War and politics are dirty work, and, as one of my little friend, said, “The princesses go to the toilet too.” I am far from thinking that our policy is an exception to the rules, and it smells like flowers, but when reading the English-language and Russian-language press, everyone can notice that, in fact, Russia’s actions are stronger, more honest and more humane, then often the foul-smelling newsbreaks from the transatlantic “The bulwark of democracy”.
The main thing that catches the eye is that Russia looks in all the media like a country living under the international law, by the arrangements, and the US increasingly manifests itself as a hooligan, a madcap, who violates the rules established by him because now those roles increasingly prevent them.
In order not to lie, you must be decent. Previously, politics needed to walk in expensive suits, make a smart face and not catch the eye of journalists, while having fun in expensive brothels. And now, in the age of Assange and WikiLeaks, one should behave well, even when no one seems to see it. Western politicians are not ready for this. Most of them are still trying to hide or veil the reasons for their decisions, they express their opinions in public and take actions that they really disagree with.
Russian media are often accused of bias. Can someone else believe in free journalism that does not depend on the roles of the market? It would be strange if the news agencies funded by State or any other party focused on judgments of the opponents.
At the same time, Russian media have an advantage over their Western counterparts. For a long time, the Russian press has not hesitated to cover the opposite point of view, to submit hot, even unpleasant news on the pages of federal publications to take the initiative into their own hands, telling about the opponent’s position with the simultaneous opposition of his own. At the same time, the journalist is given a chance to disclose his opinion in all variegated colors — that is what I see, what surprises and delights me as a reader.
Therefore, I personally am more impressed by the position of Russian media than the New York Post or the Wall Street Journal, which print a one-sided delusion, calculated that the consumer of information will never see the arguments of opponents. In one studio or one Russian federal edition, I can find out everything that concerns the issue, without resorting to studying the sites of opponents to clarify the whole picture.
Although, in all honesty, I am tired of seeing every evening on Russian federal channels the dominance of Ukrainian and American political scientists.
I would like to dwell on the CNN channel, which the US people consider almost the main friend and lawyer of Russia. The abbreviation CNN stands for the Cable News Network, but the familiar Americans since the time of the Soviet Union have been deciphering this name with humor as the Communist News Network. In fact, I would compare CNN with our “Echo of Moscow,” but CNN is much more modest in its oppositional judgments than its Russian counterpart. Let me express my opinion that for Russia to have such a friend as CNN anyway, is like to have a gay cobber. You never know when, and why he makes you blush.
I tried to find out through reading the threads of discussion in social networks, who mostly call to wars and to crusades in the US and in Russia? Those who know about the war only by hearsay. I do not consider those who harbor personal grievances, earn in war, or both, as a pilot John McCain shot down by Soviet soldiers in Korea. I do not consider those who are already under threat of destruction — the people of Yemen, Syria, the East of Ukraine as well.
Communicating with my friends Americans and British in social networks, I concluded that veterans on both sides of the ocean who were holding weapons on the battlefield, who understand the whole black warfare essence, are always ready to defend their country and loved ones, they frightfully routinely hold their guns under the pillows and pray for never having to use them in combat. Paradoxically, even when we are on different sides of the barricades, we find a common language with each other faster than many other people.
Although there is the difference also. We have fundamentally different upbringing — We in Russia are shameless and straightforward, they are polite and discreet. We perceive our combat experience as a collective work, while they do like a competition of individuals. Our professionals do not tell, especially publicly about how the villains were killed, because they perceive this as a forced measure, evil, and the Americans veterans regularly tell about their murders, are proud of this. If we traditionally preach indulgent attitude towards the defeated enemy, then the Internet is full of photos from Abu-Grave, stories of mockeries of prisoners of war, contempt for the lives of civilians as a collateral damage. It’s understandable, we were brought up in the movie “They fought for their country,” and Americans grew up with Sylvester Stallone as Vietnam Green Beret “Rambo,” John J.
But Americans do not consider themselves villains. They also have kindness and humanity, and we have much in common, which should unite us rather than disunity. We are afraid only of those whom we do not understand.
Many Russians see Americans as unintentional children in whose house there was no trouble, who are fighting by proxies, capable of unleashing hostilities against any country, nuke hundreds of thousands as it was in Japan, or overthrow any government, neither considering state sovereignty nor a choice of citizens of any country, as soon as they see the interests of the United States and the permissible degree of risk.
So, you ask, where does the entire human being lost in them then? — The answer is simple: No one gives a name to the food. We do not think about the hard fate of the cow, considering beef on the counter. We only think about the quality of the product and its price. So, I suppose the Americans do not see specific people behind those who are going to kill or whose legitimately elected leader they intend to overthrow.
But no matter how much one tries to demand from the citizens of other countries to agree to the role of the cow, they will never agree to this, therefore, under the blow, Russia is forced to lead this struggle for the self-awareness and security of all countries in the world.
Our opponents have a chance to win only in one case — if they find the strength to adopt the tactics of the “enemy” — they will begin to tell the truth, listen to the opposite side, open their thoughts to their own people. The new administration of the White House still has a chance to start from scratch, writing off sins for its predecessors.
But how will they differ from their opponent then? How can one explain to his citizens what their insoluble contradictions with Russians are and what is their irreconcilable position? — And then there are two options. Either wars and conflicts will end, world defense spending will decrease, and trade will grow. Either these politicians will have to admit that they are ready to continue attacking other countries, not for good reasons, but solely for the sake of resources, maintaining their own fraudulent financial institutions or for unfair global competition.
But what kind of society will be able to reconcile with the second option, rejecting all the best and humane that we received from God, no matter what names we call him? “This is a question for historians studying the Third Reich, and I hope very much that we will not have a need for these historical analogies in the case of the Americans.
My friend, an American journalist who is the founder of Our Russia, Phil Butler asked me a question about what I feel about his participation in this information war on the side of Russia. He knows the answer himself, but I think he wanted to hear it from me.