. But there is another mystery to you: the Mensheviks of the banks were not robbed, they did not receive money from the экxyсов, but they lived in the neighborhood of the Bolsheviks in European capitals just as well. The standard of living of the revolutionary emigrants did not depend on their party affiliation.

No, there is no way to explain the free life of Russian revolutionaries. If you do not keep in mind the struggle of the powers on the world stage. The conclusion is simple: the source of funding for the Russian revolutionaries was the special services of the countries competing with Russia. Or one such country. That is why the version about “naive democrats who accidentally disorganized the country”, about the “tragic errors” and “fatal mistakes” of the Provisional Government is untenable. The destruction of the Russian Empire in 1917 was the most ambitious British intelligence operation in its history. If all the mysterious events taking place then are viewed at such an angle, the fog dissipates. Immediately find the explanation and strange connivance of the Bolsheviks from Kerensky, and the lack of Anglo-French assistance to the white fighters for the restoration of the country during the Civil War. Everything mysterious turns logical and understandable.

And among this mysterious - the story of the gold mines "Lena Goldfields" and the purchase of Swedish locomotives.

Their engine is flying forward

“Lena Goldfields” is a British company that in Tsarist Russia owned a controlling stake in gold mines that mined a third of all Russian gold. The workers were paid a penny, although mining was carried out in permafrost conditions, and the working day lasted 16 hours. As a result, it came to a riot, which the tsarist authorities calmed down with weapons - the notoriously famous Lensky shooting. The blood of the Russian workers shed a shameful stain on the tsar. But foreign shareholders remained, however, with it.

1917 comes the year. The revolution sweeps away the capitalists. The Bolsheviks nationalize all the country's enterprises, including the gold mines on the Lena River. However, in 1925, the Soviet government unexpectedly re-entrusted the concession to develop the Lena mines to the Lena Goldfields company. For a period of thirty years. The contract is forced through Trotsky, the conditions are fantastic. Lena Goldfils has the right not only to wash gold from Yakutia to the Ural range, but also to extract silver, copper, iron. To this end, a British company is given a complex of Russian mining and metallurgical enterprises. The share of people's power in the mined precious metal is 7%, the share of Lena is 93%. Question: Why did the Soviet authorities sign such a draconian agreement? Why did they destitute their native state?

But here's another absurd contract: the purchase of steam locomotives in Sweden at the Nidquist and Holm factory by the Leninist government. The order quantity is one thousand locomotives. The price is 200 million gold rubles. This is twice as much as necessary. But the main thing: it is not clear why such an order should be placed abroad. And even more so in Sweden, which was by no means the leader of steam locomotive building! The company did not have enough power; it never built more than 40 locomotives per year. But in Russia itself there was the famous Putilov factory, which produced locomotives 250 a year. However, they did not give the order to their native Russian workers - they gave it to the Swedes. But at the same time the Soviet government gave them an interest-free loan so that the Swedes build a factory to fulfill the order. This amazing situation was outraged in the Russian economist magazine 1922. And - signed a sentence. Lenin ordered the Dzerzhinsky magazine to cover up: counterrevolutionaries and accomplices of the Entente gathered there.

- But what is the reason for such generosity to foreigners?

- Well, think for yourself: you can’t send a transfer to the British and write “a refund of funds spent on the Russian revolution” in the payment system. They paid with such orders, through neutral countries, such as Sweden. 200 million gold rubles is a quarter of the country's gold reserves. So the British could be pleased: the rival's empire was destroyed, and the spent was returned. And earned.

True, the renaissance of Lena Goldfields did not last as long as it was intended. In 1929, the Chekists conducted a series of searches and denied the British concessions. Why? Trotsky was expelled from the USSR that same year, Lenin was long dead. The power is Stalin, who did not hang out in exile, at the time of the February Revolution was in exile in Siberia. He should not have been to the British and, with a clear conscience, returned the mines to the state.

The end of this story is certainly interesting to readers in the Baltics. Over the next decades, Lena Goldfields demanded compensation from the USSR for the loss of the concession. The litigation lasted until the 1968 year, after which the British banking circles finally decided to make peace with the USSR. Of course, not free. In the British banks since 1940, gold was kept belonging to the Baltic states that became part of the USSR. For decades, it was not transferred to Moscow under various pretexts. And in 1968, it was Baltic gold that, by mutual agreement, covered Lena’s claims.

- Dexterously! The British got the desired collapse of the Russian Empire. The Bolsheviks gained power. The Latvians, Lithuanians, and Estonians paid for this fulfillment of the wishes. That's really - the grimaces of history.


In the second part of the interview for the Latvian magazine Patron, the conversation turned to who financed the coming to power of Adolf Hitler and how the Stalinist economy was organized.

Adolf is going to hike

- The Germans should love you, Nikolai Viktorovich: filling in the gaps in the history of Russia, you clear the history of Germany. For example, until now it was believed that Hitler was nurtured and financed by German industrialists, all kinds of Kruppa there.

“Do you know what always struck me?” A lot of books have been written about World War II. It would seem that there can be no white spots here. But in fact the opposite. Historians have carefully calculated the amount tanks, guns, soldiers and planes at the warring parties. However, they did not answer the most important questions dictated by common sense. On the one hand, they amicably write that Adolf Hitler dreamed of conquering the whole world. On the other, they admit that Germany was not ready for the war that he started in September 1939. Three weeks later, the German Wehrmacht began to end air bombs, and after the defeat of France, which took only six weeks, the German army came to an end in general with all the ammunition. Excuse me, but are they so prepared to conquer the world?

Such logical inconsistencies in the subject of Hitler - the sea. Here is the well-established version that it was fostered and financially supported by the sharks of German capitalism. It is devoid of logic. Did you read the program of the Nazis? Why should breeders give money to a party that requires the nationalization of industrial trusts? participation of workers and employees in the profits of commercial enterprises? exemptions from the private property of large stores and renting them at low prices to small producers? adoption of the law on the free confiscation of land? cancellation of interest on mortgages? ban on land speculation? Would you, in the place of large German capital, finance people who demand this? It is clear that no.

- Maybe Hitler came to power without sponsors? Maybe he was supported for objective reasons? A terrible crisis is raging in the country. Remarque describes how they ran to spend their salary before lunch, because after lunch the money will be half as much. In such conditions, any populist with slogans understandable to people should win.

- I'll tell you more. Inflation was such that it exceeds the imagination of any person. For clarity: in 1913, all the wealth of the German Empire was estimated at 300 billion marks. And only ten years later, in 1923, the whole amount was equal to the American exchange rate at the exchange rate of only 7. People were not buried in coffins - it was an unprecedented luxury, but in cardboard boxes. A single egg cost the same as a 30 million eggs cost ten years ago! And at this time, a certain Ernst Ganfshtengl gives a friend Adolph a thousand dollars - a fortune! - For the purchase of a printing house and a Nazi newspaper. And who is Ganfshtengl? Half American, the son of a major dealer of antiques with a family business on 5-th Avenue in New York, graduated from Harvard, spent the entire First World War in the USA. Why did this rich esthete, who possesses a great sense of humor, become imbued with a love for a straightforward little-educated corporal? Why he took in his villa in the Bavarian Alps, introduced into secular circles? The environment of Hitler was disgusting to Ganfshtenglyu, Goebbels, he called a pig in his eyes. However, he followed Hitler on his heels and inspired, inspired, inspired. About the fact that Germany should be friends with the UK and America, about the fact that Adolf must believe in himself, and everything will work out.

During the beer putsch Hitler was sentenced to five years in prison. In prison, he wrote “Mein Kampf,” dictated to Rudolf Hess, who typed the text on a typewriter. The main idea of ​​the book is all that Ganfshtengl whispered. England is Germany’s most important ally. Mein Kampf is a direct appeal to Great Britain: we are creating a powerful new movement among the Germans, the fascist party. We should not be afraid, we love and support the interests of the British. Just help - and we will pursue a policy pleasing the United Kingdom. In the book there is even a direct appeal: “Give us a weapon!”. And what? Hitler was heard. Mein Kampf is typing while Hitler is still seated. After that, the term is suddenly reduced to him from 5 years to 11 months. And why? In British intelligence, they read this book and realized what pro-British force is growing on German soil. It was decided to support this force, clicked on the right channels - and Hitler was released from prison.

From this point on, the future Fuhrer’s money problems are solved forever: he acquires a villa, the six-seat Mercedes-Compressor of the latest model. The costs of the Nazis are crying out of proportion to their incomes. Each attack aircraft was at the expense of the party dressed, shod and fed. Each member of the SA received a salary - at the time of total unemployment in Germany. It was this, and not the eloquence of the Fuhrer, that was the most effective means of recruiting new members of the fascist party. You wear a brown shirt and you can feed the children. Who gave all this money? Stories about good old women, like the widow of a piano factory owner, are ridiculous. Even with great stretch, it was only a third of the party budget. Who gave the rest? We will never wait for an official response, because in the last days of the Third Reich 90% of the financial documents of the Nazi Party were burned. They were destroyed in the first place - in contrast to such trifling papers as orders for mass executions and deportations, which will then form the basis of the international prosecution and lead to the gallows of generals. He burned all financial documents the permanent treasurer of the Nazi Party, Obergruppenführer SS Franz Xavier Schwartz. For which he received a “childish” term, considering what post he held, only two years. In 1947, the former treasurer goes free. And then he mysteriously dies. A good witness is a dead witness.

All events show that Hitler deliberately fed to fight with Russia. England, France and the USA had the opportunity not to allow Hitler to create a new powerful Wehrmacht. However, he was allowed to do so. From a certain point on, the Germans stopped requesting reparations for the First World War. Germany sells military patents in the field of tank and aircraft construction, supplying it with equipment. The League of Nations suddenly allows Hitler to become a collector of German lands. How to explain it? Also “supported by the manufacturer Krupp”?

And how to explain that Hitler started the war on two fronts? After all, he always wrote that the war on two fronts is a guaranteed death for Germany, which is why she suffered such a heavy defeat in the First World War. And suddenly June 22, waging war with Britain, he attacks the Soviet Union. Why does Hitler contradict himself? And he does not contradict. For Hitler, it was obvious that he would no longer have the first front. The front should be one, with the Soviet Union. And with Britain, what went down in history under the name Strange War will continue: when at the beginning of World War II soldiers did not shoot at each other, but played football and cards in the neutral zone, when the first British soldier was killed only through 2,5 months after the outbreak of hostilities.

And if we still remember that 10 May 41, Hitler’s closest aide Rudolf Hess suddenly flew to the UK, it becomes clear that Hess was flying there to negotiate with England. And he agreed with England. Evidence of this is the secrecy of all the documents related to the arrival of Hess. We are told that Hess flew in to offer Britain peace, and the UK refused. Then why are these documents hiding? They should be published on the contrary. So everything was different: Hess offered the world, the UK agreed to it. This is the secret that is hidden from us. That is why Hitler attacked the Soviet Union: he was sure that there would be only one front - in the East. The British deceived him. Purpose? It is as old as Britain: ruin the successor of the Russian empire with the help of others — the Soviet Union, and stay clean and out of it.

Found spit on Stalin

- Why did Stalin become a bone in the throat just for the Anglo-Saxon civilization? After all, the Iron Curtain fell after the speech was not de Gaulle, not Franco, not Emperor Hirohito - all the claims, moreover on behalf of the “English-speaking commonwealth,” Churchill said.

- In December 1945, the Soviet Union did not ratify the agreement, as a result of which the dollar was to become the world's only reserve currency. The answer to this was Churchill's Fulton speech immediately in March 1946, and an iron curtain fell across the entire planet. Stalin built an alternative economic system in which the main force was not money, but the idea. That's what infuriated the "English-speaking community"! This completely contradicts the main principles of the civilization that the Anglo-Saxons are building. In the same place, everything is tied up with money, because the bankers who usurped the right to create money manage this civilization. Indeed, in all of today's Western civilization, the state is deprived of the right to issue money. Money is created by central banks, which are subordinated to private individuals, and the states borrow money from them.

Stalin's economy was built like this: the money supply did not increase, but there was a constant reduction in the price level, which led to a better life for the population. That is, the money supply is unchanged, but new enterprises are constantly being introduced, new goods are being produced, and due to this, with the inevitable, that is, not increasing money supply, prices can be lowered. The Anglo-Saxon modern civilization is built on other principles: bankers constantly reprint new money. Therefore, in a situation where in one civilization money would become more and more, and they depreciated, and in another civilization the amount of money would be unchanged, but it would become more and more expensive and weighty, it is absolutely clear who would be the winner. To this we add racial segregation and the colonial system, which was then in the West. And human rights were, of course, on the side of the USSR, because there really were all equal, and the Soviet Union had the colossal authority of a victor in World War II, who destroyed Nazism in Europe. In a historical perspective, the western model simply had no chance. Therefore, its creators tried to eliminate Stalin physically. And they managed to poison him in March 1953.

- Today, when the British Empire collapsed ...

- The British Empire did not fall apart at all. This is an illusion. It still exists, just in disguised form. Here is a question for erudition: who is the head of Canada? Do not know? Well, such a question: what is the structure in Canada?

- Republican.

- Wrong. The fact that you respond so is the fruit of many years of manipulation in our mind. Modern Canada is a monarchy. The head of state there is a monarch, the English queen, Elizabeth II. In addition to Britain, the British monarch is the head of state in 15 countries. And if it seems to you that this power is nominal, that the English Queen reigns, but does not rule, you are mistaken. The Queen of England can declare war, dissolve parliament, lead the army ...

- Why doesn't she use it?

- Also how to use. Take both world wars. What, say, could threaten Germany to countries such as Canada and Australia? Yes, nothing. However, both declared war on her. More precisely, so: the British monarch each time declared war on their behalf to Germany. Can a country be considered independent if the head of another state declares war on its behalf? If the parliament can dissolve it at any time the head of another state?

- But Elizabeth never dismissed anyone!

- Because everything goes as she needs. But if in Canada a party wishing to let go of the province of Quebec and enter into a military alliance with China win the election, you can be sure that the queen will immediately dismiss such a parliament. And in her country the queen is an absolute monarch: the head of the legislative power, the head of the executive power, appoints the prime minister, and she is not obliged to approve the leader of the winning party. This is not regulated by law, it is just a tradition. In fact, the queen can put anyone on her post and remove her from her. The queen may declare the decision of any court invalid. She is the head of the church. Where else will you find such power? The British Parliament works calmly only because its decisions do not go against the queen’s policies. But if, for example, a miracle happened, and in Great Britain the party that favored an alliance with Russia, NATO’s dissolution or something else would have won the election - you can be sure that the queen would intervene immediately. She has all the powers for this.

How much a pound is up and running

- Is it true that the Bank of Russia’s gold and foreign exchange reserves do not belong to Russia?

- I'm afraid to upset you. You are from Latvia, right? As a matter of fact, Latvia’s foreign exchange reserves do not belong to the Latvian state. This is a system that exists in all states whose currency is not a backup. There are central banks, whose main task is to support the stability of the dollar and not the national currency at all. They buy back all the dollar and euro mass entering the country, and only within this framework they issue the national currency. And the dollars and euros they immediately lend to other states in the eurozone and the United States. Thus, the hot money supply is withdrawn from circulation and there is no devaluation of the euro, the dollar. And the states of the eurozone and the United States get the opportunity to live beyond their means, because they constantly borrow the same money, actually getting the resources for free. All central banks invest their foreign exchange reserves in the debt securities of Western countries. And the gold in these gold reserves is very small, less than 7 percent. All the rest is not even securities, it is records in the American computer. Just computer tac toe. Turning off this computer will reset everything.

- Why is Britain stubbornly maintaining its pound, not adjoining the eurozone?

- Because the British do not want to share their money with anyone. I mean the right to issue them. But with pleasure they are ready to take away the right of others to issue national currencies. Great Britain occupies a special place in the Schengen area. As it is today, it is the force that controls the world. Together with the United States, it constitutes a single organism. States are the body, but the brain — the center of the web — is in the UK. Look: we read a lot about the difficulties of the American economy, but almost nowhere to find detailed information about the difficulties of the British economy. Although the national debt there is also very large and the problems are no less. However, for some reason no one writes.

- Do you believe in the viability of the EU and its strength to butt with the Anglo-Saxon civilization?

- After Europe began to pursue an independent policy, bankers representing the Anglo-Saxon civilization struck at the European economy of Europe, simply ceasing to lend to Greece, Italy, France, and so on. This immediately caused colossal problems, since all the states of the modern Western world live beyond their means. Accordingly, they are completely dependent on who gives them these funds. The question is: how much Europe is ready again to hand over its sovereignty to Washington. If it passes, the crediting will continue, investors will “believe” in the economy, and for a while everything will calm down. If the Europeans do not want to do this, then we will see an even greater rampant separatism, international bankers will finance the fragmentation of European states, such as Spain, Belgium. They will sway the economy to bring Europe into submission.

But in the long run, we see that the system of creating money from nothing and life beyond its means already comes to a standstill even where it was invented - in the US and the UK. In the world there is no close to such a quantity of goods that would correspond to the printed money supply. Therefore, when creating money to pay off government debt, the value of the money itself collapses again and again. The creators of the financial pyramid see a way out in one thing - a global war. And they are preparing this war. Today in the Middle East - its first stage.

- Are you sure that the Third World is inevitable?

- It is wrong to pose the question. World War then called the historians. Just analyze the history - and you will see that humanity cannot live long without a serious war. Not because people are bad by nature, but because war makes it possible to solve a number of geopolitical and economic problems. The organizers of the First and Second World Wars are the same forces that, by organizing a terrible war, nullified the statehood of competitors, destroyed their financial and economic system and moved towards establishing world domination. Today the task before them is the same. Yes, they dominate the planet, but they need to reset the economic and political potentials of those countries that can challenge them. Namely - Russia, China. It is necessary to retain control over Europe, so that not too independent policy is conducted there.

- And where does the Middle East?

- Need, relatively speaking, the new Hitler, the new Nazis. Need a powerful destructive force. Its role today is played by Islamic fundamentalism, which the authors - Britain and the United States - lead to power in the whole region in order to dismantle all the statehood there, to destroy the entire infrastructure. Then the large human masses will be left without means of subsistence, and they can be moved towards the borders of Russia and China through Afghanistan and Pakistan. And if you bring up Islamic revolutions in the countries of Central Asia, the task is much simpler.

You are on land, I am at sea

- Why did the Islamization of Europe happen so abruptly today?

- The task of the political elite, which today leads the planet - the constant fragmentation of peoples and any social groups. Therefore, in Christian Europe, they tried to provide a large influx of people professing Islam. But if Europe was Islamic, they would have tried to bring in large numbers of Christians there in the same way. Their task is to cause discord, so that the peoples would be busy with strife and would not even think of confronting their policies. Therefore, discord is sown not only on the basis of religion, but also on the principle of any social group. The last thing they want to destroy is the family and belonging of a person to any gender. Ideas have been launched that it is normal for a person to change the sex several times in a lifetime. Educational programs are being created for children, where it is told that boys can love boys, and girls love girls. There is only one goal - a person should not be tied to any group: neither national, nor social, nor even sexual. This creature should not identify itself with anyone or anything at all, but it should want only one thing to consume it.

- A multipolar world - how do you see it? Who with whom?

- We must understand that Russia has no allies. As the wise emperor Alexander III said, Russia has only two allies: its army and navy. There are four centers of power in the world today. The dominant is the Anglo-Saxon civilization led by Great Britain and the USA. Further Europe, which is largely subordinate to the United States, but is trying to play its game led by Germany. The third force is China, which is growing and becoming a big headache for the Anglo-Saxon civilization. And the fourth force is Russia, which, after the treachery of Gorbachev, little by little comes to life, realizes its own national and geopolitical interests. It is between the four centers of power that the whole struggle will be in perspective.

- What is the role of the Baltic in today's world order?

- Since the civilization of the sea must constantly block the land outlets of civilization to the sea, the Baltic will always be a hot place. Note: as soon as the USSR was destroyed, the Baltic states for some reason did not become fully independent. They are included in the structure of NATO and the European Union. That is, joyfully gave their independence into the wrong hands. Explain: what's the difference - to enter the Warsaw Pact or enter the NATO bloc? What is the difference - Latvian soldiers are in Afghanistan as part of the Soviet army or as part of NATO troops? Out of one system - immediately turned out to be included in another. Why? Because states located in key strategic locations cannot be independent. The Baltic was, is and will be a kind of field on which other, much more powerful geopolitical players play. This caused the Lord God, drawing just such a coastline. Therefore, the land civilization will always break through to the Baltic ports, and the civilization of the sea will block these attempts. The land civilization will strive to create friendly states there, and the civilization of the sea will create hostile to it. So independence for the Baltic countries is a conditional concept. They will always be part of a geopolitical entity. Today, it is hosted by the civilization of the sea. The results are obvious: half of the local population has left and works in a foreign land. Is it possible to preserve culture? I doubt it. I remember that in Soviet times you come to Estonia and you feel at every step a national flavor. I recently visited there again: hamburgers, cheesecakes ... When these three republics were part of the land civilization, they were the flagship there - it was brilliance, chic, the personification of the West, the rest of the republic looked at them with interest and even with a little envy. And as part of the civilization of the sea today, they turned into backyards, the outskirts, to which no one cares. However, your location is so interesting that you will have to face a choice more than once.

Still change.

- The information in your books is sometimes so amazing that you wonder: how did the author get it?

The most interesting thing is that a huge amount of information is in the public domain. You just need to be able to find and analyze it. Yes, in the British archives, no one researcher does not penetrate. But the answers to the main secrets are not found there either, because there are no protocols for serious events, no receipts are left. The activities of a history researcher are in many ways similar to the activities of an investigator. After all, it is rare for a criminal to leave material evidence at a crime scene. And even more rarely, when he stands near the victim with a bloody knife. Nevertheless, the criminals are found - by circumstantial evidence, by whoever benefits the crime, with the help of witnesses. Find and plant. When the state acts as a criminal, it has immeasurably more opportunities to cover its tracks. Therefore, crises, revolutions, political assassinations, organization of wars with other states are disguised and hidden much better than the crime of any serial maniac or criminal gang. However, here, as in forensic science, someone always saw something, heard something, remembered and wrote in his memoirs. Statistics confirmed something. In the archives of the press additional details flashed. And now - compare and draw conclusions. I am sure that with the availability of facts and analytical skills, not only I, but also my readers, can independently unravel the most convoluted tangles of history.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. makst83
    makst83 4 September 2013 08: 50
    I agree on 100%! Anglo-Saxons, in particular Great Britain, brought evil, misfortune and all shit much more than Germany (Kaiser and Hitler) combined and multiplied by 2!
    1. a52333
      a52333 4 September 2013 21: 09
      Russia, both now and before the revolution, has always been an important geopolitical player. Straight as an artillery barrel. We go to you. - And on snot. I must say, after "I'm going to you," everything, put out the light. We need to learn from the small British. Not everything should be decided by direct force. Cunning. This is what Russia has ALWAYS lacked. She is great, but by the strength of the people, but not by the wisdom of the rulers. Stalin is who you can be proud of, from the point of view of the ruler. GO TO YOU.
    2. Apollo
      Apollo 4 September 2013 22: 05
      Quote: makst83
      I agree on 100%! Anglo-Saxons, in particular Great Britain, brought evil, misfortune and all shit much more than Germany (Kaiser and Hitler) combined and multiplied by 2!

      Excuse me, but you wrote complete nonsense, both of them were enemies, and as for 100%, you carefully read the interview. For example, this quote

      I bring her literally
      That is why Hitler attacked the Soviet Union: he was sure that there would be only one front - in the East. The British deceived him. Purpose? It is as old as Britain: with the wrong hands to destroy the successor of the Russian Empire - the Soviet Union, and by themselves to remain clean and aloof.

      assuming purely hypothetically that Germany would prevail over the USSR What do you think Germany would stop?! She would immediately deploy troops against England, defeating it would go against the USA. I think it makes no sense to explain further.
      1. studentmati
        studentmati 4 September 2013 22: 12
        Quote: Apollon
        assuming purely hypothetically that Germany would prevail over the USSR What do you think Germany would stop?! She would immediately deploy troops against England, defeating it would go against the USA. I think it makes no sense to explain further.

        Briefly and concisely! In two sentences all the salt! good
      2. zart_arn
        zart_arn 4 September 2013 22: 20
        You can also add that with England, the 3rd Reich started the war earlier than with the USSR. In general, best friends have often become sworn enemies in world history.
        Let's face it - in the geopolitical game there are no friends and cannot be. There are partners, allies, opponents, enemies, and all of the above often change roles and places. Therefore, Emperor Alexander III correctly spoke (quite worthy, by the way) - “In the whole world we have only two faithful allies,” he liked to speak to his ministers, “our army and navy. All the others, at the first opportunity, will gang themselves up against us. ”
      3. a52333
        a52333 4 September 2013 22: 29
        Apollo, I disagree with you. Hitler, finishing off France, could EASILY defeat the expeditionary force of small Britain, the most combat-ready part of it. They were defeated, demoralized, and unable to organize a defense. If he saw Britain as his potential target, he would not let them go. But he allowed 338 thousand to cross !!!!!! the British and do not trample them with tanks, and do not burst "on their shoulders" on the islands. IMHO, he did not intend to, did not see Great Britain as a target. Haven't seen a competitor? I think no. I agree with Starikov. He was banned from sponsors. THOSE. he was not going to fight them either now or later. And the fact that France and Great Britain declared war on him on September 3rd was a "strange war".
        1. Apollo
          Apollo 4 September 2013 22: 40
          Quote: a52333
          Apollo, I do not agree with you.

          hi For God's sake
          Quote: a52333
          Hitler killing France

          he finished it off
          Quote: a52333
          could easily break up the expeditionary force of small Britain

          Quote: a52333
          its most combat-ready part

          this is a moot point, do you think in England at that time there were broken parts
          Quote: a52333
          If he saw Britain as his potential target, he would not let them go.

          England stood in his way, and in order to conquer it, the defeat of the USSR was needed.
          Quote: a52333
          He was banned by sponsors

          then who is the sponsor if Germany fought against the French-English expeditionary force ?! England is sponsoring Germany against itself ?! Where is the logic?!

          To be honest, I approach all articles critically, 100% of articles have not been recognized, will not be recognized and will not be recognized. Somewhere, yes, you will find a contradiction somewhere.
          1. a52333
            a52333 4 September 2013 22: 43
            Press with authority or is it still important to hear an opinion? I do not argue that Russia was "tastier".
            1. Apollo
              Apollo 4 September 2013 22: 49
              Quote: a52333
              Crush authority

              To be honest, Alexey, then there is no question of any authority or rating.
              Quote: a52333
              or is it still important to hear an opinion?

              Of course the opinion.
              Quote: a52333
              I do not argue that Russia was "tastier".

              Here I will not even argue with you.
              1. a52333
                a52333 4 September 2013 22: 55
                Thank you. hi Let us ponder ... If, after the USSR, tomorrow ... then, but firmly planned to attack, he would have finished off (drowned, taken prisoner)
                this is a moot point, do you think in England at that time there were broken parts
                yes, but nonetheless the best of none.
                IMHO. Not going to attack England in principle.
      4. d_trader
        d_trader 4 September 2013 22: 44
        Starikov describes this in detail in his book "Who Made Hitler Attack Stalin". Hitler was an absolute Anglophile, that he spoke more than a dozen times at rallies and wrote in his mein kapf. The Anglo-Saxons took advantage of this in full respect of all traditions.
      5. stalkerwalker
        stalkerwalker 4 September 2013 23: 27
        Quote: Apollon
        assuming purely hypothetically that Germany would prevail over the USSR What do you think Germany would stop?! She would immediately deploy troops against England, defeating it would go against the USA. I think it makes no sense to explain further.

        I do not agree.
        And the famous "Stop Order" at Dunkirk, and further repeated attempts by the Fuehrer to conclude an "honorable peace" with the British, fit into the outline of this article.
        And the Fuhrer was not static in his thoughts.
        And what would crush England - read Doenitz's memoirs, where he popularly writes that Germany NEVER had the strength and means to carry out Operation See Loewe.
        And everything else is fantasies, from the series "What would have happened if ...".
      6. Nitup
        Nitup 4 September 2013 23: 37
        Quote: Apollon

        assuming purely hypothetically that Germany would prevail over the USSR What do you think Germany would stop?! She would immediately deploy troops against England, defeating it would go against the USA. I think it makes no sense to explain further.

        In fact, there is no contradiction, by 1939, when Hitler was supposed to attack the USSR according to the Western plan, his army was much weaker than the forces of the allies. They planned that after the victory over the USSR, Germany would be weak and they would defeat it without any problems. Moreover, the head of Hitler’s intelligence, Admiral Canaris, was originally a British agent and merged all the Old with Britons.
    3. aksakal
      aksakal 4 September 2013 23: 18
      Quote: makst83
      brought evil, misfortune and all shit much more than Germany (Kaiser and Hitler) combined and multiplied by 2

      - I doubt something that the direct executor is less guilty than the organizer. Hands are also in blood.
      By the way, where is Yarosvet? He once threw it to me and with saliva proved that they live better in the West. I did not argue which is better, but at the expense of what? And here we read: This immediately caused enormous problems, since all the states of the modern Western world live beyond their means. - simply put, either in debt (which needs to be returned), or due to robbery and parasitism (and from such a lifestyle, a normal chela turns back). This is the secret of a good life for an ordinary westerner. Now, according to the logic of the Yarosvet (by the way, change your nickname Yarosvet, you worship the West, and call it "zapadozhopoliz", understand?) Russians should live the same way, that is, either rob, or parasitize, or borrow. Let him live like that.
      1. Normal
        Normal 4 September 2013 23: 42
        Quote: aksakal
        and with saliva proved

        In terms of saliva, few people compete with you.
        Quote: aksakal
        By the way, change your nickname Yarosvet, you worship the West, so call it "zapadozhopoliz", understand?)

        By the way, aksakal, change your nickname. Aksakal is an elderly, respected, calm and reserved, wise person. You don't fit a single definition. So you're just a bastard. Change your nickname, understand?
      2. tirazu
        tirazu 5 September 2013 01: 24
        What is this strange axiom "people live better in the West"? I completely disagree. Traveled around Europe on my own and did not at all have the opinion that it was somehow too sweet and sour. And friends for a long time in Germany are not at all glamorous and do not live in poverty. They live on average.
      3. Yarosvet
        Yarosvet 5 September 2013 16: 41
        Quote: aksakal
        simply put, either on credit (which needs to be repaid), or due to robbery and parasitism (and from such a lifestyle, a normal brow is reversed). This is the secret to the good life of an ordinary Zapadents.

        Yes, you are just a genius, the sun !!!

        Well, open my eyes to the world, tell me in detail - whom exactly is the ordinary zapadents robbing! Tell me who the Finns, Canadians, Aussies, Norwegians, Brazilians, Greek, Cypriots, Chinese workers at the factory are robbing.

        All of these guys, receiving a minimum wage, have 3-4 times more from a common piece than a Russian who receives a minimum wage - tell me the truth, tell me who they rob?

        PS I'm still waiting for your confirmation of your idle talk about Stalin, nicknamed Kob, robbing River Ships laughing
  2. repytw
    repytw 4 September 2013 20: 48
    And without this article, lately I’ve started to hate more Britons than Americans, they also use their fools.
  3. Brave
    Brave 4 September 2013 21: 28
    Nikolai Viktorovich quite logically and readily describes the course and meaning of things, sometimes you think how you yourself didn’t guess ...? request Need to read more ... But time and time
    1. a52333
      a52333 4 September 2013 21: 46
      EXCELLENT. "The smell of oil", "Hitler, who made him attack Stalin," and this article is painful to read, but "Betrayed Russia" is necessary. This article is such a fusion of "Betrayed Russia" and "Who Made Hitler"
  4. ZU-23
    ZU-23 4 September 2013 21: 39
    Of course, geopolitics is more important than chess, because there is someone more important than chess players and figures on the board, that is, it is the observing organizer of the tournament.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  5. avt
    avt 4 September 2013 21: 46
    Well, not to say that they made some kind of discovery, they could have added Pavlush No. 1 for beauty to the money of the murdered Aglitsk ambassador, walk along Rasputin, where again the Aglitsk intelligence was in advance, and they themselves do not hide it, they even filmed a movie on the BBC. Well, in general, of course, a plus, it is quite popular in the format, but those who want to delve into the topic can still dig a lot of interesting things. Leontyev over there in the Big Game also covered the topic well.
    1. a52333
      a52333 4 September 2013 22: 40
      But do not you think something strange about
      Pavloms #1
      ... The book "Betrayed Russia" is told. He was not a moron playing soldiers.
      1. avt
        avt 5 September 2013 10: 51
        Quote: a52333
        The book "Betrayed Russia" is told. He was not a moron playing soldiers.

        Well, the article was on the site and discussed it, of course there was a kind of comrade, but far from being fools, his real decrees confirm this. But what to do request Petrusha No. 1 was drinking to hell - according to the historians, he took a break from the affairs of state, called his comrades-in-arms' blyazha and sons - probably thanked not that Pavel, like Peter No. 3, was thrown by the victorious opponents, this is the lot of losers.
  6. rugor
    rugor 4 September 2013 22: 03
    In places it smacks of undisguised paranoia, but in general it is interesting, especially about the Stalinist model of the economy.
  7. vvvvv
    vvvvv 4 September 2013 22: 12
    This is how it should be - I recommend looking at "Zhirinovsky about Latvia (and the Baltic States)" on YouTube ...
    I think like Zhirinovsky. This is an elementary logic and a general concept - when the "brothers ram", then their "schnyri" should keep quiet, and not take on a lot ... Otherwise ... Here the US schnyrs are completely cut off and, I hope, the time will come to be responsible for the market ...
  8. Concept1
    Concept1 4 September 2013 22: 32
    Read his books.

    What N. Starikov readily and clearly writes about has long existed in the form of fragments in our information field. So to speak, such an information puzzle that someone had to collect in order to get a more objective picture.
    In order to better understand this picture, the picture of the world order and the place of our people in it, for this, in my opinion, you need to consider the details, as detailed as possible, and then look at it as a whole, only if possible without imagination, without emotions with cold reason and facts. Which Nikolai does in his books.
  9. v_1
    v_1 4 September 2013 22: 36
    There is such a novel by Stephen King (and the TV series) "Under the Dome", so if the Americans and the British were covered with such a piece, Stolypin's dreams would come true.
    In general, our problem is that we do not know how to attack. "Seelow Heights" does not count.
    I’m talking about the moral side, about education. Since childhood, we have been taught to be peaceful and reasonable, but the world is not like that.
    1. d_trader
      d_trader 4 September 2013 22: 54
      Quote: v_1
      We are taught from childhood to be peaceful and reasonable, and the world is not like that.
      So you need to persistently reformat it for yourself, but not be compared to our eternal geopolitical enemies. In truth and justice, the strength of our civilization and its pivot on which Russia rests
      1. v_1
        v_1 4 September 2013 23: 06
        it is a re-colonization of all the foundations, including one, but the illusion of another sun city.
      2. VasDA
        VasDA 5 September 2013 04: 35
        "Why should we bend under the changing world? Better it bend under us." (C) Time machine.
  10. Gerurra
    Gerurra 4 September 2013 22: 39
    our leaders also have kids abroad. Maybe they work for MI6.
    1. a52333
      a52333 4 September 2013 22: 49
      Maybe they work on MI6
      Almost ... almost. There is real estate, there are accounts. let's say, they hold .... for a specific place.
    GREAT RUSSIA 4 September 2013 22: 42
    Well, the Anglo-Saxons were and will remain the enemies of our GREAT MOTHERLAND, and the enemies are number 1. But this is not for long, the times of RUSSIA will soon come, and these Anglo-Saxons with their smelly logic, vile ambitions will go away as the greatest crime in the history of mankind.
  12. yur
    yur 4 September 2013 22: 50
    This is who should be in the presidential advisers, in the FSB and other structures. And if all of the above do not use the work of Starikov N.V., then this is to our misfortune and to the delight of the arrogant Saxons.
  13. Black
    Black 4 September 2013 23: 02
    Well, I do not like the islanders ... But .. It seems to me that everything is somewhat straightforward and simplistic. The whole world cannot be a translator of the ideas of one nation. Each nation solves its tasks, blocking with some, fighting with others.
    It turns out that the Russian Empire (the forces of peace and good) grew and "cut windows" humanely and proceeding from tender feelings, and the Saxons (the forces of evil) only think how to "bend" the world. Somehow very literal for conversations between the instructor and the personnel.
  14. Avenger711
    Avenger711 4 September 2013 23: 12
    Before discussing millennia of geopolitics, Starikov would have liked to understand that the state, by definition, could not be collapsed by revolutionaries for someone else’s money there.
    1. VasDA
      VasDA 5 September 2013 04: 39
      That is, when the events of the last 30 years took place in Europe (and not only), were you absent and only yesterday returned to planet Earth?
  15. Uzoliv
    Uzoliv 4 September 2013 23: 13
    Quote from Mr. Starikov: “It was obvious to Hitler that he would no longer have the first front. The front should be one, with the Soviet Union. And with Great Britain, what went down in history as the Strange War: when at the beginning of the Second world soldiers did not shoot at each other, but played football and cards in no man's land, when the first British soldier was killed only 2,5 months after the outbreak of hostilities. "
    I can't say anything for the soldiers, but the British sailors began to die almost immediately after the declaration of war. For example, the German submarine ace Gunther Prin sank his first ship, the British steamer Bosnia, on September 5, 1939. And on the night of October 13-14, the British battleship Royal Oak (Royal Oak) sank in Scapa Flow, killing 833 sailors. It was a strange war, but at sea it was real.
  16. Karabin
    Karabin 4 September 2013 23: 21
    Old men are not interesting to me due to the pop-like nature of their "research", far-fetched semi-facts and conspiracy theories bloated to the size of an elephant. This "researcher of history" gives out "works" to the mountain, as once Tender May songs. Moreover, it is written there that meets a certain demand in society at the moment. The conjuncture will change - Starikov's tone will change. So in this interview, I went from Lenin and the Provisional Government to 1968, from giving credit to the "genius" of the British and the corruption of all our rulers. Only Stalin was spared. The people who accepted and did not accept the revolution and fought for and against in the Civil War, and then built, fought again, built again, Mr. Starikov leaves out of brackets. Apparently the people did not come out with a snout, to influence politics when the vile Englishmen obey business with Kerensky, Lenin, Trotsky and others. Modern power for Starikov, like a sacred cow, cannot be touched, although it is possible to apply his "ability to analytics" to find parallels a la "Lena Goldfields", starting with Rosneft and ending with state media with a two-day hysteria over the birth of an English spice. But this is for now. The pendulum will swing and Kolya will write many books about the great masters of intrigue, the British, and the Kremlin dwarfs. Or maybe he himself will be released. Pop doesn't "live" for a long time.
    1. v_1
      v_1 4 September 2013 23: 40
      he operates with facts, not verbal "chatter". Formulate a question and ask Starikov. You will get an acceptable answer, which you can refute after receiving a discussion. What problems? You are like a proud Jewish "noseg" who is ** aetso in his cozy)
    2. Black
      Black 4 September 2013 23: 54
      Quote: Karabin
      Pop doesn't "live" long.

      Bravo!!!! In the top ten!
  17. Bezarius
    Bezarius 4 September 2013 23: 48
    About Canada was a direct revelation, honestly.
    1. Black
      Black 5 September 2013 00: 10
      Quote: Bezarius
      About Canada was a direct revelation, honestly.

      Again, not everything is so straightforward.
      Both the USA and Canada according to Starikov are "teles", England is the brain.
      Do you know that Canada is essentially consolidated by its aggressive southern neighbor in the wars of 1776, 1812 and 1861. Strange self-flagellation, don’t you?
      Having acquired Alaska from Russia in March 1867, Seward (the then Secretary of State) publicly announced that this agreement was the first step "to encircle all of British North America, which should end with the transformation of the Canadian provinces into the states of the American Union."
      Not everything was so peaceful in the "Danish kingdom" and, I assure you, is.
      1. Hitrovan07
        Hitrovan07 6 September 2013 02: 32
        And what - is there a second? Was he the last step and the last?
  18. rpek32
    rpek32 5 September 2013 00: 11
    A bit about Syria.
    Others and cries, comrades:
    WASHINGTON, Sep 4 - RIA Novosti, Alexey Bogdanovsky. US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel is confident that Russia and other countries are supplying the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad with chemical weapons. He stated this at a hearing in Congress on Wednesday.
    "It is no secret that the Assad regime has accumulated chemical weapons, significant stockpiles of chemical weapons," Hagel said. To the congressman's clarifying question, from which specific countries the weapons came, the head of the Pentagon replied: "The Russians supply them, others (also) supply them with these chemical weapons. Something they do themselves."

    РИА Новости
    1. Hitrovan07
      Hitrovan07 6 September 2013 02: 30
      It is a pity that the Russians will not prosecute a US government official for libel (the evidence is again like in the movies (quote) - "... our gentlemen take their word for it." laughing
  19. saag
    saag 5 September 2013 06: 59
    "... Nikolai Starikov, whose history books are read in one breath. An economist by education, he considers any fact from the point of view -" who pays for this? Who benefits? "
    I will now ask an interesting question "who benefits?" for Messrs. Starikov and Fedorov to explain the "international position of our country" (C)?
    If I were in the place of foreign intelligence, I would pay attention to them, just in case, as an agent of influence and not directly, but indirectly as if from the authorities, so that he would be perceived as a pro-government person, then there would be even more faith: - )
  20. Belogor
    Belogor 5 September 2013 07: 39
    Far from everything is ambiguous, but has the right not to exist. His thoughts are quite populist in style and resemble the matches of one of our politicians.
  21. individual
    individual 5 September 2013 09: 22
    The publication is controversial, about this and comments.
    It is indisputable only that the Britons always intrigued Rossam.
    It's time for Rossam to put the Britons in the Z pose.
  22. dmb
    dmb 5 September 2013 10: 05
    I think that the preamble of the article was the reason for the publication. Well, where about "one breath" and "fame". For the sake of the latter, and of elementary earnings, Mr. Starikov has once again repeated what he says without much variation in all his "creations". At the same time, the aforementioned writer does not particularly bother himself with working in the archives, but uses the reprint of well-known truths about primary sources that are beneficial to him without saying anything. Apparently from his inherent personal modesty, which he strongly resembles another zealot of piety. Only in cinematography. Mikhalkov is his last name. Of all the opus, the answer about the concession amused me a lot. I wonder what methods the opus writer himself could offer to attract investments and restore the country after the civil war? Note that the country has been restored. By the way, how do the concessions of that time differ greatly from the current investments, and is the country recovering so successfully? One of the commentators suggests asking Starikov questions to get an answer. I don’t think I’ll get an answer personally, but let him try.
  23. michajlo
    michajlo 5 September 2013 13: 01
    Good day to all!

    I personally liked this article and it is a plus from me. It was interesting to read the exchange of opinions between members of the forum, full of pros and cons of the author (Nikolai Starikov).

    It goes without saying that many of us have different views and beliefs, in disputes we will quickly find the truth or come to some kind of another general conclusion which none of them convinced us ONLY of their innocence at first did not even guess.

    Knowing the author himself, I personally know little, I will read more in order to have something to think about or look for a weak spot in his "too generalizing conclusions."
    It is possible that the author himself is "fashionable", "trendy", I have no opinion here, for now.
    I can say that in my opinion it doesn’t matter how to call whom, personally calledь "secret world government" or "world queen". The main thing is that there are many intentionally hidden before us simple inhabitants, things and principles of MANAGEMENT for peopleand. What should alert us all is the fact that all their designs ("rulers of destinies") slowly but inexorably turn them into life.

    But on the other hand, I personally from some already mature age reflect on many events in a similar way, as the author of this article himself.

    It is quite possible and even good that in their answers to simple questions (cited by the author: Kwho benefits? и Who patched everything for this?), each of us can come to different conclusions, but thinking about the answers to such questions is very useful to any of us in the moment!

    If only because they teach us to REFLECT on what they saw and heard and stop stupidly and naively believe everyone "Sons of the people", the highest spiritual dignitaries and various Predictors, Psychoanalysts and simply prostitutes_Analysts.

    After all, they can simple old gray-haired people wise in life, often without complete CO, immediately because to say haphazardly only after seeing any of us, hearing only a couple of our said sentences, FULLY and EXTREMELY say who we really are! And it is quite possible that many people may not like this truth about ourselves (including me).

    In my life I had the honor of seeing, talking and hearing such simple, not rich old people, they were highly respected by fellow villagers, acquaintances, neighbors! Interestingly, all of them were deeply religious, knew the Bible and the Gospel in detail. Maybe there is a reserve for the self-empowerment of us modern semi-atheists (this is me personally)?

    For example, about the realities of today.

    Tell a specialist (not for me, don't be alarmed!), No. of your mobile, No. of your SIM card, your Email and IP-address, "Account No. - and he learns a lot about each of us (including me), down to what" Condom or Gel / for young customers and "not for a shower", except for food, medicine and drinks, we (or you) buy similar things ... smile
    Rђ RІRѕS, these "little things" are no longer laughing, this is a clear sign of total "surveillance". Here in Slovakia, by the end of the year, it is already necessary to "chip" the dogs.
    In just a couple of years we ALL EU residents will have a "medical chip under our skin"(for a local doctor, they say ?!).
    And the unbelievers or the naive only further insist that "NMP" (New World Order), "world government" are supposedly the inventions of conspiracy lovers.
  24. ZeroFact
    ZeroFact 5 September 2013 22: 46
    There is a significant claim to the article - a simplification of the issue. The author reduces everything to the ONLY driving force (in this case, England), which, in my opinion, is a serious mistake.
    As for the October Revolution of 1917 and the "foreign agents" of Lenin and company, I always have a question (not rhetorical): "How then did the Soviet Union take place when there were traitors around?"
  25. Hitrovan07
    Hitrovan07 6 September 2013 02: 27
    "Everything else is not even securities, these are records in the American computer. Just computer zeroes. When this computer is turned off, everything will be reset." - Greatly written. Bravo.