Andrey Fursov: Who really rules the world?

Historian Andrei Fursov has been studying world elites for many years

Almost half of Russians believe that we are ruled by Freemasons and Reptilians

Almost half of Russians believe in the secret world government! More precisely, 45 percent. These are data from a recent survey by the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM).

Curiously, the degree of belief in a secret all-powerful body grows with the level of education of the citizens surveyed.

True, opinions about the composition of this "government" in Russia differ. Some believe that the oligarchs rule the planet, others blame the Americans, others blame the Freemasons, Jews, "some world politicians", or specific Obama, George W. Bush and Queen Elizabeth II of Great Britain. The confusion in the answers is understandable - the government is secret! A third of the Russians polled do not believe in it, a quarter found it difficult to answer.

These 45 percent of our fellow citizens are essentially right, but wrong in form. There is no such form as a “secret world,” says historian Andrey Fursov, who has been studying world elites for many years. - But the closed supranational structures of world coordination and management are a reality. These structures often dictate their will to governments, parliaments, and individuals. But in no case do they represent a single organ of the world elite.

- What is the top of the world? - with hope I ask the historian. What if this is the very secret government of the planet. So you don’t want to part with a beautiful conspiracy version, in which almost half of your compatriots believe!

The world elite is a collection of families of monarchs (not all, of course), the old European aristocracy, bankers and industrialists. They are interconnected by business, family and occult ties, organized into closed lodges, clubs, commissions, etc. A sort of family and business web that has existed in its current form for 150-200 years.

- Does the Queen of Great Britain enter there?

Of course. As well as the royal family of the Netherlands, a number of ducal and count families of Italy, Germany, Austria. These are not decorative figures at all, relics of the Middle Ages, with which they are often portrayed, but one of the segments of what British Prime Minister B. Disraeli called "masters of history", and our wonderful writer O. Markeev - "masters of the world game."

- And Obama?

God bless! Well, if Clinton said that the only thing Obama is good at is bringing coffee to bed for him and his wife, then in relation to the world's top Barack is something like taking out a chamber pot. What are presidents and prime ministers in the West? High-ranking clerks who were hired by the world's elite to serve their interests and put in high chairs. Moreover, as a rule, the special forces of the world's elite look after the clerks. As, for example, Colonel House under US President Wilson and the "assistant" of the British Prime Minister Lloyd George, Lord Lothian. In reality, it was the president and the prime minister who were with their "assistants". A rare exception is Bush Sr. and his undersized son as presidents of the United States. The Bushes are at the top of the world, they are distant relatives of the British Queen, they lead the Skull and Bones Society (an offshoot of the Illuminati) at Yale. But, again, this is an exception. As a rule, presidents and prime ministers come from the middle class, which the top looks down on, especially in the Anglo-Saxon countries. Recall the story when Thatcher announced the name of the fifth member of the Cambridge Five (high-ranking British - Soviet agents. - Ed.) - Blunt, who, apparently, was the illegitimate son of George V, i.e. uncle of the current queen. Windsor Thatcher did not forgive this. The petty bourgeois (as another representative of the “gentleman class”, who was then living in Moscow, described her) eventually had to resign - also because of the attack on the owners.

- And Bill Gates, one of the leaders of the Forbes ranking of the planet's billionaires - is he among the world's top?

Well, of course not, like all other representatives of the "young money", including the Russian-speaking oligarchs. For all of them, the world elite has one phrase, according to Moidodyr: “Go home and wash your face.”

- But why is the myth of world government so persistent?

This myth did not arise out of nowhere. On the need to create a world government back in late XVIII centuries, Swiss and Jewish bankers, the Illuminati spoke. In the twentieth century, such representatives of the world elite as Warburg, N. Rockefeller, the ideologist of mondialism J. Attali and many others declared this as a specific task. And although the world government has not been created, the elite has moved in this direction.

- Will it work?

I think no. The world is too big and complex to be managed from one center. This is the first. Second: the world elite is not united. Clans compete with each other, and in the post-capitalist world there is not enough room for everyone. However, the top two or three dozen Families will come to an agreement. However, this is not enough to create a world government. Something else is needed. For example, to reduce the world's population from the current 7 to 2 billion; devastate a significant part of the planet with wars, epidemics and famine; chip the majority of the population; standardize, level national cultures; destroy the existing education system and all kinds of identity - national, family, racial, gender, human-species (transhumanists are engaged in the latter). In the West, the destruction of identities is in full swing. But after all, there is Russia, China, India, the World of Islam, Latin America, where all these "kunshtuk" will not pass, where civilizational (suicide) murder in the spirit of the modern West, flying led by the United States into the abyss of History, is impossible. In this regard, it should be noted that behind the current confrontation between Russia and the United States/supranationals in Ukraine, among other things, there is a conflict between two future projects, two world orders: human and anti-human. After all, it is the Russian Federation with its nuclear power that still guarantees a certain balance in the world, a balance that serves as a military shield for the BRICS. But this is a separate issue.

- And what about the "golden billion"?

To a large extent, this “thing” is like a hearth painted on canvas in the fairy tale about Pinocchio. About 30-40 years ago, it was assumed that the inhabitants of the North (USA, Western Europe), no more than a billion in number, would lock themselves up in the fortress "North" (on both sides of the North Atlantic) and from there they would rule the world. However, the neo-liberal counter-revolution of the 1980-2000s, with its pursuit of maximum profit, buried the project of the "golden billion" in its original form. The dollar clouded the mind, and masses of people from the South were sent to the North in order to exploit cheap labor: Latinos in the USA, Africans, Arabs, Turks in Western Europe. Today, the South has firmly established itself in the North, where a most acute contradiction has arisen, fraught with a terrible explosion. On the one hand, there is an aging, non-poor, shrinking and de-Christianizing population, a significant part of which is mired in vices and perversions (drug addiction, homosexuality). On the other hand, there is a young, poor, socially angry, family-oriented Muslim (in North America - Latino-Catholic) population. Sooner or later, between these two "blocs" the Leninist question "who - whom" will arise, a "great hunt" will begin. And then instead of the "golden billion" there will be "golden millions" who will try to live either in impregnable floating cities, or in mountain fortresses, or somewhere else. "Golden billion" as a strategy of the world's elite is the past.

- Other conspiracy theorists reduce all events in the world, up to the civil war in Ukraine, to a confrontation between the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. Whoever wins will rule the world!

Indeed, in Lately actively stick out this line of confrontation "Rothschilds - Rockefellers". Such opposition does exist. It played a big role in the twentieth century, passing like a red thread through its major events, including world wars, where the victory was on the side of the Rockefellers. It is interesting that this confrontation began in Russian Empire- in the Baku oilfields. There, the Rockefellers "sponsored" the strikes of workers in the "zone" owned by the Rothschilds. And the strikes were organized by the Bolsheviks of the Fioletov group, where Koba-Stalin played the most active role. The Russian Empire with its Baku oil, or rather, the Western owners of "black gold", was the main competitor of Rockefeller's "Standard Oil" at the beginning of the 20th century. As a result of the 1917 revolution, Standard Oil (more precisely, the cluster of companies into which it was formally divided in the United States) became the absolute leader. The Rothschilds directly “entered” the USSR only after the death of Stalin, although the USSR was in constant contact with companies associated with them (for example, De Beers by the Oppenheimers). With the Rockefellers, especially in the first half of the 1930s Stalinist USSR worked very actively, but after the death of J. Rockefeller in 1937, the intensity decreased. In earnest, the second coming of the Rockefellers (and with them the Warburgs) to the USSR took place in 1973, almost coinciding with the election of Yu.V. Andropov a member of the Politburo.

- Very interesting! Well, what about the current stage of the struggle between the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers?

Everything is more complicated here. Firstly, in addition to the struggle, there is cooperation: both clans are represented in almost all any serious behind-the-scenes structures, although there are contradictions on the issue of the world currency, at least on this moment are essentially irreconcilable. Secondly, the platform of the world elite is not limited to the Rothschilds and Rockefellers - there is the City of London, the Vatican, Arab and East Asian "houses". I'm not talking about the symbiosis of clans, large states and transnational companies, which greatly complicates the picture. Finally, thirdly, something tells me that just as the “right” and “left” were manipulated by the same individuals and groups, the same can be with the pair “Rothschilds - Rockefellers” according to the principle “the struggle of the Nanai boy with the bear”.

- Maybe someone who is even richer than them?

This or these "someone" is not necessarily richer. Money is just a function of power, which is based on one or another system of ideas - secular, and more often occult. Information and energy are more important than matter, and metaphysics is more important than physics. Sapienti sat.

- Many believe that the world is ruled by Freemasons. This is where they killed Peter III, committed October revolution and destroyed the USSR, it is they who rule the world.

Well, Freemasonry really played a big role, especially in the XVIII - XIX centuries. "Freemasons" brought up the human material that played a leading role in the era of revolutions of 1789-1848. in the West and came to power. However, the nationalization of Freemasonry created a number of problems. WITH late XIX century, new forms of organization of closed supranational structures were required, more adequate to the new era of the world struggle for power, information and resources. We are talking about the "Group" (or society "We"), which was created by S. Rhodes and developed by A. Milner, and other structures. Nobody canceled Freemasonry, it continued to play a certain, sometimes significant role, but it ceased to be the only and dominant form of conspiracy structures. So, in the Russian revolution, the Freemasons of the Grand Orient of France lodge acted very actively (through Kerensky), but there were other forces associated with British intelligence, the Rockefellers, the Americans, German General Staff and, of course, the counterintelligence of Russia, which put its stake on the imperially oriented Bolsheviks. The resultant of these forces is the October Revolution.

After the Second World War, a need arose for a new “generation” of closed organizational structures, and they appeared: Bormann’s Fourth Reich, the Bilderberg Club, the Club of Rome, the Trilateral Commission ... Many of their members remained Freemasons, Illuminati, Bneibri, etc., but the structures were fundamentally new, “sharpened” for new tasks.

- Well, what about the worldwide Jewish conspiracy, in which not so few people believe?

At the heart of the legend is a "worldwide Jewish conspiracy" ( huge contribution Scottish Rite Freemasons contributed to its development) is the fact that since the middle of the 19th century, Jews have been very active in the financial sector, in the media, science, and have largely taken a leading position in these areas. Moreover, it was Jewish capital that tied turn of XIX- XX centuries, Great Britain and the USA, which had been at enmity for a hundred years before. The Jewish world diaspora is indeed a serious force, but far from being the only one.

All major forces have their own long-term plans. Some call it a conspiracy, I prefer the term "project". World history- this is the battle of Projects, their resultant.

Unfortunately, Russia, with the exception of the Stalin period, did not have its own Project.

- And the famous Comintern?

The Comintern, which was allegedly disbanded in 1943 (since 1936, Stalin led the way to this and to establishing control over the assets of this left-globalist organization) is not a Russian project. In general, it must be said that a lot of foreign elements were built into the “USSR project” from the very beginning, realizing the interests of various powers and structures (primarily closed ones). As history has shown, Stalin only succeeded in suppressing this artificiality for a while, but after his death it gradually regenerated. Together with the interests of the degenerated Soviet nomenclature, this factor played a big role in the liquidation of the project, or rather the totality of projects (which never became a system) of the USSR.

- And what can you say about the reptilians, Andrey Ilyich? This theme is very popular now in America. Although in Russia he is already walking. Two serious doctors of science assured me with a blue eye that the power on the planet was seized by aliens from the planet Draka or Nibiru, who took on a human form. All Western presidents are reptilians. But they can be recognized by their characteristic special signs. The web is full of videos of these reptilians in the White House, etc.

I love science fiction, fantasy. But I do not want to comment on the version launched by the American Ike. I think that such versions are deliberately spread in order to divert attention from the real secret control structures. And compromise the very search for hidden mechanisms historical process in general, including ancient history and the origin of man.

- Then let's talk about very real structures, for example, the Bilderberg club. Many call it the secret government of the Earth. Once a year, high-ranking members of the Bilderbergs gather in the hotels of the Rockefellers or the Rothschilds, discuss behind closed doors actual problems humanity, make their own decisions.

Real power is secret power. And the Bilderberg Club is in full view, they even have a website. Bilderberg is the facade organization of the world's elite. The club was created in 1954 to reconcile the old European elite, both the one that supported Hitler (“the Ghibelline line”) and the one that fought against him (“the Guelph line”) with the Anglo-Saxons and integrate it into their project in general and the “European Union” in particular. Today, the Bilderbergers are running around those questions that are raised in a really closed, often informal mode.

- In December, a sad anniversary awaits us. 25th anniversary of the "historic" meeting between Bush and Gorbachev in Malta. Formally, it was the end cold war". In fact, Gorbi and his team shamefully surrendered the USSR and the entire socialist camp to the West there. Soon the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century happened - the Soviet Union collapsed. The place of betrayal was clearly not chosen by chance: the island is the patrimony of the powerful Order of Malta. The two main bestsellers of the beginning of the 21st century, clearly promoted on a global scale by some very influential forces, also lead to vague suspicions. The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown is about the Knights Templar and Opus Day. JK Rowling's Harry Potter saga openly advertises the Order of the Hospitallers. There is a strong opinion that it is the orders founded many centuries ago that secretly direct the course of world development.

They don't direct, they just try. Moreover, both in conflict with each other, and in the fight against the Anglo-Saxons. The name of the new Roman pope-Jesuit "Francis" is a kind of gesture-symbol of reconciliation of old opponents, Jesuits and Franciscans in the face of pressure from the Anglo-Saxons. The ally of these two orders is the Order of Malta, whose long-time specialization is mediation between the Vatican and MI6, the CIA. The Order of Malta is an element of the Vatican system. Yes, the surrender of the socialist camp and the USSR to the Americans and supranationals in the person of Bush Sr. took place in Malta, but Gorbachev flew to Malta from a meeting with Pope John Paul II, who blessed Gorby to surrender the social system and the country. The hierarchy is there.

An attempt to convince people that some separate structure - the Bilderbergs, the Maltese, the Masons, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, etc. single-handedly rule the world, away from the real mechanisms of world governance, from the Network as a whole, replacing it with private cells. Another technique is to hide entire structures (corporations, banks) behind specific individuals or parties. Thus, National Socialism is presented to us as an act of the NSDAP and Hitler and Co. In fact, the creators of National Socialism and the Third Reich project were primarily Anglo-American bankers and industrialists, corporations like I.G. FarbenindustrieAG.

You can read more about how these structures created the first form of the European Union - Hitler's "Third Reich" in a very interesting book Dmitry Peretolchin "World Wars and World Elites". She appeared in the series “Games of world elites. Andrei Fursov recommends reading” (Knizhny Mir publishing house) We conceived this series specifically for publishing works about the world elite and its structures.

The works of Alexander Shevyakin about how the USSR was falling apart, Alexander Ostrovsky about Stalin and perestroika, and Vladimir Pavlenko about the Club of Rome. All three authors are great. I also highly recommend the novels by Oleg Markeev and Alexander Gera, which clarify the picture of the world. By the way, Gera and Markeev died under unclear circumstances...

- And the last question: what awaits us? The victory of the organizers of the world government?

Hardly. There are clan, ethno-civilization and - until now - state interests that are difficult to reconcile. For the Chinese or Muslims to go under a world government? And the Russians won't come either. There is a real reduction in the number of closed supranational structures, each of which will control its own macro-regional bloc. And this is far from the realities of world government. Besides, when the world collapses - and the world of capitalism collapses! - they are saved, although not alone, but not all together, but in packs. We are waiting for the struggle of "packs" - the most different. And old, very ancient, and relatively young. Closed societies, once they have arisen, as a rule, do not disappear, they are transformed, be it the priestly organizations of the ancient Near East, the Triads, the Templars, the Freemasons, the Illuminati, the Anglo-Saxon clubs, the Comintern, the Fourth Reich, and many others. Substance (people), energy (money) and information (ideas), united, acquire superhuman, suprasocial qualities and begin to exist on their own, carefully protecting themselves, their borders and convincing the world around them that they do not exist as organizations. Another thing is that over time they transform, take on new forms (“a snake” sheds its old skin and bites its own tail), enter into bizarre relationships with each other and facade structures. But there comes a day when, in a crisis, the decisive battle for the Future is approaching, and closed structures come to the surface and (or) make themselves known. I think this is the reason for the sharp increase in the volume of printed materials about secret societies. The future is coming, and whoever grabs the trumps will win in it. Therefore, when asked in what currency to keep money, I answer: in the currency of the “Kalashnikov assault rifle”. Or at least a good set of throwing knives.

FROM THE "KP" DOSSIER

Fursov Andrey Ilyich, 63 years old. Director of the Center for Russian Studies in Moscow humanitarian university; director of the Institute for System-Strategic Analysis. Academician of the International Academy of scince (Innsbruck, Austria). Author of over 400 scientific publications, including 11 monographs. Recently new books have been published: Forward to Victory!, Cold East Wind of the Russian Spring, Russian Interest. He lectured at universities in the USA, Canada, Germany, Hungary, India, China, and Japan. Member of the Writers' Union of Russia. Winner of prestigious awards for scientific, journalistic and social activities.

12 best books about the hidden mechanisms of power from the historian Fursov:

2. A. Ostrovsky “Stupidity or treason? Investigation of the death of the USSR.

3. V. Pavlenko. Myths of "sustainable development".

4. A. Shevyakin. How the USSR was killed.

5. S. Norka "Conspiracy against Russia".

6-8. O. Markeev. "Intrusion Threat" "Black Moon". "Unaccounted for factor".

9. A. Gera. NABAT (trilogy).

10. D. Peretolchin. "World Elites and World Wars".

11. E. Ponomareva. Crime International in the Center of Europe. How NATO Creates Bandit States.

12. Yu. Emelyanov “Death Combat of the Nazi Leaders. Behind the scenes of the Third Reich.

This summer, the world definitely flew into a zone of turbulence. Here are just the highlights. Brexit in England, threatening the collapse of the entire European Union; the NATO summit in Warsaw, which effectively declared a cold war on Russia; an attempted coup in Turkey with 18,000 detainees, including more than a hundred generals; preventing Russian athletes from participating in the Summer Olympics in Rio; a series of monstrous July attacks in Germany, France, Japan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria; weird anti-cop fights in quiet places like Kazakhstan and Armenia; Murder of journalist Sheremet in Kyiv...

LERMONTOV BUILDING INSTRUCTIONS?

Maybe, indeed, Mikhail Yuryevich is to blame for these cataclysms, as occultists and astrologers say? July 27 marked the 175th anniversary of the tragic death of the poet. And something terrible always happens on Lermontov's anniversaries, Anna Akhmatova, a big lover of mysticism, also noticed. On the centenary of birth, 1914 - World War I, on the 125th anniversary (1939) - World War II, the centenary of death - the Great Patriotic War! On the 150th anniversary (1964) - Khrushchev was overthrown, the leader of the socialist camp, who threatened America with a boot and nuclear missiles. 150th anniversary of death (1991) - GKChP, Gorbachev's resignation, collapse of the USSR, US victory in the Cold War. 200th anniversary (2014) - coup d'etat in Kyiv, "Krymnash", war in Donbass, introduction of anti-Russian sanctions, the beginning of a sharp confrontation between Russia and the West...

And here is a new round of tension on the next anniversary of the death of the poet. Will it turn into World War III? By the way, the First began on July 28, the Second on September 1. I'm not talking about the August GKChP, also associated with Lermontov. We have just entered this black time gap.

“Mikhail Yuryevich Lermontov has absolutely nothing to do with it,” declares categorically famous historian Andrey Fursov, director of the Center for Russian Studies at Moscow University for the Humanities. - Answers must be sought not in heaven, but on sinful earth.

IF TOMORROW WAR...

- So let's look, Andrey Ilyich! Is Russia threatened by World War III? Too many signs of her now.

- Indeed, the frenzied and unbridled Russophobic campaign in the West reminds of the pre-war situation. It goes on all fronts, including economic sanctions, the tightening of the rhetoric of NATO leaders, the “doping attack” on Russian Olympic athletes. Such campaigns are usually carried out in order to convince their own man in the street that it is justified to strike at some kind of "fiend of evil." This is such an outcast, a "bad guy" that certain circles in the West are trying to blind information from the Russian Federation. Similarly, the British, when preparing Crimean War 1853-1856, already from the 1830s they launched the "Russophobia" project. And they convinced the Europeans of the need to strike at Russia. We were then hit by a coalition of British, French, Ottoman Empires and the Kingdom of Sardinia.

- So, again, the war is not today or tomorrow?

“Now the situation is different. We have the legacy of Stalin and Beria - nuclear weapon. So the West itself will hardly dare to openly fight against us, at least for now. But creating problems along the perimeter, using Poland, the “Baltic dwarfs” or Nazi Ukraine as a springboard, can. Controlled chaos strategy.

— Like in the “Arab Spring”?

- According to the method of action - yes. As for the object, no. Russia is not an Arab state, and not even their sum. As Alexander Marshal recently sang in a wonderful song, addressing the Americans: “Russia is not Vietnam and not Bosnia!”

Today, the US priority is the chaos of Europe. The American elite hardly hides this.

GAMES OF THE WESTERN "THRONES"

But Europe is Washington's closest ally! On NATO, anti-Russian sanctions.

- One of the goals of the Russophobic campaign is just to fasten the European Union to Washington more tightly, to make it more manageable, by exacerbating relations between Europeans and Russia.

- Intrigued.

Chaotization is happening before our eyes. These are millions of refugees who suddenly flooded into Europe from countries engulfed by the "Arab spring", bombed Libya, exhausted by ISIS and "moderate" terrorist organizations in Syria, neighboring states of the East and Africa. So the Americans staged the “Arab Spring” not by chance. They knew where they were heading. But the destabilization of Europe through the operation "migration crisis" is part of a much larger, in fact global game, the battle of the Western "thrones" for the future.

- Reveal the secret!

- There are no secrets. All secrets on the surface. To support its economy without a large-scale war, the Anglo-Saxon "throne" - the United States - needs to "eat" several economies in Southeast Asia. To do this, they came up with the TPP - the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Trade agreement between 12 countries of the Asia-Pacific region. USA, Australia ,Canada , Mexico , Malaysia , Vietnam, Chile , Japan etc. It has already been signed on February 4, 2016. The next in line are Indonesia, Thailand, Taiwan, Philippines, South Korea. But this is just an exotic snack.

The main dish is the European Union. For him, the Americans prepared their noose - TTIP. Transatlantic trade and investment partnership. The world's largest free trade zone between the European Union and the United States. With its help, they want to do with the EU the same thing that Western Europe did with Eastern Europe after the fall berlin wall. In short, the Western European economy - the backbone of the European Union - will be eaten up. After all, judging by the documents, both zones - TPP and TTIP - should give complete freedom to American transnational corporations. There will be a de-sovereignization of a number of states.

Such a prospect, of course, does not delight the Western European “throne”.

- Never heard of that!

- It includes the British royal family of the Windsors, conditional Rothschilds as top managers of a dozen of the largest financial and industrial families, aristocratic families of Northern Italy and Southern Germany of Guelph origin, the Vatican. Of course, among these "thrones" themselves there are contradictions. But in the face of a common danger, they together oppose the creation of the Transatlantic Zone. Therefore, negotiations on TTIP are difficult, the signing of the agreement is being delayed, much to Obama's displeasure. Opposition to full transatlanticization in Europe will grow. Well, in response - I really want to make a mistake - most likely, explosions will thunder.

An interesting situation has arisen. In order to "suck" Europe into the Transatlantic, the Anglo-Saxon "throne" needs the European Union, but a weakened one. This makes it easier to negotiate with his leadership in Brussels. And the Western European “throne”, in order to disrupt the plans of the opponent, needs to destroy the European Union. After all, it will be more difficult for the Americans to negotiate with each of the nearly thirty states. But even if successful, it will take more time to design the Zone. Thus, both “thrones” are moving the European Union in the direction of weakening. Only one wants to stop somewhere, and the other wants to reach the end. Therefore, the migration crisis suits both. It is important when the command follows: "Conductor, press the brakes."

Is Brexit also a game of thrones? But Obama himself publicly opposed!

“Politicians should be judged not by words, but by deeds.

True, Brexit is a more complex and long-playing maneuver. The goal here is not only the weakening of the European Union. Having left the EU, the ruling class in the UK is freeing its hands. First, now he can, as before, enter into bilateral relations with the United States. Secondly, it can participate in China's projects much more freely than before. Thirdly, getting rid of the European Union chains will help to more actively develop their invisible financial empire, which the outstanding British statesman Lord Mountbatten in the 1970s.

So, back to the attacks. After Brexit, the role of Germany and France will clearly increase in the European Union. And right away in these countries - a coincidence? - swept a wave of terror.

WHO SOWED THE ISLAMIC WIND

- Well, ISIS inherited it. What's with the Game of Thrones?

“With ISIS, things are not so simple either.

Islamism arose back in the 1920s and 1930s and subsequently developed as a reaction to the inability of secular Arab regimes to solve the problem of economic development and minimal social justice. Almost from the very beginning, the British intelligence service MI-6 worked with him, from the 50s the CIA and Mossad joined in. In 1979, the Islamic revolution broke out in Iran, Tehran became a hotbed of attraction for radical Islam.

However, the material and technical base for the global expansion of the phenomenon, which was later called "international Islamic terrorism", was provided by the United States. This is their "merit".

- How?

- As Alexander Afanasyev noted in The Contagion Zone (I take this opportunity to recommend this and other novels by a remarkable author to readers of KP), before entering Soviet troops in Afghanistan, the USSR and the USA waged their confrontation in the Third World, whether it be Asia, Africa or Latin America, offering alternative projects for creating modern society- socialist and capitalist. But it was precisely about modern projects. In Afghanistan, the failing United States relied on the forces of the archaic world, on the forces of the past.

“Hill tribes, bearded Mujahideen…

- And they let the genie out of the bottle. After the end of the Afghan war, the Islamists who got stronger spread throughout the Middle East. And they began to bite their master.

- Bin Laden from a friend became "Terrorist number 1" in the world according to the United States.

- Then the move to utilize religious fundamentalism for secular purposes was repeated by the officers of the Baath party, who were thirsting for revenge after the defeat of the regime of Saddam Hussein by the Americans. These completely secular people also decided to ride the Islamist wave. This is how the "Islamic State" banned in Russia appeared.

“Which, before the American takeover of Baghdad, was just a frail affiliate of bin Laden's al-Qaeda in Iraq.

- It is very important that the former British Prime Minister Tony Blair admitted the guilt of the Anglo-Saxons for the emergence of this organization.

I repeat, it was the United States, by its actions in Afghanistan in the 1980s, that gave a powerful impetus to the formidable and wild force of the 21st century - Islamism.

Another thing is that already at the beginning of the century they received a return - the boomerang returned and hit the hunter painfully. What happened was what the American analyst C. Johnson predicted in his famous book “Blowback” (“Recoil”).

It is this “return” that the United States tried to use to its advantage, defining it as “international terrorism”.

Please note: neither the Italian "Red Brigades", nor the German "Red Army Faction", nor other similar militant groups of the late twentieth century called "international terrorism". The term appeared after the September 11th provocation, when the Americans needed to hang it on someone. It is clear that only that which hurts the interests of America or is directed against it can be of "international significance". Plus, with the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the former enemy - the USSR, it was necessary to invent and construct a new enemy of the United States and the West - as an evil opposing the North Atlantic "good". International terrorism was appointed to the role of this "evil". But without ideological coloring, he was too thin to resist the West. Therefore, he was hooked to Islam. The image of "evil" immediately began to look very powerful, grandiose, attractive. Why, a whole world religion, an array of peoples! Exactly what the United States, their satellites, needed.

- As in the Cold War - a whole world ideology, communist, an array of socialist countries. In the face of a new "danger" you can enter Afghanistan, Iraq, arrange an "Arab spring"!

- Although it is obvious that most of the Islamic doctrine has nothing to do with terrorism.

By the end of the 20th century, a new global redistribution of the world arrived in time, allowing "international terrorists" to increasingly get out of the control of their curators and enter into complex relations of struggle and cooperation with them.

- How is that?

- It is clear that big politicians, like Obama, have no contacts with international terrorists. For this there are special services. CIA, MI6, Mossad and others. They serve the states, transnational corporations of the core of the capital system, closed supranational groups of world coordination and management. And to a large extent also controlled by terrorist organizations. Or even create and then direct their activities. However, sometimes the dog goes berserk and bites the owner, but that's another matter. At a minimum, these organizations are infiltrated by agents of Western intelligence services.

And if we talk specifically about the Islamists, then their interests coincide with the interests of transnational companies, they have the same enemy - the secular national state. It is no coincidence that the author of the bestsellers "Dollars of Terror" and "Scenes of Terror" R. Labevière, a former Chief Editor French "RadioFrance Internationale", called the Islamists " watchdogs globalization the American way. By the way, it is not a secret for well-informed high-class world journalism that 90% of the world drug trafficking is somehow controlled by the three largest intelligence agencies of the West: the CIA, MI-6, Mossad, and 10% fall on criminal and international terrorist structures, permeated with agents of special services. This is no coincidence. 50% of banks in the world lend to drug trafficking - fast, "live" money, liquidity, without which these banks would not be able to function normally and, most likely, would go bankrupt. So here, too, the interests of the special services and terrorists coincide.

It is necessary to distinguish between two types of terrorist attacks. Those for which the ears of the special services are clearly sticking out. As in Nice, where the attack was timed to coincide with July 14, the French national holiday - Bastille Day. An ordinary Arab loser will not come up with such a thing. And bearing the character of "unmotivated individual outbreaks of violence." Like the "Afghan lumberjack" who chopped people on the train.

- Or "Munich shooter", "Syrian with a machete" ...

“However, there is such a thing as a induced psychic epidemic. These outbreaks of violence are also related to the growth social tension in Western Europe, which is becoming a very, very unsafe place.

A string of terrorist attacks and violence in July convinces Germans and French that their governments are not in control. Which, among other things, hits a certain part of the European elite, for example, Merkel, Hollande, and the leaders of the European Union. Plays on the further weakening of the EU. This is no coincidence.

- Hello Andrey Ilyich, it seemed that after the presidential elections in Russia, the squealing and shouting in the Western world against our country would subside. Exactly the opposite happened: our ambassadors are being expelled from Europe and the United States, God knows what economic dirty tricks are coming up ... And our Foreign Ministry continues to call all this public "partners" and show its toothless mouth. Where is the famous pride of the Great Russians?

- The loss of strategic vision by the Foreign Ministry is not today, and not even the times of Yeltsin and Gorbachev. This began in the late 1960s, when the Soviet Union began to react to circumstances rather than create them. It was possible, for example, to inflict serious damage on NATO by provoking an internal crisis during the "Paris Spring". But we decided to come to an agreement with the Americans: they do not interfere in Czechoslovak affairs, we do not interfere in the affairs of France. Although, it was possible through the French Communist Party and through the trade unions to provoke NATO to send troops to Paris in 1968. And then, for decades, screaming about how "a dirty NATO boot crushed a wonderful Parisian spring."

Yes - US President Lyndon Johnson assured us that they would not interfere. From the point of view of political technology, the Americans did everything correctly. They didn't really intervene in a "military way". But they provoked our entry of troops into Czechoslovakia. As early as August 3, 1968, negotiations between the Soviet leadership and the Czechoslovak leadership were underway in Bratislava, to the cries of a raging crowd. The Soviet leadership yielded to the Czechoslovaks: build your Czechoslovak "socialism with a human face", but there are two conditions: stop Russophobic propaganda and stop all talk about Czechoslovakia leaving the organization Warsaw Pact. And what? On August 5, an article appeared in Pravda entitled "Imperialist plans thwarted," and the next day a mass demonstration began in Prague. The Czechs jingle the keys, "Ivan go home" - and the slogan "Czechoslovakia must withdraw from the Warsaw Pact." It was a direct provocation aimed at getting the Soviet Union to bring in troops. And it was possible to avoid this, but Brezhnev mediocrely missed the time.

- Tell me, why was there no attempt at such a political exchange on Afghanistan? Why did the United States nevertheless get in there with the supply of Stinger MANPADS, began to shoot down Soviet planes and helicopters. Then the tragedy began, which eventually led to the collapse of the Soviet Union.

I do not think that Afghanistan is the factor that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. Yes, and "stingers" - this was not the very beginning. Most importantly, we were lured to Afghanistan. And on the Soviet side, two people actively advocated for the entry of troops into Afghanistan - Ustinov and Andropov. Gromyko supported them. There is no direct evidence, but judging by all the indirect evidence and evidence, Ustinov and Andropov decided very a simple problem: The Afghan war allowed the Committee State Security and the Ministry of Defense to put very large financial flows under control, these were departmental decisions.

- It is clear how the Americans managed to lure us to Afghanistan: by the imaginary threat of their own invasion. And how did they manage to lure us to Ukraine? How did you manage to create such a situation when a third, or even half of the Ukrainian population became, in fact, not only enemies, but were poisoned with anti-Russian poison?

- The Americans have been actively working on this since the late 80s, late Gorbachev. And in the 1990s, several hundred NGOs worked there. Practically in all serious higher education institutions of Ukraine the so-called "NATO rooms" functioned. If you want to receive a good place work, you should have a note in your diploma that you took such and such courses in the “NATO room”. We did not work there, we have a half-dead "Rossotrudnichestvo", which was engaged in unclear what. The Americans, on the other hand, divided Ukrainian society into segments - social, age, each of which had its own NGO. At this time, the ambassador to Ukraine, Chernomyrdin, played the button accordion and sang songs with the Ukrainian oligarchs, and Zurabov also did some incomprehensible things. In the 1990s and early 2000s, our government believed that everything needed to be negotiated with the oligarchs. We did not take care to create real pro-Russian forces there.

It must be said that disturbing processes began in Soviet times. In 1955, General Secretary Khrushchev signed an amnesty for almost all those who collaborated with the Nazis during the war, including in Ukraine. About 100,000 former Banderaites returned to 5 western regions of Ukraine. In addition, from 1955 to 1965, about 100,000 Ukrainians from Canada returned to Ukraine. We came with money.

Who let them?

Khrushchev allowed these people to return. Most importantly, as soon as Khrushchev signed this amnesty, the Bandera leadership changed tactics. They stopped the armed struggle in Western Ukraine, and gave the command: Bandera and members of their families should do everything to take places in the Soviet, trade union, Komsomol, party organizations, integrate into them properly. The integration of the nationalists began, and quite successfully.

Already in the mid-60s, nationalism flourished in such a way that it was even reflected in football, I remember even the football authorities of the Soviet Union raised the issue with the leadership of Dynamo Kiev that the goals scored by the people of Kiev should not be announced at the Kiev stadium as a victory: “The goal was scored by Vasil Turyanchik!”.

Who was one of the initiators of the collapse of the Soviet Union? The person who was responsible in the Ukrainian leadership for national question Leonid Kravchuk. It was on this basis that a very well-established American not even propaganda, but a psychohistorical program, lay down. And in 25 years, you can recode an entire generation. It must be said that socio-cultural psycho-historical recoding is what the Western special services are now working on. In Ukraine, among other things, there was an experiment.

- What can we hope for after such a "recoding" in Donetsk and Lugansk?

Donetsk and Luhansk are traditionally Russian regions. An example from football: in 1968, the Ukrainian teams agreed that in Kyiv they would hand over the game to Dynamo Kyiv, and on their own fields they would play with him in a draw. All Ukrainian teams agreed except Shakhtar Donetsk. The party organization in Donetsk has always had tense relations with the party organization in Kyiv. It even showed up in sports. Luhansk and Donetsk are not Ukraine. Another thing is that people there are already insanely tired. This may play a role. Although, I can't imagine that we would surrender Donetsk and Lugansk. And so that they, after all this blood, lay down under the Ukrobander regime.

- Now, as it was 2 years ago, the Ukrainian army is preparing an offensive to divide Donetsk and Luhansk. Do you think we will provide military assistance?

— I do not know in what form, but I am convinced that effective assistance should be provided. Otherwise, the Russian leadership will simply lose face, and many neighbors will decide that they can wipe their feet on us. For example, in Kazakhstan and further everywhere. Therefore, Donetsk and Luhansk are the zone, the violation of which should lead to a very tough reaction.

- In the West, they began to crush Russian oligarchs? The goal is clear - to set them against Putin: with the possibility of a coup d'état. What forks does President Putin have today?

- The fork is very serious. We live by what is created in Soviet time and eat away the Soviet legacy. If you look at similar turning points in Russian history, there were two. In 1565, on the eve of the oprichnina, and under Stalin. By 1565, the legacy of the Horde era had been eaten away, when there was almost no land left to distribute to the "children of the boyars" as estates. By 1929, the legacy of the Russian Empire had been eaten away. The question arose before the authorities, at the expense of which layers will we make a breakthrough into the future, at the expense of whom to a greater extent?

Both times the jerk was made due to the infringement mainly of the top. This, by the way, could not be forgiven by liberal noble historians to Ivan the Terrible, and not because he allegedly killed his son. This is precisely what the Soviet elite cannot forgive Stalin for. In both cases, a breakthrough followed, and both of these breakthroughs each time brought the country forward. In the case of Ivan the Terrible, it was longer and more dramatic, with Stalin everything happened faster.

Now the situation is the same - the Soviet legacy has been eaten away. The only thing we have really made progress in is to raise the armed forces, but not the industry. By 1937, the Soviet Union secured military-industrial autarky from the West. Now there can be no talk of any autarchy: we just have an army that can fight, and there are those types of weapons that can be used.

Now again a fork, which rests on this. After 1991, two groups took shape in the Russian ruling stratum - one I conditionally call "clerks", and the other "controllers". The "clerks" are those who are ready to hand over the country to transnational corporations even now. "Controllers" come from the other. They live by the principle “the bear will not give up its taiga”. In this regard, they act as representatives of their country. However, the "controllers" and the "clerks" have something in common - they are all supporters of the liberal market economy. If this does not create problems for the “clerks”, then it creates problems for the “controllers”, because if you oppose the “clerks” and come into conflict with their masters, you need the support of the population. And what kind of support can there be if you carry out those "reforms" that destroy the economy, health care, which turns into a health care facility, destroy the education system.

This contradiction is unresolvable. In addition, another contradiction is superimposed on it - the growing conflict with the West, and it will grow. At the same time, society, youth, is turning to the left, “neo-Sovietism” is in vogue, and the ideology of the top is different. Yes: foreign policy pressure can rally people for a while. But if this is not supported by some economic and social measures within the country, it is difficult to say how this system will develop.

- Ivan the Terrible solved this problem with the Oprichnina, Stalin with the "Red Terror". We're talking about Putin. Will our president be tempted to hang a dog's head and a broom on the new guardsmen, as was the case under Ivan the Terrible, and clean up the modern elite: make them run away, or send them to logging?

- In fact, Stalin solved this issue in a different way: he did not have his own oprichnina, but he used the oprichnina principle of the state of emergency - he set one group against another. As for the terror of 37-38, it had a difficult relationship with Stalin. The historian Yu.N. Zhukov wrote very well about this, the materials have been declassified, and the situation is now clear. In 1936, Stalin tried to introduce the principle of alternative elections into the new Constitution. But he lost at his own Politburo: 3 votes for him, 8 against. The logic of his opponents was as follows: if alternative elections are allowed, then the people can choose the children of landowners, capitalists and priests. This cannot be done. Stalin lost, but the regional barons, among them Postyshev, Eikhov, Khrushchev, seemed to them not enough. Postyshev and Eikhov came to Stalin and actually demanded quotas for the "seizure" of hostile groups of the population. In this situation, if Stalin had refused, he himself could have ended up in the Lubyanka. Stalin chose an asymmetrical response: “Do you want terror? Okay, you will be terror. You run this machine on the bottom, and I on the top.

The terror of 37-38 years is two processes: bulk process, which was launched by the regional barons, and the process at the top, which was launched by Stalin. As soon as Stalin achieved his goals, the terror was curtailed, Beria replaced Yezhov, and the "Beria thaw" began.

Returning to the current situation, the following should be said. In order to implement what Ivan the Terrible and Stalin did in their time, you need to have 3 things: first, you need to have a repressive apparatus; second, you need to have an ideology, otherwise, all repressions will result in banditry; third, you need to have a massive social support.

Regarding the third point. We did not have a social base for this. But thanks to the efforts of liberal citizens (real liberalism in the world died in the 1910s - 1920s), we have a layer of the urban lower classes that we can rely on. A mass of discontented population has appeared, among which these neo-Soviet leftist ideas are spreading. It is possible to create a repressive apparatus, but an ideology is needed - for the sake of what all this is being done. It does not exist, but how without ideology?

- Let's return to the "world behind the scenes". Already the third world war ready to untie?

- The current situation is somewhat reminiscent of the 30-40s of the 19th century. After the British realized that Russia was their main enemy, they began to prepare a European coalition. It was then in the twenties of the 19th century that Russophobia arose in Britain as a phenomenon - enmity towards Russia. During the years 1830-40, the British processed the European public opinion. Pay attention to the intensity of the current anti-Russian hysteria. This was not the case during the Cold War, because the Soviet Union was strong, and no one was going to fight with it. This does not mean that they will definitely break into a war. Everything will depend on how strong, durable, united we are, etc. But the heat of hysteria in the West is, of course, preparing the population for the fact that a strike on Russia is a morally justified and practically necessary thing. Hatred for Russia captures entire sections of the population, it becomes completely irrational. This is what we will live with in the coming years.

- Andrey Ilyich, why have the leaders of Russia since time immemorial been so eager for the love of the West? Why is any bunch of English or Warsaw gentlemen discussed here, on Channel One, on Russian television, talk shows are rampant, where Solovyov and many others spit on the words of idiots unknown to us: about whom we don’t even want to know anything? Where does the inferiority complex come from?

- Back in the 18th century, our society split into a Western-like class of masters and a class of serfs. The first quickly turned into a kind of close-knit pro-Western nation, and the people remained the people. The split is triple: class, cultural and socio-ethnic. That's why Civil War was so cruel with us - fundamentally two different social "beings" clashed. Our nobles in the 18th century, from the time of Catherine, lived not by their own needs, but by Western ones. Not realizing that Western needs were met by an order of magnitude more developed economy. Therefore, the Russian nobles, in order to lead a socially acceptable noble way of life, had, in Marxist language, to take away from the population not only the surplus product, but also part of the necessary product.

- Our pro-Western rich are not descendants of nobles. Where do they get such arrogance from?

— It started back in Soviet times. I really want to go somewhere clean and bright. What is Berezovsky? Unfortunate, zatyukanny guy, and suddenly he - everything! These people ran out of the laboratories, from the doorways, they had their own idea of ​​the sweet life, in addition, they did not like very much in Soviet life. This mentality is superimposed here is what.

When Ronald Reagan became President of the United States, for all its simplicity, three independent groups were created to predict what would happen to capitalism in the next 10-15 years. Everyone gave the same forecast: in 1987-88, a very serious crisis awaits the world economy. Production in the Western sector will fall by 25%, in the Soviet Union by 10-15%, and the Soviet sector will endure this much easier than the Western sector due to the planned nature of the economy. And people are used to tightening their belts.

The political consequences, they predicted, would be as follows: in Italy and France, the Communists could come to power, in England, the Labor left. Nothing like this is expected in the USA, but riots of the black population and the lower classes in largest cities. In 1992-93, another crisis will hit, and this will be the final.

Reagan took this seriously. The most interesting thing is that at the very beginning of the 80s in the Soviet Union, two people - V. Krylov and P. Kuznetsov - prepared for Andropov an analysis of what would happen to the capitalist and socialist world. The conclusions were similar to the American ones, but no one listened to them.

After the crash in October 1987 New York Stock Exchange Fed-appointed Greenspan said that the United States will save only a miracle. This miracle was the destruction of the Soviet Union. And the subsequent looting of the former socialist zone led to the fact that the last 3 years of the second Clinton presidency, the United States had a surplus for the first time in 30 years. The destruction of the Soviet Union really gave the West 20-25 years of quiet life, but then the crisis of 2008 still shied away. Now there is a struggle for what the post-capitalist world will be like. Russia has no place in this world, Brzezinski formulated this. According to him, the world of the 21st century will be built at the expense of Russia, to the detriment of Russia, on the bones of Russia. What is now spinning around Russia is an attempt to create a springboard for the final solution of the Russian question. Moneybags intuitively feel this and keep their nose to the wind.

- The crisis of the Western economies of the 80s of the last century was solved by the rise of China with Western money. They helped the Chinese and only one desert remained on the world map - this is the Russian Federation, where there are no roads, where there are unplowed lands. Why, instead of prolonging the pleasure and taking Russia by the whole capitalist world and embedding it into their conglomerate, they separate us with missiles, bombs ... They scare the devil with what! Where is the logic?

The long-delayed "unpopular reforms" are vital for Russia, former Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation and potential candidate for prime minister Alexei Kudrin is sure. Will they be implemented in the next 6 years of Vladimir Putin's rule? And how will the current presidential term differ from previous ones? BUSINESS Online is answered by Mikhail Delyagin, Evgeny Satanovsky, Andrey Nechaev, Vladislav Zhukovsky, Andrey Fursov, Rustem Kurchakov and others.

"FIRST OF ALL THERE SHOULD BE ENFORCEMENT OF THE CRIMINAL CODE IN RELATION TO RUSSIAN OFFICIALS"

Mikhail Delyagin - political scientist:

First of all, there must be enforcement of the Criminal Code in relation to Russian officials, in particular in relation to those liberal reformers who use their official position to destroy Russia. Mr. Kudrin was the Minister of Finance of Russia for 11.5 years and created many openly criminal schemes, in particular, he borrows money at relatively high rates and invests these funds in Western securities at very low interest rates, causing enormous damage. No economic policy is possible without elementary conscientiousness. If crimes are not punished, they become the norm, in fact, which we see in the example of Kudrin.

As for unpopular measures, you need to understand that these are anti-popular measures. When liberals call for perpetually unpopular reforms, they seek to inflict maximum damage on Russia because they serve the interests of global profiteers, which are contrary to the interests of any people. If Putin keeps these liberals in power, then Russia will be destabilized before the end of this period. When the governor of the Moscow region is beaten, this indicates that the population cannot bear such a socio-political situation. And Mr. Vorobyov is in power in good standing, before this incident he was even considered as a candidate for the post of prime minister ... This is not to hit some bastard.

Andrey Nechaev - former Minister of Economy of the Russian Federation, chairman of the Civil Initiative party:

Need reform social sphere, judicial, increased protection of property. We need everything that will help create a favorable investment climate. You can open our program either on my website or on the party website - it says how I imagine the necessary reforms, but these reforms will not be implemented for the next 6 years, because Putin is not ready to risk his popularity, rating. These elections have demonstrated that the population is ready to endure further deterioration in living standards, and corruption, and the restriction of democratic freedoms, and the arms race. Incentives for reform and motivation are drastically reduced. I think that there will be a further aggravation of the international situation, an intensification of a new stage of the Cold War and a vegetative existence in the economy.

Evgeny Satanovsky - economist, founder and president of the independent scientific center "Institute of the Middle East":

Kudrin is one of the main culprits of everything that happens to the state apparatus. It was he who was one of the main creators of this complex, intricate, unreformed system. Many thanks to him for good words that we need reform, but that's the same as saying that breathing is good for health. Kudrin represents that part of the elite that has worked and continues to work to ensure that the state ceases to pay attention to what the population needs, and completely separates itself from worries about it. In fact, no one is needed for it, except for that part of the population that serves the oil and gas industries. If things continue like this, it will lead to the liquidation of the country. All that remains is to give Kudrin the opportunity to go his own way, ignoring his advice.

As for Putin's current term, it will differ in that the environment will be afraid of losing what they have, and only thanks to the presence of Vladimir Putin on the captain's bridge will they try to snatch a fatter piece, betray it early, take everything away before they nailed it. This is what distinguished the last years of the reign of Peter I and Catherine II. How exactly Putin will deal with this is the severity and personal problem of the president.

Vladislav Zhukovsky - economist:

Kudrin's proposals are such recommendations of the canonical ghouls in power, that is, when the question concerns emptying the pockets of the population in an even harsher form: inventing some new taxes, extortions, increasing taxes, introducing dozens of different non-tariff fees, etc. For some reason, our notorious reformers and supposedly experts in power who consider themselves liberals call this structural reforms. In fact, this is another legalized way of brazenly climbing into our pocket. For some reason, they do not say: let's carry out painful unpopular reforms, for example, for the ruling offshore-oligarchic vertical. Let's say, let's raise taxes on the raw materials export revenues received by state monopolies and state oligarchs, introduce a progressive taxation scale, which is in all normal civilized countries ... They never offer this.

But when the question concerns some other ways to get into the pocket of the Russians, then there are many options at once: let's supposedly carry out the pension reform. Although let's not forget that we have a collapse of the pension system, over the past 18 years, three pension reforms have been carried out in the country, each of which ended in a completely expected and logical collapse and fiasco. That is, if we call the pension system this beggarly starving existence of 36 million old people, pensioners ... And this is not a pension at all - a handout from the master's shoulder so that 36 million do not go into a hunger riot, as was the case with the monetization of benefits.

"THE NEW TERM WILL DETERMINE PUTIN'S PLACE IN HISTORY - NOT THE FIRST 17 YEARS OF RULE, BUT THE LAST SIX"

Valentin Katasonov - economist, professor at the Department of International Finance, MGIMO:

Usually a house is built from a foundation. And if we talk about the economy, economic reforms, then, of course, they must be built on a foundation, let's say so, political, spiritual and ideological.

And Kudrin assumes that all his reforms will be built on the foundation of a pro-Western, liberal ideology with all that follows from this. And it's better for a non-former deputy prime minister to build a house, because the Kudrins and Chubais broke it down, they basically can't build anything. Therefore, I think, first of all, we need to stop, figuratively speaking, the fire. And in order to stop it, we must first bring the Central Bank to its senses, bring it into line with the requirements of the Constitution. Russian Federation, Firstly. Because now it is a cat that walks by itself, but there should be an organ government controlled. Secondly, the Central Bank should be engaged in the development of its own economy, and not serve overseas. That is, radical changes in the monetary model are needed - money should be issued in the form of loans for the development of its own economy, and not in the form of perpetual loans to support the American budget and the US military machine.

Thirdly, the immediate introduction of restrictions on the cross-border movement of capital. Just recently, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation published data for the first two months on Russia's balance of payments - net capital outflow doubled compared to the same period last year, despite any economic sanctions or promises of forgiveness (regular amnesties). All the same, capital is running, where it is running, why - I don’t know. I suppose that, most likely, to the only remaining offshore - The United States of America. And there they are waiting for him with open arms and they will explain what expropriation is, an expropriator. Here are three points just to stop the current disaster.

There are, of course, other ways, say, deoffshorization, but these are activities that require a certain amount of time, professional knowledge, skills and patience. And if we talk about the concept of economic reform, then we need to build a self-sufficient economy, return it to the state it had in the best years of the 20th century. Now it is a semi-colonial raw material appendage of the West.

Andrey Fursov- historian:

Any economy is an element of the whole. And any economic reforms are preceded by socio-political preparation. It is impossible to simply take and carry out economic reforms. We had such a guide - Pyotr Stolypin, who completely failed. The Bolsheviks made their reforms by changing the power system, the functional system. That is, economic reforms succeed when they do not break out of the whole. Otherwise - collapse. What Kudrin is talking about is reform for the sake of reform. We can say that the new term will determine Putin's place in history - not the first 17 years of his reign, but the last six.

Marat Galeev - Chairman of the Committee of the State Council of the Republic of Tatarstan on Economy, Investments and Entrepreneurship:

In general, Kudrin and political reforms, and structural management always starts with the courts. I think that he is right and, in principle, I support his position in this part. Although I don’t know if he himself believes in all this or doesn’t believe ... Probably not. But, I repeat, these reforms are needed, I agree with him. What does unpopular reform mean? Even if you try to conduct them, this does not mean that everything will immediately work as intended. This is a very long way, because society is not able to change quickly. Nevertheless, we need to move in this direction. But cosmetic reforms, such as changing the "police" to the "police", which did not give the expected results, are not needed. Therefore, if you decide on reforms, you need to understand their complexity and longevity. If, in anticipation of quick results, zigzags go again, nothing will work.

I also note that there are political risks in the sense that not all of them will be popular, so every time, in every political election cycle, politicians postpone decision-making. So that's why Kudrin says: either now start making decisions, as he put it, during the period of the "window of opportunities", or later, before the next elections, again there will not be enough determination.

“WHERE THE SPOTLIGHT SHINES, THERE WILL BE LIGHT, BUT GENERALLY THERE WILL BE DIRT AND DARKNESS”

Dmitry Potapenko - Managing Management Development Group:

We need denationalization, let's say. This will be very unpopular, since today 67 percent of the economy is in quasi-state hands. They cannot be called public, but they can be called private, but directly related to those in power. It’s not bad to start dealing with the market at least someday, because we regularly assert that market reforms have taken place in our country, but in fact this is a lie. Since Kudrin thinks that there will be no real competitive political reforms in our country, he correctly knocks out the story that, most likely, not directly, but indirectly, they will begin to raise the retirement age. This is already being done actively, since many are denied pensions due to the lack of a sufficient number of points. Plus, this is the introduction of direct currency control over citizens. I think this is exactly what Alexey Leonidovich has in mind.

In addition, I think that further stagnation will continue in Russia, because the president himself has become a hostage of his own system. It does not have maneuverability, as this will cause the system itself to demolish it. The president is a function. Putin built a system that was fixated on him - this is his biggest mistake. The system is not built on him, he can, like a magician in a blue helicopter, deal with one problem, but this will not be global, other problems pop up. This system is not working. That is, where the spotlight shines, it will be light there, but in general there will be dirt and darkness around. And since he will need to think about how to live his grandchildren, the only option for him is to try to tighten the screws. But still, the system will sooner or later outlive it.

Ilya Yashin - politician:

I don't really agree with Kudrin - unpopular reforms are bad for Russia. Our country needs reforms in the interests of the majority, and not in the interests of a narrow group of people who consider themselves the masters of life and are used to squandering money. And now, when the result of this policy affects the economy of the state, they believe that it is necessary to milk people for money. Here is the concept: people are the new oil. That is, oil has become cheaper, now we will tighten our belts and draw the remaining savings from people, so we need to carry out unpopular reforms, raise the retirement age, etc. I repeat, I do not agree with this, I have a different point of view. I believe that it is necessary to fundamentally change the structure of the Russian economy. What is her problem? It depends on the sale of energy resources abroad, and everything should be based on modern technologies, it is in this direction that we need to develop. For this, of course, political reforms are necessary, because no economic growth is possible from "suffocation", you can only sell oil and weapons, nothing else will work. We need political reform, change of power, the most honest elections, we need freedom of speech in the country, freedom of entrepreneurship, creativity, lowering administrative barriers for business, it is necessary to establish civilian control over the security forces. Then enterprises will begin to develop, then modern technologies and innovative things will start working in the country. And it will certainly give an impetus economic development countries.

Will any of this be implemented in the next six years? I would like to believe, of course, but, to be honest, the election results greatly undermine this optimism. That is, I am an optimist, although I understand that there are no reasons for this. As for Putin's current term, I don't know how it will differ from others. I am afraid that, unfortunately, he already lives in his own world, does not listen to anyone's advice, does not understand the real picture of what is happening in the country. Therefore, there are a lot of dangers and risks associated with Putin's new term, and precisely with the fact that he has been in power for a very long time. If you remember, at one time he himself said that a long stay in power can drive a person crazy. Translated into Russian, this means (and I absolutely agree with this) that a long stay in power blurs a person's real adequate assessment of what is happening around. And it is precisely this that Putin becomes dangerous in the new term. In general, and on the previous one, such symptoms were very noticeable. And the loss of connection with reality, his sense of self as a great historical figure, his clear orientation towards foreign policy to the detriment of the internal (they say, we will tighten our belts, but we will show everyone our iron will) create huge risks for the country.

Damir Iskhakov - doctor historical sciences:

The first direction of the reforms is very important - to increase the economic rights of the regions, that is, budget allocations should be changed in favor of the regions. The second is the strengthening of the role of medium and small businesses: finally, we need to create such economic conditions that the medium and small entrepreneurs begin to feel normal and develop their business. Otherwise, everything is absorbed by big business, so our development is one-sided, one-sided. Well, of course, against this background, it is necessary to develop democratic tendencies. I do not think that democracy will develop in our country right away, but some conditions must be created for this. I am a big pessimist on all three positions, but at least applications on this score are being made, Kudrin is not doing so badly there, however, he is trying to bypass the most serious moments. Alexey Leonidovich there focuses on the administrative structure, but simply change the structure without changing the rest ... The current term has a very important difference: somewhere closer to its middle, a fight for the next ruler will begin. New forces are being activated that want to take power in Russia. Therefore, this period will be completely restless for Putin, the moment will come very quickly when he will experience hardships Russian rule.

“QUESTION: WHO WILL IMPLEMENT?”

Rustam Kurchakov - economist:

No reforms are needed anymore, so much has been said about them, so many options... When there are so many, nothing is needed. It will definitely change in the next six years, change in the next month and flow in the other direction. The current presidential term will not differ from the previous one only in the figure of the president, but everything else will be different. The figure is the same, but, as Vysotsky sang, "it's just a different person, but I'm the same." Putin in an interview will say: “What are you doing? I am the same,” and everything will be different. He probably wanted to leave everything as it is, but that's impossible. The river flowed in the other direction, like a spring flood, Navruz has already marked a bifurcation point and a point of no return, the flood is starting, people think that everything will be fine. All of a sudden, everything changes. That's how it's arranged. Man proposes, but God disposes with the help of nature. This is how it will be about.

Fanir Galimov - entrepreneur, chairman of the council of the All-Russian public organization"Tatar villages of Russia":

I don’t even know what to say, in the modern world everything is so uncertain. Everyone says it seems right, beautiful, but in fact a lie. They say one thing, I want to believe it, others say the same thing. I think that something will change in the new term, Putin was re-elected, he will start changes. They say about the Tatars that they are cunning, we, with our cunning, perseverance, must do something with these reforms. If something does not change, then there is no meaning to life.

Iskander Zigangaraev - General Director of KZhK Logistic:

I don't think strong political reforms are needed now, just the smooth course we have taken needs to be continued. Now the country has rallied around a single leader, he has his own vision, it is necessary to strengthen the defense capability, but do not get too carried away, increase the military budget. It is necessary to strengthen relations with China, because this is a large consumer market, their GDP is growing, respectively, they will consume more food and electricity. We need to focus on this country. We need to move away from selling raw wood. We need to develop small and medium-sized businesses and support entrepreneurship. Putin relies on the power of the bourgeoisie, they need to be made patriots of Russia so that they do not take out the money they earn. The reforms, I think, will be implemented, I believe that Putin will not lead us to stagnation, there will be no Brezhnevism, we have already moved away from this. He even differs in characteristics from Brezhnev - he is active, goes in for sports, in controversy a wise man, foreign politicians cannot shut his mouth, he is balanced, his policy is balanced. The only thing is that we want everything quickly: they say, the boss will come, he will change the whole country, but it doesn’t happen the same way. Putin does everything gradually, they say that he covers up his oligarch friends... Yes, he doesn’t cover up - it’s impossible to imprison everyone at once, then there will be a revolution.

Ferid Ayupov - President of the Simbirsk House Group of Companies:

Firstly, it is necessary to reduce the state apparatus, and not only because it is a big cost for the budget, as they say, every official is looking for a job, so fewer officials means fewer of these moments. Secondly, we need a tax reform in terms of simplification. A huge layer of tax administration is entrusted to enterprises, organizations, because accounting departments are involved in tax calculation, take a lot of time from business, support this apparatus, and in fact they are engaged in tax calculation. Especially for small and medium-sized businesses, simplification is needed. Greater introduction of a simplified tax: pay and work for a year. I think that the development of the economy will become a breakthrough as soon as loan rates fall. If we have crises once every 8 years, then until 2022 we can still work and work calmly.

I would like to engage in the improvement of the nation. We spend a lot of money on health care, at the same time propaganda healthy lifestyle life, no one is engaged in a healthy diet. I mean on a national scale. Then we will be a healthy nation, we will spend less on medicine, people will feel comfortable. I think that what Vladimir Vladimirovich has outlined, the tasks that he sets, do not raise any questions. Question: who will implement? With us, with such a strong political leader it would be more rational to have a stronger team that will implement economic programs.