Ukraine War Diaries 1341: Why Do Ukraine and Russia Choose War. Arestovich, Sobolev

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Alexey, I'm glad to see you, first of all, because
the news are interesting. We will discuss Trump and the
cancelation of negotiations, but I suggest we start from synchronizing
on our positions. And I'm a little tired of all
the talk and the media that I Stovitch has changed

(00:22):
again changed his views. And it took me quite a
bit to scroll through your conversations recently, especially with a Subjark,
and I noticed a few things that I want to
dive in, and I suggest let's dig deeper to try
to understand well. First of all, I think there are
two most common types of interview with Alexei Stovich. One

(00:43):
of them is very favorful, very favoring discussions where people
do not argue and let you speak or agree with
everything you say. The other type of interviews is where
people try to pun you and try to suggest some
thing that you'll have to dispel. Actually had my own
entry with senior sub Check, and I understand that she

(01:06):
has rather high professional skills. But whoever, I understand that
you did not quite like the tone of this conversation. Sure,
we were recording it for about seven hours, but she
continued to kick in the same target, and most questions
were starting with you faulted there, and you changed your
opinion here, and you know, a few years down the road,

(01:28):
people probably won't even remember you. However, it gathered millions
of views. Even a spokesperson for Vladimir Putin reacted to that.
But I do want to ask you one question, and
it's important for me to ask it. There was one
scene there where you discussed the shoes. How many pairs
you have? Senior was asking Alex say about the number

(01:52):
of shoes he has and how many and hell often
does he choose? So this was a set right, This
was a specially recorded piece of conversation that she asked
to record in this fashion. Why did you agree, Listen?
I do have some love to theatrical production. I have

(02:13):
over a dozen of years and theatrical production and Black
Square Troupe, and I took a liking to such a suggestion.
So how did she ask about it? Well, she did
tell me that she will ask you a question about
shoes and you understand what implies, and she suggested, let's

(02:33):
play around that. So we did. I think this miniature
for changing shoes and linking to changing opinions I think
you understand that she used it to blame you, blame
your character for something. Oh sure, yeah, I understand that perfectly.
But for me it was a small ray of light

(02:54):
during these seven hours that was at least something creative.
Did you tell her that you object to the format
a bit? Yeah? Actually on the twentieth, on the fortieth
minute of that, I told her that listen, I can
take a certain position in this interview and you would
be the one looking like a fool in this interview.
It's quite easy to do, actually, But instead I'm placing

(03:17):
myself in a vulnerable position where you will continue talking
about how idiotic I am. But I'm still drawing, using
logic to try to bring attention to the important points
that I want to deliver. And I knew that people
will still be able to listen through the fluff around
the interview to make sure that there are ways to

(03:39):
create a situation where the war stops and there are
no more wars. And I was ready to pay with
whatever she needed me to pay for that with to
send this message. Oh yeah, that message actually was heard.
It was discussed on different levels in Russia as well.
How the border should be affixed what should be the
next steps. So Alexey, what methods of fight do you

(04:03):
think will work for this war? And I want to
go deeper into that, but before we dive, I want
to ask another question. What is most important that you
did not understand back in twenty three, twenty four Even
we can take probably about that for a longer time
if you have. But sure, the main point that I

(04:24):
recognized was understanding the real position of the West. It
is different. Its relation to Russian and Ukraine are different.
Second is that West is not homogeneous to complete contemplating
even attacking their opponents with nicks from That's what I
heard from one side of Americans and Russians and Ukrainians

(04:45):
think that the degree of hatred between them is way
worse than degree of hatred between Arabs and Jews. But
they have not heard that discussion of not liking or
hatred between the left and the right, extreme left and
extreme right states, and there is some significant fundamental conflict
between two sides in the United States. That actually shook

(05:07):
me to my depth, and I started to understand a
few things. Then Russia is a third realization is that
Russia is not a healthpaonn there are a lot of
people who are following very logical stream of thought. And
having talked with a lot of different politicians, not only
people of influence, not only from the West, but also

(05:28):
from the East, I would say a lot of them
are following the rational politics, but very few are so
logical and rational as the politicians in Russia. And I've
been following politics for over twenty years, right, of course,
I'm following Russian politics. Kremlin and modern Russia is very
strong in their school how they follow things. Do you

(05:49):
think it's a school or psychotype. Yeah, and twenty plus
years in power, of course that place into effect, and
the West fails to understand Russian rationality. The West is
rational in its own way. It's analytics, it's the balance
of power, it's all these calculatable things. But when Moscow

(06:12):
poses a June ultimatum of twenty twenty four and be
hell high water, we continue following with that. The West
does not understand that. Even the smartest of them fail
to understand why, and only traditionalists and very religious people
in the West can understand such a stance. Wait Alexei.
So it comes that it will be very difficult to

(06:36):
prove to Russia mathematically that it's not good for them
to continue with this work because apparently mathematics is not
a reason for them. We can spend over several trillion
of dollars on his efforts for the last ten years
and this direction, and of course from mathematics calculus, this
was very unprofitable. This was very questionable decision. But yeah,

(07:00):
there's a difference on the West. They do consider that
mathematics will prevail in Russia. There are people who think
that mathematics will prevail. They also based their opinions on
the analytics. But the West does not understand Russia to
such a degree like Ukraine misunderstands Ukraine. They have all
the data about Russia, but they fail to understand the

(07:20):
spirit that stands behind it. Same thing between Russia understanding Ukraine.
So you've been talking to all of these political figures
around the world, Alexei. Do they not get it? Still? Yeah,
they try to understand that, Nikolay, But their attitude is
similar to the one to gil or Hamas. There is
a very small group of specialists who dive in and

(07:41):
who understand the core nature of the conflict and attitudes
of the sites. But unfortunately they're not the ones making decisions,
the ones up above them. Even the most the strongest
of the means, they somehow fail to understand that some
of there is another logic that doesn't care about the
quantity of vessels and tanks and weapons. It is the

(08:04):
factor of morale. And I think Napoleon who told the
West that morale can maximize your armament by three. There
was Hitler who said you can actually shake civilization or
choose that path of destruction to change the world. Japanese
tried to show it to Americans in the Second World War.

(08:25):
The difference Stalin also was a good example. However, while
having their same left and left centric ideas that carry
sometimes a religious character for the left in America, they're
still missing this understanding Alexi. You know, I don't want
to call it a sentencing to the West, but it

(08:46):
does highlight that they do not understand or do not
have enough attention to even understand their inner problems. And
for example, our Democrats and the inner Russian arena. Like
Catherine Schulman, she says, the government doesn't have a specific goal,
and this is about that. This is exactly about that.

(09:07):
One of the well known politologists in Russia saying that
government shouldn't actually have any specific goal, they should just
be form the function, right, Nikolai and many people they
are slaves of concept of this concept or any other one,
and they can't even step outside of it. And here
we can remember Carl Jung who said that fanaticism is

(09:29):
a suppressed questioning. So the world is full of people
in politics for trying to suppress the questions that they
actually have. They try to suppress that narrow minded worldview
and they want to have it as a platform, but
it ends up being a foilt in head on their head. Okay,
let's talk about the enemies and concepts. I do like

(09:49):
where our conversation is going here. I like your statement
that the main factor, the main quality for the warrior
is not just to wage the war, but to or
to fight, but to understand who is the real an me.
And in your interviews, very often we hear that in
Ukraine there is an insurgency army dug out is an option.
There is a sorosite group, a very leftist left, Western

(10:13):
sponsored group, and there is also another group which you
consider to be a big problem in Russia, so called
Z supporters. Yeah, Putain's power is actually propped into the
direction of war by these Zeters, who blatantly and bluntly
support whatever war action can be taken. They just want

(10:36):
to fight, Alexy. I want to say that some people
who will be watching us perhaps are not watching your channel,
And I want to make a note here that we
did conduct a special sociological review and questioning people in
Saint Petersburg and Russia. We're trying to understand, asking questions
of people who are leftists, who are liberals, who are

(10:58):
left liberals, left leaning, and many people what we discovered
do not even understand the difference or what these groups are.
So why are you saying that that leftist project of
neoglobalists is our mutual enemy. Well, the key problem of
the globalist is that they don't want any diversity, not

(11:20):
real diversity. Their main goal is to make sure that
everybody is a left liberal, left leaning, and if you're
not leftist, then you're a Nazi of some shape different concentration,
like Nazi light or Nazi ultra right. But you're still
not a human if you do not understand or not

(11:41):
accept their leftist ideas. This is Soviet times comes am
all in pure form just taking root. In the West,
they're talking about social equality, meaning that you should not
cause any emotional harm to a potential Somalian immigrant Germany,
and if you make them feel not well, you should

(12:02):
be put in jail, and immigrants should feel fine. Today,
still the killer of Ian Zerutsky in the United States,
he's still not in prison. General Prosecutor published today a
tweet that he will that she will make sure that
he's in custody and be done with but for now

(12:24):
he is free. So the same norm, the same societal
norm that is being accused that we lived for centuries
are called retrograde norms and all the new equality so
to say norms are or the fringe ideas they become norm.

(12:48):
Are they trying to make it norm. That's the problem
with globalists. They essentially declare our custom way of life,
and there's nothing more holy than the custom way of life. Family,
these values and religious values. They put it down and
they announced that LGBTQ agenda is to be on a pedestal,

(13:10):
and everything that questions is it needs to be removed.
One of the other dumbast ideas is to regulate the
market in favor of equality and what is that equality?
Only they understand or they can judge what it is right.
That's the problem with all the leftists, that's always the case.

(13:30):
And everything on the right is in their view, is horrible.
And another thing that they declare is you have to
be free but not soulless. And if you're trying to
be mathematically to bring logical ideas, you need to be suppressed.
So another picture for you, a girl with purple hair

(13:53):
comes to a logger somewhere in Oregon and is telling
him that, you know, man, you're cutting the tree and
you're making a crime against humanity and nature. He puts
the ax down and says, girl, please leave that place.
I have job and I need to work and I
have to feed my family. And she would call on
the police to accuse him of emotional harassment. And in

(14:16):
her worldview or that globalist already propagated by the group,
is that he needs to be put under control to
make sure not to propagate or not to even talk
about these ideas. So they misbehave, they attack you, and
then they run to government for help. It's very difficult
to find more obnoxious people than they are. And here's

(14:37):
a small comedist get on the topic here the climate
activists running to the oil terminal, who are gluing themselves
to the will others are blocking the roads and angering
the drivers. According to their words, they're attacking and trying
to stop the oil trade affected in some fashion, and
that skid talks about Yeah, okay, I get it, the oil,

(14:58):
but we have the sunflow or terminal here, so what
the heck they're doing. Another problem of the system, alex
I think is that this system, the globalist system, is
very expensive and they're only funded by one thing. They're
only funded by the dictatorship of the Center. All other
countries are free only in the framework of freedom that

(15:20):
they instill in everybody. Right, if that freedom is given
to them, that's the degree of freedom. That intent to
suppress everything that counters the freedom as they see it
and justice as they see it. That actually is a
good descriptor of that leftist idea. All right, Alexai, we
are aware of this position, we know it. You're calling

(15:42):
yourself center, right, And I was quite surprised recently in
stream with Uli Latinina, where you mentioned that the level
of psychiatric illnesses elements in the countries of the West
is growing year to year, and you're indicating that part
of this problem is that they are very savvy or

(16:03):
becoming very well trained in diagnosing everybody in the most
minute thing. Do you really think it's all about diagnosis
and not about people depressing more in the liberal societies,
especially the ones who jump on this liberal bandwagon and
losing the true north. All two things come to play here, Nikolay.
First of all, that symbolical ideas that we're driving people

(16:26):
for ages are being lost in this group. And then
also the over development of that psychotherapy branch. You can
break a leg trying to figure out where is the
real diagnosis and real issue and where the girl is
upset about some religion in India makes her take the
shoes off before entering the shrine. Right, They're lacking the

(16:48):
full term discussion. Yeah, And in discussion with eul Alatina,
we did not have much time to dedicate to this topic.
I would only say Nicolai that during the last year
and a half, very successful discussion. The most successful discussions
I have are in the interviews with you. Oh yeah,
you did mention sometimes with Shellless that he's the one

(17:11):
who's mostly arguing with you, Right, but it's a different position.
Arguing is one thing. That's when the journalist is pressing
with his idea, it may cause the argument. But I
do not see that in our conversations, we actually dive
and try to understand each other. So you did mention
that the people from the West, I'll like say, are

(17:33):
the ones who can afford themselves these drugs and digging
into these issues. I would say that it's probably not
too fun of a fun to have, and who would
voluntarily start digging and picking their mind? And how do
you also imply that we all will be jealous of
the West, who is going to affect their way of

(17:58):
life because of another syndrome, fake syndrome sucked out of
some psychiatrist thumb or other ways. So you're saying that
the West has a lot of money, they can give
free food, they can give free transport and try to
help somebody who is saying that he's feeling horrible and

(18:18):
he is lost. But all the greatness of the civilization,
I think you understand that all the greatness is based
on the achievements of the epoch of Christianity, and what's
happening now is not a fun experiment in this story,
and there's a clip from his intrigue with Latina that
he appreciates leftists from the West more than the incapable

(18:41):
supporters of Zaynsky who did not want to talk to anybody.
I guess, nicol I have to explain that clip. That
was an irony. There is I try to play on
the irony on the excess of certain layers in the
Ukrainian society. All right, I understand you did mention that

(19:02):
at some point you were tired with Dugan and his
ideas and these ideas propagating in Russia. Yeah. I have
thought about that long and hard, Nikolai. What is wrong
in Alexander Dugan? A lot of things are okay, but
one thing is horrible. Wait a second, let's try to

(19:23):
understand who is closer to you in October of twenty
five eleftist liberals or the extreme right like the Duggan
neither one, nor one nor the other. I actually like centrists,
somewhat right cleaning centrists. I do like the ideas of freedom,
but neither on the left nor on the right. They
are well developed, They're not smart to the current society.

(19:45):
On the right side, these ideas are presented by libertarians
when there's very little bit of government. On the left,
it's for everything good against all the bad and using
the might of government to instill that. So that's I
would agree with you on that. But Senia Subchak was
pushing in here interview that you're probably closer to Dugan
than to the leftist liberals. But I think that all

(20:08):
this leftist illusions that we can get rid of the
core ideas of humanity and religion with it, this is idiotic, Okay,
Nikolay Dugan is a philosopher. He's trying to understand very
deep thoughts and think them through, but he is very
weak in publishing his ideas. You can read his social

(20:30):
media and he can have two very contradicting ideas in
the next tweets next to each other. But what concerns
me with his presentation on this is that we are
all light and everything against us is darkness. What closer
to me is that here I have some light and
you can take it. I'm okay to share it with you.
So where is he picking up on this ideas about

(20:54):
the last shining city on the hill and the darkness,
evil of evil attacking it and allSome, So I understand
this is a mythology that he grew up in. And
there is a group in Russia, these z leaning pro
put and pro war group that actually is picking up
on Dugin's idea and puts it on the banners. But
do they understand where it leads? Oh sure, Alexi. Yeah,

(21:16):
and the result of this would be nuclear allowed, nuclear
war and the end of humanity. But yeah, to juxtapose them,
Dugan is saying that sin should not be tolerated. While
we do have, for example, the guys on the left
we probably should compare, not even our sul of Underlin
with Dugin, but some transhumanists like Klaus Schwab and Nick

(21:39):
Land who suggest, and that's their current idiocy on the
left liberal idea that some people want to liberate the
core of Earth from Earth. So that's another orbit of
schizophrenia developing there. I think this is a proper juxtaposition
to Dougin's ideas well, Nikolin, that's what du Guiness suggesting.

(22:01):
He's saying, our diplomats, why are they wearing the costumes,
the business costumes. We should develop our fashion to be
in line with the proper Russian costume of the seventeenth century.
So how do you read that as a great philosopher
who doesn't want to differentiate form from content, or he's

(22:21):
very primitive and for him the shape equals the content.
Why instead, for example, my idea, should we not be
like Japanese, wear the appropriate modern attire business suits, and
just stick with our ideas from the whatever ideas and
times we have in the country. Right, I don't know,

(22:45):
Let's say if I want to argue about that, because
in Japan their spirit is facing a big demographic problem.
That's why the right is winning there now because they
have significant issues with traditionalism. Okay, so we can pick
Hindu Indians for example, right, and they can wear the
Western attire, but they can remain absolutely India like on

(23:08):
the inside. Right, I agree with you on this, Alexei.
Russia is also in a state of some rcho stand
when we did since Peter the Great try to join Europe.
But we still have the core of Russia in our mythology,
in our spirituality, in our everything. Right Nically, here I

(23:31):
agree with him on most of things. That the setup
of the Western democracy always implies to have a pretty
picture and the real reality hidden behind it. I'm Dugan
is saying that the Orthodox Christians cannot do that. You
need to tear down the veneer, and you need to

(23:52):
show what is pretty what is ugly? Okay, So I
have a question in relation to that, if I get
dressed as a seventeen century Slavic somebody, would it help
me to figure out or to push my ideas? Today
I can work and operate in a modern business that
I are just fine. Why are they putting on a

(24:13):
pedestal the need to be even visually dressed or representing
yourself as those from back in the years. Well, here's
the difference. I think Alex say that in India they
have their own philosophy that it has never changed, that's
still there. And in Russia we have Chadayev, Perdaeovslavyov, Dostayevsky

(24:37):
and all of these ideas that are generally in the
tradition of the Western modern modernity and Western philosophy, and
we don't really have anything deeper underlying that that you
can rewind to. Well, here's the problem. I think, Nikolai
that Russian literature is Russian philosophy. This is the counterpart.

(24:59):
This is how Russian philosophy what it went into during
the twentieth century. And this is why people in Ukraine,
some of the authorities are fighting with Bulgakov and Pushkin
because they cannot explain how Bulgakov and Pushkin and their
literary works, what relation they have to modern politics. But
the nature of that thing is that that philosophy is

(25:23):
hidden in their books. It's the deeper lay underlayer that
is telling. And Dugen is trying to be a normal
Russian philosopher, probably one of the few in the recent years,
but for some reason he then puts that hat attire
of three centuries back. And he sometimes reminds me of
myself when you bring some weird idea or slap something

(25:44):
on the environment or background around you, and during the
interview over your close and then you have to explain that.
All right, Alex, say on this point, let's make it
pivot and go into the ideas of what options are
for people in Ukraine and Russia. And they are now
essentially between two lights, between the Ukrainian insurgency Army Dugout

(26:08):
and Russian Vitniki ors those dead patriots who want to
destroy and kill everybody and everything who stands on the
path of Holy Mother Russia, and I'll quote you here
that you think that Russia is following the path of
that Ze Barracks. Yeah, I think Russia is going in
the direction of Chinese modernization and Russian Vitnik Barrack. Is

(26:29):
that really so? Yeah? Okay, Nikolay. You'd want to make
a perfect speech during an interview, but it's difficult, of course,
right we're talking live on air. Depends upon the interview
or two. Sometimes like thank you right now, I can
formulate the thought more precisely. I would say that the

(26:52):
threat of Russia going into developing in the direction of
that z Barrack is significant and it needs to be prevented.
Putin starts to understand that, it starts to present itself
as a danger to him in the inner politics of Russia. Yeah,
this is absolutely so. I agree with it, Alexey. And

(27:15):
after that phrase that you mentioned on the nineteenth of September,
I did feel myself rather awkwardly being in that barrack. Well, yeah, no,
you're not full in a berk not the whole country,
isn't it. There is a significant force in the country
that is pushing the country towards that, and it's difficult
for putin to try to be so irreconcilable with the
foreign threats, but still not to fall too deep into

(27:37):
that land of the z patriots that barracks. So I
have seen his press conference recently, and it's interesting to
see how he maneuvers between that. He on occasion did
mention things like he had different opportunities to mention, if
there's no Russia, then why do we need such a
world right? And these days he comes up and his surroundings,

(28:01):
Piscov is speaking about his thoughts. Essentially, who is saying that, okay,
let's see what happens in six months. He's saying this
is not a friendly act about the missiles, for example,
that the United States is going to present to Ukraine
and that Russia is getting an answer to properly respond

(28:23):
to this suggestion. And I was surprised. I thought Russia
will be more radical when they heard about the missiles
that Ukraine may be getting from the United States. But
they're holding themselves. So that was a surprise, and I
surprise for me Alexey. I was also concerned a lot
of people are grasping at these statements. You can imagine
how many millions of Russians are following you, even mity

(28:45):
Piskoff is now reacting to your interviews. When in one
stream I want to say that the whole Russia is
a barrack that doesn't leave anything in its path after
it's rolled through it. It's like a steamroller. In the
other stream, you call it different. Right, You need to

(29:05):
separate z force pushing and propping up Putin's government from
Putin's government itself. All right, Nicholai, this is a dilemma
that I face here. I am using word to present situation,
present options. Right As a publicist, sometimes my love for
theatric for theater and the bright word sometimes serves me

(29:30):
in a wrong way. You can call it the dug
in disease. But sometimes for a good phrase, I may
forfeit some of the meaning or present maybe a more ultimate,
more extreme view. However, those who watch me diligently, they
can see that I will level up this rhetoric in

(29:50):
the next stream, right right, I can agree with that,
But if somebody is watching just that stream from the
nineteenth of September or October, I actually say that whenever
you said that the barrack is more dangerous, they have
more resources, sidzim penis toying with them, and I was thinking, okay, well,
then sids in penis toying with the Zee barracks. And

(30:14):
now you're saying that this is not the whole Russia, right,
there is a balance here. Well, of course this is
not the whole Russia. So then why are you declaring
that the whole country is that whit Nick Barracks. Well,
it's a delicate point here, Nikolay. I need to make
a decision answering whether I'm answering as a politician. Then

(30:38):
we'll have one interview every four months with some basic
outline of the course that I would go with. Do
I want to go this route? Big question? However, if
I'm talking as a publicist, as a journalist, as the
opinion maker, as the talking head, I cannot be talking
about that in a political facion. I need to present

(31:03):
more lively ideas. I need to be more colorful. I
need to be presenting it to the audience in a
different way than political platform. And that's a decision that
I have to make when I'm giving interviews. So I'm
mostly leaning towards the publicist awards the journalist's position, and
then you're basically picking up on those who are interviewing you.

(31:25):
I'm glad Alexei that we did talk to you about that,
because that did sound sharp for my audience in Russia
and myself too when I was upset. Well, I'm glad
Nikolai that you had enough got to approach me with
this question and to ask this question, because in the
modern world there are a lot of snowflakes who are
afraid to use the words through the mouth, so to say, So, Alexi,

(31:48):
what brought you to this idea of that Vatne barrack
and that z Patriot construct. You did not bring it
too much earlier. But in the context of the recent
interview that Alva gave Russian big singer big star of
the second half of twentieth century. So was it because

(32:10):
or was it influenced by her interview and maybe influenced
by some of the statements of the congressman in Russia. Well, no,
not the comments, because the comments usually made by one
and a half percent of medmen under these interviews. It
was more intuitive feeling that is related to a complete
failure of anchorage. Course with leaving or retiring by Admitia

(32:35):
Kossak and an interview by Alkachova that brought the width
of the fanaticism, of irreconcilable fanaticism in Russia. Can this
course be true? Absolutely? Put in his showing that that
they can be the course. He's not the most leaning
this way, but he can present the world that this

(32:57):
can happen. And I am very sensitive these things. I
see that as a threat. I know it's permeating the
air in Russian politics. The form itself, I blundered, right.
I made a statement that I clarified later after I
exhaled and I thought, okay, what is exactly happening in Russia.

(33:18):
I reformulated that and said that irreconcilable stance of modern
Russian politics, and it is irreconcilable, otherwise there would be
no sanctions. It legitimizes the irreconcilable layers in Russia, the
fanatics in Russia. So roughly speaking, there are Russians who
are saying that unfortunately, situation is so that we need

(33:39):
to proceed with this operation in Ukraine un till the end.
These people are taken hostages by the enemy regime of Zilanscaan,
we need to continue to the end. So this is
the official statement, by the way that Britain is making
that it is a tragedy of Russian and Ukrainian people,
that Ukrainian people are being held hostage by small group.

(34:01):
And then there is a more extreme deviation from this
is that we need to destroy Ukraine, we need to
destroy the traders in Ukraine, and we need to destroy NATO.
And I was warning against this trend. This is dangerous
first of all in Russia for Russians, and there is
a lot of such rhetoric. It's dangerously permeating everything in Russia.

(34:22):
I don't like say you think that it's growing, that
it's too much of it in Russia. I read the
commentary under a Pugatchova interview. She's still on the list
of foreign agents and she is not friendly to put
into regime, but her entry to Russia is still possible.

(34:43):
She can come and leave as she wants. But put
in refusing from reaction Nikola in this case, from reacting
to her interview is already a positive signal. I think
that they're still holding that they are not attacking her
because she is a symbol the capital of good things

(35:03):
that were in Russia. And also remembering the bad things
like gulags and Stalin regimes. So she talks about all that,
and in the interview, she's denouncing the current course that
Russia has, and she's basically taking away that symbolic capital
from Russia and saying that the course Russia is going to,

(35:23):
the way Russia goes now is not follower of all
the good that Russia had during the Soviet times and
before that, and ignoring all the lessons that Russia should
have learned from all the mistakes it made. So if
you look at the reaction of the public to her interview,
Orthodox Christians, they usually look from the point of repenting.

(35:48):
That's very common. And those who actually want to question
a few things, I send them to the interrogation papers
of Vatican for Giordana Bruno that lasted for eight years,
where some prosecutor was asking, like on the page three
hundred and twenty eight of the fourth volume of your book,
you're telling that, And Giordano Bruno was question back like,

(36:12):
oh do I say that? And then he as Aristovich,
tries to explain that now you're taking it out of
the context. I meant a different thing. So one of
those he did ask one of the prosecutors. Why are
you reading my quotes verbatim? I forgot what I wrote,
but you know it by heart. So he said that

(36:36):
we need to learn what you're saying here in your books.
We need to understand that so much, to such a
degree to understand what went wrong that we got such
an opponent as you yourself are so in Russia. The
way I see it is that Ava is a huge
holder of societal, historic, epic, cultural capital of Russia. Suddenly

(37:02):
makes such a statement that is a huge sign, huge
red flag for the government in Russia to perhaps check
your bearings and verify that you are going in the
direction you want to be going. At least it should
be something that pushes them to think. And looking at
the reaction of Russian power, I think they are showing

(37:23):
that they're starting to think the more primitive public. They
went into a different mound. They started to post all
the crap stuff about Ala Pugachova. And this is a
big threat for the centrist course that Russia can prevail
by staying close to so if it deviates from that,

(37:43):
Russia will fail. Wonderful, I say. I think a lot
of commentators were upset at Pugachova because she mentioned to
die of and people interpret that with a lot of
emotions about her comments. And the first leader, Jezhna but
archetypical mother as you call her. She is not even

(38:05):
talking about the reasons for the conflict, Like if she
would have presented that centrist position better, the relation to
her statement would be different. Well, there are also two
different angles here and I can explain on that, elaborate
on that if you want. Sure. Bogachova was talking about
d dive as a person, and there is always a dichotomy.

(38:28):
It will be difficult to find somebody who was in
my orbit for a while, communicated with me for a while,
who would find me a horrible, uncomfortable person to deal with. Right,
I got a similar story, Alexey, But the opinion we
have about public figures is different. Right, similar story. Another thing,

(38:51):
whether it's Bogachova's domain to discuss about the reasons for things,
but she showed that it's unacceptable, and understandably it's her
own biography immigration having to leave the country. It still
is a signal that should bring the leadership to think,
to pause, as Orthodox Christians should and take stock. And

(39:14):
we've been talking about Zed patriots, that they're putting too
far and too high into that direction. We actually had Krassowski,
a propagandist in Russia who was suggesting that our soldiers
would kill everybody, including children in Ukraine, and he was
removed from media rather quickly. So I don't think that

(39:37):
the wing of propaganda in Russia is a significant threat
to put them. Did I say that this is already implementing. No, no, no,
I'm applying that this threat is possible, So you think
it is. Yeah, I was talking that this is a
possible threat while you're holding these guys Slavia and christinikovon delish.

(39:57):
But they're still creating the public opinion. They're still doing
with people's emotions. Why do you need this media? You
need to make sure you use them to create certain
constructs and human minds. You can fire Slovyov later, but
people will have the constructs that he built in their
minds that will take life of their own. And here's

(40:20):
a sklip from Sloviov's show in Russia. So for me, Alexey,
the analogy with the dugout doesn't quite work because in Ukraine, well, Nikolay,
everything is more rough in Ukraine on this regard, definitely
worse in terms of the dugout. But when you talked
in your interview with Ula Latina and you are presenting

(40:43):
that the forces of barracks in Russia, I disagreed with
that significantly. We have this fraction, but it's not the
leading one, Okay, So yeah, I would agree that in
Russia it is existing as a threat. But in Ukraine
this is actually a thread that is realizing. It is
running the country a moment, and you need to fight
with that in Ukraine first and only then with the

(41:06):
Russian Federation. Let's look at the Ukrainian nationalists at the moment.
Then I understand Alexei, you're calling them the main enemies
for the country, and you've been talking about nationalists and
the insurgency dugout for a long time. We know that
it started back in the USSR times with the statements

(41:26):
that Ukraine is not Russia. Then there was ideology of
Russian people as colonizers then before the country descended into
those nightly walks with tortures. I did want to ask you,
do you think during the last the modern history there
was a segment there was a period in history when
Ukraine could have gone differently while it was still going

(41:47):
towards anti Russia. Was there moment when Ukraine had a
different chance. We have a tragedy of a different kind.
Nikolay very poorly understood in Russia. I heard how the
articulate that, and I'll try to indicate the problem with
the highest precision. Same as in the world we had

(42:07):
left liberals, we have left nationalists in Ukraine. So all
these people with the statements and cardboards, these are direct
agents and comesam all so to say of the globalists,
of the leftists, liberals who are funding them with the
grants and their support of usaid and stuff, who were
doing that. Today in the United States they're being fought.

(42:31):
The globalists are being fought by Trump administration. But in Ukraine,
these are the forces that formed the government administration Ukraine
since two thousand and four. From the first Madam in Ukraine,
the right wing was always marginalized. It was always laughed at,
and even the fans of Tolkien were respected and appreciated

(42:53):
more than the right. But when leftists left, globalists started
to pick on the Bijinski. The rhetoric of course very
hawkish right and they're using that and to achieve their goals.
That's when the country, the destiny of Ukraine, went in
the wrong direction. Look, the tragedy is in that the
West is mum about systemic violations of Ukraine's constitution, drafting Commission,

(43:19):
the right of human rights are being deteriorated out of
court proceedings, like with myself. The worst is mom about
that they're letting pitbull to fight with the bear, and
they don't care about pitbull being ugly. And they do
publish on the left, they do publish the human rights violations,

(43:41):
and they do indicate that there is an issue with Ukraine,
but it only is present in one table and nobody
talks about that. So what did the right grew up
in Ukraine? On war? And the leftists picked on the
ideas of the right, especially the ultra right ideologists, with
such as speed and such polish that it still surprises me.

(44:03):
And then all these suicides, all these grant eaters, they
go and use the right extreme right tools, being full
of absolutely left ideas, they get the waves that resonate
and their radical as leftists and their radical as ultra

(44:23):
rights by their means, and they would not be so
powerful if all the Western media on the Western politicians
would not take their side immediately and automatically. Now let's
look at the steps first Minsk agreement. Parashenka is trying
to organize the first Minsk Agreements. The right wing in

(44:44):
Ukraine protests near the government, birkot and special forces, and
Parashenka could have dealt with that, but instead he decided
that no, they would not do that, not because the
right who are protesting or throwing flash banks, but because
the West immediately propped them up. December nineteenth of nineteen,

(45:08):
Telansky is meeting with Puttin in Paris. This has hoped
to be a solution for an old conflict, for the
resolution of two Minsk agreements. The right wing goes to
pitchersk rebelling, and immediately seventy different public organizations come out
with accusations that Paris accords are horrible and we should

(45:28):
not be doing that. Merkel wrote that about that later,
that this is when she understood that we are on
a path of war. Zelenski was afraid of those right wingers.
There were just five hundred people. He somehow got scared
with them, and they were not even going to fight
to the end. But all the public organizations that were

(45:50):
immediately supported by the Western press and politicians. That's a
whole other deal. Look at the cardboard protest recently, nineteen
year old boys and girls. They're not a threat to
the government. Zilians came in time, recalled the congressmen from
vacation and re votes on the law. Because the kids

(46:10):
came out with the cardboards. Don't make me laugh. Because
the West entirely supported that motion. That's why these forces
are not strong by themselves, but they're strong as the
fifth column of the leftist globalists. In Ukraine. Such forces
take their side that not Ukraine, single Ukrainian leader can
fight against it and the ideas that they push about

(46:33):
everything Russian. In the West, they would probably get all
kind of public reprimand and some countries would be put
in jail because it goes against European constitution, norms of right,
probably even American constitutions. Absolutely racist and semi fascist and
sometimes fascist state. The West refuses to see that because
they're propped up. These groups are propped up by the globalists.

(46:55):
When daily people who are being drafted are being killed.
Yesterday they grabbed somebody's human the drafting bus and today
he's dead with brain trauma. They refuse to see that,
They refuse to talk about it, right, they present it
as AI generated videos. Yeah, when some dug up details
very nuanced legal issues in the law that even professional

(47:18):
lawyers not deal with immediately. They need to understand and
read through the papers to understand them. Suddenly there is
youth protesting with the cardboards and signs on them. So
Ukrainian leadership is not independent then today it's already scared
by the right and they're giving general rank to some
of the right wing leaders and they somewhat know how
to do that. They hope that they basically will have

(47:41):
to fight them and maybe organize their other troops against them,
because nobody really will support the right wings. But Ukrainian
youth does not have to fight. Apparently to local globalists
and the global globalists that Ukrainian youth should not be
participating in this war and learning how to defend the country,
but they need to be out with the cardboards. Yeah, Alexi,
I think you got something. You're onto something here. Ultra

(48:05):
leftists with the ultra right narratives who are propped by
the West. This is the problem, right, bookmark this thought,
and I wanted to indicate the real threat. This is
a potential threat. This is a threat, but it's a
potential threat. The real threat will surface when the ultra
leftists will find a way to agree with ultra right.

(48:27):
For now, they're hating each other, especially on the topic
of LGBTQ, but biographically they do have some bridges where
they can connect, given that there are two figures like
Budanovan's solutionary who can be their spokesperson, who can help
them connect, because that's when the lid of the coffin
will actually slap, when these two forces will join their ranks.

(48:50):
End of the first segment.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Ukraine War Diaries 1341: Why Do Ukraine and Russia Choose War. Arestovich, Sobolev

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

Ukraine War Diaries 1341: Why Do Ukraine and Russia Choose War. Arestovich, Sobolev

Stuff You Should Know