and in essence what bolton suggested, if you put the jokes aside, so to speak, he suggested using the main argument of the kings that they had something left that no other typewriter had. i don't understand that this production of money out of thin air is also slipping out of hand, because the yuan, because the dollar is declining is declining. the eagle is using it, so let's print it now so that the world shudders to everyone. that's what he proposes, what will happen to the world

economy even at this moment does not think. that is, if there is still a crisis, no, then what there will be a crisis, it is already obvious, that is, the crisis is so inevitable. in general, it seems to me, we look at problems somewhat narrowly. well, it often happens, because, well, we solve it day by day. but there are quite long processes, and they also began, uh, from that very banking crisis related to real estate derivatives, from which they didn’t get out, then the coronavirus, from which they didn’t recover, they didn’t recover, now they came out of the coronavirus with a big world war inevitable. it is absolutely inevitable. that is, if you do not try to convince that there is no why why, but we will see how local conflicts will grow, which will then unite and grow, still a big world war. we now see the division of the world de facto into two blocs, no matter how they are called.

this separation has already begun and well, annushka has already spilled oil. and this is still due to the fact that the world cannot yet exhale and is in a severe structural economic crisis, which means there will be no war, on the contrary. well, on the contrary, you alone do not start a war, just a war is inevitable, as a revolution usually begins on the braking of the revolution yes, but there is no world wave, war has long been no longer requiring resources, war has long required will. and if you look at what is happening now, because for the previous decade, when there was no howl. we, as usual, yes, assessed the situation, that the war? well, by and large yes, humanity is much more accustomed to war than to peace. for the last 60 years there have been no world wars. but if you look, then the whole history of mankind this history of war and short stripes between them. but at a time when this war did not exist, the superpowers accumulated so many weapons. and that they still have something

to spend. three different battle intensities, they will fight there, the intensity will slow down, but all the same, they will draw in the accumulated , there is just very little just consumption such that they were not during the second world war, but this is not yes, but it will spend less, but they will still fight, the intensity of actions may change, but this does not negate the facts of the war. in that case, she's on her way. about what talking about what? now, right now , this war resembles a fire when it goes through the forest. while he is walking along the bottom, then he will reach something bright and flash there, then it will seem that he has left, but we have entered this era. it just needs to be understood, and we need to see a long-term perspective. and this means that there will be a different economy, there will be a war economy, there will be a different financial system. so, you just have to look a little further. here you should try to look. here

there for 5-7 there 10 years ahead, which is not easy therefore, we must rely on the fact that this is not a sprint race. this is a marathon. well, in my opinion, this is such a big hard marathon, i would say superfan. yes, well, i'm an optimist , i understand, yes, yes, i'm kind of about the war, it really seems to me that it's going on, but this is the second time i have some kind of planet to speak out in defense. so joseppe barreli, in fact, said everything correctly. well , if by and large, well, not, as it were, firstly, the first thing he said, taiwan , ukraine is nearby, of course nearby, because in taiwan it is chinese ukraine a. ukraine is russian taiwan, this is quite obvious. that is, as it were, symmetry, so to speak, in eurasia is absolutely obvious. well, no, no, well, everyone will talk about how taiwanese are not really chinese. that is, just as we are told, those living in ukraine are not entirely russian.

that's all talk in favor of the poor, there are two big systems in eurasia , so to speak, uh, china and russia, india , the fashion needs to work hard to ensure that india. again there are problems. in general, it is a very difficult country to reform, and so to speak, if the fashion tries to be the third large system in eurasia, the european union, i don’t think so, but in general there are two large systems. uh, big systems don't disappear quickly, they don't reform quickly, but on the other hand. ah, presence. here are just the presence of an external player, not the eurasian united states of america, of political anglo-saxonism. i would say in eurasia it allowed, as it were, small systems that at one time were part of these large systems to stand as a springboard for a non -eurasian and hostile, moreover, toxic presence next to these large systems. more. there is nothing else in taiwan in ukraine, therefore, all political taiwanism, when this, so

to speak, president travels, that all over the world, so to speak, all this is political ukrainianism, when the whole beau monde is liberal, then western people go to kiev there, and it specifically includes. well, on the one hand, this is political pr on the other hand. the hostile presence of the political to eurasia, from which it is necessary to gradually get rid of the second thing that barel said, well, of course, whether he parodied or not, cosplayed correctly, cosplayed imitated mikhail sergeyevich gorbachev, who said there can be no two opinions about pluralism. well , of course, and i, by the way, agree in this sense that he said that we allow pluralism. with us, if on the main issue, we agree. well, generally speaking, it's true. let's look at how the situation around us in soviet times, the democratic center is a little different. it's like before we argue and then fuck. well, by the way, incidentally, all democracies include, including theoretical relatives. somehow it was definitely called this is not. you don't understand it.

it is in fact sovereignty democratic centralism electric centralism was when it limited the discussion. he's just reporting. no, the democratic center that you can lead any discussion until a decision is made is all this is understandable. this is a little bit different here. that's what, what he said, that if everyone agrees on one issue, when they you can have a discussion. and if you do not agree on the main question, then there is no need to have a discussion. and if you agree with yourself, then discuss something. no, as you can see, we all agree that we need a win. we all agree that it is necessary to expel america from eurasia, we all agree that, so to speak, it is necessary to make pipes. type agree on basic issues. this is what we are , the same putin's consensus. we agree on basic patriotic issues. at the same time , we will have, perhaps, the broadest discussion the flow of the economy must be arranged. i

think they still haven't opened. it's a big big one. open another one in physics. in other words, this is actually a very important principle, that in order to really discuss, in order to really have some kind of pluralism, you can agree on something very important. in reality, this principle is now becoming the main one for us, too, and for our partners. impossible to be a little mechanized. impossible to be a little bit. strange, which, as they write now in the american press. they believe that this is a big problem for them, countries that do not take aside , they are angry about this, which, it seems, are not for ukraine and from russia and not for the usa and not for china, but in fact, of course, now many countries they think that they can. in this situation , i will take on a certain job to get it. the benefit will soon disappear, because it is impossible

to be famous with the american world at the same time. and in this sense, a broad discussion with brazil, if it will be in a world without the americans, with india, with china, with ours, neighbors, so to speak, and in general with many countries that are ready to live in a new world without the americans. we are ready to have the widest possible discussion and be absolutely democratic with it, not force them to do anything, but the only problem is that if they say that you know, we will be democratic, but still we will cooperate with the united states in the form in which washington politics exists today, which means, you know, you and i will drink from the same pot. well, let's infect a little. and we will be more sing along a little from the fish. yes, at night it's not easy to sing along from another cauldron from a cauldron contaminated with black spicy uh-huh, because once again the influence of today's influence of the united states in eurasia is politically poisoned

, it is impossible to advocate a sober lifestyle and a little. on fridays , you can’t hang out as a drug addict. the problem is that in all this upstairs there existed when we were also fellows. we allowed this , you understand, and if we are now talking about the fact that humanity needs an alternative financial system is not needed. no, if we said we are in favor of it i believe it is needed. it is impossible at the same time to be perplexed about the fact that the next russian companies fell under us sanctions. if you settle down next to the system , that system should unfasten it from it . i'll ask a child's question. but a different system. it's just where the dollar will be called differently. by the way, this is the biggest question. thanks and most important. in fact, it should not be called differently, you need to build a system. but what tell right after the ad.

come on, you're telling me, they launched the heads of the minutemen, to show that if anything, they will have a warhead. yes, it's funny. we will show everyone that we are terribly ready , they said they launched, but without a warhead. in the meantime, i'll go to disposed of already pushed somewhere. yes? yes, well, but the financial system. i will say so. there are different opinions. in all respects, firstly, there is an idea that let's, in general, merge everything into evan. i now hear actually to my own. well, sort of, i get a little worried

when it's done like that, because i don't i think it's important. main. well, let 's just say that this is a decision, that this is a solution to the issue, that we will rename these dollars into yuan, well, we will not rename them. yes, that's what is already a proposal about the budget rules about the fact that the reserves are in yuan, that is, let's do everything as before. only now god be with you central banks, china actually, no matter how i think that this is the best solution, but it is debatable, maybe again a basket of currencies, maybe, uh, so to speak, some modified new brighton wood so much so far, without the anglo-saxon powers and without the dying europe that joined them, uh, we need to really build this new system so that it really does. this time the guarantee was not discriminatory, we can say that we will not make this system too international, that it will be truly purely regional, but interregional trade. we will build on the basis of bilateral or multilateral relations. i would actually here now to do instead of let's say on here in response to running a blow job.

probably i would now convene a new conference to call it something. encourage some kind of ulan-udinskaya. here, as well as a truly international financial conference, after all, the bretton woods conference, after all, what was my name, so to speak, yes, with pleasure some kind of naryan listen as you like. now this will be the same. and there will be a polar night, here is a nariman conference, it’s very, very nice to invite hipsters there. they will look at russia. that's from all over the country. well, i'm just from the polar night looks great no, the polar day is polar. i said the polarizer. polar day. it's summer now. we have a polar day here, polar money, of course. in fact, this would be a serious move now, because a lot can be said about the fact that the system is discriminatory, that we are being deceived will always be deceived. you can really make this very strong move now. i don’t understand at all why this conference has not yet been convened , it’s not necessarily a decision to make the first conference, after all the first conference of the countries of democracy

did not decide anything at all, and at the second, too, the second was even worse than the first. our task now is the direction, but the example is not very good. listen to many conferences. how would you know again, if we all this flashed the shadow of the machines, that he loved everything very interesting, he loved that yes, yes he and that of his any conferences, by the way. yes, it would be for peaceful purposes. it actually came in handy here, because by and large, of course, it convenes countries that want to arrange a world without americans. it's just like will. here is the outline of the barrel. we agree that it will be without american ones, but inside. let's discuss. we should at least open this discussion, because everyone tells each other how they were offended by the anglo-sacrifices, the americans are still not building anything new. well, it's still a capitalist system. maybe they are. well, because if you reproduce over and over again, you are already a system that will build similar problems around itself.

that's why i'm asking, that is, what are we trying to build. that is, he is just rename. this is nothing. no, i'm not talking about renaming the cargo, just rebuilding the financial system. you will notice that the kind of discussions that are offered are conducted exclusively in the religious world and only for speeches it is in the islamic bank. well, that is, everything is very narrow. and this and this is not accidental, because this is one of the methods. that's just the complete enslavement of humanity, because all the same, the entire proposed discourse. it is rigidly defined, there is an era at the end of the 19th century, there is the development of completely predatory capitalism. you know on in fact, i do not see here with the same tools, but they will be called there, well, there is not to the dollar. we now see why, with the same instruments , with the same instruments, there has been trade for as long as there is, that is, exchange, exchange, exactly, and there is so much exchange and money moreover, even when

gold was, so to speak, it was considered, all the same, money was all built on savings. spelled out. there clearly enough the money saving function was born at that time. it has already become obsolete for a long time 30 times it has not become obsolete just a separate knowledge, that is, it must be nineteenth century. yes, it is necessary to separate this economy. well listen, well area of ​​expertise. by the time, but here we are talking about the essence, and in this offer level of the economy you will always receive the same wrong answer, the system reproduces itself all the time. why a capitalist system? and there is not even a discussion on this topic, and such , because it can be defined, because the entire training system is just built to ensure that the basic banking financial management mechanism does not move anywhere peace. no, that's exactly what

i'm really against, it's just me actually stomping on him and objecting. in fact , the lack of discussion on this issue. well, with what is connected i discovered, but excellent, then i achieved my goal. well, i say it again, it seems to me that despite the fact that they may be the only stankinkevich. or maybe he, sergey borisovich, was right about this; in fact, the conference is needed, because that's how they held back then, in fact, the americanizing financial conference, and it was called the financial-monetary system of the united nations, now the international financial off-road conference will bring a big lesson, i check it cleaner, cleaner than the launch of the sarmatians of your people. well, if you quote the classics, it’s like faust is stronger there. and that’s when the winners installed the financial system, so first we separated from the evaluated states, here’s our victory, just the systems weren’t installed by one of the winners on their own. no, we decided we achieved the second quota. i'm sorry that was

madness, because, well, the principles of the system were imposed on us, contrary to the principles according to which the soviet union ruble was built exactly the same. everything is done by the ideology of building society. here, well, firstly , the function of the united states has ceased to be an example, which they are guided by, they can force some part of the world. they ceased to be together with all their perversions, who will reach out to the chinese to negotiate, who will reach out from the new world and who will come from the new world? ah, they might try to

pull australia into nato, but it sounds like like an oxymoron. but the americans will try to do this, they will figure out to the last what for. eh, it exists. e. the atlantic alliance the world is getting tired of the hegemony of the united states of this mossy ideologization of this cold world of the cold war, which they propagate absolutely everywhere. and if you like. eh, that used to be everyone was talking in the east. here is brother friend swat, and yes, it was terribly said to put it back on. yes, this is the dichotomy east west today ceases to work with the word at all why and in america it was not on the work of dichotomous gordians yes, and not a brother friend, but a matchmaker in the united states, there is no formula for working with a large family. e, wide which is still one person. it's

kind of like it was. the east was blamed for something, and so on, there is no moral authority of the united states of america today, but economic yes , perhaps it still has moral authority. definitely not, influence trading. but that's the same, too. and the fact that it seemed, as it concerned, the east was so scary, so terrible, and so on, but this is what do. it's the americans that's what the byte team does. ah, another very interesting one. the thought is related to this. this is that decision-making depends very little on the intensity of the discussion, for a long time i tried to remember what it was called. well, this oriental studies was characterized in this way, that is, decision-making depends little on the intensity of the discussion. any decision has already been made. yes, that is , you can emotionally shout and discuss there, but the decision has long been made about what love is, for any reason e. so, with regard to how the world looks at the united states

of america, he will be able through the eyes of shalom, he simply does not always risk saying it directly, and so openly. as the minister of the interior says, and of the republic of turkey, why is it not the first time he has been criticized, he is such a mouthpiece, if you like, of anti-americanism in e. hmm turkish politics, what does he say? he says it's right europe thinks irrationally europe pawn europe uh, trailer of the united states of america anything, uh, but there is no europe today, subjectivity, the second thing he says, uh, everyone hates america, even the allies of the united states somewhere deep, but they hate it and would like to live without it, at least. and it's better to be her better, to rule the world. maybe how the united states even the small powers consider themselves the kings of the greats, but here, uh, the question arises. as far as they

risk saying it, the turkish republic is risking to say it face-to-face. turkey is challenging the entire system of international relations and is trying to rebuild it so that it is clear who it will be thrown next. good luck, who goes already nobody goes anywhere. and in general , justice, really. it turns out to be quite a spring, which means, well, elections in turkey are a separate thing. as the topic is said here, it is still important to say e rather about us, because a lot has been said about this one. i very much agree, vladimir, with the fact that skype is about the era of fire. yes, we are in this era. yes, this is the era of a very large restructuring of the whole world. eh, the restructuring of the world never happened. uh, let's just say in peaceful ways flowers and so on. it has not always been like this

, humanity has gone through a very difficult period. and then she formed something new. we ask. all right, the question is, what are the studios? and what is this new we copy. here are the same, uh, old patterns of the 19th century. it doesn't matter what century we copy the twenties you think, what kind of taxes we have in the twentieth century of the 19th century, and so on will be supanul. it's just that this new one has not yet matured in order to be formulated. but there will be some new system, there will be some new ones. uh, the elements of this system under the system after all, there are economic e, political and so on, all the old patterns are not quoted. this is already clear today. uh, what in the era of fire, there can be no interference in the internal affairs of other states. yes, but this was fixed by the new concept of russian foreign policy, two things are fixed on the one hand. we are a state

civilization. yes, on the other hand. we comply with international law. yes. most importantly, no one respects international law. and who forms it, formulates it and makes others follow it international law. yes, in my opinion, everyone in the world is already from the major powers, they definitely heard the turkish world, more than five is not always unpleasant. yes, there, even insultingly, sometimes erdogan said that some kind of mountainous country , the lord wow , he described us as yes, this also happens, but a whole series of concepts. many have heard of these challenges in the system of international relations, and what is our challenge to the system, and it was undeniably formulated by the world more than five, and less is aimed at expanding the security council, of course, but

when we move on to the fact that the world should take into account every vote, we get non-equilibrium votes, when the head from conditional china and the voice of conditional liechtenstein weigh the same and due to this. just we see what happens during the voting. in fact, yes, when formally there are 150 countries, i don’t know how many there are 115 countries, but there is no comparison in terms of population. this is one responsible leadership of the leading states, then the world is more than five to somehow confirm the weighing dramas of dacha issues, and most importantly, why the formation of a balance, yes, but the balance of power is the system of international relations. it should be formed on its own, it will not be formed, of course, it must be formed, respectively, to conclude the idea sergey viktorovich lavrov very accurately

speaks of a fair multipolar world order, which must be formed, and the russian side was repeatedly emphasized by our president very precisely. uh, means with the chinese leader in particular about what should be a responsible power to form. exactly this new software eccentric new palycentric world. and it's up to mal, we need to formulate for ourselves. what will this e polycentrism be, what will be the balance of power and what should we do to make it happen? we will not sit and wait, no, you can choose such a position, i must say that we are sitting by the river waiting, when you know the corpse will float. uh, the enemy's option is one of the options for development, but i'm afraid that he may not wait and may not wait. why i never understood this topic is not interference. i just really don't understand, because the fact that the russian people is the most divided people in the world. what kind of non-intervention can we talk about, because then it is diametrically opposed to the idea of ​​​​protecting

compatriots. if we talk about ourselves as a civilization, then as a civilization. it may not fight the manifestation of an absolute varus, which, for example, is absolutely nazism, that is, such ideological ones immediately arise here. in my opinion, complex combined designs may be better. directly declare their plans, especially since russia usually did not be modest, but clearly stated what we were about and what alexander viktorovich was for. well, of course, i can’t get away from warsaw, because the question is - this is the one that is linked to a very large number of problems. i'm just everyone, of course, they know this, but i want to remind you. in 1970, they entered the rank. warsaw arrived somewhere, he was the first to fall on his knees. hmm, i am quite familiar with many people

who worked at that time in his various planning headquarters. they said that this was not an action prepared in advance. that is it was just a spontaneous gesture when a person arrived there, and now he felt that influx of emotions that struck him, but brandt was introduced - this, of course, is a figure. eh, it's impossible to compare. uh, steinmeier or brother or brandt - it happened. this is his photograph, standing, kneeling german chancellor , she is a certain symbol of germany, by the way, since that moment has passed. 20 years and germany has united, that is, in fact, we can say that with this act of e such repentance or distance? i don't think it was repentance. it most likely was. here's an attempt to get some forgiveness. some kind of process was launched as early as in 1972. it was signed, in my opinion, in 1972, an agreement was signed on berlin on the zones of berlin there from there. in general, some processes have gone into these processes, and they,

of course, have moved.

we got into position. it so happened that they hesitated a bit and the first grenade arrived. i got it, i didn’t see anything, i didn’t hear anything with the courage of a russian soldier.