Roman Alymov Posted January 14 Posted January 14 16 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said: What can you say about that? There is no basis for a meaningful discussion here. This is as absurd as an 'Pioneers Afternoon' at the Soviet children's organization 'Lenin Pioneers'. What is "'Pioneers Afternoon"?
Stefan Kotsch Posted January 14 Posted January 14 9 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said: What is "'Pioneers Afternoon"? Difficult to translate. But you probably can't know that anymore. Too young for this? 'Our country's pioneering work has a long, glorious history and its heroes. We are proud of the pioneers and want to be like them, worthy of them. To achieve this, you need to study well, help your elders, not offend children and play sports.' https://ognikavkaza.ru/news/obrazovanie/ikh-gorn-zovjot-istoriya-pionerskoj-organizatsii-pervomajskoj-shkoly
glenn239 Posted January 14 Posted January 14 9 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Yes, because Russian GDP is very low presumably. 6.91 trillion by PPP, 4th overall in the world.
Roman Alymov Posted January 14 Posted January 14 37 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said: Difficult to translate. But you probably can't know that anymore. Too young for this? What is difficult to translate? I was born in 1975, exactly in time to be "Pioneer" all the usual term. What i was too young for is Comsomol (but, actually, one girl from our class did join Comsomol for some reason - it was sort of strange amid USSR collapse, but still possible). 40 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said: 'To achieve this, you need to study well, help your elders, not offend children and play sports.' What is wrong about "study well, help your elders, not offend children and play sports"?
Mike1158 Posted January 14 Posted January 14 I thought the current crop of propoganda was, invade your neighbours, slaughter their citizens while ruining the home economy and gurning a lot.........
Stuart Galbraith Posted January 14 Posted January 14 Murdering critics in the most impractical way possible, threaten the use of nuclear weapons every week...
Roman Alymov Posted January 15 Posted January 15 (edited) Long time ago i was asked here about "image of the future" and ny answer was "de-facto no image". On the same from https://t.me/Alekhin_Telega/12764 "The main question about the text (https://t.me/Alekhin_Telega/12761 ), which has not been disclosed and which I am asked: do we have a clear image of the future for Russia itself and the Russians in it? And is there a strategy to achieve this? For example, Mikhail Polynkov writes about this (https://t.me/soldat_prav/9777 ) and Midshipman Ptichkin (https://t.me/rusfleet/11494 ). The answer is no. And that's the main thing. Russian image of the future is a reference point for anyone who lives outside of Russia and considers himself Russian, or at least somehow relates himself to the Russian world, but there is something about it that does not suit him. But there are no such reference points. This is our main problem.: we respond to challenges, life happens to our country and people, and we don't make it with our own hands. And because of this, life happens to most of our people. Russians have long been interested in the idea that if we build an image of the future that is understandable and acceptable to Russians, in which everyone understands their place, their contribution to its formation and the return of their lives for the benefit of the Russian world, then all Russians will come to us together with their republics. This is the soft power that is talked about a lot in power, but which they do not know how to use. But some people know how to cut budgets on it, as Yakemenko*, the former head of Nashi and the youth team, recently told us. But in order to realize this, the state needs to focus on the individual and the people. In our country, it affects the economy, international politics and the personal well-being of an official/clan. So it turns out that each of us creates his own image of the future, and since each of us has fewer and fewer opportunities to influence the future of the country, most create an image of the future only for themselves, in which there is only personal well-being and do not care about everything around, even, as we often see, that the country He's fighting. While I was writing this post, I saw that they had created some kind of regular competition for "social architects (technologists)." But if the country has no goals, no ideas, and therefore no plan, then what will these architects do and what kind of society will they build? Everything will be like Raikin's: there will be no complaints about the buttons, there will be no complaints about the sleeves, but the jacket will be ugly and it will be impossible to wear it. But I'd better write about the competition separately when I get into the details. In short: Russia and Russians need a common image of the future, a common idea or one supported by the majority (as it turned out, many people do not like the word "ideology"). And the main thing is that at least the majority of officials live and work within the framework of this idea, and it is better to create conditions so that it is impossible to work in the civil service within the framework of Yakemenko's ideas, that is, outside the idea for the people and the country." * former official of organisation created to promote "Russian idea" and support Putin, recently claimed in interview he was only busy stealing as much money as it was possible, and all actions were just imitation. No surprise here for majority pro-Russians, but another reminder of who are our rulling elites. Edited January 15 by Roman Alymov
Roman Alymov Posted January 15 Posted January 15 "The crisis of cooperation: historical examples In the Russian Empire, cooperation was the main driver of economic growth. The tsarist budget usually served a small bureaucracy and endless wars. Everything else was solved with private money, and proper planning and regulation. For example, at the dawn of the development of electric trams, they spontaneously appeared within 20 years in most large and medium-sized cities of Russia. Everywhere at the expense of local cooperation. This made it possible to launch tram lines in St. Petersburg, Odessa, Moscow, Kiev, Ryazan, Simferopol, Tula and many other cities in a short time. Cooperatives of the tsarist era solved the full range of pressing economic and social issues: consumer societies, mutual credit societies, educational cooperatives (gymnasiums, universities, libraries, theaters), and infrastructure cooperatives flourished.: paved roads, trams, river transport, railways, etc. Cooperation among Russians throughout the empire was easy, fast, and with minimal bureaucratic obstacles. Due to this, after the war of 1905 and before the war of 1914, the country was transformed. You can all see the remnants of this transformation on the central streets of your cities, even those that have become rundown villages over the years. In Soviet times, the society's cooperation also flourished. I remember an old-timer of skiing in the Crimea telling me how he and a group of enthusiasts equipped the slopes themselves, built rope lifts at the nearest mechanical plant, and all this as part of the initiative of a local sports society, which they themselves created. Sports and cultural societies, scientific societies and clubs, youth construction groups and much more are all examples of successful complex cooperative activities in the USSR. And no one, not a single organ or Soviet official, got into trouble with the words: "No orders, this is Stepan Stepanych's land." In Crimea, one of the most remarkable examples of collective cooperation is the greening of the peninsula, more than a million trees were planted in 1945-1991, which still has a beneficial effect on the lives and health of Crimeans and tourists. Industrial cooperation in the interests of the military-industrial complex and tyazhprom in the USSR was also at the highest level, especially when Kosygin "let go of the reins." Cooperation (collaboration) It's not just about economics. And it's not always about the benefits. In a broad sense, cooperation is any kind of collaboration between people from different industries and colleagues. The purpose of cooperation is to create a new quality by the collaborators, which will equally apply to them or to broader segments of society. The necessary conditions for cooperation are: the habit of cooperative forms, the unconditional willingness of the majority to cooperate constructively, preferring the common good to personal gain, a positive perception of the future, and a willingness at any moment to expel from the cooperative community anyone who tries to turn cooperation to personal gain. The fraudulent privatization of the 90s became possible in many ways because Soviet Russians were accustomed to cooperating for common benefit within the framework of the socialist economic system, and could not even allow the thought that universal property and cooperation could become the subject of someone's profit. But that's exactly what happened. The young post-Soviet society, like a child who was severely traumatized in childhood, firmly and for a long time lost faith in the power of local, regional, and national cooperation. Instead, he was offered another form of cooperation - "anti-cooperation", when everyone steal exactly as much as they can carry off, and treats with respect and envy those who can carry off much more. Naturally, the dislike of cooperation has affected all strata of society and all institutions of the state. Everywhere, cooperation has been replaced by feeding from the position occupied and the struggle of all against all. Completely basic principles and foundations of cooperation began to collapse. The level of cooperation that we have today does not meet the challenges of the times. Change, or die. The call sounds exactly like that." ( https://t.me/zhivoff/18736 )
Roman Alymov Posted January 15 Posted January 15 "Alexey's good note on cooperation, which I will add with one more important conclusion, is that the current ugly form of formalized bureaucratization of all spheres of society is a consequence of the fact that the initiative of citizens has been replaced by a formal order. And this has penetrated into all spheres of society, since anyone without experience in independently creating a structure for the interaction of ordinary people, and working within the bureaucratic system, as they grow up the career ladder and increase responsibility, intuitively wants to protect their fifth point from any problems, and cover themselves with paper... And therefore, instead of a volunteer rescue service, we need ministerial requirements for legislators to introduce regulations on the rules of visiting forests and mountain hikes, which actually killed mass mountain tourism for children. About doctors, teachers, operatives buried in paper, about logbooks, and all that sort of stuff, you don't have to remind. And it all comes from the fact that there are very few people who know how to achieve results, instead of formally following the processes. And as a colleague recently cited in a discussion, for example, that many decisions in the defense industry could be carried out in a month or two, but if you do that, then in six months the person who went for it will sit down. Because there and there, he violated the rules and regulations, crossed someone's path there, and at the exit the person who gave, for example, an extremely necessary weapon for the front, earned nothing from it, showed effectiveness - he will be in prison. And absolutely according to the law, because he violated many regulations. But no one will think that these regulations need to be revised, that they can harm the state, that harm from them can amount to huge sums and lives. But no one will ever do that now, because it is the sacred cow of the bureaucracy. And in many ways, this is all due to the fact that we do not have an understanding of "taxpayers' money" in society. When every citizen feels like a member of a huge artel, in the treasury of which is his contribution. And having seen the mismanagement, negligence, he will not pass by. Instead, we have in society the concept of state employees, the struggle for the budget, its development and further development, even if the earth does not burn. The main thing is to beat out your department, and what the others have there doesn't give a fuck. Therefore, it doesn't matter to them how many guys died there, or how many coffins the state lost, if Commander Butcher sent the guys to slaughter without proper support, saving government equipment, for example. According to the reports, everything is fine, I saved the equipment, but there is no war without losses. It was only recently that such commanders began to be changed, when it turned out that they had completely lied. But this is not the only example, they save on the purchase of critical elements, they try to save on matches, not realizing that this is a consumable, and that there is no need to carry out R&D for years in order, for example, to establish serial production of a conventional Niva 4x4 in a simplified configuration, to make it essentially a buggy. But instead, mechanics make cars in the military, simply throwing out the excess from old Ladas and any cars bought for salaries, which are essentially needed for one-time use. Why can't the Ministry of Defense do this? After all, such an order can be made with one paper in one hour, and AVTOVAZ's capacity will easily provide several dozen <of thousands> cars per year. So cooperation is one of the feedback options in the state mechanism that can replace excessive regulation. And therefore, the revival of the tradition of cooperation, mutual assistance, and horizontal ties began with SVO. And whether it can overcome the deadening of society by formalism largely depends on how effective the state will be in the end." ( https://t.me/rusengineer/6290 )
Stefan Kotsch Posted January 19 Posted January 19 An interesting assessment. It is based on the Russian telegram channel https://t.me/s/vchkogpu. Well, that's how we know the Chinese. ... 'The ultimate outcome of this scenario likely involves a US-China agreement and the complete 'draining' of Russia from both sides.' ... https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1881019789293842614
Roman Alymov Posted January 20 Posted January 20 4 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said: An interesting assessment. It is based on the Russian telegram channel https://t.me/s/vchkogpu. Well, that's how we know the Chinese. ... 'The ultimate outcome of this scenario likely involves a US-China agreement and the complete 'draining' of Russia from both sides.' ... https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1881019789293842614 Probably, they mean this text "The opinion of the CHEKA-OGPU source on how the real basic and most likely scenario of the domestic economic policy of the Russian Federation was changed at the beginning of 2025: "Back at the beginning of the SVR, an informal working group on the situation in the economy and finance was organized under the first person of the country from sane, but completely loyal and dependent on the existing regime (Oreshkin, Siluanov, Nabiullina, Kovalchuk, Kostin and a number of other little-known names). Each member of the group by himself has considerable weight and huge resources in the system and has subgroups of his employees in various profiles. The main task is to inform about the real state of affairs in the economy and to look for real solutions, despite the rigidity and unpopularity. Without going into details and solving local crises, in fact, until the end of December 2024, the main strategic line was based on the most likely scenario of exhausting the economies of democratic countries, causing discontent among their populations and reaching acceptable agreements. All the media, public authorities and controlled leaks of economic data, not only abroad, but also inside the country, were primarily aimed at convincing Biden's ruling group, and Trump over the past few months, of the normal state of the Russian economy, its moderate growth, the absence of critical problems and the ability of the Russian Federation to continue the confrontation as long as necessary. For example, our group had all the real indicators of the Russian Federation – an increasing drop in GDP by 1-4%, an increase in inflation to 25% over the past year, etc. The main figures for the public space were carefully adjusted, and the holes that appeared were quietly filled with reserves from the National Welfare Fund. While there was a high probability of reaching an agreement with the United States by demonstrating "muscles", it was much more profitable and cheaper to demonstrate them with hidden doping. There was a categorical ban not only on discussing serious restrictions and hardships for the population, but also on the actual elaboration of such measures – due to possible leaks and confirmation of the "weakness" of the Russian economy for US analysts. The main scenario assumed that the newly elected president of the United States, who had his hands "free" at the beginning of his term, would be convinced of the possibility of the Russian Federation continuing the conflict throughout his term, would want to quickly resolve the crisis and this would be the best time for agreements. Intense secret negotiations between the Russian Federation and Trump's representatives took place almost all December, but the conditions put forward by the Americans were completely unacceptable to the pro-Chinese elite group in Russia, which at this stage has the greatest weight. Actually, back in 2023, we warned the country's leadership that such a scenario (and not the one chosen by the leadership for the main one with an agreement with the United States based on our strength) is most likely: in the event of its delay for years, China will not allow an agreement with the United States (China probably leaked real data in the Russian economy to the United States, hence such tough conditions on their part), will not only receive resources below cost and supply its products with a 200-300% premium, but also solve its geopolitical task. – By talking about the friendship and partnership of the Russian Federation, Russia will use its forehead to beat the United States and the EU, negotiating agreements for itself and preventing its open conflict with the United States. The end result of such a probabilistic option involves reaching an agreement between the United States and China and the complete "milking" of the Russian Federation from both sides. After the failure of negotiations with representatives of the new US administration, the Russian leadership is aware of its loss in this "poker" game and the severity of the consequences for the country and its future generations, but reasonably considers it possible to retain power inside the country by tightening internal restrictions for citizens in absolutely all areas, but above all in the field of finance and consumption, that, according to calculations, will allow the regime to stand at least until 2027. And the overall strategy has not changed in principle – to expect changes, random, unpredictable geopolitical events that affect US policy, in order to reach acceptable agreements, showing opponents that Russia can pay the price of the conflict not only with blood, but also with the gold of the elites." ( https://t.me/s/vchkogpu#:~:text=Мнение источника ВЧК,и золотом элит».) This text is definitely written by some pro-Western liberal, most likely from excile outside Russia, as 1) "exhausting the economies of democratic countries" - no pro-Russian would describe West as "democratic countries" 2) "aimed at convincing Biden's ruling group, and Trump over the past few months, of the normal state of the Russian economy" - again, laughable for pro-Russians. RF state apparatus always was completely transparent for West (as it was constructed by West), and the very idea that it is possible to misinform West about Russian economy now, when at least five former vice-PM (people with top possible security clearance) and numerous other officials have disclosed their foreign citizenship and left Russia (to consult Western intelligence if needed) - is beyoung any reasonable imagination. 3) "pro-Chinese elite group in Russia" - what? Unfortunatelly there is no " pro-Chinese elite group in Russia", entire elite is pro-Western. And so on.... If you would like real pro-Russian opinion, then here it is (as responce to recent Iran-RF agreement, where Iran is not recognising Russian borders): "After Minsk and Istanbul, only a complete idiot would entrust the fate of his countries to our ruling liberals . After all , it has long been clear to everyone that they will betray <allies> at any moment as soon as the Western master beckons them with a finger ." https://t.me/donbass_skripnik/19347
Roman Alymov Posted January 20 Posted January 20 While ordinary Russians are crowdfunding even simple tin cans etc. for the troops on frontline, "Zenit" sport club (sponsored by Gazprom) is considering "purchase" of Brazilian football player for EUR35mln https://t.me/donbass_skripnik/19430?single
Stefan Kotsch Posted January 24 Posted January 24 (edited) An interesting article from the newspaper KOMMERSANT. It is primarily about an analysis of failure in Syria. But the author bluntly draws a direct connection to the war against Ukraine. 'It is difficult to understand why other powerful forces were supposed to go on an agreement that was pleasing to Moscow on its terms, and these wishes naturally turned out to be built in the sand. On the contrary, the demonstrated limitations of Russian military achievements only stimulated the opponents of Russia to attempts to take revenge by increasing their intervention and exhausting the Russian side by imposing increasing costs on it. A few years later, this ... will be repeated in Ukraine. It is entirely possible to bluff on the world stage with power and skill, but it is important not to believe in your own bluff too much. However, another strategic lesson is no less significant: in the modern world, victory is possible only in a quick and fleeting war. If you actually win within a few days and weeks but cannot achieve your political-military success quickly, you will ultimately lose no matter what you do. A long campaign itself is already a strategic defeat for his initiator, no matter what private military successes he achieves. A long war not only means a disproportionate exhaustion of resources in relation to the military goals achieved, but also the loss of a strategic perspective ... ' https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/7362241 Edited January 24 by Stefan Kotsch
JWB Posted January 24 Posted January 24 The Bryansk Kremniy EL plant, one of the largest microelectronics manufacturers in Russia, has suspended operations after a drone attack, the company's press service said. Six drone strikes were recorded. Part of the production facilities and the enterprise's warehouse of finished products were damaged. https://x.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1882721153988309175
JWB Posted January 24 Posted January 24 1 hour ago, Stefan Kotsch said: A long campaign itself is already a strategic defeat for his initiator, no matter what private military successes he achieves. A long war not only means a disproportionate exhaustion of resources in relation to the military goals achieved, but also the loss of a strategic perspective ... ' Sun Tzu.
glenn239 Posted January 24 Posted January 24 2 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said: A long campaign itself is already a strategic defeat for his initiator, no matter what private military successes he achieves. A long war not only means a disproportionate exhaustion of resources in relation to the military goals achieved, but also the loss of a strategic perspective ... ' That a good point. Take a vacation to the Confederate States of America this year and let them know that because the war lasted about 1,500 days that for some reason therefore the Union must not have won a strategic victory. :^) There's tons of spin coming out right now about the war. It's all garbage generated by organisations that are fleecing the sheeples. In fact, with Trump's taking office and his suspension of arms shipments to Ukraine in conjunction with a possible crisis in NATO, the safe bet is to not make any bets. There's simply too much up in the air at the moment. Meanwhile, the Russians continue to grind the Ukrainians out one day at a time, just like 'ole Grant did....
Stefan Kotsch Posted January 24 Posted January 24 57 minutes ago, glenn239 said: Meanwhile, the Russians continue to grind the Ukrainians out one day at a time, just like 'ole Grant did.... You can see it that way, the Ukrainians follow the idea of the Swiss. To make war as costly and fatal as possible to the attacker so that he ultimately gives up Well, one could tell the Swiss (or the Finn) that their idea for defense was purest nonsense. And the surrender on the first day would have been the better variant.
Stefan Kotsch Posted January 24 Posted January 24 2 hours ago, JWB said: 3 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said: A long campaign itself is already a strategic defeat for his initiator, no matter what private military successes he achieves. A long war not only means a disproportionate exhaustion of resources in relation to the military goals achieved, but also the loss of a strategic perspective ... ' Sun Tzu. Sun tzu. Well, some are resistant to learning from the old masters.
glenn239 Posted January 25 Posted January 25 (edited) 6 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said: You can see it that way, the Ukrainians follow the idea of the Swiss. Trump said that the Ukrainian numbers have not been accurately reported. He repeated the Ukrainian claims for a million Russian dead, but then said that the actual number of Ukrainians killed is 700,000. He didn't cite his source, but as the president of the United States, one can assume that the source would be the US military's own tracking of Ukrainian losses. Edited January 25 by glenn239
Sinistar Posted January 25 Posted January 25 (edited) trump also reports the same message from the biden administration regarding the russian economy and that it has flunked or that it is in deep trouble and strangely even something suggestive about putin's physical or mental health whether it is true or not it is more similar than not to the biden administration's message since the commencement of the special military operation- russia is in trouble in this war if putin will not parlay and whether you believe that message is true or not says something about you or anyone given the propaganda trump is repeating some of the same messages from biden and zelensky or the ukrainian press almost verbatim on some matters which is different than what trump was saying earlier in his debate with biden these messages are also occurring as zelensky continues to ask for nato troops in ukraine and you see once again the uk and france toying with the idea of sending some kind of show of force to ukraine either during any active phase or any post negotiated settlement and so is what trump says either true or not true in the case of it not being true either trump does not know that is not true and is receiving the wrong intel or is being misled or he knows it is not true and for some reason he is continuing the facade there is evidence that trump is trying to force putin to negotiate on trump's terms and putin does not seem to be going for it putin does not seem at all to think he is running out of anything or that the economy cannot sustain the war in that case trump is not going to end this war as easy as he said he would and he does not have a lot to negotiate with if putin probably he thinks he has the all the momentum that he does not have to agree to anything trump wants to do to end the war on terms that trump proposes and come out of it with a win of some kind for trump putin's stated goals has been since the beginning from the russian perspective: 1 - liberate the donbas and protect the russian population in ukraine 2- " de-nazify" ukraine whatever that means to putin's satisfaction 3- absolutely no nato troops in ukraine and no nato membership for ukraine then he will talk but assuming putin will not bend on any of those then what is it that trump really can offer if trump thinks they are negotiable and putin does not putin has said openly that nothing short of all of that is on the table and in that respect putin is not done yet if somehow there are no guarantees for any of those in the plan because from putin's perspective they do not want a repeat of the minsk accords or some conceit where a truce or a ceasefire is simply buying time to bring in nato and re-arm and refit and then you fight this war again 5 or 10 years from now but against different odds so if trump is not prepared to accept any of that putin continues until putin decides otherwise Edited January 25 by Sinistar
glenn239 Posted January 25 Posted January 25 11 hours ago, Sinistar said: trump also reports the same message from the biden administration regarding the russian economy and that it has flunked or that it is in deep trouble and strangely even something suggestive about putin's physical or mental health What Trump said of the Russians is not interesting, as the West has engaged in fantasy trolling on that topic since day one to keep the sheeples hypnotized. It's what he said of the Ukrainians that matters, that their total of dead is 700,000. He said this as president, meaning that he might have been briefed on the real figures by the US military during his initial security briefings.
Stefan Kotsch Posted January 25 Posted January 25 15 hours ago, glenn239 said: 21 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said: You can see it that way, the Ukrainians follow the idea of the Swiss. Trump said that the Ukrainian numbers have not been accurately reported. I didn't mean any numbers.
Sinistar Posted January 25 Posted January 25 (edited) 5 hours ago, glenn239 said: What Trump said of the Russians is not interesting, it is interesting because the trump team followed up with these statements by telegraphing that the next move is to tank russian oil prices in order to force them to negotiate- it is interesting because if that is what they are considering then you see how the trump views the solution to ending the war whether you think that is a good idea or not it is indicative of how trump seems to view negotiations and what he things is going to get putin to bargain Edited January 25 by Sinistar
Roman Alymov Posted January 25 Posted January 25 Meanwhile Putin is continuing with his negotiations begging "January 24, 2025, 18:22 Politics Putin declares Russia's readiness for negotiations on Ukraine However, Kiev itself forbade negotiations with Moscow. Vladimir Putin said that Russia is ready for negotiations on Ukraine. However, there are issues that require special attention. The President recalled that the Ukrainian authorities had forbidden themselves negotiations with Russia. "The current head of the regime in Kiev, when he was still quite legitimate, issued a decree banning negotiations. How can negotiations be resumed now if they are prohibited? (...) If negotiations begin within the framework of the current regulatory framework, they will be, strictly speaking, illegitimate, which means that the results of these negotiations will need to be declared illegitimate," Putin said in an interview with VGTRK journalist Pavel Zarubin (quoted by Interfax). "Until this decree is lifted, it is quite difficult to say that these negotiations can be started and, most importantly, properly completed. Of course, some preliminary plans can be made, but it is quite difficult to talk about serious negotiations in conditions of a ban from Ukraine," the president noted. The Head of State noted that US President Donald Trump had made numerous statements regarding the negotiations on Ukraine. According to Putin, he has always had a businesslike and pragmatic relationship with Trump. In his opinion, the crisis in Ukraine could have been avoided if the Republican had not been "robbed of victory" in 2020." (Путин заявил о готовности России к переговорам по Украине)
Roman Alymov Posted January 25 Posted January 25 From Zakhar Prilepin, another "guardian" "IT'S A MISTAKE TO THINK THAT NO ONE SEES US. EVERYONE IS WATCHING US. You cannot wage war with the aim of negotiations. Not a victory, but negotiations. That's what smart people say, and they're right. We created BRICS, we made some promises, some hopes to Africa, Latin America, Vietnam, Mongolia, friend Kim... but do you know what is very noticeable? That it's all kind of... part of the bargaining. Moreover, there is no bargaining with the above-mentioned Africa, Latin America and further down the list. And bargaining with a big and "real" partner. For whom, by and large, all this was conceived. There's too much protocol in this whole story. There is too little visible essence. You can find out by one simple feature. If Russia were to seriously decide to re–establish great friendships with the great South, we would at least take a look at how they live there now. They would be interested in them. They would have launched TV programs about them on all TV channels. We would send a lot of special correspondents there, who would send us news from there, as they are being sent in a continuous stream from the United States and the European Union. They would hold huge festivals of Cuban, Mongolian, North Korean and Vietnamese culture one after another. And they would finally launch their own version of the otherwise named "Nobel Prize", their own version of the otherwise thought–out "Oscar", and create their own value hierarchies on shares with the Global South. Never to be humiliated by the white master again. And joint military exercises with new cronies would be conducted wherever possible, as without this. But Russia, in this sense, is such a lady, such a lady. "Do you want to be friends with us? Oh, we're so glad! Write down your last name in that visit log over there! We'll call you back!" Russia has not even turned over on its other side. She continues to gaze with loving eyes at "white Christian Europe," "Trump's rednecks," Trump himself, and all the rest of this obnoxious company. Turn on any talk show, listen to what it's about, what names are being pronounced. How many times will we hear in our news programs about Macron, Scholz and the Baltic defense ministers, and how many times about the heads of Mongolia, Laos or our new African friends. We hardly know who rules there in those countries that came or joined the queue in BRICS. Well, except for Maduro (he's colorful) and a couple more who are just impossible to miss because they run countries where a billion people live. We haven't even tried to figure out what their values are, what their interests are, what they're singing, what they're reading, what they're playing, what they're dancing to. We have not formulated a big message to the world, for which we ourselves are ready to take serious responsibility. The message is, if not about our common, universal goal, then at least about our own. What do we want? Do we know? So that any official will know it by heart and the students remember ikt also? ...But Trump knows what we want. We want a "deal". That's why he talks to us like that. As we deserve it. "Do you want a deal? I'll give you a deal." He doesn't believe for a single minute in our "ideology" (we don't have it), in our new "friendships" (haha), in our worldwide prospects for establishing new rules of planetary community (ho-ho). He's a pragmatist. Whoever he sees, he talks to. And he sees the shadow of the "European world", which wants to "return to how it was" and become a "part" of their "white civilization" again. Is he wrong? Well, let's show him that he's wrong. Is he right? ...Then it's sad."
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now