Self-determination of the “Victory Powers” in a global conflict: building the world according to your own drawings
The last time, we, based on the Victory Parades, spoke about the eloquent self-determination of “Western partners” in matters stories, world order and the presence of a global conflict. And settled on two important issues:
(1) what is actually the subject of the current world conflict?
(2) What is the self-determination of the “Victory Parade” powers in relation to this subject?
Today we discuss this.
The subject of the world conflict is banal gesheft. Namely: the natural desire of the owners and beneficiaries of the current world order to maintain its dominant place at the top of the global food chain in terms of reduction (or reformatting) of the global food supply.
Parade of self-determination at the Victory Parades
"Crossing": on reconciliation of reds and whites in Chinese, or once again on the dead ends of nationalism
The current conflict already affects almost all aspects of political life. This is a financial and economic crisis, and a frantic war of propaganda, and a chain of the most genuine local wars of “all with all” (in which the powers do not fight among themselves, but there are no “uncovered” in fact). By the way, the convenient side effect of local wars and chaos is an accelerated replacement of the population in the European Union, an element of reformatting the food supply: spoiled white slaves, who for some reason consider themselves to be “European gentlemen”, crowd out the unbroken dark-skinned, which is extremely useful for gesheft.
The conflict over gesheft occurs within a single civilizational project — within a single system of values and prices, within the framework of rules and hierarchies generally recognized by all participants of the process, within the framework of recognized economic and social structures. This project is usually called “liberal”, then “financial-imperialist”, then simply “global”. This, in general, is the very “western” project, which on the ruins of the Yalta world, in the conditions of degradation and self-dissolution of the “red project”, declared itself the winner of the “twentieth century ideology run” - the crown of perfection and even the “end of history”. However, it’s more important that no one even “proclaimed” anything, but the fact that the others agreed. And even the “losers”, as it were, betrayed their “red project” to anathema and, having pulled up their pants, rushed after the alluring dollar.
So: although the conflict is caused by the crisis (or even a dead end) of this particular project, all the fuss is strictly around the redistribution of nishtyakov according to the established rules with the changed conjuncture, but not around the “revision of the fundamentals”. Actually, the concept of "state" in the meaning of "country" in this conflict is very conditional - rather, the historically established area of feeding of certain global boyar clans. Even the United States - by and large, only the territory of the traditional base of the most important clans. So to speak, ancestral estate with serfs.
And, strictly speaking, in this logic, the elite of the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China, ranked among the “forces of evil,” are the same players who bargain for fatter preferences: “spheres of influence”, oil prices and other merchant indulgences. And there is enough evidence that such self-determination quite suits both Moscow and Beijing — I mean the interests of influential clans, and even the steps of political leadership. After all, the obvious mood Comrade. Putin's "agree in an amicable way" can be interpreted this way.
That is, with minor amendments, we see exactly the same logic of “conflict of interests” that took place ... 100 years ago and was called the First World War. How it ended for, as Comrade put it. Lenin, of Russia as a “weak link,” is well known.
However, today there is one nuance in the self-determination of the “powers of the Victory”. That model of the world order, within which there is a conflict, - she in fact, if she had at one time a creative component, over the 70 years successfully degraded to a purely parasitic one. That is, beneficiaries of a global project should have this benefit at someone’s expense. Namely: at the expense of the loser, at the expense of his “territory of feeding”, his “family estate”. And, since Russia and China were appointed “bad guys” in this conflict, this means that they deliberately sentenced not to lower profits, but stupidly to plunder. Including, by the way, those Moscow enthusiasts of the “single world market” who, with some kind of fright, imagined themselves not blacks and suckers, but white gentlemen equal to real white gentlemen: “point” individual / sectoral sanctions of the West against Russia - this is what .
Thus, the parasitic essence of the dominant global project automatically forces “candidates for victims” to correct their self-determination in a conflict.
In the Putin version, this self-determination adjustment is called the word sovereignty. Namely: economic, scientific and technological, state, social, cultural and especially military self-sufficiency. Putin's concept of “geopolitical continents,” which is expressed both in the Eurasian Union and in the “turn to the East,” is all the applied components of such self-determination.
And this is not just bargaining with the owners of a global project. This is venting civilization (not only territorial) space, where we live with our minds.
In principle, as of today, and Comrade. Putin and the Chinese comrades block out such a space according to the rules of the same “Western project”, recognizing them as perfect - with an “invisible hand”, consumption of iPhones, bars and servants, and other dogmas of the liberal religion. That is, we will have, they say, the same order - only with spiritual bonds and the replacement of the sacred dollar with a sacred ruble / yuan. Or, as Konstantin Semin put it recently, “parochial capitalism is Orthodox or Confucian”.
Meanwhile, the very concept of state sovereignty is a heresy from the point of view of the “globalization” project. And blocking out the civilization space is completely rebellious separatism.
And for this, and so, and so - will beat.
That is, at the very least, we will have to compete with the existing global Western project. To compete with him according to his own rules - and even if the rival trumps himself at the table to draw himself - an occupation with a dubious perspective.
Actually, exactly from these considerations, after the First World War and the Time of Troubles in Russia, a “red project” started - an alternative to “world imperialism”. Exactly of these considerations, Comrade. Stalin ignored Bretton Woods and the "Marshal Plan," tore off the ruble from the dollar, wrote about the "economic problems of socialism in the USSR" and agreed with Comrade. Roosevelt on the Yalta world.
And the experience of our “red project” is valuable not by “scandals, intrigues, investigations”, not its deification or, on the contrary, oblivion. The experience of the “red project” is valuable for its civilizational sovereignty. And understanding why he lost in the competition is not a reason for self-flagellation, but a lesson for our next sovereign civilization project.
Because only another civilization project can compete with a civilization project.
And this step in its self-determination “the Victory Parade powers” will be forced to take. Actually, the widely announced "Glazyev plan" is at least an attempt. Disputable, successful or dead-end - time will tell. At the very least, by the way, we must wait for its publication, and not for commentary retellings.
But in another way - no way.
Hands remember ...
(1) what is actually the subject of the current world conflict?
(2) What is the self-determination of the “Victory Parade” powers in relation to this subject?
Today we discuss this.
The subject of the world conflict is banal gesheft. Namely: the natural desire of the owners and beneficiaries of the current world order to maintain its dominant place at the top of the global food chain in terms of reduction (or reformatting) of the global food supply.
Parade of self-determination at the Victory Parades
"Crossing": on reconciliation of reds and whites in Chinese, or once again on the dead ends of nationalism
The current conflict already affects almost all aspects of political life. This is a financial and economic crisis, and a frantic war of propaganda, and a chain of the most genuine local wars of “all with all” (in which the powers do not fight among themselves, but there are no “uncovered” in fact). By the way, the convenient side effect of local wars and chaos is an accelerated replacement of the population in the European Union, an element of reformatting the food supply: spoiled white slaves, who for some reason consider themselves to be “European gentlemen”, crowd out the unbroken dark-skinned, which is extremely useful for gesheft.
The conflict over gesheft occurs within a single civilizational project — within a single system of values and prices, within the framework of rules and hierarchies generally recognized by all participants of the process, within the framework of recognized economic and social structures. This project is usually called “liberal”, then “financial-imperialist”, then simply “global”. This, in general, is the very “western” project, which on the ruins of the Yalta world, in the conditions of degradation and self-dissolution of the “red project”, declared itself the winner of the “twentieth century ideology run” - the crown of perfection and even the “end of history”. However, it’s more important that no one even “proclaimed” anything, but the fact that the others agreed. And even the “losers”, as it were, betrayed their “red project” to anathema and, having pulled up their pants, rushed after the alluring dollar.
So: although the conflict is caused by the crisis (or even a dead end) of this particular project, all the fuss is strictly around the redistribution of nishtyakov according to the established rules with the changed conjuncture, but not around the “revision of the fundamentals”. Actually, the concept of "state" in the meaning of "country" in this conflict is very conditional - rather, the historically established area of feeding of certain global boyar clans. Even the United States - by and large, only the territory of the traditional base of the most important clans. So to speak, ancestral estate with serfs.
And, strictly speaking, in this logic, the elite of the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China, ranked among the “forces of evil,” are the same players who bargain for fatter preferences: “spheres of influence”, oil prices and other merchant indulgences. And there is enough evidence that such self-determination quite suits both Moscow and Beijing — I mean the interests of influential clans, and even the steps of political leadership. After all, the obvious mood Comrade. Putin's "agree in an amicable way" can be interpreted this way.
That is, with minor amendments, we see exactly the same logic of “conflict of interests” that took place ... 100 years ago and was called the First World War. How it ended for, as Comrade put it. Lenin, of Russia as a “weak link,” is well known.
However, today there is one nuance in the self-determination of the “powers of the Victory”. That model of the world order, within which there is a conflict, - she in fact, if she had at one time a creative component, over the 70 years successfully degraded to a purely parasitic one. That is, beneficiaries of a global project should have this benefit at someone’s expense. Namely: at the expense of the loser, at the expense of his “territory of feeding”, his “family estate”. And, since Russia and China were appointed “bad guys” in this conflict, this means that they deliberately sentenced not to lower profits, but stupidly to plunder. Including, by the way, those Moscow enthusiasts of the “single world market” who, with some kind of fright, imagined themselves not blacks and suckers, but white gentlemen equal to real white gentlemen: “point” individual / sectoral sanctions of the West against Russia - this is what .
Thus, the parasitic essence of the dominant global project automatically forces “candidates for victims” to correct their self-determination in a conflict.
In the Putin version, this self-determination adjustment is called the word sovereignty. Namely: economic, scientific and technological, state, social, cultural and especially military self-sufficiency. Putin's concept of “geopolitical continents,” which is expressed both in the Eurasian Union and in the “turn to the East,” is all the applied components of such self-determination.
And this is not just bargaining with the owners of a global project. This is venting civilization (not only territorial) space, where we live with our minds.
In principle, as of today, and Comrade. Putin and the Chinese comrades block out such a space according to the rules of the same “Western project”, recognizing them as perfect - with an “invisible hand”, consumption of iPhones, bars and servants, and other dogmas of the liberal religion. That is, we will have, they say, the same order - only with spiritual bonds and the replacement of the sacred dollar with a sacred ruble / yuan. Or, as Konstantin Semin put it recently, “parochial capitalism is Orthodox or Confucian”.
Meanwhile, the very concept of state sovereignty is a heresy from the point of view of the “globalization” project. And blocking out the civilization space is completely rebellious separatism.
And for this, and so, and so - will beat.
That is, at the very least, we will have to compete with the existing global Western project. To compete with him according to his own rules - and even if the rival trumps himself at the table to draw himself - an occupation with a dubious perspective.
Actually, exactly from these considerations, after the First World War and the Time of Troubles in Russia, a “red project” started - an alternative to “world imperialism”. Exactly of these considerations, Comrade. Stalin ignored Bretton Woods and the "Marshal Plan," tore off the ruble from the dollar, wrote about the "economic problems of socialism in the USSR" and agreed with Comrade. Roosevelt on the Yalta world.
And the experience of our “red project” is valuable not by “scandals, intrigues, investigations”, not its deification or, on the contrary, oblivion. The experience of the “red project” is valuable for its civilizational sovereignty. And understanding why he lost in the competition is not a reason for self-flagellation, but a lesson for our next sovereign civilization project.
Because only another civilization project can compete with a civilization project.
And this step in its self-determination “the Victory Parade powers” will be forced to take. Actually, the widely announced "Glazyev plan" is at least an attempt. Disputable, successful or dead-end - time will tell. At the very least, by the way, we must wait for its publication, and not for commentary retellings.
But in another way - no way.
Hands remember ...
- Andrey Sorokin
- http://www.odnako.org/blogs/samoopredelenie-derzhav-pobedi-v-globalnom-konflikte-stroit-mir-po-svoim-chertezham/
Information