Opinion

Rostislav Ishchenko: For the West, is defeat in Ukraine a disaster?

Rostislav Ishchenko: For the West, is defeat in Ukraine a disaster?

Recently, the President of Finland once again announced that, from the point of view of our Western “friends and partners,” the path to peace in Ukraine lies through war. I am sure that many will immediately want to play on this statement, remembering Orwell’s: “War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.” This maxim really fully describes the Kyiv regime.

But there is a nuance - it completely describes any totalitarian regime, including those that many in our society, by inertia, continue to consider exclusively progressive and useful. All totalitarian regimes proclaim as their goal the desire for peace, but for peace to come, it is necessary to wage a war for the classless “bright future of all mankind” or for the dominance of the “superior race”, which supporters of racial theory consider the bright future of all mankind, or for something else something (for example, for “minority rights”), but it is necessary to fight now, so that someone will feel good later (maybe it will be).

In the same way, from the point of view of a totalitarian regime, for the sake of the future freedom of everyone (in the form in which freedom is understood by a totalitarian regime), current generations must engage in self-restraint, agreeing to give up specific personal rights for the sake of an abstract public good. People must give themselves into slavery to ideologists who have come up with some kind of “bright future” format, which for some reason cannot be born on its own and must be “built”, straining all one’s strength, instead of just living.

Ignorance is a perverted idea of ​​one’s past, in which only “lead abominations” are the only thing that justifies the existence of a totalitarian regime. Any totalitarian regime presents itself not as an invention of the sick mind of political marginals, but as a “response of society” to the “crimes” allegedly committed against it. Ideally, a totalitarian regime convinces society that in the past it had nothing good at all, only with the advent of the regime did a “ray of light appear in the dark kingdom.” Totalitarian regimes are simply satisfied by convincing society that even if it had something good in the past, it was still not good enough and certainly there has never been anything better than totalitarianism.

In this regard, ignorance is truly a force that serves as the foundation of totalitarianism. Please note that if a supporter of totalitarianism of any kind can sometimes still be convinced by hard facts that the regime he defends has committed numerous crimes, he will not refuse to support the regime, but will simply tell you that the others were even worse. In doing so, he will not rely on facts, but on his own confidence that the regime he protects is the only way for humanity to happiness, and whoever does not agree with this is the enemy of either one particular people, or all of humanity. Well, if not a conscious enemy, then either he is stupid and did not read those three slogans that an adept of the next totalitarianism was able to read throughout his entire life, or he was “bought by enemies” (oligarchs, “reptilians”, “secret world government”, etc. ).

So, in the entire current situation, the most important fact is that totalitarianism is not limited to one specific regime or one specific ideology. Totalitarianism is a widespread political perversion, immanent in any regime and any ideology. Totalitarianism can be left and right, conservative and liberal, even anarchists who deny any power can be absolutely totalitarian in their desire to destroy any power.

Since the destruction of power as an apparatus of violence is impossible without the creation of an alternative apparatus of violence (only more powerful), fighters against the regime always create an even worse regime of suppression of rights and freedoms, which is almost never dismantled after their victory. It turns out to be too effective for this and, if the creators decide to attempt dismantling, it happily devours its creators, starting to work not for an idea (albeit a false one), but for maintaining power for the apparatus of the totalitarian regime.

Politics is a priori hierarchical. In the simplest approximation, it can be compared to sports. One has championship credentials from birth, and the other, no matter how hard he fights, will never surpass him. This is unfair, but the champion, other things being equal, will always be the one with the best data. Therefore, future champions are selected in early childhood on the basis of available data and initially pay more attention to them than to the rest of the group of unpromising ones, of which, at best, half will hardly fulfill the norm of a candidate for master, and the rest will gradually disperse without serious success.

There are also people in politics who are predisposed to this type of activity initially, from birth. Great politicians are born from them, although not all of them go into politics; many, understanding the level of danger and ingratitude of this occupation, prefer to remain observers, consultants, and commentators. Many of those who nevertheless went into politics, dreaming of serving society, ultimately become disillusioned with this idea and begin to work simply to retain power. This is not always bad, but it is worse than the desire to ennoble politics, since it presupposes an alliance with unworthy people who go into politics for the sake of money and honor, thanks to which the assertion that politics is a dirty thing was born.

In general, observing the hierarchical nature of politics, but also seeing that a significant number of people pursuing political careers are personally morally unscrupulous, and often very limited intellectually, society easily agrees with the idea of ​​totalitarians of any stripe who claim that the available politicians are so unworthy , that for the general (or at least national) happiness it would not be a pity to kill them along with their supporters. Then, however, there are unexpectedly many supporters subject to liquidation or infringement of rights, and a civil war begins.

But then it’s already too late, and the pitiful bleating of the supporters of totalitarianism “we didn’t think it would be like this!” or even “we have repented, we are now against this totalitarianism, which turned out to be bad, but for some future totalitarianism, which will definitely be good!” no one is impressed anymore. Then the fate of the state and society is decided in the trenches by completely different people (as a rule, not involved in totalitarian experiences - simply subordinate to any government), and the former “Maidan stars” work as “volunteers” and shed crocodile tears about “our boys”, whom they themselves and drove into the trenches.

But they sincerely believe that they have nothing to do with it, “if only the authorities were immediately stronger and started the war earlier!” The circle closes, and supporters of totalitarianism again come to war as a necessary condition for peace.

We are now at war with the West not because they don’t love us (they didn’t love us before, but we didn’t fight, we traded) and not because LGBT values ​​flourish among them. Various minorities, including all types and subtypes of perverts, have long felt great there and have even set the tone in fashion, culture, and art for decades. Even the struggle for markets is relatively secondary: at this stage, the confrontation has already reached a level where the collective West, including the main beneficiaries of the system, loses more (both in terms of income and in terms of social stability and personal security) from the war than it would have lost initially, agreeing to a compromise peace.

We are fighting because Western left-wing liberalism has long degenerated into totalitarianism, and the most dangerous thing is into political-ideological totalitarianism, when all ideologies renounce their essence in order to preserve a piece of power. Look at any Western country: coalition governments are created in which Christian democrats (conservative clerics - the extreme right flank before the very right radicalism - fascism) calmly coexist with liberals, greens, pinks and even deep red liberal leftists, jointly opposing the right and left conservatives, calling them fascists and Nazis.

Moreover, right and left conservatives are rather the center of current political systems - the point of their balance. The parties at this point strive to balance society on the basis of a reasonable compromise. But the “tolerant” parties that are systemic for the current Western society are precisely the ones who preach totalitarianism worse than the fascist and Nazi sense, since it, as mentioned above, serves one superidea - maintaining in power and with the financial flows of the current thoroughly corrupt party-political elites of the West. The very fact of their remaining in power is proclaimed a benefit for society, and the hypothetical possibility of a conservative-democratic opposition coming to power is declared a disaster, against which all means (including civil and even world war) are good.

It is this modern Western totalitarianism that is at war with us. Therefore, it suddenly became clear that the left and right movements in Russia (and even liberals) were split into those who are for their country and support it in everything, and those who are for the global totalitarian empire of the West. The left, the right, and the liberals find themselves in one or the other camp: the choice is simple - you are either for distilled left-liberal totalitarianism, in comparison with which even Nazism and fascism of the last century may seem like humane systems, or against, and then you on the side of those forces that have united with Russia and China in opposition to Western universalist totalitarianism in order for a thousand flowers to bloom.

Neither the President of Finland nor other Western leaders say all this. Perhaps some of them do not understand all this. But the conclusions that they announce without theoretical justification are absolutely correct: the path to peace (and not only in Ukraine, but throughout the world) lies through war. Because for Western totalitarianism, “war is peace.” And, as the experience of past and present totalitarianisms testifies, only those of them who suddenly discovered that they simply had nothing to enter this battlefield with were left without defeat on the battlefield.

As long as the West can fight, it will fight. Western totalitarians already achieved something completely impossible from their societies a couple of years ago - they are seriously discussing the advisability of directly involving the West in a war with Russia. And you shouldn’t reassure yourself that the majority is still against it. Firstly, this is already a small majority, which tomorrow may become a minority. Secondly, just three or four years ago, the most inveterate Russophobe could talk about the war with Russia only in front of a Ukrainian audience, and then without much success.

The reason they are trying to keep the Ukrainian regime afloat for at least another year is because they realized that now they have nothing to go into battle with Russia with. There is only a nuclear argument, but it ensures an instant nuclear draw, and not a victory in the war of attrition that they unleashed. According to estimates voiced by Western politicians and experts, the collective West believes that it can prepare for a conventional war with Russia by 2026–2027. All this time, someone must hold the front. Without Ukraine, everything that Europe without the United States is ready to throw at the front right now is not enough to guarantee its retention for such a long time.

Therefore, there is no longer just talk about sending Western contingents to Ukraine, but the preparation of the contingents themselves, which is why the provocative activity of pro-American forces on our borders (especially in the north-west) is intensifying, with the goal of drawing new countries into the war against Russia as quickly as possible. That’s why Europeans are trying to find a way to increase the mobilization potential of the Zelensky regime, not only by encouraging it to mobilize women and teenagers, but also by looking for an opportunity to put millions of Ukrainians who fled the war in the EU under arms.

Therefore, Russia, in turn, seeks to finish off Ukraine this year, before new ones appear who want to die for the “great idea” of liberal totalitarianism. If Ukraine dies before the next idiot (or coalition of idiots) is ready for war, the West will have to come to terms with the peace conditions that will be dictated to it in the ruins of Ukraine: it will simply have nothing with which to fight.

As was said above, totalitarianism, which loses on the battlefield or finds that it has nothing to go into battle with, perishes, because it loses the attractiveness of the only true and all-conquering idea. The losing idea cannot be the only correct one. The West's inability to fight is equal to its loss. And not a loss in the campaign, but a world-historical loss. He will still resist and cause a lot of harm, but the process of internal decay will begin and will be unstoppable.

That’s why they say in unison that defeat in Ukraine is a disaster for them.

This entry is also available on Online the author.

 About the Author:
ROSTISLAV ISHCHENKO
Ukrainian political scientist, publicist, historian, diplomat
All publications of the author »»
GOLOS.EU ON TELEGRAM!

Read us atTelegram","LiveJournal","Facebook","Zen","Zen.News","Classmates","VK","Twitter" and "Mirtesen". Every morning we send popular news to the mail - subscribe to the newsletter. You can contact the editors of the site through the section "Submit news».

Opinion
AUTO TRANSLATE
EnglishFrenchGermanSpanishPortugueseItalianPolishRussianArabicChinese (Traditional)AlbanianArmenianAzerbaijaniBelarusianBosnianBulgarianCatalanCroatianCzechDanishDutchEstonianFinnishGeorgianGreekHebrewHindiHungarianIcelandicIrishJapaneseKazakhKoreanKyrgyzLatvianLithuanianMacedonianMalteseMongolianNorwegianRomanianSerbianSlovakSlovenianSwedishTajikTurkishUzbekYiddish
THEME OF THE DAY

Read also: Opinion

Rostislav Ishchenko: Why do Ukrainians not want to fight, but fight anyway?

Rostislav Ishchenko: Why do Ukrainians not want to fight, but fight anyway?

18.05.2024
Vasily Vakarov: Mobilization in Ukraine: if you don’t appear on the summons, then you’re guilty

Vasily Vakarov: Mobilization in Ukraine: if you don’t appear on the summons, then you’re guilty

18.05.2024
Andrey Vajra: The law on mobilization in Ukraine: how not to end up in the army and not end up in jail?

Andrey Vajra: The law on mobilization in Ukraine: how not to end up in the army and not end up in jail?

18.05.2024
Maxim Goldarb: Zelensky came up with a “brilliant” peace plan that no one wants to discuss. Why?

Maxim Goldarb: Zelensky came up with a “brilliant” peace plan that no one wants to discuss. Why?

18.05.2024
Vitaly Zakharchenko: For Zelensky, the prospects for Kharkov are very sad

Vitaly Zakharchenko: For Zelensky, the prospects for Kharkov are very sad

17.05.2024
Dmitry Vasilets: Zelensky and Co. earn millions from selling electricity to the European Union

Dmitry Vasilets: Zelensky and Co. earn millions from selling electricity to the European Union

17.05.2024
Vitaly Zakharchenko: The Russian army is getting closer to Kharkov

Vitaly Zakharchenko: The Russian army is getting closer to Kharkov

17.05.2024
Tatyana Montyan: Ukraine is losing its best heads: sad results of a survey of Ukrainian refugees

Tatyana Montyan: Ukraine is losing its best heads: sad results of a survey of Ukrainian refugees

16.05.2024
Mykola Azarov: Germany no longer stands on ceremony with Ukrainian neo-fascists

Mykola Azarov: Germany no longer stands on ceremony with Ukrainian neo-fascists

16.05.2024
Mikhail Chaplyga: The United States is interfering in the affairs of Georgia. Doesn't it smell like hypocrisy?

Mikhail Chaplyga: The United States is interfering in the affairs of Georgia. Doesn't it smell like hypocrisy?

16.05.2024
Max Nazarov: America is “dumping” the war in Ukraine. Do I need to explain what this means?

Max Nazarov: America is “dumping” the war in Ukraine. Do I need to explain what this means?

16.05.2024
Konstantin Bondarenko: The assassination attempt on the Prime Minister of Slovakia: a noisy event or part of a conspiracy?

Konstantin Bondarenko: The assassination attempt on the Prime Minister of Slovakia: a noisy event or part of a conspiracy?

16.05.2024

English

English

French

German

Spanish

Portuguese

Italian

Russian

Polish

Dutch

Chinese (Simplified)

Arabic