Another interesting interview with Sergei Pieeslegin and his analytical assessment of reality.
Today, as we have compared the current crisis respective times to 1917, we hear various voices comparing it to the russian crisis, for example comparing the ban on Telegram to Prohibition (a memorable “dry order” introduced in the USSR in May 1985, during the reign of M. Gorbachev, a strategy of prohibitions trying to limit alcohol consumption- PZ). Can you see the parallels between the collapse of the USSR and what is happening today?
When the COVID pandemic began, I remember saying: “Why are you all telling me about this conspiracy theory? For a long time there has been no theory, there is simply a practice of conspiracy that cannot be missed erstwhile seen with its own eyes.”. This is precisely the same situation. If we talk more or little seriously, and erstwhile we talk about conspiracy, we mean something very simple.
There are countries, people and structures curious in Russia having problems, or for example, that Russia does not be in any form or that a conglomerate of states should be created in its place, as has already been the case with the russian Union. Because these people think rather stereotypically, it is rather natural that they usage the same methods under fresh conditions that have been prepared under erstwhile conditions.
How, then, did the dismantling of the russian Union proceed?
Of course, russian decay had its roots in interior problems. It was a failure in the moon race. Again, for us now, it doesn't substance whether the loser was authoritative or we just admitted it. It was the economical crisis of the 1970s. In short, we can go further and see a full series of missteps at earlier stages of development. But that's not a problem right now. These are interior problems that caused a major crisis.
I'll remind you that by definition, all crisis is an attempt, an attempt, from which you can come out affirmative or negative. I will besides remind you that there are 4 basic forms of crisis erstwhile both leaders and subjects realize that this is simply a crisis and are trying to do everything in their power to get out of it. erstwhile leaders understand, but society does not. erstwhile society understands but does not feel the influence of leaders. And erstwhile neither side understands anything.
So you cannot influence a hostile country erstwhile it is doing well. Your influence will be an highly insignificant origin that can force a tiny number of people to change their position, but it will be very fewer people and nothing will happen.
But if the country is in crisis, if the situation is unstable, the situation can be radically changed with a very tiny impact at this point. In fact, it is simply a standard martial art technique: influencing the enemy erstwhile it crosses a critical point in a given operation.
The russian Union crossed a critical point and they influenced it. It should be remembered that this kind of influence always involves the usage of sleeper agents in the country. And that's an crucial question. any agents most likely didn't know what they were doing. I mean, they were following orders. Not knowing what they were doing. But, for example, by reading any things about Yakovlev, I begin to believe that he, or Shewardnadze, were full aware of what they were doing and knew why they were doing it.
What are we dealing with here? The first thing to do in this situation is to make a gap between the top and the bottom. This means creating a situation where, from a lower class perspective, any action to harm the government is justified. Any word that ridicules a government or ridicules it is justified. Any propaganda that correctly describes his actions is absolutely true. Well, it looks like we've already made that step.
What was done to accomplish that?
And here you are absolutely right. A series of idiotic bans have begun.
People wanted to perceive to music, but they were forbidden. And I remember it very well erstwhile 75% of your recordings at the performance had to be Soviet, with a fewer from another countries, and then there was 1 track left. You can usage conditional mode there. Beatles, fundamentally anything from the West, but allowed. Of course, no 1 liked it. By the way, doesn't that remind you of websites, white and black letters and all that? It was precisely the same. White lists of western songs that can be performed. As a result, the government simply lost all young people in a short time, due to the fact that among the youth there were practically no people who did not perceive to music, and those who listened, in general, were very annoyed by what they should perceive to and what they should not. Yeah, there was no Internet, but, sorry, who needed Led Zeppelin? They always had it on tape.
Second act. The fight for the discipline of work has begun. That was for Andropov. They started catching people in baths and another places and sending them to work. That didn't improve the level of work. The workers were already annoyed due to the fact that the people they caught were around them, handling themselves perfectly. And in general, they assumed they'd someway get along with their superior, where he should be, what he should be doing, and when.
Well, it was later expressed in the celebrated sentence: “when the programmer is at work at 8 a.m., he is no longer at work but came to work‘. That was the second point.
And the 3rd point is Prohibition.
By the way, I remember Prohibition very well. due to the fact that there was fundamentally nothing to buy. Not only did the russian Union never learn to make decent wines, but for a fewer sweet ones in Crimea, but what was available was impossible to buy even for a wedding, even for a large celebration. According to the anti-corruption programme, which one more time irritated everyone, it did not produce any affirmative results.
Then began jamming western voices (the radio). And again, I ask you a question; doesn't it remind me of something, like slowing down the Internet? People started looking for ways to bypass those jammers, and again, they asked the same question. Eventually, erstwhile control was lost, it became clear that people did not want to support this government. And the fact is, erstwhile the union broke up, nobody stood up for the country. That's not the strength there.
Yes, it can be said that people specified as Nina Andreyeva and Samo Umalatov ( known during the period of social and political activists – PZ) spoke, but they were people who could not truly change anything, even if individual tried to perceive to them.
Second point, the army, again, no 1 talks about it now, it's not customary to talk about it. I remember perfectly how at the Assembly of People's Deputies, there was a minute before the ultimate Council, erstwhile a letter came from the Pacific Fleet submarine officers, saying that we full support your convention and we want to inform you that if individual tries to do something about it, remember what ended with 1 outburst from Aurora, and with us, the weaponry much more serious. And it's not a joke, it's the real paper that came in. I mean, the military didn't want to support the country either. And then there was no prolonged armed conflict.
How could it not be? Afghanistan was a prolonged armed conflict.
We just didn't put it that way. Okay. Oh, yeah, we didn't set it that way. And it ended,
By the way, withdrawals. I mean, there's nothing affirmative about the Afghan War. Incidentally, if we're talking about a comparison, playing in school, I mentioned the war in Afghanistan. There was a terrible scandal. There is no war in Afghanistan. There's a military operation in Afghanistan.
Also acquainted words.
That's right, acquainted words. So, I'd like to point out that yes, and of course, influencing the authorities, the ones that actually make the decision. Moreover, the authorities were affected in 3 directions.
The first point is to activate interior conflicts in structures erstwhile it does not substance what happens to the russian Union, in our case with Russia. It is crucial how you can advance against your most bitter opponent. You've long forgotten why you had a fight with him, erstwhile and how it happened, but you know for certain you're not talking to him and you gotta fight him. Therefore, the first step is to provoke interior conflicts.
The second point is to decision to enemy position. The explanation that everything in the planet will be fine and that everything in the planet is fine, but the russian Union, and by advocating its destruction, you are only doing his citizens a favor, and that is what the government should do in this situation. That was the second line of influence.
And thirdly, and the most interesting. By transferring money to the West, which could only be done after the collapse of the Union, you will supply for your household and become independent of the russian strategy and its problems.
As a result, it turned out that not only the population, not only the army, not only the safety of the state, but the government itself turned against each other. That's an interesting point.
And it ended, as you remember, with a coup attempt. besides a very interesting point. I have nothing good or bad to say about politicians right now. I just want to draw attention to the fact that the blanks that have succeeded do not even realize the simple models of Lenin's revolution, but at least the request to take over the telegraph, telephone and bridges. They didn't even understand. But what else is there to say?
And from this perspective, the coup looked like a completely comical spectacle that had no chance of success at all. I remember that besides very well. We were in Riga at the time, and there were any girls who lived next door. A horror, a nightmare, there was a military coup in Moscow. And then we went to call, find out. I said, "How does the telephone work?" They say, “Yes, the connection to Moscow is fine.” I say, "So this is not a military coup, it's a pretend game."
That's what it looked like. Well, then, as you can imagine, there was an attempted coup in August, and in December we no longer had the russian Union, despite the decision in the referendum, despite the army, despite everything else. People are absolutely right about this.
The union was a strong military state, but at that time it lacked a position, political will, and its own imagination of the future.
Well, like you said.
I remember late seeing comments on the English-speaking Internet, that Russia's power is usually judged by atomic warheads. If you look at the economy, demographics, social policy, it turns out that this power does not exist. So now they realize it in the West. But what do they realize in our country? It seems there are many wise men and many wise businessmen. possibly there are useful people even in the government itself. Or, as we spoke recently, will there be any self-awareness in the “Galactics” of Wowa?
Well, look at 3 things.
Firstly, we must comment on this message from the West. It is interesting, and for me, it is an interesting and intriguing example of classical card flips. But in fact, there is simply a method, a technique. Incidentally, it was developed by Alexander Ivanovich Agieev. Actually, I know her well due to the fact that I utilized to usage her for a fewer tasks. This is simply a method to find the country's real possible on the basis of about 12 parameters, including, of course, military strength, territorial space, economy, mineral resources, demographic data and many others.
Therefore, you draw a polygonal structure and polygon on it, depending on standardization of the number of units that a page has for a given parameter. Then you calculate the purely formal area of this polygon.
So if we look closely at this situation, we will discover the following facts. atomic power. The first parameter we have now is rocket missiles, at least officially, and we have more warheads than the U.S. and more mid scope missiles.
Delivery times are better. Yes, of course,
The Americans will be fighting it now, yes, they will be arming themselves and so on, but that besides takes time. For now, the first place in the armed forces is undoubtedly the second position. The U.S., thanks to its very crucial leadership in aviation, and its very good navy, inactive outranks us in this respect. China is weaker than us, partially due to the fact that they have much little atomic weapons, although its number has increased. But, strictly speaking, the first 3 places are so much ahead of the remainder that there is no request for further counting.
However, the first place in atomic weapons, which means global conflict, is definitely the second. Economy, four, five.
How do you number it? Of course, but four, five. Demography. Russia's demography is weak, but generally, it's good. Today, only in the United States are affirmative among developed countries. Therefore, if we compare developed countries, it is besides somewhere around the third, 4th place. So we start drawing,
Yes, the question of resources is clear: first, second place with the States. Again, if you number and if you include logistics. Yet China besides belongs to uncommon earth metals, given their resources. But again, the 3 best clearly stand out, while the others besides clearly lag behind.
As a result, on the overall illustration of 200 countries, we are in no way below the 4th place in average terms, and most likely in the third. If you call it a deficiency of power of Russia, another than military power, I would call it classical card twisting.
I would say that Russia is undoubtedly weaker than the United States. And this is inactive an open issue, due to the fact that the United States is presently in a worrying zone. As much as it will affect the next 5 years, it is unclear. And as far as relations between Russia and China are concerned, there's a very interesting question about how precisely we're going to calculate this. That's why I'd say second and third, and I'd consider it rather accurate. Second and 3rd places are dangerous. There are those who are evidently more dangerous and who want to influence it somehow. Yes, and that is, of course, dangerous. This is the first point.
The second point I would start utilizing here, look, all these calculations, unfortunately, do not include 3 very crucial things. They just can't be taken into account. We don't have that kind of technology. The presence of perp. And impracticability involves independent decision-making, the existence of its own imagination of the future and the presence of political will to guarantee implementation of the decisions taken. And erstwhile we look at this parameter, we can say that Russia is presently facing a very serious crisis.
It is facing a serious crisis due to the fact that it is presently lacking a imagination of the future. Yeah, you could say,
We're talking about the LGBT fight, we're talking about both of these struggles, we don't request transgender people. This is not a imagination of the future. We keep trying to convince ourselves that we want to reconstruct the past by applying conventional values. The thought is good, but completely unrealistic, so we don't have a imagination of the future. Put a image of the past in his place, it's useless and unnecessary exercise.
The second point is that we deficiency subjectivity.
In what way?
We have a president, he's a subject, he's a decision maker. He's got a board of experts, he's got artificial intelligence. But artificial intelligence is based on databases, mostly made by the West. Worse still, there is something else, our intellectual space is very powerfully influenced by the intellectual field of the West. This means that much of the decisions we make are mostly inspired by this field.
And erstwhile was it different if we remembered the Slavic philosophers, the occultists, etc.?
The most interesting thing is that the Russian cultural code, mostly speaking, stands out by the fact that you can accept everything interesting, crucial and valuable, foreign, without forgetting about your own behavior.
Our fundamental problem is not that we read Western books, Western newspapers, Western theories. Our problem is that all management, I talk here in the broadest sense of the word, including, for example, those who commission work to independent organizations specified as ours, after receiving an answer to the question, regardless of whether it specifically concerns artificial intelligence, the first thing they ask is, "How does it relate to American research?" Even in areas where Americans have not yet started research, and so this cannot have any relevance.
I'd say a small different. They won't do anything until there's a certain number of experiments and implementations abroad.
In general, in the large West, as in the United States. And better yet, possibly even in the United States. But in fact, European experience is besides important, but American experience is the best. And at this point, the problem is not that we usage them, but alternatively that we present this position as an expert, external and framework, alternatively than as 1 of respective positions that, incidentally, besides has its own interests, like any another player, alternatively than as an expert position due to the fact that yes, we absolutely cannot and do not want to consider it a game.
Well, what we were just discussing about the power of Russia – this expected expert position, although in fact it is simply a shift of cards and movement in the game. And good play. And no, this decision in the game is about no 1 checking. No 1 will even look at the numbers. It's taking besides long. Which is precisely what the situation is now. And that's the main weakness.
And the final political will. besides many of our decisions are inactive inspired by Western experiences and Western positions. I will not talk about the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank for the hundredth time. For example, I would like to point out that attacks on Ukrainian data centers, if they have even begun, have occurred somewhere in the last week, right? I think it was the first time they were attacked. Although mostly they could have been destroyed in 2022, without much reasoning about what would happen later.
Well, as Iran has shown us, this is my... Iran has shown that this is possible, yes, before Iran, we surely did not realize it, which is besides shameful, yes, it is besides shameful.
And this willlessness, continued desire, already in conflict with the enemy on all fronts, constant listening to his position, inactive occasionally reasoning of global warming, of our function in fighting him. This willlessness is now Russia's most crucial problem.
Let us now summarise everything that has been said and we will get the following conclusions:
The current crisis, Russia's interior crisis, is linked to external influence. And I want to discuss this separately later in the Attractors thread(*), and this is related to interior phenomena.
And so, again, we see the usage of the same textbooks that make sense: find out what people need; free them, and they will surely support any anti-government, anti-state, any collapse of the country. Yeah, then people will realize they've been cheated, but it'll come later.
And now we have Telegram and the Internet. erstwhile again, I don't want to bring this situation to Telegram. I'm bringing her online. I am saying that the thought of a white letter itself is unconstitutional, that the thought of prohibiting any platforms itself is unconstitutional, that all the actions of Roskomover are unconstitutional.
And the question, although rhetorical, we frequently say that we have older people in power, sometimes we say it's wrong. But these people surely saw it all. Where is the historical memory?
And this is not a historical memory of any mythical events, any one-and-a-half-century events that took place a long time ago, which, well, what can I say, in general, I think most of the listeners, remember these events very well, and we experienced them at different ages. Remember, we talked about Russia's cultural code, that 1 of the main shortcomings, well, from the position of the outside world, is clearly that each code is perfect for its conditions. One of our main shortcomings is the deficiency of gratitude towards our predecessors. The russian Union only at the very end of its existence, and it had already begun to realize, tightening its teeth, that Tsarsk Russia had solved many akin problems with akin methods.
And not all Tsar's Camaryla was a bunch of idiots. But to be honest, they deserve credit. We have always loved Suvorov, Kutuzov and many other, oh, wonderful people. And yet The russian Union never dealt with the problems of 1917 due to the fact that he thought the Tsar was liable for everything, everything happened due to him due to the fact that everything was incorrect with him, so they led to a revolution, but we are different, everything is fine with us.
Well, our current government thinks precisely the same. It was the russian Union. It is apparent that everything was incorrect in the russian Union. So they brought him down. We're not Soviets, we're doing well.
And let us not forget that we are a digital concentration camp. We have the ability to monitor everyone. We have the ability to control all opinion. We have laws that let us to announce anything false news and distort the government's position. Of course we can handle it.
The Tsar government couldn't handle it. The russian government couldn't handle it. Obviously, this 1 can't handle it either. And either there will be adequate drastic steps in advance to let at least a minimal restoration of the broken link between society and power, at least at the level of the President.
All right, you can swing on anything else. Or I'll answer precisely as I said, and they won't be able to handle it either.
So there is no point in asking what way the breakup will go. As they say, what pieces fall into a vase – this is simply a question of a random kind. Any script can happen, and any event can become a triggering factor. That's the question.
The situation is inactive rather mild. We are not in ninety-first year or seventeen years, we are in 9 and sixteen years. There is simply a time to take the essential action. But we must remember that time is moving out. And this is precisely the case in which the deficiency of a solution is in fact a solution, which implements a very circumstantial scenario.
I'd say 1 good news has come up since we last met. The hazard didn't increase, and, you know, now I'm reasoning about how we planned it, but our colleagues canceled the game and we were planning to play the fall of the USSR. So if now, somewhere behind the scenes of our government, and possibly even without us, the collapse of the USSR was played and compared to what is happening now, I think it would be very useful. That is true, but I will repeat again: the hazard has not increased, but has not decreased and remains very high.
The horror of this situation is as follows. In fact, for a man, for a citizen of a country, for his patriot, the worst situation is erstwhile in any conflict you feel that you cannot support your government or its opponents. You're completely dissatisfied with any of them.
And that is the origin of social depression and the problems we face. I cannot support this government, due to the fact that what it does is not only stupid, but besides very akin to what I utilized to do in Western textbooks, which I personally led, and I remember that. But I can't support my opponents either, due to the fact that during the war, this would lead to a military defeat. And this is another way to break up, according to the Russian cultural code.
In general, it doesn't substance how things turn out. Well, I'll say it again, which is truly embarrassing, due to the fact that it's people in power as adults who have seen these methods, and erstwhile the game is against you.
They're playing the same game with fresh instructions, and there's nothing you can do. You haven't drawn any conclusions. You haven't learned, you know, sometimes I feel like saying, "The devil is simply a good strategy, but alternatively monotonous." And the West is good at playing the devil's game.
But again, our situation is as follows. We callback Galaxov again. Power must, it is power must be aware of the situation. Yes, I understand, you could say, "People request to realize the situation." I think people realize her beautiful well. People realize her first.
Secondly, be aware of what you are doing, set goals and accomplish them. In fact, it is simply a task that people delegate to authorities, creating them, reminding them that people delegate power, not the another way around.
Thank you.
(choice, emphasis and crowd. -PZ)
(*) The large Attractor[1], from the English word "attract" – "attract, attract, enslave"[2]) is simply a gravitational anomaly found in the intergalactic space at a distance of about 75 megaparseks, or about 250 million light years[3] from Earth in the constellation Norma[4]. This object with a mass of about 5 ≤ 1016 M The average density of substance in the large Attractor area is not much higher than the average density of the Universe, but due to its gigantic size its mass is so large that not only our Milky Way, but besides another galaxies and their close clusters (including the cluster in the Panna and a number of close superclusters) have peculiar speeds directed towards it, creating a immense stream of galaxies.[2][3][7] The existence of the large Attractor confirms its impact on the movement of galaxies and their clusters, which we observe in the space area of respective 100 million light-years.
The large Attractor – a immense cluster of galaxies, extending from the constellation Centaur and Hydra to the constellation Pawia, with a center in the constellation Coalhouse[1], mostly obscured by nebulas lying in the plane of the disk of our Galaxy.
The large Attractor was discovered in 1987 by a squad of scientists (named the 7 samurai group) composed of Donald Lynden-Bell of the University of Cambridge, Sandra Faber of the University of California, Santa Cruz, David Burstein[in another languages] of the University of Arizona, Roger Davies[in another languages] of the National Observations of Optical Astronomy, Alan Dressler[in another languages] of the Carnegie Institute[in another languages], Robert J. Terlevich of the Royal Observatory in Greenwich and Gary Wegner of Dartmouth College[2].
The large Attractor with its gravitational effect causes galaxies from the Local Supercluster to decision to its center at a velocity of 100-300 km/s[3][4][5]. The mass of the large Attractor is estimated to be 5 × 1015 masses of the Sun, or about 1046 kg[6][7].
The large Attractor belongs to large-scale structures in the Universe.
