russia is a russian person in relation to, how do they say the establishment of peace? and what we received in response, and here in response we received this is what we now have, well, how can you forgive after that. as well as not only russia received it, but at the same time, even in the west, they believe that they have complete moral superiority , it seemed like a fading way out of you. but it is also our fault that we very rarely pose the question in this way, since we still have our own internal struggle there, so to speak, there is such and such a gorbachev yeltsin. well, let's let's put that aside and say that in general it was a great act of human humanism - that's another matter. what did it come? well, so to speak. we must use. we do not use it in any way, and therefore i, uh, believe that this greatness is one of the greatest crimes by the west in relation

to that world in general and the story could have gone completely differently ruslan here for clarity. eh, we have a lot of emotions. and this is understandable. but let's talk about specific facts. can we say that after the collapse of the soviet union in russia absolutely voluntarily chose the path of destruction? she didn’t even show agreements with her neighbors when they left the soviet union. whatever territorial requirements you may have, even in relation to those territories that were traditionally russian, you know, i will tell you more in depth. and so to speak, it went somewhere even to the point of absurdity, the goodwill of the russian federation when the operation to

force georgia to peace ended 15 years ago ended in success, but, however, everything went wrong , and everything was done. let's say. so crookedly began to understand within the ministry of defense. it turned out that there were very big failures of military intelligence, and when general korabelnikov, who headed the main discharge department, was reproached for this. he said, i'll show you a document now. here is the decree of president yeltsin, secret decrees that we are forbidden to conduct reconnaissance in relation to, and neighboring countries, that in the ninety -second year an agreement was reached between the leadership of the former republics well , probably, minus the baltics, most likely, here is 13. oh, 12 republics -3. uh, the baltic republics that we are not conducting, but intelligence activities, well, against a friend. we are military, like a dog tied to a stick. we were told we don't drive and had to run a whole row.

even the purely bureaucratic procedures of the then minister of defense to the chief of the general staff to cancel these decisions and give instructions to conduct this reconnaissance. can you imagine to what extent it was necessary to become friends before history, yes, but in order to reach such an absurd state. here, uh, talking about the preferences of uh russian society. uh, when in the west they hope that uh people will get tired of the war, and uh, want to uh, retreat and may even agree to surrender. and what does it bring? well, some kind of impulse in russian society, but look, uh, another way for russia is much more modest and subordinate in the world order. here are those who hope so, it would be interesting for them to look, it is useful to look, but the recent poll in russia of public opinion. and which

russian leaders are the most popular in the first place peter i then catherine ii then joseph stalin, then leonid brezhnev, then nikolai ii lenin alexander ii and at the very bottom of the list, mikhail gorbachev and boris yeltsin what does alexander dugin say about the mood of the russian people, and what kind of government and what policy are these people ready to support today? i am deeply convinced. i know my people, i feel them deeply. i study it, i live it, but certainly. we need a strong leader, and here they choose not because this or that ruler did it, good or bad. and how much he

strengthened the state, how much he was powerful as he was victorious as he was great. in general , i think that to such figures as stalin, to whom there is now a recently monument. we have put people treated modulo an official monument, but big for something, note 8m is huge nonetheless. and it wasn't an expression of politics. ah, the top leadership of the country. maybe this, well, this is definitely an expression of the aspirations of our people, which are many, many, uh, which stalin refers to completely non- historical non-historical. they see him great emperor. they see in him a man who created and strengthened a huge country that won the war. why did they win the deadly war with the leadership of the mortal war and stalin e, such figures and the terrible and peter are taken modulo. they could

do a lot of bad and evil things for our people, but it forgets everything. this is erased and new mythological figures emerge. stalin peter the terrible figure, which in fact. uh, they sing because of what people want to see in them. it's not about history. it's about the future. it's not about the past. this is about how the dash people want to see their leader strong , powerful, victorious, strengthening our territory. yes, maybe these are cruel rulers, but if this is cruelty in the name of the state in the name of faith in the name of an idea in the name of the people - this is cruelty, only it will be forgotten, it will be shaded before the desire that the people carry in their hearts in their souls. and this can be done at any time of this kind. polls won't

change anything. no, comfort doesn't matter here, nor peace doesn't matter here liberation of the peasants. here , the greatness of the state does not matter much. victory in the war. glory and power of the fatherland. and this is a constant of our psychology of our people, of course, and people. there are people who suffered lagged behind on and if the people who suffered from peter and are still alive are old believers who remember him as the king of the antichrist, and he is in the first place, despite the evil that this or that political does in our country is remembered not this history includes completely different factors. the greatness of the state. here, of course. quiet doubt regarding the fact that the people will always choose the great , even a despot, not to mention the tyrant of the great ruler of an authoritarian ruler, because how can one be a great ruler in such a country, if not authoritarian, than even a gentle

, kind, but failed everything person. and this kindness will disappear and be erased from her. we will not see, we see, only shame, humiliation, betrayal and stupidity, and therefore such characters as gorbachev yeltsin, they not only close and generally wonder how they got into this in this list and their it's just that everyone doesn't david everyone hates. if someone even owes their career or their rise, still deep down, maybe keeping certain certain obligations, they also hate. you are despised, this is a very important aspect of our people. we have a different account. we have different parameters, we have different criteria and, uh, when we talk about what we exposed, huh? stalin was almost forgotten by the eighties, and if it were not for the atrocities of the liberal reformers who lost the country, lost its greatness went. here's what ruslan spoke in complete surrender to the west.

in fact, maybe the rest of us would not simply remember the insignificance of these rulers, who ruined a great power in contrast to those huge figures , the great figures who created it , strengthened it, elevated it to glory. this insignificance created, in my opinion , modern stalinism. it has nothing to do with history, memory, this is a russian myth, and therefore in this monument at 8 m. i do not justify. i'm just explaining it, that is, the people want it. he wants stalin, he is not the wrong one the steel that he wanted, the steel that he will be. i uh think you are absolutely right. and this does not mean that people are blind to stalin's mistakes and crimes, and stalin deserves, from my point of view, both indignation and admiration and, uh, when he

died and when the memory of his last deeds, which, in general, included a large element, but disrespect for the law. it was natural for the soviet leadership. then go along the path that khrushchev and the twentieth congress followed. but now we have another historical perspective. now we have a different historical memory, and therefore it seems to me that for the vast majority of the russian people, as you absolutely correctly said, there is a need for a strong and decisive leader , and those in the west who think that skipping, if you like, kiev terrorist methods in fact, taking responsibility for what the green does.