“Targeted societies do not recognize themselves as targets; they consider themselves the masters of the elements that are devastating their countries,” Konstantin Cheremnykh, author of the “Anonymous War” report, told the VZGLYAD newspaper. This report describes who and why is organizing “color revolutions” today and how they threaten modern civilization.
“A phenomenon in recent years has been a sharp increase in mass protests in different countries of the world. The series of “orange revolutions” has been replaced by “revolutions 2.0”, the distinctive feature of which is the key role of the Internet and social networks. The Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street, Bolotnaya Square or the London pogroms - everywhere we see young people and the middle class on the streets demanding change. A common point of view on these events is the growth of self-awareness of the young and active, the desire to participate in choosing the path of development of their countries and “democratic protest” against tyranny and corrupt elites,” begins the report to the Izborsk Club “Anonymous War. “New Year 1968”: ideological content and mechanisms of “revolutions 2.0”, prepared by Konstantin Cheremnykh and Marine Voskanyan, edited by Andrey Kobyakov.
With a careful analysis of the political, social and cultural background of these events, the authors argue, it turns out that they do not occur on their own, but with the active participation of an external entity, which aims to change the civilizational paradigm of humanity:
“This subject has a complex structure, and its individual components have both coinciding general and specific goals and objectives. In both the “color revolutions 1.0” and the “social network revolutions 2.0”, the interest and direct participation of government departments (primarily the United States) can easily be distinguished... At the same time, a number of supranational parapolitical structures, university centers and international NGOs sponsored by a certain group of oligarchic foundations with the direct assistance of high-status international institutions. On the other hand, both the ongoing activities of these structures and the results of “revolutions 2.0” bring benefits to a number of specific types of transnational business. In general, this entity can be characterized as a “civilization lobby” implementing a certain global project.”
The report substantiates the thesis that the ideologies of protest movements are associated not only with current politics, but also with the fundamental processes of changing civilizational guidelines that began in the second half of the 20th century and related to issues of moral values, culture, religion and the place of man in the world. Preaching these recipes for complete liberation from authorities (state, military, religious), the participants in “revolutions 2.0,” although they consider themselves liberators of peoples, in practice implement the program of a narrow global circle of economic and cultural enslavers.
Work on the report “Anonymous War” resulted in the writing of a book, the preparation of which is already being completed by the authors. The newspaper VZGLYAD interviewed Konstantin Cheremnykh.
VZGLYAD: What was the reason for the appearance of your report?
Konstantin Cheremnykh: Our report was conceived long before Bolotnaya appeared. The occasion was the “Arab Spring” of 2011, in the picture of which there was much that was familiar from Serbia, Georgia and Ukraine, but on a larger scale, with a new stereotype of mass protests, alternating like a pulsating wave with newborn movements named after the number of a successful rally, with a new way to excite the masses and attract new participants through purely emotional means: someone commits self-immolation; nearby, instead of helping, business-like people film his torment on camera - and the world immediately finds out about it. And with the logos of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube as revolutionary brands. Based on this scope, it was possible to evaluate the technological advantages of “2.0” tools and predict the astronomical income of their creators.
And indeed, a year later they became billionaires, and the countries themselves where these revolutionary processes unfolded became beggars. This was the main result and the main paradox: the target societies do not recognize themselves as targets, they consider themselves the masters of the elements that devastate their countries. Each of the protest movements imagines that as soon as they sweep away the annoying government, freedom will automatically bring prosperity and give them what the authoritarian government did not give them, took away, or underpaid.
VZGLYAD: How did this differ from the first series, from the so-called color revolutions, except for greater coverage and rapid development?
K.Ch.: The series of “color revolutions” that began under George Bush provided for the selection of new leaders to replace undesirable politicians who were labeled “dictators” (although Kuchma or Shevardnadze, of course, were not despots). Their heroes were surrounded by a halo of “leaders of the new generation.” As for “revolutions 2.0,” their participants themselves proclaimed them leaderless—revolutions without leaders. At the same time, the source of the processes was “not recognized” for quite a long time, until Hillary Clinton could not resist boasting, declaring: “We are waging an information war.” From these two features it followed that they differed not only in the method of organization, but also in purpose and, ultimately, in the result.
However, the idea for our report did not arise at the moment when it was already clear where the legs were coming from and who was winning. After the spring of 2011, autumn came, and then the most interesting thing began: following the model of protest movements in the countries of the third world or, conditionally, the south, mass “revolts” arise in the countries of the north, as they are commonly called, industrial ones. Or, more precisely, post-industrial, since the manufacturing industry from them has been outsourced to developing countries since the 1970s.
My attention was drawn to the statement of Immanuel Wallerstein - an economist with a special view of world processes, although at the same time a high-status one who is part of the elite. In November 2011, he said: "We have come to the new year of 1968." Indeed, at the rallies of the American Occupy Wall Street one could see “veterans” of that revolution, sometimes called the “revolution of rock, drugs and sex.” Including those who have made a solid political career. Then I came across an interview with Daniel Cohn-Bendit, now co-chair of the Green faction in the European Parliament. In 2005, he visited Moscow and answered questions from Russian leftists. They were actually disappointed, but interested me. For example, when asked about his views, to everyone's surprise, he admitted that he had always been "green" from the very beginning. It would seem, what does protecting nature have to do with anarchy? At first glance - none. But for some reason, the modern human rights movement at the level of leaders of leading NGOs is closely intertwined with the movement to protect nature.
Responding to questions from Moscow leftists in 2005, Cohn-Bendit clarified that the human rights movement, consonant with his direction, is not a movement for the civil rights of any person, but for the rights of minorities. He said: “We also wanted to develop some kind of new lifestyle that did not mean submitting to the morals of our parents. From these feelings arose the women's movement, the homosexual movement, that is, movements that signified the autonomy of the subject in relation to the prevailing morality."
VZGLYAD: Didn’t these movements arise at the beginning of the twentieth century?
K.Ch.: They arose at the very peak of the industrial age and, moreover, had little connection with each other. The cradle of these trends was in England, as, indeed, was the movement to protect nature from humans, which for some reason we call environmental, although in English it is called the environmentalist movement. That is, it has nothing to do with ecology as a science, but with a system of views, which, like any philosophy, ends in “-ism.” Environmentalism - from the environment, environment - is probably better translated as “ecologicalism”. These elements existed separately and then merged. Just when nuclear parity between the USSR and the USA arose and, accordingly, in addition to “hard” forms of influence on the opponent, “soft” forms were required - or, as they used to say then, ideological struggle.
But this struggle, of course, did not extend only to the USSR. Cohn-Bendit was asked who his teachers were and what texts could be considered manifestos of the worldview he represents. He titled the article by his peer Andre Gortz “Farewell to the Proletariat,” and among the philosophers of the previous generation he quoted Hannah Arendt, the author of the book “The Origin of Totalitarianism.” He contrasted her phrase “The same person can be good and bad, kind and evil, he can do something terrible and do something for liberation” with Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s idea that man by nature is a carrier of good.
In your opinion
A series of articles based on the materials of reports at seminars at the Institute of Dynamic Conservatism, dedicated to the history of environmentalism and its adherents, the secret springs of its use for the purpose of manipulating the consciousness of the masses and elites.
Why are environmental prejudices in demand?
By the end of the first decade of the 21st century, humanity is faced with striking paradoxes. On the one hand, the progress of science opens up new horizons at both the macro and micro levels. Modern aerospace technologies make it possible not only to overcome gravity, but also to explore new worlds. In turn, electron microscopy has allowed biology to reach the level of intervention in the genome of a living being. The human mind has come very close to solving the main problems limiting the development of civilization. Combining the achievements of science that study mega- and micro-processes fundamentally makes it possible to begin solving such previously unimaginable problems as preventing genetic anomalies, moving genetic material in space with subsequent resynthesis, colonizing other planets and going beyond the solar system.
On the other hand, the basic problem of poverty has not been resolved on planet Earth. Moreover, this problem has only worsened with the rise of a world order called globalization. The failure of the modern design of the financial system, revealed by an unprecedented crisis, would seem to stimulate liberation from the shackles that limit the development of the human race. However, on the way to this liberation, ideological structures created in the middle of the 20th century are piled up, simultaneously with the separation of the financial system from the physical value equivalent.
Western liberal ideology, most concentratedly expressed in F. Fukuyama’s book “The End of History,” is forced to reconsider its positions: in fact, it has been refuted by the very practice of globalization, and the methods of overcoming the crisis that governments and international credit institutions are resorting to essentially reject the dogma of “ the magic hand of the market,” supposedly guaranteeing equality of opportunity for citizens and states.
It has been said more than once that liberal theory is undergoing a crisis similar to the crisis of communism. But globalization has another powerful ideological reserve. National governments, which need to make strategic decisions about the path of further development, will be able to subjugate the appetites of corporations, make changes to customs and currency regulations, but to break into an era of new progress, you need to believe in progress. But for more than forty years, most governments in the world have been regularly stating that industrial growth is undesirable, harmful, and dangerous for humans. Moreover, it accepts obligations with targets to limit growth. Today it is called the Kyoto Protocol, tomorrow it will be called differently, but the refrain is the same: humanity cannot move in large steps, it must mince back and forth so as not to upset a certain “balance” with the forces of nature, so as not to inadvertently overstep the “limits” growth" - otherwise terrible things will happen.
The artificial barrier extends not only to actions, but also to cognition. Space research and the study of human reserve capabilities are relegated to the background. The tasks of molecular genetics are reduced to applied agronomy, at best - to the synthesis of treatments for individual pathologies (AIDS), nanotechnology - to the creation of materials for technology that facilitates communication, but does not develop cognition, nuclear physics - to experiments on particle collisions, but not to extract energy from synthesis.
At the same time, the attention of civilization is painfully drawn to the topic of sufficiency of energy resources. The far-fetched nature of this fixation was already obvious to scientists in the 1950s. Moreover, researchers from the countries of the new economy - China, India, Iran, Brazil - remain determined to overcome the dependence of their countries on fuel (non-renewable) energy resources through the development of the most efficient sources - water energy and nuclear energy, but former industrial, and now predominantly service economies of the “first world” hinder these initiatives under purely irrational pretexts. Instead, the use of renewable sources is imposed in a deliberately costly, ineffective form that does not contribute dynamics to overall technological progress, but rather reproduces archaic methods, except perhaps with the use of certain new materials (including rare earth metals, dependence on imports of which creates greater vulnerability for the country than dependence on oil and gas).
The justification for such a distortion of scientific and technological development is the desire to avoid disturbing the “natural balance”, moreover, interfering in the affairs of primeval nature. As a result, those technologies that are directly intended to provide a reliable barrier between human and natural activity are not being developed. Thus, European airlines find themselves helpless in the face of a cold snap or a volcanic eruption, despite the presence of cold-resistant materials and protective filters.
This distortion of development, which creates new risks for the population of the entire globe, is a direct consequence of a distorted picture of the world (at the level of cognition) and the instillation of a crippling fear of the future (at the level of emotional perception). Millions of people are instilled with helplessness in the face of natural processes and, at the same time, with a sense of collective guilt for influencing these processes. The symbol of this man-made vicious circle is the widely disseminated hypothesis instilled through the media, school and college textbooks, and tons of popular literature about “global warming,” which supposedly threatens some regions with deadly drought and others with equally fatal flooding.
I. Predispositions of mass psychology.
1) The dogma of global warming and related axiomatics are spreading in Western society with degraded religious meanings (according to G.K. Chesterton, superstitions spread most widely where religious faith is weak) and with hypertrophied egocentrism. Fears for one’s health, according to sociological data, dominate by a large margin in the hierarchy of values of the population of Western European countries. Ideological “seeds” falling on this soil become catalysts for mass “health hypochondria” (a term in psychiatry applied to sluggish schizophrenics who try to compensate for the perceived defect in energy potential created by the disease by intense physical exercise). Moreover, in a situation of real, and not fictitious, environmental danger, obsessions (cycles of ritual, ceremonial-like actions, such as collecting garbage to the last crumb) are joined by mass fears, reaching the point of panic with a massive feeling of helplessness.
2) Ideas about the collective guilt of man before nature are easily assimilated by both believers of different faiths and atheists brought up in a left-wing (anti-capitalist, anti-oligarchic) coordinate system. The cult of “saving nature,” especially in forms specifically addressed to “lesser brothers,” exploits not only consumer, but also complex, higher, inherent only human values - self-restraint, self-sacrifice (in the name of gorillas, dolphins, whales, beached and etc.), and because of this they reach the active young generation, which is not prone to hypochondria, distracting them from other subjects of service. The young man treated in this way expresses pity for the insect, but is indifferent to his own similar creature: after all, a person is “by definition” guilty, and therefore unworthy of such care as a monkey, a dolphin or a rat - although all these creatures also emit “dangerous” into the atmosphere carbon dioxide.
II. Predispositions of the politically active layer.
3) In the broad mass of the European population, human power over nature and, consequently, its “desecration” for decades was associated with the “brutal” practices of communism or Nazism, and advanced dual-use technologies, especially nuclear ones, with the Cold War. This gives rise to the specific phenomenon of Western European prejudice towards the industrial gigantism of large powers in general and towards nuclear technologies in particular - a prejudice arising, among other things, from the “inferiority complex” of a small country in front of a large power; a small space, where there is “nowhere to hide” and nowhere to obtain resources, in front of an “unfairly” large freedom of internal maneuver. This symptom of an inferiority complex is more typical of the predominant older generation of politically concerned European citizens. Any development project conceived by a major power is interpreted as an aggressive intent; attempts by a new member of the European family (Poland, Bulgaria, Lithuania) to preserve the method of energy production mastered during the period of the USSR or the hated “Komekon” (CMEA) are interpreted as “rudiments of communism.” However, no real alternatives are offered to these new members.
4) Representatives of the middle level of the political establishment of Western countries, generally aware of the manipulative nature of the above-mentioned concept, consider “green ideology” as the lesser evil compared to other ideologies that easily embrace large masses of the population. This circumstance serves as justification in cases where “green” dogmas obviously, objectively impede the development of a profitable productive economy. Let production be cut back or outsourced, but the population brainwashed by the “green theory” will be more predictable; let young people be carried away by butterflies, and not by the real leaden abominations of life: it’s calmer that way.
5) Individual elements of the “green doctrine” do not contradict the transformed (degraded) social democratic concept, which makes it easier to politically block and conquer electoral groups in the political process, including at the pan-European level. In the complex interaction of “old” and “new” European countries, the “green” language turns out to be the most universal language of both political “recognition” and influence, and environmental arguments are a fairly effective means of preventing “red” and “brown” overlap among poor neighbors.
In addition, the spread of the theory of “global warming” in the countries of the “second” and “third” worlds creates tools for interaction between “old small” and “new small” countries against the “big old” and “big new” powers - in particular, in the format “EU-Latin America”, as well as a convenient political cover for the shadow economy, the laws of which preserve the stereotype of metropolises and colonies. The growing role of shadow markets in ensuring the stability of the European currency creates additional incentives to perpetuate this stereotype.
III. Predispositions of the global elite.
1. It is more convenient to divide and rule if the system of values and motivations of the population are distracted from the real, glaring problems of civilization. The most convenient way to prevent the emergence of self-sufficient state systems in the world that challenge the holders of the levers of global control is most conveniently not through reason (“rational psychotherapy”), but through mass superstitions and prejudices.
2. Secessionist (separatist) movements that undermine the power of potential rivals are more convenient to manage on the basis of standard ideological tools than to come up with new protest motivations each time. The surrogate identity raised by such movements is potentially safer than a concept built on pure ethnic nationalism, or even more so on a traditional confession, infringed in a sensitive region by the regime of a potential rival (target country). Obviously economically insolvent neo-states, or preferably unrecognized states, built in this way are easier to “exploit” in the future, including by saving on the maintenance of tribal leaders.
3. The production and distribution of a highly liquid product that clouds consciousness and immobilizes statistically significant masses of the active population, including those of our own “industrial” countries, is more conveniently carried out in conditions where mass consciousness is distracted from physical production. A global civilization, the elements of which are indifferent to each other, is more easily stratified into idle consumer classes and layers of poor producers. In turn, it is convenient to juxtapose the claims of countries with “stupid” specialization (Latin America, Central Asia) with the interests of post-industrial “substrate countries,” especially if motives for reindustrialization and/or protection of the internal market are maturing in their public circles.
4. During the period of inevitable breakdown of the system of social relations of speculative capitalism and the transition to a more perfect form of non-economic domination, where the apparatus of formal democracy will become pure decoration, it is convenient and expedient to fill the agenda of world civilization with imaginary priorities of supposedly universal significance.
5. The establishment of countries with transition economies, disadvantaged by the lag in the post-industrial consumer economy, is easier to manipulate if its hopes for modernization are “fertilized” with the idea of energy saving in the name of natural balance: one can guarantee both the creation of an additional market for a post-industrial product and the waste of budget funds of these countries on obviously ineffective technologies, and at the same time cultivate a sense of inferiority among their national elites, and, accordingly, psychological dependence on the “advanced community” that is “in the technological vanguard”, and hence political dependence on the “advanced countries” - the USA, Israel, Japan, Great Britain, Denmark, with a corresponding influence on foreign policy. As a result, the target country turns out to be internally split into a population for which “advanced” benefits are available and unavailable, and on the world stage it is opposed to both the “new economies” and, especially, the “third world”.
Legislative bodies of several regions of the country supported the appeal of the Arkhangelsk Regional Assembly of Deputies to the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation to conduct an audit of the activities of Greenpeace for compliance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.
Expert of the Institute of Dynamic Conservatism Konstantin Cheremnykh and writer Dmitry Peretolchin talk about the role of Greenpeace in the politics of global elites.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN. Konstantin Anatolyevich, the “green” parties have a very strong political influence on the global establishment. Why is this happening?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. When our reader or listener perceives the word "Greenpeace", he is told that it is an environmental organization. But in any English text it will be said that this is an “environmental organization” (“environment” - environment).
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.What is the difference?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. The fact is that ecology is a science, and environmentalism or ecologism is a worldview, philosophy, ideology. These are as different things as scientific research and propaganda.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.Then we need to talk about the tenets of this ideology.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Any ideology has its own history. If we talk about environmentalism, then in the 20th century there were several key events that played a role in its formation. The first of them is the emergence of the “New Age” movement at the turn of 1950/1960, the second is the report of the Club of Rome “Limits to Growth”, and the third is the emergence and approval at the UN level of the theory of global warming.
How does this work in politics? In 2014, a climate summit that usually takes place separately was timed to coincide with the regular annual session of the UN General Assembly, after which the next EU summit was convened, and at this summit the “20-20-20 Program” was approved, meaning the percentage of reduction in atmospheric emissions.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.In fact, this idea influences the regulation of industry...
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Ideas first influence the thinking of the elite. Let me give you a specific example. Since the 1940s. For some reason, John Rockefeller II begins to be more interested in the topic of national parks than in the topic of the oil industry in which he works. And then, one after another, members of the Rockefeller family begin to lose interest in the industry in which they made their capital, and get carried away with a topic that is not yet called “limits to growth,” but simply population size, that is, the topic that Thomas Malthus studied. As a result, the dogma is affirmed that there are only a hundred years left of the traditional energy resources that are necessary to support the entire population of the Earth.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.Did this happen at the Club of Rome?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, in the 1972 Limits to Growth report. But this was not yet the completion of the entire structure. The construction was completed when the theory of global warming arose. Why is it important? The fact is that environmentalism as a philosophy appeals to so many movements: religious, philosophical, sectarian. The common features of these movements are that humans are equated with animals. If we talk about religious directions, then we are talking about the transmigration of a person’s soul into the soul of a tree or a frog, etc. But the fact is that one should care about a person and his life no more than about the fate of a frog or, God forbid, cannot be crushed mosquito - this is not the final stage of the philosophy of environmentalism. And the final stage comes when it is stated that it is carbon dioxide created by man, and not by anyone, that is the source of that terrible disaster that is destroying the Earth and all living beings on it. Man is equated to the source of sin before nature. Man should no longer control nature, he should only repent, beat his forehead against the wall permanently for the fact that he changes anything in nature at all.
From that moment, this philosophy becomes a religion, but in comparison with the Abrahamic religions, it is turned upside down: what is a value there becomes an anti-value here.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.Anti-system?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, and this complete ideology is beginning to be applied in geopolitics.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.What are the tools, specific organizations?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. First, Julian Huxley's International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) arose in Great Britain. Then the World Wildlife Fund, then the well-known Greenpeace and many other organizations. You can call them NGOs, which involve millions of people in different countries of the world, and they represent a very impressive force in terms of the number of volunteers employed there. This is important because volunteers work for an idea, for free, and it is convenient. This exists within the framework of any ideology, but when all this is directed against human development, it is clear what the final result should be.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.Is this ultimately aimed at controlling the economy?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. It depends on the political situation. For example, if the United States wants to reindustrialize, it is now unprofitable to apply this philosophy in its country.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.But it is beneficial to use it in Europe to kill a competitor.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, but I would start not with Europe, but with China, with whom the United States has been working in this regard for a long time. The events in China that led to the Tiananmen Square uprising in 1989 were not just about the Chinese Communist Party being criticized for stagnation or some kind of repression. A very important element was the campaign against the construction of the Three Gorges hydroelectric dam. There was a best-selling book called "Yangtze, Yangtze," and the campaign was much more powerful and vocal than, for example, the anti-diversion campaign in the Soviet Union. Another thing is that the Chinese party leadership turned out to have a greater sense of self-preservation than the Soviet leadership.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.You said that the elite are first infected with ideas...
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, and if there had not been Gorbachev as General Secretary, then there would have been no second phase of perestroika, including the closure of the Rostov NPP, Petrozavodsk NPP, etc. And most importantly, let’s see where Gorbachev went after?
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN."World Earth Charter"?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, the Earth Charter. He is considered one of its authors, although in fact Maurice Strong, Deputy Secretary General of the UN, played a major role in it. And what about the structure that was presented to Gorbachev? It still exists and is called very solemnly: “State of the World Forum”. To understand: “State of the Union address” is the annual address of the US President to the Americans. And here is the “World Forum”. That is, Mikhail Sergeevich, when he was offered to head such an organization, in his own mind felt like a more important person in the world than George Bush Sr. But this is already a matter of personal manipulation, and in the end he did not get the role he expected.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.Certainly. But who came up with the philosophy of environmentalism?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. If we open the word “environmentalism” in the English-language Wikipedia, we will immediately see the name of Thomas Malthus, who wrote economic works and drew the same conclusion to which the Club of Rome later returned with the help of the Rockefeller family.
In the same list we will find sources from different philosophies, primarily Jainism. This religion was included in the nine major religions of the world by the husband of the British Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Philip, a great supporter of this philosophy.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.Who wants to be born in the next life as a deadly virus! Not a tree or a frog, mind you.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes. Jainism is professed by 0.4% of the Indian population, and although India is a populous country, it is not so much for both India and the world to count it among the defining, leading religions. Another stronghold of environmentalism is Ismailism, a sect that separated from Shiite Islam.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.But for us, the environmental movement is personified primarily by the Greenpeace organization.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, this is how it is perceived in our country, since this organization operated in our country and caused more scandals than other structures. But Greenpeace is one of many grassroots structures in the environmentalist movement. It is incorrect to call this organization ecological, because, as we said, ecology is a science. We cannot say that there is, for example, some kind of zoological movement.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.But the declared position of Greenpeace is the protection of nature.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. The declared position of Greenpeace has changed throughout its existence. Let's remember where they started in 1969, when this name did not yet exist. And they started with a very noble struggle against nuclear testing, which was then approved by the Soviet side. Then suddenly this topic was replaced by the topic of whale protection, which persisted for a long time, and then this structure joined many others in the common struggle against nuclear energy and traditional hydrocarbon energy.
And it is no coincidence that Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace, who later left it, said: “When I joined this organization, I thought that it was for the people, and then I realized that it was against the people.”
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.This is a very layered statement.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. This is an awareness of the real mission that these organizations carry, and with them a variety of other organizations that may call themselves human rights or fighting for the freedom of religions or certain territories.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.Is there any reason to believe that they are literally against people?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Let's reason. From the fact that in 1972 a report to the Club of Rome said: in a hundred years, resource reserves will be depleted, one can dance in different directions. We should give the floor to scientists, specialists, and not philosophers. Let them figure it out, search, prove that resources are really running out. If this is the case on our planet, let's explore other planets and outer space. But instead, it is proposed not to build anything, not to mine anything, to drive less and, ultimately, to breathe less.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.One of the British politicians suggested putting meters on people...
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, David Miliband, who served as UK environment secretary before becoming foreign secretary.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.What is the role of Greenpeace in this international movement?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. In 2009, Kumi Naidoo, a man of South African origin and a former anti-apartheid fighter, became the executive director, that is, the main figure of Greenpeace. He had not dealt with whales or oil companies before. But this human rights activist was invited, and he headed Greenpeace. In addition, he also organizes the “Worldwide Call for Climate Action.” We are talking about the notorious climate catastrophe, which is the completion of the philosophy of environmentalism. People who pollute nature are blamed for this disaster. It doesn't matter that there are volcanoes that emit carbon dioxide, there are animals that emit carbon dioxide. It's not their fault! Man is solely to blame!
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.And this is the final formulation of the question...
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, this is the final formulation of the question: man is evil. This is what Patrick Moore realized.
If we talk about a global trend, then environmentalism or ecologism is only one of the elements of the policy of global structures. Let's take the same Kumi Naidu. Where else do we find this name? We find him on the advisory board of Transparency International.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.An organization that supposedly fights corruption?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, and this is a targeted fight. This is a kind of campaigning when a dossier is compiled on certain individuals, etc. This explains, for example, the fact that the attack on the Gazprom Prirazlomnaya platform did not end with the attack itself. At the same time, publications appeared in the Western press that allegedly Gazprom acquired the foundation of this platform in a not entirely legal manner, which means that there is probably corruption here. A dossier is being collected on Gazprom employees, etc.
If we look at what other characters are sitting next to Kumi Naidu in this council, we will see Tawakul Karman - the “star” of the “Arab Spring” in the state of Yemen. She belongs to the Islah party, which is part of the Muslim Brotherhood movement. This movement is not in honor for a variety of reasons, not only in Egypt, but also here and in many other countries. The radical part of the Muslim Brotherhood is aligning itself with very dangerous structures in the Sinai Peninsula.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.Is it possible to say to some extent that the same forces behind Greenpeace are behind the Muslim Brotherhood?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. The main question is: why in the same structure there are people who deal with the dossier, people who are involved in protecting nature, and people who are involved in social agitation, which leads to massacres and civil war - for example, in Yemen, where it is going on with since the Arab Spring began there? Tavakul Karman is the main person who should be responsible for this! And she sits safely next to Mr. Naidu, and they coordinate something! Sitting there is Jessica Tuchman-Matthews from the Carnegie International Endowment for Peace. What kind of world do they want to build through such coordination? This is the question that seems to me the most fundamental.
The director of Crown Agents, a company that has existed in the UK since 1833, is also on the same advisory board. This is the British equivalent of the American USAID. Only in 1997 did “Crown Agents” formally become non-state, but did not change its name, “Crown Agents”: It is curious that several years ago Yatsenyuk agreed with them so that this structure would take control of Ukrainian customs.
And if we look at which foundations sponsor all this, even more questions may arise. For example, "Aga Khan foundation". The Aga Khans, kings of the defunct Ismaili kingdom, have a rather peculiar reputation even in terms of how they behave with their own coreligionists.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.They even took part in the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, both in the collapse of the USSR and in creating a favorable environment for drug operations in countries adjacent to Afghanistan.
There is a whole bunch of structures that assign to themselves certain titles of global organizations. For example, the Global Commission on Drug Policy, which loudly announced itself during the Arab Spring. Its composition almost completely coincides with “The Elders” ("Elders") - a group of political veterans, former presidents, etc. That is, the drug lobby and the human rights lobby intersect in a surprising way.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.But Greenpeace still has nothing to do with drugs?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Greenpeace itself is not, but the same group "The Elders" was founded in South Africa, and I think that Kumi Naidoo must be familiar with these characters. The International Council for Transit Justice also originates from South Africa, which deals with property issues, including cultural property, in those countries where “dictators are being overthrown,” for example, the Museum in Iraq.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN. Today, in this regard, many questions arise regarding Iraq, Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt... Is it possible for Greenpeace to have a connection with intelligence structures?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. If a social structure that arose as a grassroots initiative, like Greenpeace, eventually becomes part of the establishment, then groups of people appear who deal with contacts with various political and intelligence structures. Moreover, such tools as Greenpeace or Transparency International are very convenient because there is lively enthusiasm and volunteerism. There are many people who collect information (which can be material for intelligence) for free, from the heart. It's very economical.
Dmitry PERETOLCHIN.That is, Greenpeace is an organization that is not really involved in environmental protection?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. At a minimum, it participates in the same campaigns that human rights organizations simultaneously engage in, stirring up public sentiment in the country in which they work. Greenpeace is a very convenient tool, so it will continue to be in demand.
From the editor.
Under the current conditions, Greenpeace is changing tactics. Now its activists are trying, under the “roof” of Russian environmental organizations, to get into government programs, for example, under the auspices of ASI - the Agency for Strategic Initiatives under the President of the Russian Federation. These programs allow them to conduct seminars and trainings for Russian teachers, environmental education workers in nature reserves and national parks, and even participate in the creation of school textbooks and video lessons, while subverting the traditional aspirations of Russians and other peoples of Russia for harmony with nature under their environmentalism and human rights advocacy.
Rice. Gennady Zhivotov
Konstantin Cheremnykh
QUASI-RELIGION OF DEGRADATION
Based on reports at the Institute of Dynamic Conservatism
INTRODUCTION
SECOND PILLAR OF GLOBALIZATION
Why are environmental prejudices in demand?
By the end of the first decade of the 21st century, humanity is faced with striking paradoxes. On the one hand, the progress of science opens up new horizons at both the macro and micro levels. Modern aerospace technologies make it possible not only to overcome gravity, but also to explore new worlds. In turn, electron microscopy has allowed biology to reach the level of intervention in the genome of a living being. The human mind has come very close to solving the main problems limiting the development of civilization. Combining the achievements of science that study mega- and micro-processes fundamentally makes it possible to begin solving such previously unimaginable problems as preventing genetic anomalies, moving genetic material in space with subsequent resynthesis, colonizing other planets and going beyond the solar system.
On the other hand, the basic problem of poverty has not been resolved on planet Earth. Moreover, this problem has only worsened with the rise of a world order called globalization. The failure of the modern design of the financial system, revealed by an unprecedented crisis, would seem to stimulate liberation from the shackles that limit the development of the human race. However, on the way to this liberation, ideological structures created in the middle of the 20th century are piled up, simultaneously with the separation of the financial system from the physical value equivalent...
At the same time, the attention of civilization is painfully drawn to the topic of sufficiency of energy resources. The far-fetched nature of this fixation was already obvious to scientists in the 1950s. Moreover, researchers from the countries of the new economy - China, India, Iran, Brazil - remain determined to overcome the dependence of their countries on fuel (non-renewable) energy resources through the development of the most efficient sources - water energy and nuclear energy, but former industrial, and now predominantly service economies of the “first world” hinder these initiatives under purely irrational pretexts. Instead, the use of renewable sources is imposed in a deliberately costly, ineffective form that does not contribute dynamics to overall technological progress, but rather reproduces archaic methods, except perhaps with the use of certain new materials (including rare earth metals, dependence on imports of which creates greater vulnerability for the country than dependence on oil and gas).
The justification for such a distortion of scientific and technological development is the desire to avoid disturbing the “natural balance”, moreover, interfering in the affairs of primeval nature. As a result, those technologies that are directly intended to provide a reliable barrier between human and natural activity are not being developed. Thus, European airlines find themselves helpless in the face of a cold snap or a volcanic eruption, despite the presence of cold-resistant materials and protective filters.
This distortion of development, which creates new risks for the population of the entire globe, is a direct consequence of a distorted picture of the world (at the level of cognition) and the instillation of a crippling fear of the future (at the level of emotional perception). Millions of people are instilled with helplessness in the face of natural processes and, at the same time, with a sense of collective guilt for influencing these processes. The symbol of this man-made vicious circle is the widely disseminated hypothesis instilled through the media, school and college textbooks, and tons of popular literature about “global warming,” which supposedly threatens some regions with deadly drought and others with equally fatal flooding.
What trends of the outgoing year will determine the future of the world?
Konstantin Anatolyevich, what events and trends were the most significant in 2018?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. This year, the biggest events were either controversial, such as the American congressional elections, which we cannot consider a victory for one side or the other, or changed their vector during the year, as, for example, in France. After all, when Emmanuel Macron arrived in China at the beginning of 2018, he was greeted not just solemnly, but with hints that he was the leader of Europe, spreading his influence to other continents.
And what do we see at the end of the year? Demonstrations against the environmental tax in France turned out to be a continuation of the trend that has already manifested itself this year in Australia, Brazil, and Saudi Arabia, where Prince Mohammed bin Salman for some reason decided not to engage in solar energy. That is, ecoskepticism has become a global trend. Moreover, the French events also showed the class nature of what was happening.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. But what we saw in France was a clear illustration that there is an exploiting class that uses ideological concepts of global warming, and there are exploited classes that feel the hard way that part of their own income is being taken away under ideological pretext.
If we talk about this in terms of information wars, we must remember that this year there was a serious fight against right-wing conservative social networks and organizations operating on the right airwaves. In various countries, measures have been taken to identify these networks, usually under the pretext of Russian interference in their activities, for which certain word lines targeted at the far-right electorate, etc. were monitored.
But the protests in France were prepared by a successful campaign on social networks, while tracking tools could not catch anything, since the addressee of this campaign was not a narrow category of right-wingers and not only Marine Le Pen’s supporters. The usual issues on the right-wing agenda, such as migration, were not even raised. The question that was raised concerned very broad layers, including people of color, and it was the fundamental ideological question of modern leftist philosophy, or more precisely, what leftist philosophy has degenerated into on a Euro-Atlantic scale.
"TOMORROW." What is conventionally called “progressivism” - a mixture of environmentalism, feminism, racial and gender “minorism”, etc.?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes. It is worth emphasizing that in the French events one can feel the hand of Stephen Bannon, Trump’s election campaign strategist, a right-wing conservative politician who in France deliberately spoke to a left-wing audience, on left-wing resources, in order to reach broad layers of anti-elitist positions.
"TOMORROW". Did the congressional elections in the US itself reveal any trends of the year?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Let's see how the Democrats prepared for these elections. Here is a note from the respectable portal Politico dated October 30, that is, a week before the elections: “The Republican Party base was electrified by Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings, but that surge of enthusiasm did not change the trajectory because that momentum was outweighed by a tidal wave of Democratic outrage. The massacre of eleven people at a synagogue in Pittsburgh and the arrest of a suspect in sending mail bombs to a number of Democratic political stars further outraged the electorate ahead of the midterm votes.”. Indeed, even before the congressional elections, Trump's rating was knocked down from 44 percent to 40 percent.
Further, Democratic political scientists tell the portal’s author that “Democrats are feeling better than they were two weeks ago, when the debate over Judge Covano seemed to close their narrow path to a Democratic majority. But now Democrats have regained ground as attention turns to a series of mail bombs and a synagogue shooting.”
"TOMORROW". What are the characteristics of the events mentioned?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. In both cases, the attackers were some strange people. The person who sent the parcels was completely uneducated, but for some reason he knew exactly the addresses of those to whom these bombs needed to be sent. In Pittsburgh, an impoverished farmer living in a trailer somehow knew about the existence of the HIAS organization; moreover, he somehow knew that this organization had recently been engaged not in helping Jews, but in refugees from Arab countries, working in Greece, Colombia etc.
And why did it occur to these people to carry out these terrorist attacks not a year, not three months, not the day before the elections, but exactly the time that was needed to bring down Trump’s rating, the rating of the Republican Party and the ratings of specific politicians, the campaign against which began even before these two events occurred?
"TOMORROW". By the way, the reasons for the terrible terrorist attack in Las Vegas in 2017, where dozens were killed and hundreds wounded, are still unclear.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. This shooting is not even remembered now, since we are talking about a terrorist attack that had an economic aspect. It was a conflict within one corporation, where there were Democrats and Republicans, and in fact the economic blow was dealt to the part that was controlled by Republicans close to Bob Dole.
But the shooting had a direct impact on the gubernatorial elections in Nevada, where Las Vegas is located. Steven Sisolak, who was running for governor of Nevada as a Democrat, somehow learned about the need to ride on the anti-gun issue even before the terrorist attack in Las Vegas occurred. And his opponent, Republican Adam Lassot, was supposed to start his campaign on October 1, 2017, and it was on this day that the shooting occurred in Las Vegas. As a result, Nevada became a “blue” state, that is, a Democratic state for the first time in the last twenty-five years.
If we talk about the "echo" of Pittsburgh, then it is worth looking at the state of Colorado. In this state, on November 6, 2018, Jared Polis won the gubernatorial race by a very small margin. His campaigning did not hide either the fact of his nationality or the fact that he was openly gay. This is the first time an obvious pervert has been elected governor. Previously, there were only cases when a person was elected and then came out. But Polis openly declared himself, and the corresponding communities wrote this down as a plus sign.
"TOMORROW". What communities are we talking about?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. For example, Bend-Ark, which is run by the son of George Soros, distributed a letter after the Pittsburgh synagogue attack that said: “Our Jewish community is not the only group you are targeting. You have also knowingly undermined the safety of people of color, Muslims, the LGBT community, and people with disabilities.” It would seem, what does LGBT have to do with it? If you forget about the gubernatorial campaign in Colorado, it has nothing to do with it. But in fact, it turns out that the death of people becomes an opportunity for someone to gain political benefits.
Here's another quote from Tammy Heppes, one of the authors of the Bend-Ark letter: "Trump has blood on his hands after Saturday's mass shooting at a synagogue." Steve Schmidt, a former aide to John McCain, echoes her: “Conservative media figures like Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin have blood on their hands after Saturday’s synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh.” This is a clear “blood libel” against Trump and his supporters, and from their last names it is clear that it does not matter at all what nationality the person is. It is important that he does not fall into the categories listed above in the Bend-Ark letter. He is a different breed.
"TOMORROW". Is this a new type of discrimination that can be called “progressive”?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, and such discrimination has become the trend of the year, coming to public attention.
Another pillar of “progressivism” is environmentalism, but this year the topic of global warming, which is gradually ceasing to concern people, was hardly heard. The Democrats were given instructions in the election campaign to switch to chemicals and contamination of drinking water, which is closer to people in everyday life.
"TOMORROW". Have there been any new trends in 2018?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes. Almost everyone who ran for the Senate, House of Representatives or state legislatures as a Democrat had on their list of organizations supporting that candidate the National Organization for the Reform of Laws (NORML), an abbreviation of which is constructed to sound like the word "normal". That is, every “normal” Democrat should be a supporter of legalizing marijuana.
Of interest is not only the name of this organization, but also the individuals who come to the fore in the press with revelations of the attempts of the Trump “dictatorial regime” to suppress the “popular demand” for the legalization of marijuana. When the office of the US Attorney General sent a letter to various departments with a proposal to conduct a series of information and propaganda events explaining the dangers of drugs, the press presented it as almost a conspiracy against the American people. The BuzzFeed portal was involved in this - the same portal through which the so-called “Steele Dossier” was leaked, accusing Trump of colluding with Russia. On this portal there is a person who specifically deals with LGBT issues - Dominic Holden. He even has a special award as the best LGBT journalist. Well, Holden was one of two correspondents who had the honor of attending a very intimate event in Chicago, where Barack Obama was reporting to Bettilo Salzman, the woman who made him president, about his successes in two areas - global warming and regarding LGBT. And now it turns out that the issue of drugs is being raised by the same figures. It should be noted that Bettilu Salzman is the daughter of Philip Klutznik, the head of B'nai B'rith in the 1960s and 1970s.
"TOMORROW". It turns out that Soros and these organizations are acting in the same direction?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. In this case, their interests coincided, but this does not always happen. For example, the letter from the Bend-Ark organization, led by Soros, mentioned above, mentions Muslims: “You have also deliberately undermined the security of<...>Muslims…” The issue with Muslims turned out to be difficult and even inconvenient. Why? The fact is that during the campaign against the conservative Judge Kavanaugh, representatives of the Black Lives Matter movement, especially its female part, came out with the most massive protests. And it turned out that these extras with progressive slogans are raising something called “multi-sectorality,” which includes support for the Palestinian people. And here the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), founded by B'nai B'rith, had questions, since it was not only about supporting the Palestinian people, but also about supporting a campaign called “Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions” against Israel. And this is already too much for the ADL, because if you accept such a concept of multi-sectorality, it turns out that Jews are excluded from there, thereby falling out of the progressive concept, in which they were an integral part, the same suffering category as African-Americans, transgender people, etc.
"TOMORROW". Doesn’t this “multisectoralism” scare Soros? Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, it turned out to be indifferent to him, and the ADL is not indifferent. The discrepancy between these two approaches emerged immediately after the November election, when one of the founders of the anti-Trump Women's March, Teresa Shook, wrote an open letter demanding that the four leaders of the Women's March resign immediately because they are anti-Semitic. This letter had no effect, but was one of the manifestations of internal contradictions.
Even more interesting is the story of the exposure of Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg. This story involves the New York Times, which positions itself as a left-liberal publication. But it should be noted that it was this newspaper that played a saving role for Republicans in the case of Judge Kavanaugh and in Russiagate, leaking information that Deputy US Attorney General Rod Rosenstein proposed to wiretap Trump, so that these wiretaps could then be presented as evidence of his insanity and removed from office .
So, on November 14, a week after the election, the New York Times published a sensational article about Facebook, which seemed to defend George Soros, but in fact it turned out the other way around. As the authors of the article found out, Facebook had a contract with the right-wing organization "Defenders", consisting of former Bush managers who used Facebook to collect negative information about George Soros. And allegedly this was due to the fact that Soros himself said something bad about Facebook. And Soros was suspected that he was doing this for a reason, but in order to bring down Facebook’s shares.
"TOMORROW". And then buy Facebook cheaper?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes. But the main character of this article is the person who is really the author of Facebook’s success. It's not Zuckerberg himself, it's Sheryl Sandberg, a woman who was former deputy chief of staff at the US Federal Treasury. A person from financial circles, she came to Zuckerberg at the right time when his company was on the verge of bankruptcy. Having become the executive director of Facebook, Sandberg brought him to the fore through her acquaintances. And she proved to all interested players that Facebook is a very good tool that can be used in the Arab Spring campaign, etc. In fact, it is to this woman that Facebook owes its commercial and political successes. During the year of the Arab Spring, Sheryl Sandberg earned twice as much as Zuckerberg himself.
"TOMORROW". And now Sheryl Sandberg is accused of colluding with Republicans?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, that's what the New York Times says. Moreover, it turns out that this lady was defended by some Democrats, despite the fact that they knew what she was doing. And who, it turns out, protected her? Anti-Defamation League! At the same time, the authors of The New York Times do not mention that Sheryl Sandberg in her youth headed the B’nai B’rith Girls youth organization and made a career in this structure. And it would be strange if this organization did not protect her.
As a result, it turned out that the authors of the New York Times pitted their heads against the Anti-Defamation League and Soros. I have no doubt that Richard Haas had a hand in this and did it so cleanly that there is no fault with it. No one will say that this article was written against the Democrats or in favor of Trump. This is an objective investigation, after which additional publications appeared in both the American and French press that, yes, indeed, there are signs that Soros had designs on Facebook, etc.
"TOMORROW". It turns out that in the person of the Anti-Defamation League, Soros has a new enemy in addition to the old ones, among whom the most open and irreconcilable is the head of Hungary, Viktor Orban. Is Soros doing badly?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Things aren't so bad for Soros. This year he managed to achieve some success in Europe. The so-called "Soros Party" won the conference of the European People's Party (EPP), a bloc that unites a number of political parties from different European countries. At this conference, Manfred Weber, the man whom Angela Merkel promoted to the leadership of the EPP, spoke as Soros' lawyer. Based on a report by a member of the European Green Party, the conference angrily condemned Viktor Orbán in a collective letter invoking Article 7, which means that Hungary may be barred from voting in the Council of Europe for violating clauses on the oppression of minorities (by minority is meant Soros) and violation of academic freedoms in universities...
"TOMORROW". By which is meant Budapest Central European Soros University?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes. In response to these accusations, the Hungarians said that everything is fine with minorities and freedoms, but there is a certain commercial group whose interests are for some reason protected by the whole of Europe. Indeed, why does Angela Merkel or the EPP need Soros? The answer is simple: they are used to it. Among the various organizations that Soros finances is such a structure as the European Stability Initiative. In addition to Soros, its sponsor is the Austrian Erste Bank, which has many branches in Eastern Europe. This makes it clear why the head of Austria, Sebastian Kurz, ended up on the same side as Manfred Weber. After all, the European Stability Initiative is engaged in control over Eastern European countries and their finances, and through this, political personnel. This is a very convenient tool with a center in Sarajevo, where other similar “anti-corruption” organizations are located.
Merkel considered the European Stability Initiative an asset of her own. Whether this will work in her favor in the future is a difficult question, because the vote for Manfred Weber ended with the result of 517 votes against 482. So, indeed, everything is not so rosy for Mr. Soros. And one can imagine that he will be expelled not only from Hungary and Turkey, but also from other countries.
And if in the form of a trend we identify the position that the EPP took in opposing Orban, then it is best to quote from a speech by Manfred Weber: “On this continent in Europe, we invented human rights, not Christian rights.” It turns out that human rights are something opposite to Christian rights.
"TOMORROW". The de-Christianization of Europe has been going on for a long time...
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, and I would like to note another result of the year, little noticed: Orban developed a mutual understanding with Turkey on the basis of the ancient history of the Hungarian tribes and their connections with the Turks of that time. And when mainstream publications accuse Angela Merkel of being weak, and at the same time compare her with Orban, it turns out that she and Orban are figures of the same rank. This may seem strange, but if you imagine Erdogan next to Orban, this whole equation will look different.
Merkel and Macron took a very long time to figure out which of them was the boss in Europe, and in the end both suffered great reputational costs.
"TOMORROW". How do all these processes play out in Ukraine? Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Soros has been active in Ukraine from the very beginning. It is rarely mentioned that the concept of Ukraine as a center replacing Moscow appeared on the pages of a magazine published in Lviv with the money of George Soros. They also wrote that in Babi Yar the victims were not Jews, but Ukrainian patriots. And in Kharkov, for example, the Soros Foundation was involved in the re-education and employment of discharged military personnel.
But what happened in Ukraine in 2018 depended no longer on Soros, but on the Potomac Declaration adopted in Washington in July, which presented an action plan to promote religious freedom. As part of this plan, US Special Ambassador for Religious Freedom Sam Brownback came to Kyiv, although it is obvious that the so-called Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate does not fit into the category of oppressed religious minorities. But the Declaration of the Potomac allows claims to be made against a wide variety of countries, since it does not limit what is considered a religion. Religions, as defined in the declaration, may include any sects, for example, Wiccans (witchcraft) or sects that call on adherents to collectively hang themselves or burn themselves.
It is a pity that our Russian propaganda, which, in general, closely follows what is happening in the world, did not immediately raise this issue loudly at the international level. If this question had been raised, maybe Sam Brownback would have thought about whether he should expose himself to this.
"TOMORROW". After all, his approach to religious issues does not correspond to the policies of Donald Trump?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, Brownback's candidacy was lobbied for on behalf of the Christian missionary organization Fellowship, but it remained in the background that Brownback was a member of another organization, which is headed by James Woolsey, director of the CIA from 1993 to 1995, who was behind many of the attacks on Trump.
Brownback raised the topic of supporting the Uyghurs in China...
"TOMORROW". ... and in this coincided with Trump, who is engaged in containing China?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, Brownback took advantage of this conjuncture to push through the Potomac concept, which was completely alien to Trump, and adapt it to specific political tasks, which is exactly what James Woolsey did under Clinton.
Brownback has created an entire international network based on his representative offices in different countries, which should become supervisory authorities in matters of religion and more. For example, Brownback has committed to defending the Rohingya, a minority group that has been massacred in Myanmar. The reason for this is that the Chinese are planning to build an oil pipeline through Myanmar to import Iranian oil from the Indian Ocean.
"TOMORROW". What are the results of the past year for China?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. We have a very close and very important relationship with China. But something not entirely clear is happening with the Chinese sphere of influence, with their project. For example, in December, adjustments were made to the Made in China 2025 plan, which reduce the role of state-owned companies. It turns out that China is adapting to external pressure. This is a retreat.
"TOMORROW". China is strong precisely because private companies there are formally closely affiliated with the state, and this gave China certain advantages.
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Yes, and now they have brought claims against him, accusing him of the state’s influence on pricing, wage formation, and the non-market nature of the economy. At the same time, China itself positions itself as a developing country. And we get a really strange situation when a country is the most powerful economically in so many ways, but on the other hand, it calls itself developing and thus falls into the category of countries that need to be given privileges. This situation is quite old, and from the fact that Trump noticed this problem, it does not at all follow that he initially had some kind of anti-Chinese attitude.
The second problem relates to the concept of the “Chinese model”. This model was once very popular in African and Asian countries. The talk was about reorganizing the economies of these countries in an approach to a certain socialist structure, but not identical to the Soviet model.
Now the very phrase “Chinese model” has ceased to be heard, but China, for example, at the beginning of 2017 at the Davos Forum acted as the standard bearer of globalism. And globalism is a thing that the broad masses around the world perceive differently, and not always positively.
"TOMORROW". What exactly was the weakening influence of the “Chinese model”?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. It is noticeable that in many countries the attitude towards partnership with China has changed. For example, they write that Malaysia disavowed joint development projects with China because it considered that these projects were driving the country into an unfavorable debt situation. At the same time, Malaysia is extremely important for China, but something was overlooked by Chinese leaders.
Another example. In 2006, China almost got its own UN Secretary General. It was Thai Deputy Prime Minister Surakeat Sathientai, supported by China. He had enough votes, almost all African and ASEAN countries were in favor, and the Americans had to stage a coup in Thailand so that this man would lose his position in Thailand and could not become UN Secretary General.
And now the head of Interpol, a Chinese, suddenly turns out to be a traitor. But this person must be checked many times! This is a colossal blow and a very serious indicator of trouble.
Moreover, the issue of the activities of Confucius Institutes in different countries, in particular in the USA, is now on the agenda. Confucius Institutes were the most important means of Chinese soft power, and it seemed that no one would interfere with this.
"TOMORROW". What are the globalist aspirations of China that you mentioned?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. The environmentalist theory of sustainable development is often heard from Chinese officials, but in this one can see a certain element of insincerity. For example, there is a vote on the creation of a wildlife reserve in Antarctica. China votes “no”, like our country, because there is something to develop there. But just last month it was announced that the melting of glaciers was discovered on the largest Chinese plateau, from which many rivers flow, and this is of great universal significance, etc., in the same progressive language that Greenpeace speaks.
"TOMORROW". What does Chinese “environmentalism” have to do with it?
Konstantin CHEREMNYKH. Considerations may be different, but initially, when the alternative energy industry began to develop with government support in Western countries, it required a lot of those minerals that are only available in China, and this determined its interest in “environmentally friendly” energy. But now, when different countries are increasingly coming to understand that “ecologicalism” is not only an anti-industrial, but also anti-human ideology, how will an attempt to export this ideology be regarded? Previously, the British elite exported it, followed by the French elite, and now China is exporting the same thing? What will be the reaction to this?
And if in 2006, as I said, China had international support, now it has not been able to get the required number of votes on the South China Sea resolution. This is a consequence of very serious internal Chinese problems.
Interviewed by Elizaveta Pashkova
Loading...
