Jun 30, 2020
0 0

“Crimea – fine, but not enough”: Mikheev about who squeezed out the excess

It is clear that the president is constrained by the situation of international agreements - he is constrained by our relations with post-Soviet states in terms of the fact that we are fighting for influence in the post-Soviet space. But let me "translate" into Russian.

In fact, after the revolution, the Soviet government at the first stage was determined to support national minorities in any way, because it believed that the dominance of the Russian people in our country was harmful to the Soviet government. And in the destruction of the Russian Empire, the Soviet government relied on reliance on national minorities. Sometimes they were real, and sometimes invented - like Belarusians and Ukrainians. So, in order to rely on them, the Soviet government created the elite of these national minorities, and in order to root it and make it a supporter of the new government in order to give it resources, Grandfather Lenin “cut off” the territory of these republics on the territory of the former Russian Empire .

The Russian people became the largest divided people in the world. Photo: Hristo Rusev / Globallookpress via ZUMA Press

As you know, the Bolsheviks generally got rid of part of the territories: Poland, Finland, the Baltic states, part of Moldova - Bessarabia - and so on. They were taken and simply given away - for no reason, they just gave it to someone incomprehensibly. And in the territory that remained, they began to completely cut off the territories of new quasi-states from the bulldozer, and including where there were never any states at all. The same Ukraine is an example. What, was there ever such a state called "Ukraine" within the borders of the Ukrainian SSR? Yes, it never was. But the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin and Co., made a conscious bet on this. They thus destroyed the Russian Empire.

So, in fact, the territories of a large number of post-Soviet republics and Soviet republics within the USSR have no correlation with history. And in the territory of the former Soviet republics of the national included, indeed, a large number of native Russian lands. And so it is. In fact, when the Soviet Union collapsed, these original Russian lands in large numbers were transferred to other states. And that’s exactly how the Russian people became the largest divided people in the world - Putin also spoke about this at the time. He considers it a disaster, I also think. The only question is what to do next.

Yeltsin - a loyal follower of the ideas of communism

At least, in my opinion, at the time of the collapse it was necessary to fight for these territories, because the collapse of the Soviet Union could have passed through other borders. There was no rigid fixation then, these things could be avoided. These borders were drawn on paper; in reality, they did not exist. But then, Yeltsin and a group of outspoken national traitors - let's call them by their proper names - made the same stake on national minorities as grandfather Lenin did in his time.

They say that Yeltsin was an anti-communist - nothing like that. He was an absolute follower of the revolutionary technology of the 1917s and 1920s. He followed the same path - he relied on the national elites, on the fact that they would help him in the destruction of the Soviet Union. And then he, by the way, and within the Russian Federation, took the same path. And thank God that did not have time to finish it. When he said, take as much sovereignty as you want, he has already started betting on national minorities in the national subjects of the Federation within Russia, which, incidentally, also led to a war in the North Caucasus - a bloody war. That's all.

Yeltsin was an absolute follower of the revolutionary technology of the 1917s and 1920s. Photo: Russian Look / Globallookpress

What could be done after that? For example, take and support the Russians in the territories in which they ended up outside the Russian Federation. Or, say, to establish a program for the repatriation of Russians from precisely those territories. But, unfortunately, this has not been done. Some sly, ambiguous programs to support compatriots, Russian-speaking. And who is a compatriot, who is such a Russian-speaking? There is a very broad interpretation of these things.

Therefore, on the one hand, I personally welcome what Putin said, even in such an Aesopian language, reminded all these republics of whose lands were included in their composition. But, on the other hand, the question is: what next? It is clear that this may be related to the situation with the Crimea, the situation with Ukraine, but what next? It’s not enough just to state. Having said andneed to say and b. I think that b will not follow here, as well as in, Unfortunately. But the fact that we reminded them of this is already good.

What you can’t talk about

I believe that we also adopted these “silence figures” from the Soviet era and transferred them to ours. Then there were some "sacred cows" about which it was impossible to speak. For example, it was impossible to say that in fact the backbone of the collaborators who created terrible atrocities in the same Belarus were Ukrainian-Bandera. We somehow didn’t talk about it all, but in the end we got Bandera Ukraine. Who burned the Belarusian village of Khatyn? Scary SS men? Nothing like this. She was burned by Bandera, Ukrainian collaborators. Yes, they were led by German officers, that’s true. But they burned it, and they distinguished themselves by these atrocities.

In the same way, it was impossible to talk about the role of our fraternal peoples of the socialist countries - Poland, the Czech Republic and so on. The fact that they also helped Hitler once. Well, how could one talk about this when they now enter the socialist camp?

In fact, these things have largely finished off the Soviet Union and the Soviet bloc. And in our time, too, we have dragged, we have new “silence figures”: regarding migration, all these national issues, all these post-Soviet republics, many of which do not quite rightfully use the lands that became part of them simply because that grandfather Lenin decided so. Grandfather Lenin was anti-Russian, he believed that in general, national identity, religious identity in itself — all this impeded the movement towards a world revolution.

The Bolsheviks thought of the world globally, they were absolute globalists. They believed that the world was on the verge of a world revolution, and after it was accomplished, there should be no nationalities, no religious beliefs, no borders. We do not like to remember about it, our gentlemen, the Communists and others like them, but it is. Now they like to shed crocodile tears, to ask: how so why the Union fell apart? And so it fell apart that they drew these boundaries, and then they pretended that all this was normal.

In this sense, I believe that this bad tradition of silence should not be dragged into our time. What Putin said about this is good. But to say something is not enough - something needs to be done. Crimea, Donbass - this is everything, but it seems to me that is not enough.

Article Categories:

Leave a Reply