Donald Trump is trolling the Republican Party


An internet troll is somebody who deliberately
gets under the skin of someone else. You get angrier and angrier as you’re being trolled
as someone keeps insisting on a position that seems crazy. And what we’re seeing with Donald
Trump, at least in effect is that with Republican leaders. This all started with his announcement
speech in New York, it was a rambling affair, but he said some of these controversial things
about immigrants and started to attract some attention to his campaign there. “They’re
bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists.” And then, more recently, what we’ve
seen over this past weekend in Nevada and in Phoenix, Arizona, he’s been very much attracting
bigger crowds. He’s speaking for what he calls a “silent majority.” Now the truth is, it’s
not a majority of the American public, it’s not a majority of the Republican Party, but
it is a segment of the Republican Party that has been silent, and now has this huge megaphone
to make its case. The Republican Party, as it stands now, is largely white and aging.
It’s very difficult for the Republican Party to reach out to Latino voters at a time when
the surging candidate in the Republican presidential primary is a guy who basically says, “send
’em home.” “We have horrible, we have some terrible people coming in.” He’s lost some
deals. Most notably, his relationship with NBC, where he was basically the main guy on
The Apprentice. But the bigger problem for Trump has been the Republican side, where
party leaders are trying to put pressure on him to tone it down. Reince Priebus got on
the phone with Trump and basically said please, pull this back a little bit, you’re making
us look terrible. And Trump’s reaction was to dial it up. There’s no incentive for him
to not be a troll. The more he does it, the more attention he gets, the more attention
he gets, the more voters he seems to be attracting to his candidacy. And look, right now, he’s
virtually tied with Jeb Bush for the lead of the Republican presidential nomination.
Not bad for a guy who used to be laughed at as he screamed “You’re fired” on national
television. We’re almost a year and a half away from the election, so there’s a lot of
time for Donald Trump to implode, and Republicans are praying that he does. But right now, what
he’s basically doing is making it impossible for establishment Republican candidates to
go more moderate on this question and portray themselves in a way that will be appealing
to the general electorate without alienating the now Trump-led conservative base. If you’re
the Democrats, if you’re Hillary Clinton, you’re watching from the sidelines, popcorn
in your mouth, soda by your side, and hoping that this movie never ends.

Political gridlock, the economy, and your portfolio


(dramatic instrumental music) – For when politicians
speak, markets respond. (dramatic instrumental music) And they respond even when there’s no concrete action taken by politicians. (dramatic instrumental music) One of the best examples recently, was the example of Mario
Draghi, the ECB chief, who famously said in the summer of 2012 that he would do whatever
it takes to save the euro. Those words have been
among the strongest words that I’ve ever heard from
a government official, strongest in terms of their impact. Because those few words
basically pulverized the euro’s own debt crisis. Essentially over the past two years things have been getting better despite the lack of structural reforms. All you need is a
government official saying, “I’ll do whatever it takes,” and these words have
had a huge, huge impact. – [Narrator] Uncertainty is a state of having limited knowledge. When you’re faced with uncertainty it’s impossible to know precisely
what’s happening right now much less what will happen in the future. For decades researchers have been studying how uncertainty affects financial markets. But since the beginning
of the financial crisis they’ve become interested in a particular kind of uncertainty. The kind caused by
governments and policymakers. The big question about
this policy uncertainty is exactly how much it affects both financial markets
and the broader economy. We know policy uncertainty matters, but how do we measure it? And how can we gauge its impact? (dramatic instrumental music) – As you think back to the
peak of the financial crisis in late 2008, early 2009,
monetary policymakers and fiscal policymakers
in the United States and around the world were confronted with difficult challenges
unlike any they had faced for many decades and really
unlike any they had faced in the modern economy in
countries like the United States. So this meant policymakers
were facing dire circumstances, it was unclear exactly what the best policy response should be. Even if you agreed on what
the policy response should be, there was a lot of uncertainty about how effective it would be. – Is the government gonna
bail out Lehman Brothers? Are they gonna bail out General Motors? What are they gonna do
about in terms of reform sort of even after the
crisis, reform of health care, the reform of Wall Street. The unconventional monetary
policy that we’ve seen. The all sorts of challenges
in fiscal policy. In all of those, there was
a tremendous uncertainty about what the government’s gonna do. (dramatic instrumental music) – What does uncertainty really mean? Well, what kind of policy
uncertainty are we talking about? Tax policy. Are we talking about interest rate policy? Are we talking about
government expenditures? The basic story goes as follows. I’m a household or I’m a firm
at the current point in time and I wanna invest in a project, but I’m not sure if that
project’s gonna have more benefits than costs
at the current time, so if I’m highly, if uncertainty goes up, then my natural inclination
would be to wait, right? Why don’t I wait a few months until see how the economy turns out and then I can always
continue with that project. And that might, if individually
lots of individuals are doing that collectively
all at one time, right? If systematically we’re all
making this wise decision to go wait to invest in the project, to wait to start, to wait
to buy the business loan, to wait to go buy the next house. If collectively we all
have that same decision, it’s optimal individually for each person, collectively it may not be optimal. (dramatic instrumental music) – [Narrator] The market crashed. House prices tanked. And people began losing jobs as the credit crunch that began in 2007 became a financial crisis in 2008 and an economic downturn in 2009. At the same time the
White House changed hands bringing in a new U.S. president elected on a platform of sweeping change. – I think three of the biggest sources of policy related economic uncertainty in the last several years have been first the financial crisis. The unusual challenges it
presented policymakers. Second, the fiscal battles
often along partisan lines between Democrats and
Republicans we’ve had related to the fiscal cliff,
extensions of tax cuts, sequesters and so on. And third, the uncertainty
about the political durability, the constitutionality
and the economic effects of the Affordable Care Act. So the common element of all of those is they’ve been fought along
intensely partisan lines. There’s been last minute resolution or sometimes even after
the last minute resolution. So that it was highly
uncertain exactly which way things would fall out and people
had little advance warning for what the changes in
government spending would be, what the changes in the tax rate would be. That is quite unlike anything
we’ve previously had, at least in the post-war period, in the United States economy. And it’s an example of kind
of economic uncertainty that is inflicted upon the economy by the workings of the political system. (dramatic instrumental music) So we define policy uncertainty broadly. And we’re trying to capture three things. Uncertainty about who
will be making decisions that have economic
consequences, policy decisions. Uncertainty about what
those decisions will be and when they will happen. And then uncertainty
about the economic effects of policy decisions both
past and current and future, possible future policy decisions. – [Narrator] As researchers dig deeper into policy uncertainty,
they’re starting to create new subcategories and definitions. Such as differentiating
between political uncertainty and impact uncertainty,
which is the impact of that political uncertainty on the
economy and financial markets. – Lubos and I started thinking
through what really was actually political uncertainty
or policy uncertainty. And realized there are really two things that have to do with the
politics and our surprises. One thing is you don’t
know what the government will be doing in the future. So we called that political uncertainty. In the future there could be some changes in policy regulation, a banking
structure, other things, and we don’t know how the
new landscape is going to be. And this uncertainty ’cause
you don’t know what’s going to happen and news about it is
going to move stock markets. But the second type of
political uncertainty which we called policy impact
uncertainty in our paper, but is more policy
uncertainty if you want, is that even if we know exactly what the new regulation looks like, we don’t know what the long
term impact is going to be. – [Narrator] Chicago Booth
professors Pietro Veronesi and Lubos Pastor have
written three papers together on the topic of uncertainty. – In the first study we asked, how do financial markets respond to government policy changes? And we found that you should
expect the stock market to drop on average, when the
government changes its policy, so if the government does the right thing, if they announce the right policy change, that’s good news and stock
prices go up in response. But they don’t go up by
much because this good news has already been expected to some extent. We expect the government
to do the right things, but if they do the wrong thing, not only is that bad news
and stock prices fall, but the news will be unexpected and so the negative price reaction will be a lot bigger than the
positive price reactions. In our second paper we
asked if there’s news about what the government
might do in the future, how does that impact financial markets? So if a politician speaks,
how do markets respond? When politicians speak, even if they don’t actually do anything, when they speak, prices respond and prices respond because
when politicians speak we’re getting signals about what they might do in the future. So we’re updating our beliefs
about what the government will actually do in the future and those future actions
will have real effects. – We managed to, we believe to have a way to actually differentiate
political uncertainty from economic uncertainty
in pretty neat way and therefore document if
political uncertainty is there. And say for economic uncertainty it has its own risk premia, it’s only part and this is
important step in the puzzle, piece in the puzzle because
it’s really important to differentiate economic
(mumbles) instead of having different risk premia. One important implication of showing that the political uncertainty
has its own risk premia is that we also show that this risk premia is bigger in bad times. So think about it, bad times
is already when there is a lot of economic uncertainty, so there’s already big risk
premia for other reasons. And the reason we find
that political uncertainty has its own risk premia
it’s going to adapt. And therefore even have even
bigger impact on their economy, on the fact that the people don’t invest from say, find it hard to, find funding in order to invest et cetera. – [Narrator] But it’s not just
economic policy uncertainty that impacts the economy. Central banks such as
the U.S. Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, and the Bank of Japan have a huge effect and
investors carefully parse central banker’s statements to divine their meaning and implications. Even when central bankers
try to speak and act clearly, their messages can fuel uncertainty. Professors Drew Creal and Jing Cynthia Wu are digging into just this kind of monetary policy uncertainty. – Our main goal is to
understand the impact of monetary policy uncertainty
on macroeconomic fluctuations. Okay, so the first thing
is you have to define monetary policy uncertainty and then quantify it or measure it. So typically we think
about monetary policy influencing short term interest rates. Okay, the Federal Reserve
through open market operations kind of impacts the short
end of the term structure and then people’s, market
participants have beliefs about what future short term
interest rates are gonna be. And that influences current long rates. Okay and long rates are of course what we’re gonna use
for investment, right? When we want to take out a mortgage loan or a company wants to take out loans for investment or projects. So the model we have is
a way of characterizing interest rates at a lot
of different maturities. – In terms of what causes
monetary policy uncertainty, I think there are two parts of it. The first is what is a policy implemented by the Federal Reserve. So for example, recently
they trying to promote the (mumbles) guidance and they
go through different phases for some periods they
are very explicit about they think the zero lower
bound will stay for two years, for example, but for
other periods the phrase is more contingent, for
example, it will depend on the unemployment rate or it
depend on the inflation rate. So those kind of contingents
creates some kind of monetary policy uncertainty
because there is the uncertainty people have in terms of the future economic conditions. Well now the second part about the monetary policy
uncertainty is how people read about the monetary
policy uncertainty. Even though the Federal
Reserve could convey that, “We will keep the interest
rate low for another “one year or so,” but
whether the market believes in the fact, that’s a different question. (dramatic instrumental music) – So while all that was
occurring in 2008, 2010 struck me as interesting
and I had the sense, and I think a few other people did that it might be worrisome
that there was so much policy related economic uncertainty. And I still remember thinking that, well, this seems like an important topic, but we didn’t really have
any hard and fast way to assess policy uncertainty
let alone its consequences. So I just started thinking about, well, this is kind of a squishy concept, economic policy uncertainty. If you wanted to measure it, how would you go about doing it? – [Narrator] In the summer of 2010, Davis met Stanford University
professor Nicholas Bloom. And they realized they were both trying to measure uncertainty. Together with Northwestern
University’s Scott Ross Baker they started to calculate
the level of uncertainty by counting how many times newspapers used key words associated
with policy uncertainty. They used that and other measures to create the Economic
Policy Uncertainty Index. Which today is being used by
central banks across the globe, as well as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. – We started out with an index
that had several components. But over time we have
gradually put more emphasis on the newspaper based index
of economic policy uncertainty. And that’s for two reasons. It is more powerful in the
sense that it can be pushed back in time many, many decades,
even more than a century. Which is what we’re in
the process of doing now. And also pushed to many other countries. We want to ask the following question. Is the frequency with
which newspaper articles discuss policy related aspects
of economic uncertainty, is that a good proxy for how
much economic uncertainty there is related to policy
or perhaps better put, how much concern there
is among business people, among households about
policy related aspects of economic uncertainty. So we basically took two approaches. Can we validate the
newspaper index directly? And second, does the newspaper based index that we’ve constructed, does
that have explanatory power for other economic outcomes
that we care about? – [Narrator] Baker, Bloom and
Davis validated their index by entering it into an otherwise
standard statistical model and found that it had
strong explanatory power. They then compared it to the VIX, the Chicago Board Options
Exchange Volatility Index, a popular measure of
equity market volatility sometimes called the fear gauge. – And the two are very highly correlated. There’s some other things we did as well. There’s something called the
Beige Book which is designed to provide qualitative up
to the minute information about the state of economic activity in the 12 regional
Federal Reserves Districts in the United States. It’s for the people who make
monetary policy decision. The two sources told us
broadly similar stories. There are some differences in the details, but they basically told us the same story that the last several years were a period that was within the span of the data historically unusual or even unprecedented in terms of the size and the run up in economic policy uncertainty. – Our model predicts that
stocks should be more volatile and more correlated when there’s
more political uncertainty. And we indeed find that
stocks are more volatile and more correlated when the Baker, Bloom and Davis Index is high. (dramatic instrumental music) If you engage in political brinkmanship ahead of a debt ceiling like
we did in the summer of 2011, there’s a big cost attached to that. And hopefully these
calculations will deter similar actions in the future. – The last few years are
rather unusual in U.S. history and they might be the only
period in the last half century where policy uncertainty
was an important factor influencing economic performance. Maybe it will continue
to be an important factor influencing economic performance on the downside or possibly on the upside. But there are things
that policymakers can do to head off the likelihood
that policy uncertainty will have harmful effects in the future. – In our research we find that
monetary policy uncertainty will lead to higher unemployment rate or potentially in the data at least it leads to economic downturns, so the policymakers could think about, look at the result and think about when they see the increase of uncertainty they probably could implement
some kind of policies and say, “Well, can we
lower the uncertainty “before it’s too late?” – We are seeing actually,
especially with the influence of Ben Bernanke and Janet
Yellen over the last 10 years an emphasis in the way that
they conduct monetary policy and the way they
communicate with investors, the public market. They’re trying to communicate much more clearly and effectively. – Political uncertainty is
something that’s here to stay. There will always be some
degree of political uncertainty. We live in a democracy, we have
elections every four years, every two years if you count
the mid-term elections, so there will always be uncertainty about who’s gonna be elected and therefore, what kind of policies we’re
likely to see in the future. (dramatic instrumental music)

Chris Stirewalt- Fox News Digital Politics Editor


BE DIFFERENT FOR THE FAMILIES AT FORT HOOD AND HERE IN PARIS.>>>JOSH ERNEST HAS BEEN PRESSED TO EXPLAIN WHY THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WILL NOT SAY THE TERM RADICAL ISLAM WHEN TALKING ABOUT THE ATTACKS >>I AM DESCRIBING WHY WE HAVE CHOSEN TO NOT USE THAT LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT DOESN’T ACCURATELY DESCRIBE WHAT HAPPENED. WE DON’T WANT TO LEGITIMIZE WHAT WE CONSIDER TO NOT JUSTIFY THIS VIOLENCE AND ACT OF TERRORISM.>>CHRIS STALL WELL IS HERE TO TALK TO US ABOUT THIS. GOOD MORNING. WHAT IS WITH THE WORD GAME?>>THE WORD GAME IS PEOPLE NOT REALIZING WHAT THEIR JOB IS. AND THERE IS A TENDENCY FROM EVERYONE IN THE PRESIDENT TO OVERSTATE THEIR IMPORTANCE IN THE UNIVERSE BUT THIS IS A PARTICULARLY STRONG EXAMPLE. WHEN YOU HAVE A POLITICAL UNIT BELIEVING WHAT IS AND IT NOT A MAJOR WORLD RELIGION YOU KNOW YOU ARE OVER YOUR SKIS. AND THIS ADMINISTRATION SAYS IT WILL SAY WHAT IS ISLAM AND WHAT ISN’T AND WHO SHOULD BE ISLAMIC AND WHO ISN’T AS IF IT MATTERED WHAT A BUNCH OF NON-POLITICIANS IN WASHINGTON THOUGHT OF.>>YOU HAVE TO ASK WHERE THIS COMES FROM. I THOUGHT DANA WHO WORKED IN THE COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT OF THE WEST WING SAID WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU HAVE MEETINGS AND MAKE DECISIONS ON HOW YOU WILL CHARACTERIZE THINGS AND THIS WILL BE ONE OF THEM. SO WHERE DOES THAT COME FROM?>>WHAT THIS PRETTY CLEARLY CLAIM FROM — IF WE GO BACK, BACK, BACK TO THE WAY BACK THINK ABOUT THE PRESIDENT TALKING ABOUT THE ISLAMIC STATE AND PULLED A LINDA RICHMOND MOMENT AND SAID IT IS NO LONGER ISLAMIC OR A STATE AND DEFINED WHAT IT WAS AND WASN’T. I THINK THIS STEMS FROM THE VERY TOP. YES, IT IS POLITICAL CORRECTNESS BUT IT IS ALSO AN ATTITUDE AND STURBURNNESS OF THEM SAYING THEY KNOW BETTER AND THEY WILL DESCRIBE IT. THEY ARE SACRIFICING TIME, MESSAGING, CLARITY, AND ALL OF THESE THINGS AS THEY LASH TO THE IDEA THEY KNOW BETTER WHAT ISLAM IS OR CAN DEFINE WHAT ISLAM IS WHICH IS SPINNING THEIR WHEELS WHEN YOU LOOK TO FRANCE AND RUSSIA AND CANADA THEY DON’T WASTE TIME. THEY SAY WE ARE DEALING WITH ISLAMIC MILITANTS AND WE WILL DEFEND THEM AND MOVE ON.>>YOU WILL CONTINUE TO GET THESE QUESTIONS AND I DON’T SEE THEIR ANSWERS CHANGING AND THAT LEADS TO A CERTAIN STUBERNESS.>>WHEN THIS ADMINISTRATION COMES TO BEING NEEDING TO BE RIGHT, THEY ARE ALL LIKE THAT, BUT THIS ONE IS PARTICULARLY BAD. I DON’T SEE HOW THE PRESIDENT WILL RELEASE THE IDEA OF SAYING WE WILL TAKE THESE FOLKS AT WORD AND LET MUSLIMS DEAL WITH ISLAM AND WE WILL DEAL WITH THE RESPONSE TO ISLAMIC MILITANCY WHICH RELATES TO DIPLOMACY AND FIGHTING WARS.>>IT IS JUST AN INTERESTING FOLKS TO WATCH THE STATE DEPARTMENT OR WHITE HOUSE TALK

Russian politics. ”Duel” talk show. Zhirinovsky vs Raihelgauz. ”Gorbachev” (English subs)


-Good evening. Right now, live talk show of Vladimir
Soloviev – ”Poedinok”. -They are asking for president of USSR, Michail Gorbachev, to
be deprived of highest rank award of Russia:
Order of St. Andrew. -In the internet, gathering of signatures under petitions is
taking place. -Few thousand citizens have already signed it from different
edges of former Soviet Union. -Published last week poll of public opinion showed, that the
best ruler of XX century, Russian citizens consider Brezhnev. -And toward gorbachev, the biggest part, have sharp negative
attitude. -What imputes him the blame by his political opponents, and for
what he is respected by his supporters? -Why is ”age of stagnation” is remembered with nostalgia, and
Perestroika is being cursed? -Can we go forward with our heads turned back, and always
re-evaluate the history? -We didn’t need any Perestroika! We were living in calm,
presperous country! -This black, dark force came, this new general secretary
Gorbachev, trashed everything, ruined, destroyed, -Brought the country down, dispersed population! Still in blood!
Still in depression! -Take away all of his orders! Exile him back to village
Privolnoe, and deprive from pension! -We don’t need Gorbachev’s and Perestroikas! We need the Great
Soviet Union! -Michail Sergeievich Gorbachev, is one of the most bright people
of XX century. One of the most bright politicians. -He drove out country out of stagnation. He drove our country
out of 70 year, closed, completely totalitarian regime. -He gave freedom to each one of us. -For duel is called the chairman of LDPR party
Vladimir Zhirinovsky. -For duel is called, national artist of Russia, film director
Iosif Raihelgauz. -Respectable TV viewers, you also can participate in our
discussion. Call and send SMS on number of those of the
opponents, position of whom you are supporting. -So, gentlemen, your duel is starting. Please,
Vladimir Volfovich. -Well, if you, are speaking so well about Gorbachev, and you
think that he did everything correctly, then we must justify
Lenin and Stalin. -Because he did the same thing.
-No, he was doing absolutely not the same thing.
-I am speaking now, after me, you going to speak! -The same way they were decrying Tzarist Russia, and were saying
”Drove out of prison of people, there, exploitation, landowners…”! -And here finally Soviet authority, people’s authority,
everything for workers and peasants! -Same thing is here! Listen, ”drove out, gave freedom”! What
freedom?! Who asked for it, you tell me first?! -Until when you are going to do everything up there without us?!
-Without you? Without who?
-Without people! Nobody…! -Without you, not without people.
-No! Without people! Nobody, in any Soviet city had not demanded
any Perestroikas! -Nobody was even demanding change of leadership! They are sitting
there until death, to hell with them, let them sit! -That old junk! But cities were standing! Construction! People
were receiving housing! All schools were working!
Policlinics were working! -Yes, there were no much goods! But it was our goods! Soviet!
And of a great quality! And now you are bringing all this shit
from the west! -People dying from all this!
-It is you who are bringing it. Your economy.
-Yeah… It is your economy! Gorbachev’s! Yeltsin’s! -You made it this way!
-You were doing it for 20 years.
-Do not talk about this! You are complimenting Gorbachev, you
realize this?! Because he gave freeedom! -I explained what I am complimenting him for.
-”Drove out of stagnation…”! What stagnation?!
-I will tell. -Don’t tell! What are you going to tell?! What we didn’t lived
back then, huh?! What are you our tour guide?!
-I will tell. I live then too. And who are you? -I lived during Soviet authority! Yes… 43 years!
-I lived during Soviet authority too. I lived during Soviet
authority too. -Soviet government was feeding you up! And until now!
A director! Making films! At least make a fairy tale! A cartoon! -Stop muzzing out heads! Stop glorifying bloodsuckers!
-I am gladly inviting you to my theater, as an actor. -I don’t need any of your joy! You turned all of lives into a
theater! All of our lives is a theater!
-Best actor of my theater. -Only people, people, people dying! And you stay, and arranging
funerals for us! We don’t want this! We are tired of you!
-It is you, who are staying for already 25 years. -Our subject is Gorbachev and Perestroika! I don’t even know you!
-This is true. -Well prove that Gorbachev is good, and we will see how people
will vote!
-Fair. -It is clear how the people is going to vote. You are teaching
us how to vote for 25 years. It is clear how they are going
to vote.
-No need to tach! They going to vote for themselves! -They lived at Gorbachev’s time, our people!
-Because you are still in governmental Duma, so people are
voting this way. -Because people are electing! With Gorbachev, noone was being
elected!
-Of course. Of course.
-This is true. People are electing. -Yes! People are electing! Desiding for itself what to do!
-Tell us please, why is Gorbachev so close you? -I think, Michail Sergeievich, certainly, like many other
authority doers, like many politicians, a huge amount of
mistakes. -But he went by a hardest way! And today we are talking about
depriving him of the order, I think, I am sure, too bad we will
not be able to verify it with Vladimir Volfovich, -That when time will pass, I think very little, most likely our
grandchildren, our great-grandchindlen, will place monuments
of Michail Sergeievich. He did the main thing. -We lived for 70 years in a closed society, in totalitarian,
we were deprived of individual freedom. Everyone of us. I
know this very well by myself, -From my experience, I know this very well. And he introduced
for the first time, yes these words are today are a little, well,
is spoken in quotes, -Actual publicity, he is actually started to rebuild the society,
actually with him, first real elections were conducted – the
first congress of people’s deputies. -Actually, with him, a huge number of theaters had been opened,
musical orchestras…
-There… There… And you like it. -You like it too, in 1989…
-I am not going to your theaters! I don’t even want to come close
to them!
-I know you don’t go, it is obvious. -A minority is going to theaters. That exact minority…
-Yes. Yes. To watch you filth! Opened pornography everywhere!
In every theater! Whorehouses! -I remember you asked Lubimov to play in his theater.
-And he gave me an opportunity to go out there! The only
director! And I went on scene! And said, why I do not like
Dostoyevsky! But you are all afraid! -Gorbachev gave you freedom, but you are still afraid! You are
still crawling like worms! Through Russian theater!
-In 1989, simulaneously, were created our theater, and LDPR
party. -It is Gorbachev, just like me, must say…
-We don’t need it! Don’t need it!
-We don’t need LDPR? -We don’t need anything! Return the country back! We need our
country! And you live for the sake of your theater! I don’t give
a damn about your theater! -Give the country! Border posts were standing! Our army was
stationed near Paris! Everyone respected us! Bow before us!
Loved us! And now what?! -Not respected – feared.
-And good! And what now, America respects us?! America respects
us?! Everyone is cussing it! Terrible country! Occupied everyone!
Bombs everyone! -Yeah… Same sex marriages! What Paris respecting by anyone?!
French came out! Here is the freedom! Here is Gorbachev’s
freedom! -Excuse me, Vladimir Volfovich, could you specify something…?
-Yes! What?!
-You always know what you are talking about, so I have a kind
of humble question. -”Our army was stationed near Paris…” I remember in Paris, in
1818.
-It was close! It was stationed in Berlin! It was stationed in
Austria! Khruschev removed it from Austria! -Everything is near! Everything is close!
-Understood. So everything that is in range of tank dash, is
close.
-Night dash! We would had been at English Channel! -Can you imagine?! The whole of this filthy, rotten Europe! It
was whole in our fist!
-I can imagine is. Only in all times of world’s history, empires
were always collapsing.
-Yes! What?! -And now American Empire! What is it collapsing?!
-Suure…
-And European Union Empire collapasing?! China is collapsing?!
India is collapsing?! Who is collapsing?! -Only those where traitors are! Those where traitors are!
-These are not empires. Who did China ever conquered? -It conquered Xinjiang Autonomous Region! Tibet! Mongolia!
Vietnam! India! And nothing is collapsing! Because those who
are collapsing it is being choked on the spot! -Well…
-And here, they created theaters! And a play! ”Gave them
freedom”! See?! Freedom! -Freedom to robbers and thieves! To fraudsters! Mavrodi!
-Why it is, Gorbachev gave freedom, but people voted against him?
And on elections, when he tried to go for one more time.
-Yes! Yes! -And now, in the survey, his negative rating is even higher than
Yeltsin’s?
-Naturally. Gorbachev existed for 5 years.
-6! -Well, close to 6.
-More than 6! From April 1985 to December 1991! 5 and a half!
You can’t even count! You lost your memory! -5 and a half! Thank you, I will agree with that. Gorbachev
existed for 5+ years. During this time, he is, of course, he
never, nobody had dome anything like this before him.
-And there were no need to! -He found the country, absolutely raw material based. He found
the country with absolutely choked, with some kind of
democratic sprouts. Choked. Impossible. -The country, indeed Vladimir Volfovich is right, after Stalin,
after Lenin, after Khruschev, after Brezhnev, who today, the
same exact people that ruled by Vladimir Volfovich, of course
consider the best times. Brezhnev’s times. -Times, when it was forbidden to read a book. Times, when you
could not go abroad at your wish. Times, when it was not possible
to elect the ruling body of the country, and local governor. -Times when we could not even elect Zhirinovsky.
-It was done by Gorbachev, and of course I am endlessly grateful
to him for this. -This could be done very easily! Well should he tried to exposed
Stalin, like Khruschev had done it! Here, the only brave act of
all Soviet leaders, is exposure of Stalin! -Oh! And Gorbachev should pray for Brezhnev! If not for his
stagnation, Gorbachev would never come to power! He should thank
Brezhnev! It was particularly Brezhnev who created Gorbachev! -You understand?! Because Brezhnev created Andropov! And
Andropov was healing his sick kidneys there, in Stavropol! -He was seen there…! He was running around everywhere!
Sycophant! Setting the table! Clearing! Clearing! Clearing!
Setting the table! -And they pulled him to Moscow!
-You were present on that clearing. How do you know it?
-What are you saying?! Gorbachev is an agent! -From 1966 he was recruited by special services! And through
his wife! All trips abroad! Agent! Influence!
-This is diagnosis. This is impossible. -And in 1984, while being a head of a small delegation of
deputies, he was received on the highest level! Why
is this had never happened again?! -And in front of Thatcher, in her residence, baroness, he puts
the most secret maps of General Headquarters of the USSR! -Have you seen these maps?
-Well, all this is in memoirs!
-What map? Total delirium. ”He puts maps for Thatcher…”
-He wrote this in his memoirs! Have you not read them?! -He hadn’t wrote anything.
-He wrote! Everything! His assitant! All the secret maps he
showed! All our missiles! -This is not possible! Empires are collapsing from other causes!
-I’m telling you one more time! Illegally, showed secret maps
of the General Headquarters! -And this is what Margaret Thatcher liked! A spy! Came a spy,
and gave away all secrets!
-2 clarifying questions, Vladimir Volfovich.
-Please… -First, you just said that Gorbachev was Andropov’s man. If I
remember correctly, Yuri Vladimirovich Andropov, for many years
was a head of Committee for State Security of the USSR.
-Yes. Yes. Yes. -So how did it happen, that a man, undoubtedly gifted,
undoubtedly talented, powerful leader, who were heading
Committee for State Security, did not noticed, -And did not received any information, about the fact that
Michail Sergeievich Gorbachev was recruited. -And second question, how is a little leader, like you said,
at that time, departured to England, managed to steal secret
maps from General Headquarters? -Well, this thing exactly was the defect of one party regime!
The thing about which everyone is afraid to speak! -And Andropov, placed his bet on Gorbachev… He didn’t wanted to
make him general secretary at all. He wanted to rule himself for
10-15 years, but they were all sick! -But Andropov was not recruited through Gorbachev? No?
-Well, generally, he was thinking about how to exit this dead
end. They all realized, that something must be done! -Reforms. We were not against reforms! Reforms are being
performed all over the world! But don’t destroy people! You
realize that millions nad died?! And they had died! Millions
died! Millions! -Today, Russians are not citizens in Latvia! Can you imagine?!
They turned Russians into cattle!
-Well, the biggest flaw of Gorbachev’s ruling, explain please. -What it was so horrible?
-The biggest flaw. He put a goal, a goal, he said, there will be
socialism, and there will be CPSU! This is impossible! -From the very beginning he started to deceive everyone! What
they should have done…?! And I went to them! I went to them
to advise! Divide CPSU into 2 parties! -Call Ligachev’s one Socialist, and reformers – Socialist
Democratic! Give them money, which we had! Divide! Premises!
Newspapers! And let them go to elections! -And 2 equal teams would appear! And there would have been
coalition government! And there would be, let’s say, a single
head of the state! But they didn’t wanted to! -They clunged to their CPSU, and were wringing us all, only for
of CPSU to exist! Do not ”touch” CPSU…!
-Who they? -They all! Leaders! All of them!
-Gorbachev was not clunging to CPSU, excuse me…
-He was! He was!
-Gorbachev cancelled the 6-th article. (*1) -Remember what he said after Foros! (*2) In the end, in August
he said: We are going to renew CPSU! We are going to preserve
socialism! Remember! The chronicles! -You are also calling your party Liberal-Democratic, so what?
-I’m telling you, he wanted preservation of CPSU as a ruling
force! He did not wanted to cance of 6-th article! -So he started… He didn’t understood what national question is!
In a multinational country, the question about statehood must
not be raised! -If he would had started to ”hit” CPSU, CPSU was cementing in
the country! There were no any…!
-So he should have left it in the form it was? -No! No! No! No!
-It became a governmental structure, the CPSU back then.
-Well, first, change the country! With this CPSU! With this KGB!
-In constitution heading role of the CPSU was in the 6-th
article. How could you change it? -There! There! With this heading role, we were all submitting to
them!
-To who we were submitting?
-All of them! The whole country was submitting to the general
secretary! -He had more right than our president has today!
-Because he didn’t wanted to go the same way that went before
him Brezhnev, Chernenko, Andropov and all the others. -And that’s why he was waste! He didn’t wanted?! Go home! Go
to your wife!
-He behaved himself extremely honest. Gorbachev behaved with
extreme honesty. -What honesty?! He started a great revolution! And what have you
done?!
-He didn’t allowed a civil war. -Who told you?!
-And who told you? We didn’t had a civil war. -And what was it in Baku?! What was is in Tbilisi?! What was
it in Karabakh?! What was in Vilnus?! What was it in
Kazakhtansk?! -And what was it in Novocherkassk in 1962 with Khrushcev?
What? It was everywhere. Local conflicts.
-So they should had been removed! Return to division like with
Tzar! -Here what they should have done! Governances division! Like
states in USA!
-One second, Vladimir Volfovich. -Could you explain to our viewers who were born after 1990.
Well you mentioned a few very inportant points, that for our
generation explains a lot. -But I’m afraid that vewers do not understand. Could you explain
a little more detailed about events that occured in Sumqayit,
Tbilisi, Baku, Nagorno-Karabakh? So they understand. -Well, the very first! Only for a year, Gorbachev is in power!
Tough Soviet Union! December 1986! He tries, like the
comrade said it right, to remove Kunaev, -And puts a Russian, Kolbin, from Ulyanovsk PCO of CPSU! And
nationalists came out to squares! Arrest everyone! Supress!
Send to trial! -What arrest and supress? Civil war. ”Arrest and supress…”
-And who gave the right to resist to central power?!
-One by one, please. And what happened next? -He didn’t do anything! Didn’t anything! In February 1988,
Sumquait! Armenians are being killed! Genocide! -Slaughtering Armenians! Burning alive! He does nothing!
Tbilisi and Baku are bursting in flames! He does nothing! -The Supreme Council is being fired upon, television, Vilnus,
Latvia! He refuses completely! ”It wasn’t us! I didn’t know
anything! I didn’t know!” He didn’t know anything! -Do you really think that something could be done in Lithuania?
-It could be! Everything could be done! Everything!
-What could be done? You would do something with sapper’s
shovels? What could be done? -Don’t! Don’t! Don’t! Don’t! Don’t!
-What don’t? This exactly happened there.
-Act like Khrushchev! Like Khrushchev! That’s it! There was
silence! -To shoot it’s own people? Well, a very good statement from one
of leaders of people.
-But now what have you done with people?! Now what?! -Now you have done it. For 25 years you are leading the people.
You.
-Now it is going…! It hates you! It despises you!
-Well, I didn’t understood…
-I don’t understand either. -Millions had died because of you! Millions nad died! And you
pretended to be kind, yes?! And millions that died?! He ingnited
a nationality fire! -Because of nationalist policy of Gorbachev, in the end,
independent countries were created, but conflict hearths.
-The country started to crack! -You are saying, that without Gorbachev it would have been
impossible to do.
-And this is normal…!
-No. Not normal. Why is it normal? -So Gorbachev gave the order to paratrooper regiment in Tbilisi,
to disperse a demonstration, using sapper’s shovels. So this,
turns out, Gorbachev did right? -No.
-So what are you saying then?
-In Vilnus he gave the order to assault a TV tower. This is
right? -No. No. No. Gorbachev tried to resolve these local national
conflict, with same local methods. Vladimir Volfovich says that
it needed to be supressed on national level, on military level… -I already can recall 1 defence minister, who wanted to resolve
one of local conflict with 2 regiments of airborne paratroopers.
-Locally! And for 10 years Caucasus is in flames! -I realize that always…
-All mistakes! Ignorance! Incompetance! Cowardness!
-You know the history does not have conjunctive mood. And today
we are talking about what he could do. -He could not do. He could not do.
-There! There finally! Finally you said it! If you can’t, move to
a side and give a way to those who can! Move to a side! You are
unable! -He gave the way for you.
-He did not gave the way to us! Give the way to Romanov,
to Sherbinsky, to Grishin, to Kunaev! -Explain to me, what he should have done?
-What he should have done? Today, after 25 years it is easy to
say what he should have done. -What did not worked?
-What did not worked is the following. He of course wanted, he
wanted, he tried, the democratic way, the way Vladimir Volfovich
is talking about. -The way of creation of party, the way of cancellation of leading
role, and precisely by cancellation of 6-th article of
constitution. -The way of opening of the country to the world. To civilized
world.
-Directing-ruling role of the CPSU.
-Of course. -Were there ever such case in history?!
-He tried to convert the country into, of course, to convert
the country into a democratic state.
-Give an example from history! -From totalitarian state to freedom, right?! Through freedom?!
Rubbish! -It was with Gorbachev DVAR structure dissapeared when people
were allowed to go abroad.
-Of course. Of course. Naturally. With Gorbachev.
-With Gorbachev free television appeared and free printed press. -Magazines appeared, literature appeared, Gorbachev returned
Sakharov.
-With Gorbachev started a struggle against corruption. -They cancelled the monopoly of foreign trade! And everything
is started to exporting from the Soviet Union! Day and night!
Everything was being exported! -How much was gold reserve in the beginning with Gorbachev?!
Reduced by 5 times! 5 times!
-And what were oil prices then? And what were oil prices, excuse
me? -Oil prices don’t matter! I am telling you that we already had
gold!
-It does matter, because coutry is collapsed! How can it not
matter? -Nohting was collapsed!
-24$-25$, the country was of raw materials existed with no oil? -Until the 1990, USSR was the greatest country! The most
powerful! In 1990! It shouldn’t had been brought to SCSE! Why
conduct a referendum about existance of the country?! -You have all the power in your hands! Restore order! Disperse
everyone who is obstacle for you! You already have a different
KGB! You already have a different army! -He broke up everything! Broke up everything! Destroyed
everything! Coward! Incompitent! Ne tried nothing! -Gorbachev tried to sign an alliance agreement. He tried to
create a union of independent states.
-And then what?! So why didn’t he signed it then?! -He went to a vacation right away! What did he was tired from?!
From what?! Why did he went to Foros?! What he was doing there?!
Playing chess?! -And this is an interesting question. What happened?
-August 2, sit down and sign! Sit down and sign, everyone! But
he left for vacation! He provoked SCSE himself! -He provoked it! It was his SCSE!
-Good question. What he was doing in Foros? Interesting question. -It was him who did it! It was the scenario of destruction! The
scenario of transfering power to Yeltsin! He did everything! -We will continue in second round.
-He is an agent! He did everything!
-Everything is OK, please sit down. -I am listening carefuly, because I lived then too, like some of
our viewers, and all participants. And feelings differ so much. -It turs out that will passing of the time, we are reviewing not
only our history, but also editing our emotions. -How easy we are ready to refuse all these freedoms, what came to
us with Gorbachev. For what? For a hearty launch? But the launch
was also not too hearty. -Pavlov’s reform – lost of deposits.
-They made everyone beggars! 9 millions of refugees.
-We just returned forom train trip. The country is abandoned,
the people are abandoned. -Yes, yes. They are making experiments. How much longer it will
continue? No bathhouses.
-No toilets! -He was realizing Brzezinski’s plan, one-to-one, on destruction
of Russia. This is first, second, what opponent said here about
economy. We are living on Soviet Union’s economy for 20 years,
which we inhereted from Brezhnev. -He was the one who practically could save this country, which
was tolling down towards collapse. Economical collapse, political
collapse. -And then, look, he alwasy says, give us back the Soviet Union.
And immideately, he say that you are supporting Lenin, but it is
him who supporting Lenin, who created the Soviet Union. -Where is logic? Then he says that Andropov created Gorbachev,
but the same way, Gorbachev created Zhirinovsky. -That’s why here, we have a violation of, some kind of totally
elementary logic, in all this. -He does not giving you at all a chance to talk about
cultural, classical aspect of ruling… -He had a nickname in Stavropol ”Misha-suitcase”. That’s why
the question about struggle against corruption is highly
doubtful, we can say. -Because with Gorbachev we got splash of corruption, which
continued after. -He took 100.000, from the head of South Korea. Right there in
the airport. They gave him 100.000. He put it in his pocket. -Yes, they were feeding him up everywhere, and in London…
-Laureate of Nobel prize. What prize? What peace in country?
-What did they gave him Nobel prize for? Yes. -…Gorbachev saved the world from lethal nuclear threat. It
is not a joke. Today it is received like some legend. But the
Cold War is not a joke. -The world could indeed ”explode” in the beginning of 1980’s.
And countries could indeed exchange with nuclear strikes, and
the world would have really ended. -And then, presentation of such claims as ”he didn’t do this,
he didn’t do that, didn’t spopped this conflict”, etcetera, -You started indeed from the fact that any empire is eventually
suffers collapse, and Gorbachev was that exact ruler, who ruled
this empire, in the moment of it’s collapse. -Today our arbitrator is historian and writer, TV presenter,
Igor Leonidovich Volgin. -Gorbachev is discussed very often. But today, when it suddenly
revealed, that despite the difficult Yeltsin’s period, the 1-st
Chechen campaign – disgrace, most of all, Russian citizens,
dislike particularly Gorbachev. -You know, I’m afraid that these disputes will still continue
for a very long time. -Because he ”fell into millstones” of history, this Gorbachev.
It is the same point of dispute, as the year 1917, like
collectivization, like war. -Point of dispute, they are painful points, sore spots, of the
Russian history. Soviet, Russian, whatever, you understand? -Well it is rightfully said, that history in Russia is
unpredictable. It is unpredictable, it is changing. -And I think that Gorbachev, induces sympathy, human. This is
one dimention, human. The other dimention, is political. -And well, these things are dispersing, of course. If we take
the results of what he did as a politician, of course it causes
many doubts. -By many, today. But not because he did it this way, but because
what situation is like today, you understand? -Well, the wrost situation will become today, the more there
will be gathering different kinds of social ”fueling”
materials, -The more there will be dissatisfaction with economic situation,
moral situation, the more Gorbachev will be condemn. -If the country will have some kind of future, if it will have
some kind of historical solution, then of course, his merits
will be constantly, um, kind of, rising. -And I think, that the biggest pretension of Gorbachev, is that
he allowed the dissolution of the Soviet Union. -Here we can dispute any way we want. This is how he got into
this. If he had declared, in the moment when he was giving his
speech, -That famous, in December, about the fact that the country is
dissolving, if he would have said, that -”Yes, but I am remaining the president of the country. I don’t
need your fund. I don’t need your guards. -I am remaining on this position, where I am leading already
non existand state”. -I thing in this case, his moral authority would have been much
higher. He acted like he didn’t care.
-”Washed his hands”. -Yes, and you know what, surprisingly, this his deed reminds me
of renunciation of Nikolai 2-nd. -Who, like someone said, I think Julien, that ”he gave up the
country, like a squadron”. -Here he had very big authority. It is a different story, that
he didn’t had any chances to hold the country together
military way, or by force. -But moral. He had a very strong moral ”trump card”. He was
the head of the state, and nobody had removed him. Understand? -Well here, of course, dissolution of the country was not caused
by people’s movements. It was not cause by some cataclysms
from below. -The country was dissolved from above. Through reverse intrigue.
That is, the headman neede to be removed, but to do so, the
country must be removed. -Sad.
-It is a very sad event. Yes. -In the second round we will continue our discussion with very
bright experts. We will see what paints they are going to add. -And then of course we will return again, because our subject
today is interesting, and every discussion either with
arbitrator, -Or with participants, either with experts, are adding every
time, new materials for thoughs. -We are continuing our program, and experts are entering the
duel, who of course have questions to our participants. -If you please…
-Iosif Leonidovich. I have such question…
-Excuse me…
-Yes, the following question… -You should really intrduce youself, comrade general.
-Oh, introduce myself. Um, Rutskoi Aleksandr Vladimirovich. -General Rutskoi!
-A general… No, no, let’s remeber.
-Let us be modest. -No, we shall not be modest.
-Who knows, OK, who doesn’t…
-For a few months he was the president of Russia. -Everyone know, everyone know. 1993, the White House…
-Children are grown up, they don’t know anything. They are
18-19 years old. -Were you a vice president?
-Well, of course.
-OK. Hero of Russia? -Of the soviet Union, don’t confuse.
-Hero of the Soviet Union, my bad. Received a star for
Afganistan. Combat pilot. -Yes, general of combat air force.
-Yes, how many flights?
-562 combat flights. -You were captured POW?
-Everything happened. -Iosif Leonidovich, you are aware, that in March 1991,
a referendum took place. Union wide referendum. For the first
time in Soviet Union existance. -77,3%, well 78% of country’s population, said ”Yes, Soviet
Union must continue to exist”. Not renewed, but for Soviet
Union to exist. -And right after a week, on Gorbachev’s initiative, on his
conference on March 28, 1991, SCSE was created. March 1991. -A week after referendum. The question: Why? And further, you
remember, they were forces to declare emergency situation in
August, 19 of the month, -And Gorbachev let everyone down under the guise of that he
was placed under arrest. Here is the person, who flew there,
get him out there, and brought him back to Moscow. -No one had arested him, no one had turned his communications
off. It was crystal clear played betray of his comrades. -And when you went to Foros for Gorbachev, what did he said to
you? -He said ”well see, Alexands Vladimiroich? I am unshaved, I
am here under arrest…” I said ”what arrest, Michail
Sergeievich? -I passed through without any problems, I saw Dmitriy
Timofeyevich Yazov, Vladimir Alexandrovich Kruchkov, I greeted
them. I asked, they said: Gorbachev is in there, go to him”. -There were no blocking, not nothing.
-Then what had been defence minister and headman of Committee for
State Security were doing there? -They flew there, to agree on the matter: To introduce or not
to introduce an emergency situation. -This happened on August 17, and on 21, when I went there, they
were already there, because the situation had already came to
a dead end. -So you want o say that SCSE and all August days, these were
all dramatization under the direction of Gorbachev, -And when Gorbachev realized that he had lost, he gave up all
of his accomplices.
-All of his comrades. Gave away at full scale. -Heavy accusation.
-So the question connected to this. -What right president of the USSR had, to ignore the referendum
of country’s population. We are all like to talk about people. -We are all care and disputing on how our people live. So here
is the question. How can this be ignored? -Expression of the will, of population of the whole country.
This is first. And the second question. -The initiative of Ogarev, about the renewed Union agreement,
belongs to Gorbachev. Instead of Union agreement, -Something else was pasted together, a confederative state.
And this new Union agreement gathered to sign only 3 republics:
Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan. -Everyone else had refused. Basically, on 20 of the month, when
the new Union agreement should have been signed, -Soviet Union had been liquidated. Here is what the problem is.
And for this reason, not me, not you, not Vladimir Volfovich, -Didn’t made any statements of this kind, likemade this statement
Bush, Clinton, Gates, as who prevailed and who’s merit it is, we
have not done. -They made it. In connection with this, in connection with this,
a question arises: And who in world Gorbachev is then? Who
perpetrated this madness on a great superpower. -We had bipolar world. United States, and Warsaw Pact. By the
way, Warsaw Pact, was also detroyed by Gorbachev’s initiative,
in cooperation with Shevardnatze. -You understand? And today United States are doing whatever
they want. -Yugoslavia bombings. The whole Northern Africa drowned in blood.
Syria. And everywhere more and more blood is shed, and no one
can stop this madness. -So who is Gorbachev in reality? And is this freedom worth of
this blood, with which the earth is watered? -This is a good question. Is the freedom worth of all the
spilled blood? -I think, of course, about what happened 25 years ago, of course
not all documents have been disclosed yet. -Fortunately, many of participants of those events are still
alive. And I think, it is not a coincinence that Hollywood is
shooting 2 films about Gorbachev. -It is not an accident that he is one of the most interesting
personalities of the modern history. -I think, indeed very detailed, unfortunately, our children and
our grandchildren, out descendants, will research about this
in every detail, -Like we are researching what was happening back then in
Patriotic War of 1812. -But, nevertheless, I think, that the main factor in that
Gorbachev tried… he did tried to hold it together, of course. -But the main factor is that this great, magnifiscent, wonderful,
where we were all born, empire called Soviet Union was collapsing
totally regardless from Gorbachev. -Excuse me, read a wonderful book of Gaidar Egor Timurovich,
read this book, with numbers and facts.
-Don’t. Don’t. Don’t. Here is another one! Another enemy! -This activist represents no authority for me, the one who ruined
economy of USSR.
-The book called ”Destruction of the empire”. (*3) -We were alive. Why do we need your Gaidar?
-We are trying now, excuse me, Gorbachev lived in politics, in
big politics 5+ years, -And gave an opportunity to us, including… including…
-Vladimir Volfovich.
-Yes, to Vladimir Volfovich, he gave an opportunity to do for
25 years… -We did not asked him for it! We are against it!
-Yes, but without him, you wouldn’t be here.
-We don’t want it! We hate him! -There was a very important factor about SCSE, so it turns out
that, about what comrade general was talking.
-But this is unfounded, like Gorbachev initiated… -This is not unfounded.
-Gorbachev staged his own arrest, Gorbachev initiated.
-Everything is in archives!
-There was no arrest, this is the problem here. -There was no arrest. He went for vacation in Crimea on August 2.
-How it is proven today? How? How can you say that…? -Well he told them while he was leaving ”do whatever you are
planned to”, he told them! He told them while he was leaving!
If you will pull this off, I will return as a head of the state!
If you won’t, he came with Yeltsin! -He loved and loves very much, I heard what he said,
-Loved and loves what?
-He loved and loves his country and his people. -He of course wanted to preserve it at maximum. The empire was
collapsing. The economy was at zero. And all democratic freedoms,
which allowed to people to breathe.
-Yes, you have already said this. -That is why, I have said, yes, and that is why of course, he
was doing everything that could do anyone in that…
-Iosif Leonidovich, look, 5 years in power, -External debt 31 billions, in 5 years of ruling, external debt
becomes 51 billion.
-Finish please, what the debt was when Gorbachev finished? -What?
-When Gorbachev finished, what was the debt?
-Debt 3 times higher, gold reserve 3 times less! Because he
robbed everything! -It was 31 billion, when Gorbachev took over it became 51.
-Where did he robbed?
-Gave away! Abroad! Abroad!
-Please, Pavel Nikolayevich. -Good evening, Gusev Pavel, chief editor of the newspaper
”Moskovskij Komsomolets”. -I have the following question and judging, that of course the
question have been discussed here, that particularly thanks to
Michail Sergeievich Gorbachev the party of Vladimir Volfovich
Zhirinovsky appeared. -And if not for this, if there were no such kind of political
leader, there would have been no such party. -In his memoires, Alexander Nikolaievich Yakovlev, secretary of
CCCPSU, together with Fillip Bobkov, chairman of KGB USSR
assistant, remembers how this party was created. -And it is exactly with the ideological direction. First.
-Yes, yes, there was creation of the party step by step. -So I am interested in the following question. It was
immideately laid image of the party, as a couterballance
to this calm, tough policy of CPSU, such caddish, extreme, -Totally human hating principals of this party? Principals that
are laid today to humiliate people, insult people. To tramble
with boots the Indian Ocean – extremism. -Etcetera, and such as. Well this all, this all, was it laid
from the beginning, or you managed to create it during the period
of your activities, when realizing, that for Russia, -In period of revolutionaly conversion, this kind of image, well
this kind of influential cad, political clown, would be the most
interesting today? -People always offending you, Vladimir volfovich.
-I have already heard many times, from dirty, ”yellow”
journalists, eith their filthy puny newpapers,
-Here goes mutual love… -With their lies and slander, they were always slandering our
country! And especially patriots! They will never bother Gaidar,
Bolotnaya! -They are afraid it will tun out bad for them! It will turn bad
for you! You are going to withstand trial, Gusev! -We are going to shut down your newspaper! Because there is no
more vole jouranlist, there is none! You understand?!
-We will shut your party down. Forever. We are going to forget
that there was such party. -Never existed such vile puny newspaper in the world!
-Yeah, and we were criticising Gaidar more than you.
-Yes. Yes, yes, yes. You were criticising… -This means, he did not understood the subject for which we
all came here. We are talking about Gorbachev! We are talking
about Gorbachev! -If there will be a program dedicated to me, I will come and
say everything! And you can discuss everything.
I didn’t destroyed the country, Gusev! -I never took a single ruble anywhere! I never…! What
rudeness?! Regarding those who destroying the country?! -Not only rudeness! We are going to grab you by the neck, and
choke you! Scoundrels! Enemies! Rascals! Scoundrels! Beasts!
-Powerful… -He wants for us with smiles in our eyes… don’t worry, I will
pay for it.
-I realize that Alexander of Macedonia is Great, but why break
chairs? -Look at this, citizens of Russia, the country is dying, the
country is covered in blood, 9 millions of refugees. Understand?
-Big actor. And Pavel Nikolayervich is soft hunter. -Yes. Yes. A great talent.
-Russians are being scoffed everywhere! You understand?!
-I wonder why are you always talking about Russians,
Vladimir Volfovich. -And you are talking about yours!
-Tell us about your father…
-Stop, do not touch the father. -Him, Gusev, want me to speak quietly. Guys, there will be no
more country. Economy…
-You are taking care of it, of the country. -Economy… Keep silent, I am answering now! Was I silent when
you were answering to Rutskoi?! You don’t know regulations here!
-Order here. We always restoring it. -Well he is the one who is restoring the order! You keep silent!
-Please… Bring anothr glass, please. -That is, Gusev still can not understand, that a certain group
of people, a certain group of people, they are of course happy!
Really! Got rich! Stole enough! Grabbed enough! -But I saw people! Homeless! Everything got destroyed! You
realize, that there is no country at all?! Banditry! Shootings!
-Keep calm. Now is round, when you answering with turns. -Shootings every day! The other day, a little girl was strangled
to death, she was 14 years old! It is her parents…!
-Veterans have been killed. -Veterans got killed…
-What Gusev has to do with this?
-Let Zhirinovsky answer.
-I am explaining!
-Excuse me… -It was those who grew up during Gorbachev’s time! Who stole
everything!
-During your time they grew up! 20 year olds!
-Are we in power?! -Each one in his turn… Each one in his turn…
-What Gorbachev, you are ruling for 25 years!
-It was him! What Gorbachev has to do with it? -You realize that we are not the ruling party?!
-We need another glass.
-Give me a glass!
-So you will break it again… You liked the glass. -See this?! Director. Oh, no, this time I will take it with me. -So, you can not understand, you are a director, organize a play,
with God’s blessings.
-I am.
-Can you understand that there are 400 parties? Why are you
always bringing mine up? -Why are you only remember mine, all the time?!
-Well, explain to me, Gorbachev had anything to do with
appearance… Question on the same subject. -But the point was another.
-Yes. I am explaining! I am explaining!
-Your party. How it is that you, in particular, managed to create
the second party in history of USSR? -Open the archives.
-No, just tell us.
-Open archives of CPSU and KGB. Everything is written clearly. -Perestroika had started, it was allowed to create parties,
expecially after 1990 6-th article was cancelled. Finally!
With ”squeaks”! -Gorbachev gathers political bureau, and says to Kruchkov:
Vladimir Alexandrovich, what is happening? What parties are
there? Is there someone that does not damning us?! -He knew that everyone was damning them! Everyone! And Gorbachev,
and CPSU! There were millions people on meetings! -He answers: Yes, there is one party that does not says ”Down
USSR, down CPSU, down KGB”, that’s it. He names it. -Liberal-Democratic Party, chairman – Zhirinovsky. That’s it!
That’s it. That is, I was behaving myself decently!
-There! -So, like Gusev says, that I was behaving myself with
rudeness…! I was treating with respect the great country,
Gusev! And its leaders! And Gorbachev! With respect! -All ministers! All deputies! All authorities! The only party!
We were not saying ”Down!” We nowhere, so to say, did not
got people to the streets! -Not a single drop of blood, Gusev! Nowhere and never! We
didn’t put a single person of ours to jail! -But we were demanding to stop the breakdown! I honestly
suppoerted the program! Not SCSE, but the program! It is
relavang to this day! -Understood. Understood, Vladimir Volfovich.
-And what we should have done?! We should had, so to say,
like you, in ragged pants, ran to foreign editorial offices and
compliment Yetsin?! -This will never happen!
-And who was the initiator of the first political amnesty? -We did it! You are always talking about democracy, and who gave
you democracy?! Who gave you freedom?! When everyone were
put to prisons already with Yeltsin! Who gave them freedom?! -Me! Author of act about general political amnesty! And on
February 23, I, standing on tribune of governmental Duma,
-I must tell you one little story. -I was begging everyone to support it! Because communists were
against – punish Yeltsin! Democrats were against – punish
communists! -I was begging, and barely passed with 225 votes!
-We have proof.
-We released everyone from prisons! Everyone! -I have proof. On one of my shows, there were debates back then,
and Vladimir Volfovich didn’t went to president elections, there
were another candidate. -And a fight was happening between mr. Anpilov, and
mr. Zhirinovsky. And candidate for president from LDPR,
back then, stated, -From the place of witness: Vityok (*4), – he said to Anpilov,
-What is with you?, – further is not quoted. -Volfovich brought
you out of slammer, and this is how you thank him? -And Anpilov admitted rightness. Yes, indeed, that time, Vladimir
Volfovich contributed in his release. Please… This is what
some of candidate’s for president on behalf of LDPR speech
was like. -Vasiliy Koltashev, economist, and College of Globalization and
Social Movements. -And you are one of initiators of this idea.
-And one of initiators of signatures gathering to deprive
Michail Gorbachev of highest reward of Russian Federation. -See? Not me, initiator. The people. I had nothing to do with it.
-I want to explain why did we came out with such initiative, and
why today it was already signed by many many Russian citizens. -Bring me water. A director was drinking it. It’s poisonous.
-Director, please bring water and a glass, right now.
-He gave his water. Poisonous. -Excuse me please for interrupting.
-I am not a fool.
-Now it is twice as poisonous. -Yeah. Come on, come on, talk. Time is passing.
-Very often it is heard that Gorbachev gave this, Gorbachev gave
that. -But all this is still in format of an old Russian expression
”a great prince takes, a great price gives”. -Of course if we had a certain democratization of social life,
if something changed in the country, then there were all
the objective reasons for this, -And there was a certain will of the society. And of course, it
was not Gorbachev who gave, but Gorbachev took, and why are
we demanding to take away, with his turn, the highest award. -Today, the biggest problem for development of Russian economy,
is the problem of market widening. Customs Union is being
created, -Integration processes has been initiated once again on post
Soviet areas. A big integrated market is needed. -A big big marked, where there will be developed domestic
demand. That is we need to move towards those borders that we had
during Soviet times, and maybe even further. -So, basically, the matter of recreation of economical and
trading area of the USSR.
-Yes. Certainly. -De facto, in 1980’s, when Gorbachev remained in power, we had
2 options of restoration. Market restoration, yes? -And the first option was very simple, and Gorbachev was heading
towards it. That is, to enter to world market, and sell there
everything they were ready to buy there. -Don’t put any fights for it, surrender domestic market,
surrender consumers, bring everything to a collapse.
And this particular option was chosen. -And this option in prticular, starting with Gorbachev, was
realizing. And dividing of the Soviet Union was an integral
part of this option in particular. -Because in reality, for this option of market development, if
you can say that way, there is no need for a united, big country. -The other option would be based on, of course, support of
domestic consumers, but particularly this, they refused to
realize. -So, if I understand you correctly, you see Gorbachev’s malice,
and conscious movement towards collapse of the great country? -Certainly, I see Gorbachev’s malice here, and conscious aim to
collapse the country. -And thats why you want him to be deprived of the order?
-Yes. Yes. And taking into account the consequences during
10+ years – a total collapse of the economy. -Veterans are being killed for their medals, and here is…
-Here is absolutely, here is absolutely nothing to respond. But
today anything can be ascribed to Gorbachev. -He was doing whatever he was doing. He was doing whatever he
could. From all that he had done, we can name 10 points, for
which we are praying to this day. -And I had already named them, and we can continue to name them.
It is, first of all, well understandable, it is humanization,
it is freedom, is it open world, -It is the possibility for Vladimir Volfovich to lead his party
for 25 years. And to always refer Gorbachev, the possibility
to gather signatures for you today. -How can 1 person collapse an empire? Excuse me, you are an
economist, I am not an economist, but you probably know the
numbers, and you understand, that he held together whatever
he could hold together. -There were probably much more people there. Maybe in the end
there were created another one alternative party. -There were probably not a few heads. Remember how the first
congress of people’s deputies was going? -It was going on, on the opposite of today’s conferences of
governmental Duma, in real discussions, in real suggestions. -In the fact that indeed smart people started…
-They have been dispersed, but they kept silet!
But nobody is going to disperse us! Understand?! -Nobody will disperse us!
-That’s why we are living this way.
-And this way, the got dispersed! -Gathered there! Good people!
-Unfortunately, we are living like this particularly because for
25 years you are telling stories about Gorbachev, instead of
answering. -Wait! A question! You are a director?!
-Yes.
-If you can not organize a theater play! You are not able to!
-Why can’t I? -I am saying it as an example!
-Oh, yeah, OK.
-What are you doing?! You change the director! -And this is what we are asking for! Remove! Remove Gorbachev!
-Usually it is the actors that are being changed. -Another one would have come! And would have done everything!
-What Gorbachev has to do with everything? He is 20 years ago… -We are remembering that period in particular! You said it
yourself! ”Well, he didn’t managed to”!
-What is there to remember?
-I didn’t invited Zhirinovsky for a long time. He forgot rules
of the second round. -I am keeping silence, but he, he can not keep silence.
-Yes he can. Thank you. Please…
-No discipline! No order! -There! No order in LDPR. Please…
-Nikolai Uskov, ”Snob” magazine. Um, Vladimir Volfovich, um… -What magazine?! ”Snop”?!
-Not agricultural magazine ”Snop” (*5), but ”Snob”. -Um, I don’t want to discuss much history of the Soviet Union.
I am deeply convinced that it was doead born state, which
collapsed because of internal reasons. -Because it was Godless, uneffective, non democratic. And it
was a very weak country. And that’s why it collapsed. -As soon as its leader became a normal person, and not a
bloodsucker, it collapsed. And this is normal fate. -Um, an empire like this was dead born from the very beginning.
The question is very easy. You are standing right now in a
lovely Italina suit. -No! Read! Read! Envy me! I am a citizen of Russian Federation!
-”I am the president”?
-The labels were resewed… -Yeah, yeah. Nothing was resewed! Nothing was resewed! A Russian
master sewed this!
-Of course, and car Maybach on which you are driving… -No! I don’t! Go out and see! Open your eyes! Not even close!
-What then? Zhiguli?
-You are advertizing foreign cars! -You are driving on Zhiguli? Well, I have a very simple question.
-We are discussing Gorbachev here! I will show you all of my
drawers and suits! Right now we will go to my house!
-You in particular are a spawn of the revolution which started
Michail Sergeievich Gorbachev. -And I will clothe you with them all at the same time! So you
can make sure! We will shove you in a Zhaporozhets, and
kick you in the ass! -Your party appeared because there was Gorbachev.
-Here he goes again! We ahve already heard this.
-You have travel passport, because there was Gorbachev. -You can say whatever you want right now, including about
Gorbachev, thanks to Gorbachev. You are going around on an
expensive German car thanks to Gorbachev. -And your wool is Italian, and your shoes are Italinan. You
understand?
-But the Zhirinovsky’s wool is his own. -Well, explain to me, explain to me, maybe it’s better to ask a
question to youself. Why 20 years being in active politics, of
a big governmental authority. -Comparing with Gorbachev, it is 4 Gorbachev’s terms. What have
done? What have you done, besides acquiring an expensive car
and an expensive suit? -And you speak unimaginable rubbish freely everywhere, and
no one is shutting your moth. And before Gorbachev, your moth
had beet shut. -Well again. Well again. I will say to you right away. Let them
shut my mouth 100 times with Soviet power. I want to live
with Soviet power! -In the Soviet Union! Without going abroad! And we are the
majority! Can you, you filthy minority, scram the hell out
of our country?! And live there, where all Gorbachevs are! -Maybe you should get out of the country?
-We are here, you go! There is another one of yours, Gureev,
left to Paris! -Why is he mine? He is yours all the same, like mine.
-Your Berezovsky died there! Your Chodorowski is in jail! -I am answering! Look, we are discussing only Gorbachev here.
You understand? Are you Russian? Ruling party can do somehting! -Oppositional party can not do anything! What you don’t know
what it is to make a decision?!
-I know.
-The decisions are made by the majority! -That’s it! That’s why you can not blame an oppositional party
and say ”what have you done?”! We can not! We can not!
We have a minority! You still haven’t realized it! -Vladimir Volfovich, better anwser another question, which
have sounded.
-What other?! They are constantly saying ”you 20 years, you
this and that…”! -It’s not it. Nikolai formed a different thought in his question.
-Yeah what?! Translate, yes. Into Russian language! -It is, that thanks to Gorbachev, certain things entered into
our life, which we now perceive as natural.
-Agree, yes. -It is a possibility to buy normal products for normal money.
Not to be humiliated with endless queues. Of course those
who had money. -It is the possibility to travel abroad. It is a possibility of
touching western civilization, by only pushing TV button,
and speak freely. -I understood everything!
-Turn on the TV, and there are 100+ channels, maybe. Appearance
of the internet. Appearance of any kind of illusion of freedom. -I am explaining. I, um, editor of ”Snob” magazine, you are
saying right now, and you saying what? That we were not
going out of the Soviet Union? -No.
-Who told you?
-I told you. -It was not allowed for you! That’s right! The won’t let you!
But I was traveling!
-I singed a contract… -That’s right, because KGB opened your party.
-I bought 2 apartments! 2 cars! 2 apartments! I graduated
from 2 universities!
-Well you are simply a speculator. -No! No! Everything is official! People were getting apartments!
Were going abroad! Working!
-To Bulgaria and Crimea.
-This is impudent lie. -I was viled 43 years with Soviet Government!
-Mr. Zhirinovsky, this is impudent lie.
-Further, look, I agree, there are more freedoms today! So what?! -Our people are sitting in prisons! Buut is in American prison!
Polonsky running around the whole world!
-Well, these are your people. -I am telling you one more time, listen to me, you, director!
Millions of people are abandoned abroad! -Our girls are on ”pavements”! In all brothels! These are the
freedoms you gave us?! Soviet girls were all virgins!
-You are in governmental Duma for 20 years. -All of them! All of them! All of them were virgins before
marriage! Understand?
-Excuse me, here I am forced to object as a person who lived
in Soviet Union. -What?! And what?!
-Not all girls were virgins before marriage.
-So you should not socialize with these!
-But there were not all of them. -Im my class, I had only virgins! And at work!
-How do you know?
-Vladimir Volfovich, you are not ginecologist, how can you
make such conclusions? -That’s why, when you are talking about freedoms, this is…
Our ambassador was put to the ground and trampled in
lockup!
-Yes, this is insulting. -This is the kind of freedom we need?! Me and you?! No!
If you had only tried to look funny at highly authorized
ambassador of the Soviet Union! -You’ll shit your pants right away! Here how it was!
-How easy you are in your expressions today.
-And when I was going with Soviet passport, -They were all standing there, customs workers: Please, pass,
please, please, please… -But now he is standing and talking and talking! ”You have a
whong VISA!” Now?! They are taking you finger prints in
American embassy! -What are we criminals or something?! From everyone!
-No, they are fighting terrorism.
-Yes! And what we are all terrorists from today’s Russia?!
-Well, probably. -That’s why don’t thrash this rubbish! Yes, we acquired more
freedoms, but their price is prison, violence, Mavrodis appeared!
This is also freedom?! -Understood. Thank you, Vladimir Volfovich.
-9 millions of refugees, is also freedom?! Breakup of
families! Diseases! We didn’t knew these deseases! -Right?! This is the price! And these interethnic conflicts!
Every day! Every hour! What about terror in Makhachkala?! -So you want to say, that Soviet Union collapsed because for 5
years it was ruled by this person?
-Yes! Yes! Yes! -So you are saying that this country could exist forever?
-Yes! Forever! Insted of him, should have been elected Romanov,
then Sherbitsky, then Grishin, etcetera!
-There was nothign to fress. There was nothing to fress in the
country. -There was everything! Liar! We were fed every day! Everyone
was fed! Not a single hungry person!
-You had 2 apartments, 2 car, you had things to fress, but I
did not had anything to fress. -Oh, it’s because you were homeless! You were a hobo! You were
a hobo! You were a hobo!
-I am from a regular Soviet family, with 150 rubles salary. -Perfect salary! Perfect! Were you traveling to the south?!
-No, I did not.
-And now you won’t go at all!
-Now I am making enough money. -Now your salary is enough for a half of a night! But before,
it were 10 tickets to Anapa – your salary. -And now I will present you phenomenon, which appeared on
Russian television only with Gorbachev.
-Come on! -A little commercials, after which our experts will continue
discussion with heroes of heroes of our show. -We interrupted on a meaningful moment, we are continuing…
-Then we should not interrupt!
-Oh, I understand you very well. Please… -Alexei Mukhin, political scientist. I think we will need another
glass, until the end of the show. -I am very glad to know that great empires collapse with hands
of wily and disloyal patrials. -But I am forced to admit that if you put a driver of a passenger
car behind the wheel of a heavy transport, then he will
feel uncomfortable. -But if next to him will be sitting his dear wife, advisor, then
the situation will get even worse. -In this connection, one historical analogy is obvious to me.
Nikolai 2-nd obviously was not ready to rule the Russian Empire. -Michail Gorbachev, if I remember correctly, was the youngest
member of political bureau. On the most responsible moment,
Nikolai 2-nd became commander-in-chief of WW1. -Michail Gorbachev was elected president of the Soviet Union.
As the result, heavy transport just fell off a cliff. -He broke up into pieces. Part of them looted by locals, part
of it guzzled away. But, in this case, what should be done with
the driver? -In some cases, he is released with peace. In other cases, he
is put to trial. We all know what happened with Nikolai 2-nd.
-But never he is awarded. -He was shot.
-With Michail Gorbachev, well ”from prince to grease”.
Everything is clear here, also. -Question: Should a leader of a great country take history
lessons? -Everything that you’ve said, yes, Michail Sergeievich didn’t
studied in Sorbonne. But he studied in MSU. Faculty of law. -And didn’t worked at all, after graduating!
-Michail Sergeievich for the first time in many years,
started to speak humanly. -A real wife appeared next to him. Which people saw.
-And started to hate him, for the wife!
-Michail Sergeievich for the first time came to a theater,
where Vladimir Volfovich does not go. -He started to watch performances, became friends of Oleg
Nikolayevich Efremov, with Michail Ulianov. -He started to open… he opened, during his 5 years, in Moscow
there were more than 20 orchestra halls opened, -Including ”Russian Symphonic Orchestra”, the national
orchestra, which exist to this day. -For the first time, he started to talk with western civilized
world as equal. For the first time he, for the first time he,
allow me to answer, -Basically, overcame, avoided the threat of a nuclear war, on
which the world was standing, and we, you and me, know about
Carribean Crisis, and everything else. -For the first time, he gave an opportunity to normal people
to hear, that on conferences, there people’s deputies, it’s not
important where, -People can really talk. Without signing these documents…
Vladimir Volfovich says about the ruling party, and we can not
do anything. -But to disagree with ruling party you can not as well?
-We can! Criticising every day! And here is the decision taking!
You are confusing different things!
-So why are you signing everything that is given to you? -Answer the question.
-That’s why I am answering the question. Michail Sergeievich
Gorbachev was during many many years of totalitarian regime, -And people that were ruling. Monsters that were ruling. Lenin,
Stalin, we are not going to list them, Brezhnev’s stagnation. -For the first time, a person came out, educated, speaking,
hearing, giving an opportunity to speak to others, and taking… -Of course he didn’t had experience in leading a country, of
course he didn’t had the experience to drive this huge truck.
-Why did he sat behind the wheel then? -He can’t! But he sat! Delirium!
-But, excuse me, his intentions, thanks to them, I completely
agree with you, thanks to them, we are standing here and talking. -And today, when Vladimir volfovich basically behind the wheel
for 25 years, we are remebering…
-What wheel, please, stop.
-Again! Delirium! -Inside the vehicle, not behind the wheel. Inside the vehicle.
-Not even inside the vehicle! In the last railcar! In the last
railcar! -Today we are talking about why is it Gorbachev’s fault.
-In common carriage! In the last! -Michail Gorbachev is a very good person…
-Can we make it so I could hear our respectable second man? -Michail Gorbachev is a good person, but the situation in the
country is not getting any easier. You understand? -It is not a profession.
-Let him talk.
-One need to approach responsibly to what are you doing. -And Michail Sergeievich Gorbachev demonstrated that he was not
a professional. -Michail Sergeievich Gorbachev demonstrated what he was able
to demonstrate. -And this is his mistake! This is the mistake!
-If at that moment, academicial Sakharov, excuse me, would have
been appointed as chairman of governmental Duma, -Not in any case! Leave him in Gorkiy! Leave him in Gorkiy!
Your Sakharov!
-Probably something different would have happed. -Well, we must specify that Gorbachev had extremely powerful
team. But he did everything he could not to listed them. -Look, Maslyakov, who was high rank in Gorbachevs team, Gorbachev
exiled him, de facto. -He was saying on congress of political bureau to Maslyakov
”What is this rubbish?”. And then Maslyakov threw over the
whole table his rapport saying ”This is rubbish?!”, and left. -And then, Michail Sergeievich, who, sofly speaking, unlike
Boris Nikolaievich could use filthy language, started to
explain something. -But he was that exact Maslyakov, who after same loser
Kiriyenko, got the country out of crisis. -Certainly, Volodya, certainly.
-That’s why I am telling you, there was academician Abalkin,
who had warned about totally incorrect economical reforms
which Gorbachev was performing, -But he was, de facto, exiled. Nobody wanted to listen to him.
Because Gorbachev showed swaggerness. Openly, who was against
”the fur” with the most communist methods, sending them all
to suburbs. -But where he was born? Where did he came from? Excuse me,
who formed him?
-That’s why he should not! There must be others! -Because he was failed tyrant, he must become a democrat?
-Hillbilly!
-Yes. Yes. These 5 years were like that. What can we do? -All of his relatives are from farms! But I am grandson of an
industrialist!
-So what if they were from farms? -I was building factories! And he is combainer’s driver
assistant! Here he is!
-Industrialist himself does not building factories. -He was in occupation! What he was doing during occupation?!
-Lomonosov came to Moscow on foot, too. -What he was doing during occupation?! Was he setting on fire
German tanks?! Was he struggled against Germans?! What he was
doing?! Village Privolnoe was occupied! -He was 11 years old! What he was doing there?!
-What was he supposed to do?
-He was resting! Sitting and drinking tea! -With Germans?
-Yes!
-It’s a lie. -And how?! What is he going to do?! Germans were sitting in every
hut!
-We must ask him what he was doing. -Well ask him! He was 11 years old! Maybe he was even playing
dominoes with them?!
-Oh God. This is something.
-This is something new. Yes, please… -There were partizans! They were throwing themselves… Please.
-Vladimir Volfovich… -Kuvaldin Victor Borisovich, chief of lectern of Moscow school
of economy at MSU. -Victor Borisovich, also please tell us, how many years you have
worked side by side with Michail Sergeievich. -With Michail Sergeievich I worked for more than 20 years,
including 3 years, when he was, at first, general secretary,
then president of the country. -As a consultant and speech writer on foreign policy matters.
-He was talking well about me?! Not like Gusev?! -And now Gusev is pouring dirt on me! But the president was
speaking well about me!
-Vladimir Volfovich, allow us to hear out our expert.
-Please… Please… So it means it was good! -Vladimir Volfovich, at least Michail Sergeievich never allowed
to himself this kind of tone that you are allowing to yourself. -First of all, Gusev is allowing, then me! As a response!
-Vladimir Volfovich, we are graduated from the same university,
let us at least respect each other. -And Gorbachev graduated! And how it all ended?!
-And Gorbachev graduated. I thing this applies certain
liabilities.
-OK, talk. -Honestly, I do not see you having some personal pretensions.
As I remember during Soviet times you were valiantly working
as a attorney consultant, in one of editorial offices. -Yes. Yes. Editorial office ”Mir”.
-Yes, absolutely correct. Post Soviet time, you became one of
leading politicians of our country. This is true, yes?
-Yes. Yes. -That’s why, I thing you would never became one, if not for
Gorbachev and Perestroika. But to be honest, I wanted to
ask you another thing right now. -I know that basically all and everything, you are turning into
buffoonery. Nonetheless, I know that you are indeed a real
politician. -It is in your blood, and you are one of the few real politicans
of our country. So, if you allow me, I would like to ask you
a serious enough question. -In history of Russia, in XX century, there were 3 determinitive
years. 1917, 1941 and 1991. -Well, I understand, when young people, who had written, from
my point of view, a letter both stupid, and pointless, and most
likely they are going to be ashamed of their signatures on it. -But you have been through everything, and you indeed know
everything. Especially, everything that concerns year 1991. -Um… I have, first of all a little reference here, what
concerns Foros, citizen Rutskoi arrived there on August 21. -On August 19, 20, 18, Gorbachev was blocked, he didn’t had
communications, this I know for sure. I know this from guards of
”ennead”, which was guarding him at that moment. -This presented, by the way, in memoires as well. Look at…
-But you were not near him back then?
-No, I was not present in Foros. -There was no one, but his family. I was close. A cape away from
him. And in cape, there was a military ship was located. -There. You can read memoires of commander of Black Sea fleet.
-So, when he arrived on 21-th, yes indeed by that time, blockade
was lifted, since putsch failed. -And that’s why it became possible for general Rutskoi to fly
there. -General Rutskoi… And for this particular reason, Yazov flew
there, as well as Lukianov, to try to jump out of this situation
somehow. -Well, and now I am adressing to you, since, Vladimir Volfovich,
unlike many people in our country, in the second part of the
year 1991, you of course knew what is happening. -You were aware that in the country was being performed a
crawling coup d’eat. That Yeltsin initiated conspiracy with
national separatists. -And that this inavitable would have brought to something
like Belovezhia conspiracy. -At that time, you are already not a regular citizen. You were
participating in president’s elections of 1991. -And your performance, from my point of view, very well. You
are indeed a talented person. Millions of people voted for you. -But I do not remember in 1991, in the second half of the year,
not a single speech, not yours, nor your party’s, nor vice
president, with Yeltsin, Rutskoi, -Against what was happening. Gorbachev, who’s hands were tied
at that moment, already tied hands, is trying to save the
country, doing everything in his power. -So, why did you remained silent back then, and now you are
coming here and yelling ”Return our country back”? -I am answering. I am answering! -Thank you for this question! This is all kept silent for already
22 years! From 1991, today is 2013. -The only party, and me, live, supported statement of SCSE! We
were the only ones. Seleznev and Zuganov were in Kislovodsk
cleaning their kidneys and liver, I don’t know, what the hell
they were cleaning there! -We supported! You saying ”why didn’t I spoke against Yeltsin”?
Or in favor of Yeltsin? I was against Yeltsin! -In June 1991, I was traveling throughout the whole country and
condamning him! I was saying that ”if you elect Yeltsin, there
will be civil war and the end of the country”! -And today, everyone is thankful to me, for I was the only one
who warned about this! All other candidates were communists! -And in August 19, on Monday, in 09:00! I sent a message of the
supreme council of LDPR to TASS, telegraph agency of the USSR:
Supporting! Completely! The statement of SCSE! -Here what had happened. And I came out to the square! On
Manezhnaya! There were only 2 thousand democrats standing there!
Led by Ivanov! -I don’t see him anymore, they probably killed him! He kicked
me in the chest! Here is who you are, democrats!
You scoundrels! Criminals! Bandits! -Why did he kicked me in the chest?! Because I came out to ask
them what they were doing! This is legal authority! Legal
authority! -By the law about initiation of emergency situation,
emergency situation could be initiated! -If SCSE was not fromed in correct way somehow, then Gorbachev
would have came after 3 days! And he would have turn to Yeltsin’s
side, or supported it! This should have been desided by the
supreme council of the USSR! -What you, democrats, had to do with anything?! Standing there
2.000 punks! It was you, who destroyed the Soviet Union! -I was against Gorbachev! And I made a statement! The only party
that had mate a statement! And everyone is keeping quiet about it
today! Why Gusev is not posting this?! -The statement of LDPR! At 09:00 o’clock in the morning, on
August 19! Tanks arrived at 11:00 o’clock in the morning!
I remember everything! Every minute! -I came out to these tank operators and started to…! They came
out of their tanks, these bastards! They wanted to kill me!
You democrats! Bandits! Murderers! -I sat in my car, ”Moskvich”, there were no any ”Maybach”!
”Moskvich”! And I got it for free! For free! For my patriotism! -They wanted to turn it over and burn it! They wanted to turn
my ”Moskvich” and burn it! Here is what you are!
Bandits – democrats! -You were burning all of your opponents! Already in August 1991!
That’s why only hatred to you! With your Yeltsin! -And started it all, allowed it all, and provoked it
all – Gorbachev! -So, you were both against Yeltsin and against Gorbachev?
-Of course! But I supported SCSE in particular, because I
realized that these were nincompoops! -And all the more so, I never spoke in Yeltsin’s defence! During
the whole June I was against him! Throughout the whole month of
July! -I was candidate for president!
-Yes, please…
-Please…! -Vladimir Volfovich, maybe you will answer my question?
-What? Well, you asked me what position I had! -Well, if you allow me, I will repeat.
-Well, please, come on…!
-Thank you, Vladimir Volfovich. -First, SCSE removed from power the legal elected president of
the country. So you don’t need to say that it was…
-I will answer to you, right now. -No, I asked you a different question. Vladimir Volfovich, what
were you doing, when after August 21, a slowly crawling
counter-coup had started in the country? -I will explain! I am explaining!
-By people that were around Yeltsin, by people who came to an
agreement with national separatists. -I agree! Yes. I am explaining!
-Where were you statements, and statements of your party? -We, citizens of the Soviet Union, were always believing! And
in the statement of SCSE was written: ”Michail Sergeievich Gorbachev because of troubles with his
health, can not continue to perform duties of president of
the USSR”! -How could we assume that this is how a coup starting?! ”SCSE
was created because Gorbachev got sick…”! -And they, because the whole Soviet leadership was there!
Government chairman, all key mionisters, KGB, IM,
defence minister! -Everyone were there! If, let’s say, a group of leutenants would
have came from Samara, then it’s obviously a military coup!
Pinochets! -The whole Soviet leadership! And he got sick! Why should we
believe them?! -Second, what have I done next, further?! LDPR was prohibited
on the territory of city of Moscow! -Your democrat, Gavriyl Haritonov, no, rather Popov Gavriyl
Haritonovich, had prohibited! -And you are asking me what we should have done! We were
prohibited! For we had supported SCSE! -And repressions of new democrats didn’t included anyone else!
And then, we were struggling against nationalist-separatists! -Everywhere, where we could do it! And I led people through
streets of Moscow! Not you there, Bolotnaya, or Anpilov! -We were struggling against it! All 20 years! And for this Yetsin
hated me, people like Gusev are hating to this day! -I was struggling, and I’m glad that I was struggling!
For our Soviet Union! -Thank you very much, it was a very interesting round. Now we
have a little break, please sit down. -Raihelgauz never tried to either turn over your ”Moskvich”,
or kick you in the chest. -He would have gladly gave them tickets, to those who would have
burned me!
-Tickets can be bought. Sit down. -And after 20 years, they are still saying something! Murderers!
Murderers!
-Not as much years passed by, as there many versions of these
events, -Which to this day did not became history, and still probably,
something out of jounalism. -And I am very interested to understand, what had happened back
then. Why suddenly followed sequence of strange suicides
of participants of SCSE. -Why Michail Sergeievich Gorbachev suddenly agreed to a totally
indecent comic role, and the last few years were humiliating for
Gorbachev. -And he, basically, could not neither leave, and somehow with his
figure, unwillingly was blessing Yeltsin to the crawling
counter-revolutionary coup, -Which he was carrying through, together with
nationalist-separatists. Let’s talk with the arbitrator. -People indeed sincerely love Gorbachev, because one got a
theater from Gorbachev. A guy got at first ”Men’s Health”, the
magazine, with naked boys. -Now ”Snob” magazine, glamour. But they are 1%, all the rest
citizens of Russia…
-Yes. How are the people living? They didn’t gained, only lost. -Even if they would be 20%, 30%! But democracy, the majority
makes rules. And the majority is against them! -Against Gorbachev! We are talking on behalf of the majority!
”There you have a suit” – they say! But all my other suits
are covered in dirt! Like hoomeless people! -What does it have to do with anything with what I have?! I am
talking about voters! ”No, there you have this and that on
the side…”! -With any Tzar people were living happily! And with Brezhnev!
-…from a single person, it is incorrect. -Especially with passing of time, all these historical activists,
they are one way or another, are not uplifted, right? -It is of course only an excuse. It is an excuse for their own
inaction. Really.
-Of course. -What was economical privelenge in holding USSR together, if
all republics wanted independence? If it was not Gorbachev’s
will. -It was indeed most powerful centrifugal tendency, which was
impossible. Only to sink the country in blood.
-The system of interest was working there. -What is he suggesting, after all? What program he would have
started to realize, if he became president in 1991? -Well, he is saying, that he would have holded the great Soviet
Union together.
-But this, you know, you are saying the same thing. -…fonds all over the world. Here what he is doing now. So he
became a member of world government. -So, what about economy? We had a part of a car that was made
in Russia, part in Belorussia, part in Kazakhstan.
-But, they collapsed everything. -They collapsed everything, and manucature stopped. Although
economical base in Russia existed…
-It was great! -We are still using what we inhereted from Brezhnev.
-Now he is talking about a new Perestroika. -He declared it. Perestroika-2. To break up Russia! Take away
all the money one more time! -We should defend this point of vew, and it has the right to
exist.
-In fact, he indeed gave to civilian society, the possibility to
change something in the country. -To hear civilian society, to hear civilian points of view. And
the fact that in these points of view he was not always listening
the right points of view, it is indeed a mistake of politician, -But a mistake of a real politician.
-And I don’t thnk we should concentrate in analysis of this
situation in particular, although, all the same, you have lived
in Soviet Union, and there’s no need… -So, we are reminding you, that our arbitrator today is historian
and writer, Igor Leonidovich Volgin. -Turned out to be an interesting round.
-You know what I though…? -Well, good for that political atmosphere, in which a glass
becoming a weapon of politics. -Here, in our days, a glass, filled either with juice or
with water, becomes a powerful political means. -You know, like they used to write on cannons ”The last
argument of kings”? Well, it is good that the glass is the
last argument, and not cannons, not cannons. -It is neede to be said, that Vladimir Volfovich is performing a
very important social function, on ”blowing social steam”. -Blowing steam. Because it was fun. It’s a good thing. Although
I must say that our history is sad enough. Sad enough. -And these disputes, I will repeat myself, they are going to
continue for a very long time. -Some are going to demonize Gorbachev, others are going to
canonize Gorbachev. But for both of these, there are dasis.
There are basis. -Because he is a very controversial figure. Well, even is we
take, take foreign policy aspects. Right before they were talking
more about domestic policy. -Because, we, indeed, he is kind of relieved the world of threat
of the nuclear destruction. We can say it this way. -But from other side, we have lost almost at all positions,
having ”trump cards” in our hands. -Because, let’s say, we should have remove troops from eastern
Europe, we should have done it. -But we should have sign agreements with every country, about
not entering certain unions. -From Baltic states, in particular. We could have made Germany
neutral. They would have go for it back then. -Removing all forces, ours and American. Germany – neutral,
like Austria. We could make it happen, because our positions were
that strong. -But he, acted like one of Dostoyevsky’s characters, you know?
He had a certain, Julilan Mastakovich, -Who, like Dostoyevsky says ”box of candies, a bouquet of
flowers, and he was going to his fiancee Glenfilda Petrovna (*6)
to be liked”. -So he went to be liked. Yes, we came in all senses, this is
great, but this does not work in politics. -This does not work in politics. his cosmopolitan manners, was
not better that anti-communist boorishness of Yeltsin. -Here is, kind of, 2 poles were pushing each other away.
You understand? Well, he is causing a big sympathy as a person, -As a husband, like, like, like a private person. There. Like a
person, who of course did very much, who had totally
good intentions. -But we know, what we our already where good intentions. (*7)
You understand? He was a decent person. That is, he was behaving
himself decently. -Depends on what degree it can be done in politics. But we still
don’t know a lot of things. -It is good that fact are coming to the surface now, with 2
different interpretations, of what was going on in Foros. -Of what was happening in the last week of the Soviet Union.
They said it right, it is kind of secret. -Not all archived have been opened, we do not know everything.
Understand? I think historians will still think about this for
a very long time. -And of course, in this light Gorbachev, well God give him
health, let him live a healthy life. -He is a very tragic figure. Tragic figure. Of course, it is a
great stupidity to deprive him of the order. -It is, you know, like it was in 1930’s, deprive of rank, take
away the order, put to prison, exile. -We have already passed all this through. No need to take orders
away, although it is needed to be mentioned, -That Solzhenitsyn had the bravery to refuse to receive the same
order, I think, because it was given to him by, perticularly…
-Enough bravery and wisdom. -Yes, bravery and wisdom. This is a different question. Well, we
don’t need to rename anything, to take away orders and ranks, -It is like a revision of the history. It’s like Orwell. Like
Orwell ”Nineteen Eighty-Four”. -When the history is being corrected, pages getting cut out of
it. We’ve been through this all, already, in all aspects. -Well, let’s not follow Orwell’s example. In a few minutes, I
will ask question that are torturing me. -Was it Gorbachev this bad, or it was us, who could
not been able to manage the freedom? -Return. We are starting our 3-rd round. I am the one who
is going to ask you questions. -But you don’t have anything to ask.
-Oh, I do have much to ask, very much, Vladimir Volfovich. -Where were you during putsch? Yeah, where?!
-During putsch in 1991, I was working in the United States of
America. -There! There! And I was bleeding to death in the center of
Moscow! Now he is spitting in my face, this Gusev! -Well’ fortunately you were not bleeding to death.
-I can work well. I can work well.
-While working I remained Russian citizen. -I never changed Soviet citizenship. I was working there as an,
escuse me, invited professor in Alabama university.
-That’s good. -Before this, I was working in a university of world economy and
foreign affairs of the USSR, where I advocated at Evgeniy
Maximovich Primakov. -It is the cradle of influence agents. University of world
economy.
-I didn’t migrated, nor I ran. You are mistaken, but no big deal. -Well, maybe I do…
-It is hard to imagine Evgeniy Maximovich Primakov as an agent
of western special services. You please, be careful here. -What about Yakovlev Alexander Nikolaievich?
-Absolutely right, but I was working when it was already
Primakov, although I entered the university, with Yakovlev. -This way, we are going to recall general Kalugin and many
others.
-Gardievsky. -Gardievsky was at a different service. Well, a question that I
wanted to ask you. -Well, look, we are condamning Gorbachev so much today. And
formally and logically, it is hard not to condamn him. -Well, not everyone is condamning him.
-Everyone!
-Wait a second I will finish my thought. -Basically, it is impossible to understand with mind, how can
someone be rewarded with the highest award of a country,
to a person who didn’t held it together? -Because if you look at what country Gorbachev got when he came,
territory, population, economical power, -And look how he totally misspent pissed it away, without even
showing the bravery of Salvador Allende. -He didn’t remained in his office, then I am the last president
of the USSR. He couldn’t even become a symbol. -He simply gave everything away. For the last 6 months,
probably humanly we can understand, maybe he tried to do
somehting. -But it collapsed. It is a humiliating picture, when Gorbachev is
standing next to tribune on which Yeltsin is speaking, -And Gorbachev is unclear what he was doing, either turning
some papers, or bringing a glass of water. -Well this humiliation of a person, who was one of the most
powerful rulers in the world. -How can anyone feel, well exclusively, historical respect,
towards this person? -Just imagine. 1.000 years passed by. We are opening a history
textbook. And what is written there about Gorbachev? ”Took a country, and in 5 years, without any external
intervention, lost the Cold War, gave away all conquests, that
country had as the result of the Great Patriotic War, and after
the war. He gave everything away! Lost all of his influence.” And now
we are even handing him an order… -Volodya, I am forced, if this question is to me, I am forced
still not to agree with you.
-Of course, please. -Because… Nevertheless, this person at that period of
development of this country, turned up to be up there,
behind the wheel. As the first person. -Nevertheless, it is not possible for 1 person to collapse an
empire. This can not happen.
-But can 1 person hold a country together? -He couldn’t do it. Gorbachev couldn’t do it. We are not talking
today about the things he didn’t do, but about what he had done. -And he did very much. And he gave it to those who already for
1/4 of the century after him, is leading the country, and
using…
-He gave it to Yeltsin! To Yeltsin! -So there was no role of an emperor? No role of a president?
-There is role of the emperor and president. -But we got this emperor, this president. Probably, if Vladimir
Volfovich understood back then what to do…
-Vladimir Volfovich always knew what to do. -Yes, he always knew what to do, but for 25 years he does not
do anything! He tell us, that it’s all Gorbachev’s fault. -This is all Gorbachev’s fault. Why are you discussing
Gorbachev?!
-Wait, wait, so explain to me, what are you trying to advocate
is Gorbachev? -Well, what Gorbachev’s deeds? If you say that he didn’t had
anything to do with country’s collapse, he collapsed anyway. -So what was positive that Gorbachev had done?
-Gorbachev… Yes, yes, yes… -I understand, I understand very well, that I am always among
the minority, and I realize that numbers that are jumping on
the television it is all minority. -Nonetheless, I can not misunderstand and thank Gorbachev for
what he had done. And he had done the following. -First of all, he turned his sight towards the people, towards
normal people. He started to hear them. -He stopped to go this kind of course, like CCCPSU, where he
should have, like Vladimir Volfovich suggesting, -They needed to supress it, with weapons, foodstuffs, borders.
-He tried really to create, excuse me for the expression, -Democratic, liberal-democratic…
-Did he managed to?! No!
-Well, no. He didn’t managed. So what? -That’s it! Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!
-Why is he guilty?
-Then a very difficult question arises, and very sad one. -He didn’t know, he was not able to, he was afraid.
-So Gorbachev didn’t understood the nation trusted to him
so much? -Why didn’t he understood?
-I will explain. Because the people didn’t accepted him. People
didn’t followed him. -As soon as nationalist bursts became reality, people didn’t
perceived Gorbachev as their leader, and condamned him. -And on elections, when Gorbachev tried to return, he gathered
humiliating little votes. -Of course, this was after. this happened after. But when
Gorbachev started Perestroika, when Gorbachev started, um, -Started whatever he started, whatever he called ”lauch
the flywheel”, whatever he tried to do with economy. -And the most important, whatever he tried to do in ordinary,
citizen society. He woke up humanity in people. -And we are using this to this day. And saying that we didn’t
do everything.
-You are using! You! -And you are using. He had discovered you in 1989.
-No! No! No! -But people are saying: And we do not need it.
-He does not understand it.
-People are saying it today. -Because today people are saying, Vladimir Volfovich is sayng,
that there were sausages. He forgot how from Ryazan, and from
all cities were going suburban electric snag trains were going. -Snag trains.
-Vladimir Volfovich had some snags about which he is narrating
to us today. And the people were starving. -People could not go abroad. People could not read whatever he
reads today. People could not listen to those radio stations
which it is listening today. -People didn’t had any influence on state’s policy. Gorbachev
opened it this to us.
-So maybe the problem is different. -Maybe the problem is that people want fed, calm slavery and
not the freedom?
-Probably. Maybe. Maybe. But what can we do? -Maybe this is the most scary? Vladimir Volfovich, explain to me
the following.
-Come on! -You remember perfectly that period of history.
-Yes. Thoroughly. -Let’s imagine such situation. In 1986, no in 1985, you are
suddenly put into composition of political bureau, -And saying to you: Vladimir Volfovich Zhirinovsky, we do not
want there to be, – remember how it was said, – Romanov’s
clique, -We do not want strengthening of Moscow’s criminal group.
-From Ukrain they came over again…
-Yes, strengthening of Azerbaijan’s criminal group, -Of so called ”Cheikiyskaya”, because they were really
afraid of strong leasers. -Many things are resenting us there. So let it be you, Vladimir
Volfovich, like intermediary figure, like some day was Michail
Sergeievich, to come to power. -How acted Michail Sergeievich, we remember very well. Without
KGB, without the possibility to rely neither on army. -Michail Sergeievich used struggle against corruption, so called
”Publicity”, like a faucet, with the help of which, he was
hoping sweep all of his opponents in political bureau. -The faucet had opened, the door got opened a little, but then
he couldn’t stop it. -People, when learned the truth about how leaders were living,
obliderated them to devil’s mother. -Well, what would you have done? Dilettante? With fire and sword?
You would have shot? Hang on squares? -How would you had ruled the country?
-During Karabakh crisis, for example. -Well Gorbachev, is from Stavropol region, a good region,
agricultural. I don’t understand anything in agriculture. -I am an orientalist. I am a specialist on interethnic conflicts,
religious. What today is in immideate agenda! -And I am becoming general secretary instead of Gorbachev!
I realize perfectly well, that if we tell all the truth about
the past and the present, -The country will lose its authority and power! Not in any case!
Not any publicity! -On the contrary! I am limiting issue of ”Pravda” newspaper,
stopping acceptance in CPSU, it is no longer necessary to
enter it. -I am starting a different manpower policy, and I am relying on
non party’s! For me, businesslike qualities are most important! -I am explaining to everyone, that we must go to a different
administrative division! Otherwise, the country won’t be able to
develop! -There is no such country in the world, where division is
according to national lines! -And then, they were all cowards, they would have raised their
little hands! And I would say: The Soviet Union consists of 60
governorates! -And I would appointed them as governors! But, by my order!
That’s it! I stopped ethnic problem! -So you would passed on to…
-How about Baltic States?
-Everyone would be silent at that moment! -It was in the 1990’s they started to talk! In 1989! In 1985 we
are talking about elections… Everyone would have kept silence!
Everyone! -What, you would have sent troops?
-Without any troops! Everyone was silent! KGB everywhere! -Just try to make a beep! In the morning you will already be
arrested!
-So, I understood correctly, that you would have touched either
KGB and army in any case? -No! Rely on KGB! Don’t touch! Army is stationed everywhere!
In addition, send army from Russian regions to national regions! -Strengthen KGB everywhere! 2-3 times more! Relocate them from
the center of Russia, where it is not very needed! -So, military dictatorship, yes?
-No! No! A different allocation of law enforcement! -I wish to provide security to the country! That is, during
that year, everyone would have agreed with the new division! -So, ”iron fist”.
-Yes! There was fear! Yes! Everyone was silent!
-Military dictatorship, of course. -After this, I am stadially removing CPSU, and turning urgently,
to providing people with foodstuffs! -Because hungry people with obliderate any authority! What am
I saying? Exactly what SCSE suggested! Distribute land!
Distribute land, immideatly! -1 hectar each, or 5 or 6! Dissolve weak collective farms,
farms, strengthen strong ones! -So, everywhere possible there will be powerful collective farm!
-So capitalism? This is what you saying? -So generally, you are suggesting some kind of Zhirinovsky’s
version, of Chinese version of development? -Yes! Yes, yes. But they preserved CPC, I am not going to!
-Well, this kind of reform. -I am stopping, they are leaving…! I am closing down DC’s!
Then TC’s! Then PCO’s! And last CCCPSU! And giving everything
to handicapped children! -And for 10 years no any political parties! Nor any democracy!
Nor any publicity! Everyone is working! As much as they want!
And no any oligarchs! -And whoever saved some money, 10 people, barbershop, buy it out!
10 people bakery, buy it out! -A small private sector! Only common services! That’s it!
Powerful factories standing and working! -Yes, Zaporozhets, I don’t give a damn about your Maybach! I
don’t want your Maybach! You imported them here! -You don’t want Maybach, give it to us, we will find soneone to
give it to, no question about it. -I don’t have one, but he is imposing! You have a good
car he says! I was happily going around on ”Volga”! -Wait, wait, so our people, you are not only see completely
uncapable of expression of the will, uncapable of democracy,
not ready for democracy. -You see that democracy is containdicated for our people.
-No! No!
-Because what you are suggesting, you are suggesting a model: -Ruler – father, and his unwise subdued to him people, to
whom he points their places? -No abroad! No free press! No discussions!
-Why?! The other way around! The other way around! -As soon as we crosssed year 1986, 60 governorates, 5 millions
each. In 1987 we created cooperatives and farms, and left
collective farms and factories. -We are starting more and more, more free traveling abroad!
We are abandoning Trade Union’s permits, -To Czechoslovakia and to Poland! Go ahead, individual tourism!
If you make enough money, convert to dollars,
and go wherever you want! -You have an apartment, job, safety! And you are going there, as
a representative of the greatest country! -And nobody would have remained abroad!
-The most frightening that this survey showed, look. -Brezhnev is adored. Although in Brezhnev’s age, which
unwillingly became our antiquity, what’s there to brag about? -In general, except fed life, and constant lies, there is nothing
to brag about. That is, yes there were some economical
Kosygin’s reforms, -There was a very high oil price, which allowed us to keep very
high development pace until 1975. -But great victories of Stalin, in the past, horrifying war in
the past. Of course there is no this murderous concentration
camps. -Just sluggish running form of schizophrenia, who have
impudence to have their own point of view. -And people say: We are satisfied with this.
-People are saying it today. Today. -And people are saying today, after going through and seeing what
Gorbachev and Yeltsin gave us, people say:
Plague on both of your houses! -They don’t want it! They don’t want it!
-On both, Gorbachev and Yeltsin! Who were irreconcilable
enemies, -But for people, they merged into a single continuous horror.
Why? Maybe because rulers didn’t realized, that the freedom
can not be given?! -That the people must acquire it with suffering?!
-To wish for it! -And us, they took us, and threw us into the freedom, which our
people did not wanted.
-If you are fat, living in the house, ”give me freedom”! And I
am hungry, and on the street! What freedom?! -Yes, yes, yes. Of course. I agree with this, but we are not
talking about this.
-So we are talking about this! To wait a little!
-Let him answer. -We are not talking about this. We are not talking about this.
We are talking about totally different thing.
-Drink a little water! -We are not talking about what should we do?! But when
an operation is performed on a sick person, they are cutting him,
he is hurt, he is uncomfortable, but he must recover, -And be ready for a normal life.
-Try a therapy! Why surgery right away?!
-But is the operation is not prepared for, the sick person will
get slaughtered. -And he died! Well?! A different surgeon is needed! Different
surgeon! Different medicine!
-I understand, and I agree that Gorbachev had a collosal number
of mistakes, -And wrong moves. Today, I am not…
-But he had 1 main mistake. He didn’t understood the people
he inhereted. -You can say it this way. But nonetheless, he wanted to give to
these people that, what, excuse me, with him MSU education, -He thought civilized, and timely. He wanted to drive the country
out of that horror, in which today it wants to go back to. -And returning, with hands of Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Understand?
-There was no horror back then! And now if we go back, there
will be no horror. -But you have already returned, and what you are doing?! You
have already returned!
-But horror is with you! The horror is with you! -There, you are adopting…
-Great laws!
-Great laws? You brought the country on Iran’s level. -Wait…
-No! You are mistaken! Everyone only listen to Russia!
-I am not mistaken. -Everyone is coming here! Watching us calm and happy country!
-I want to tell you one little story.
-It is happy and dying because you are ruling it. -One little story. I was talikng with Valeria Iliyinishna
Novodvorskaya, who is very known for her democratic
point of views, and she was telling me: -When I see Russia, I am going to pull it towards democracy,
like I see a little child, who fell into a river. And I am trying
to pull him to the coeast by his hair. -So I said to her: Valeria Iliyinishna, maybe this is not a
little child that fallen into a river? Maybe it is a little dolphin
having fun in the water? -She is not right in her head!
-Maybe the problem is that it is impossible to make a nation
happy, against its will.
-Probably. -And first of all, a leader of a country, must follow blow of the
history, but he must understand that country, and that history
which he inhereted.
-Right after Foros he should have turn everyone upside down!
In December 1991 he could restore order! -Let’s assume! I agree with you! Look! Look!
-He could not. He could not. He didn’t understood, and
he didn’t felt. -OK, everything collapsed, he did not managed to! Well, arrest
them in Belavezha Forest! These 3 imbeciles! Arrest!
-Arrest with who? -KGB! He still had everything under his power! So was the army!
-By that time he didn’t. By that time, he didn’t.
-By that time he didn’t. -He could do everything! He could do everything! He had
SPETSNAZ! He had everything! He didn’t wanted! It was the
scenario! -You know what is interesting? We are came to culmination of
the show, and I just want remind you 1 more detail.
-Scenario! Scenario! -Mr. Kruchkov, who was head of KGB at that time, and head of the
Soviet army mr. Yazov, I think was back then, yes?
-Yazov, defence minister, Pugo – minister of enternal affairs! -Well, they didn’t took the responsibility…
-They too chickened out!
-They were afraid.
-No, they didn’t chickened out, neither they were afraid. -It’s just, they were the kind of people, who understood what
blood is. And understood what is civil war.
-There! They didn’t wanted blood! I wanted! I would have spilled
blood! I would do it! -But Yeltsin, in 1993, had already light concern to Russian
blood, to blood of Russian citizens.
-I would rip everyone’s heads off! That’s it! -But is already a different story, and we are going to discuss it
in a different show.
-…a different story! And you will not come here when this
subject will be discussed! And so are you! -Before revealing the results of TV viewers voting, I want to
introduce to you our arbitrator, who were observing the duel
from a secret room. -He is a historian and writer Igor Volgin. Igor Leonidovich,
please… -Well, while I was watching this duel, I thought that in this
armchair of arbitrator, should have been sitting a woman,
a lady, named Clio, muse of history. -Because the subject of the discussion is a historical dispute,
which will not end in near years, of course. -It is a dispute about the most painful spots of our history.
Like years 1917, like 1941, and here 1991, of course.
Of course. -And Gorbachev, in any case, no matter what you think of him,
he is a tragic figure. -He is a tragic figure, and first of all because his noble
intentions, and nobody doubt about this, he didn’t had such
maniacal thurst for power. -He meant well for the country. But his personal human qualities,
maybe they are wonderful, they did not rationed in any way with
scale of that task, that the coutry must have performed.
-There… There… There… this is what we should talk about. -That the country should have performed. Because like Churchill
said about his opponent Etle, he said: He is very modest person,
and he has all the reasons for this. -He was good, modest, good family man, good husband. But he was
not Peter 1-st The Great – it is not his fault, he was not
Ivan The Terrible – it is not his fault. -And of course, if we take, um, let’s say, well, so to say,
historical results, of this, of this, um, let’s say, presidency,
of this, sort of, this authority, -Then of course we have lost almost half of population, we lost
huge territories. That is, not a single war that was conducted by
Russia, had not resulted with such consequences. -We returned to XVII century! To XVII!
-Our borders got up by a lot. That is, right now we have theater
of war is on the west it is Smolensk, on the south it is, well,
I don’t know, Voronezh, yes.
-Voronezh! -These were the results. And then, who gave authorizations to
Gorbachev and Yeltsin to change social system?
-There! There! -Was there any mentioning about this? You know, like said one
poet from St.Petersburg, he had remarkable lines. ”A very strange country, you can not figure out what country
it is. I drank a glass, there was one government, I snacked,
there was already another”. -Well, we have this, kind of, this was changing like this.
But it is, kind of, drank, snacked, you understand? -I am thinking as following. I thing there will be more disputes
about Gorbachev. And the evaluation of his role will depend on
what future awaits the country. -And if we will get out of the historical sink, in which we have
gotten into, get out, if we will keep, I am not saying former
Soviet Union, -But at least Russia, then the evaluation is going to be one.
If we… By the way, I totally disagree about Soviet Union was
such an artificial formation. -Of course not. It is our history, it is our past. It was
organic compound.
-We had a normal country! Normal! -We can talk about the horrors that took place there, but this
is our history. You understand? Well… -And what concerns the future of the country, well, if we have
a historical future, then historical emphasis are going to be
put correctly. -If it will not be, then it will be a very sad story. A very sad
story. And Gorbachev’s, and all of us. -The question is in the future of Russia. What it is going to
be like.
-Thank you. -The LDPR is going to put all emphasis! We are going to put
all emphasiss in their places! -Well, it is only left for you to find out who did our viewers
supported, and don’t be upset with results of voting, we, me
and you, understand, that here, -Any advocate would not have been able to achieve acquittal
adjudication. -By the results of the interactive voting, with big
preponderance, the winner is
Vladimir Zhirinovsky.

The ‘Inside Politics’ forecast


>>>LET’S GO AROUND THE “INSIDE POLITICS” TABLE AND ASK OUR REPORTERS TO SHARE A FINAL NUGGETS FROM THEIR NOTEBOOKS.>>ON TUESDAY A LOT OF EYES WILL BE ON TEXAS. WENDY DAVIS HAS VIRTUALLY NO CHANCE OF WINNING IN THAT RACE IN TEXAS, RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR BUT DEMOCRATS POURED ROUGHLY $10 MILLION INTO THAT CAMPAIGN HOPING TO CHANGE THE MAKEUP OF THE ELECTORATE. IF THAT ELECTORATE ISN’T CHANGED VERY MUCH COME TUESDAY REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO HAVE SOMETHING TO CROW. AND IT WILL SEND A MESSAGE TO DEMOCRAT, DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS, AT LEAST NO TIME SOON. FROM THEY KEEP SAYING IT’S GOING TO GO BLUE BUT CAN’T SAY WHEN.>>IT HASN’T GOTTEN THE SAME ATTENTION AS THE SENATE BUT IN THE HOUSE THE GOP IS GOING TO GAIN MORE SEATS. IF THEY GET 12 TO 15 OR BEYOND THAT IT CAN MAKE IT HARD FOR DEMOCRATS TO RETAKE THE HOUSE AFTER THEY REDRAW THE LINES AFTER 2020. I TALKED TO GREG WALDEN, HE SAID 6-8 AND CHAIRMAN WALDEN WANTS TO SAY THERE’S BEEN CHATTER ABOUT HIM BEING FORCED OUT. HE SAID I’M STAYING.>>PETER HAMBY?>>I WANT TO FAST FORWARD PAST TUESDAY, A PARLOR GAME GOING ON AMONG DEMOCRATS ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON AND THE QUESTION IF YOU TALK TO DEMOCRATS IS NOT IF HILLARY CLINTON WILL RUN FOR PRESIDENT BUT WHEN. CLINTON STILL HAS TO MAKE THAT DECISION HERSELF OF COURSE BUT THE GALAXY OF PEOPLE AROUND HER ARE DEBATING SHE SHOULD DENY OXYGEN TO ANY POTENTIAL CHALLENGER, BUILD AN SO SHE CAN RAISE MONEY, HIRING STAFF OR WAIT UNTIL THE SPRING? I TALKED TO ONE DEMOCRAT WHO SAID SHE SHOULD WAIT UNTIL MARCH, APRIL OR MAY BECAUSE SHE DOESN’T HAVE TO GET INTO THE MIX AND ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM REPORTERS AND TAKE EVERY ARROW FROM THE MEDIA OR REPUBLICANS. THAT’S AN INTERESTING DEBATE TO WATCH AS WE HEAD INTO THE HOLIDAYS.>>WHEN WILL HILLARY TELL US SHE’S STILL RUNNING. DAN?>>I WANT TO LOOK PAST TUESDAY ALSO AND THE POTENTIALLY INTERESTING RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE POSSIBLE FUTURE OF SENATE MAJORITY LEADER MITCH McCONNELL. IF THE REPUBLICANS WIN THE SENATE THAT RELATIONSHIP, WHICH IS NON-EXISTENT AT THIS POINT, WILL BECOME THE MOST IMPORTANT IN TOWN.>>EXCELLENT POINT TO MAKE AND NOT A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH SPEAKER BOEHNER. I’LL CLOSE WITH THIS, REPUBLICANS COMPLAIN ALL THE TIME JUST ABOUT EVERY BREATH WILL PRESIDENT OBAMA. YOU COULD MAKE A CASE THEY MIGHT MISS HIM. THE PRESIDENT SWEPT INTO OFFICE IN A BIG DEMOCRATIC YEAR IN 2008 BUT THE SIX YEARS HAVE BEEN BOOM TIME FOR REPUBLICANS. 257-SEAT DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY WHEN THE PRESIDENT TOOK OFFICE DOWN TO 201 AND THE MINORITY IN THE HOUSE NOW. THE NUMBER OF DEMOCRATS IN STATE LEGISLATURES, THAT’S A KEY BENCH FOR FUTURE STARS, DOWN A WHOPPING 600 FROM SIX YEARS AGO. THE CHANGE IN THE SENATE THIS YEAR’S BIG BATTLEGROUND IS LESS DRAMATIC. 56 EARLY IN THE OBAMA YEARS, 53 NOW, 55 IF YOU COUNT THE TWO INDEPENDENTS WHO WORK WITH SENATE DEMOCRATS. THE PRESIDENT’S PARTY USUALLY TAKES A BIG HIT IN THE SIXTH YEAR MIDTERM VOTE SO IT WILL BE WORTH TAKING ANOTHER LOOK AT THE NUMBERS A WEEK FROM NOW. IF REPUBLICANS FAIL AGAIN TO TAKE THE SENATE GIVEN

An Introduction to Sun Tzu’s The Art of War- A Macat Politics Analysis


“What the ancients called a clever fighter
is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.” In around 500 BC – according to tradition
– the Chinese military strategist and philosopher, Sun Tzu wrote The Art of War – effectively
a manual on warfare and military tactics. In this ancient text, Sun Tzu’s most important
argument concerns the relationship between efficiency and victory. Sun Tzu asserted that
conserving resources by using deception, spying and trickery was essential to winning a war
– military action was not the be all and end all. In fact, if military combat could
be avoided, it should be. So how would Sun Tzu employ his tactics, had
he been a soccer coach, competing in a soccer tournament? Sun Tzu believes that they must win the tournament
at all costs – after all, that is the aim of the tournament – to win the title. It’s
all about the name on the trophy! Most teams competing in the tournament concentrate
on the games that lie ahead – they train hard, practise their ball skills and revise
their strategy on the field. But Sun Tzu is playing a different game…he
is playing The Art of War. He sees training for the matches as just one
factor that can influence winning the tournament – but he takes a more holistic approach
to gaining the upper hand. So, what are his tactics? He’s doesn’t just rely solely on the performance
of his team on match days to win. He spies…
He sabotages practice playing fields… He drugs rival team players…
He uses misinformation to get teams disqualified… But does his approach work? His tactics were
so successful, the team win the trophy – over other teams with superior playing skills. That, Sun Tzu would argue, is how to win a
war. He asserts that the art of winning in the
most efficient way possible is the most important art of the state, and believed the powerful
state would be the one that used deception and innuendo to trick an enemy into defeat. Right? Wrong? Sun Tzu believed his approach was amoral.
He wasn’t concerned with the idea of ‘martial honour’ but with victory alone. The Art of War was an extremely influential
book that has impacted Eastern and Western military thinking, business tactics and legal
strategy. A more detailed examination can be found in
the MACAT analysis.

Christopher Hitchens — Speaking Honestly About Hillary Clinton


HITCHENS: As for Mrs. Clinton… Look! After all she’s done for us, and all she’s
suffered on our behalf she feels she’s owed the Presidency and
you know Who could possibly disagree? Her life is meaningless if she doesn’t get
a least a shot! And — one can only sympathize. Unless you think, as I do, that people should be distrusted who are running
for therapeutic reasons. Because the Presidency doesn’t calm those
demons as her husband has already proved. But look — the reason we have to think about it, and the reason why your question is a good one is this: What else can the democrats do? And if thats the case, what the hell shape
are we in? It still divides us as between those of us
who think that a job must be found for Hillary Clinton, That the country would be somehow disgraced if she wasn’t in an important position, and those of us who could do without her. And neither answer to that question is gonna make any difference at all to the way the market performs. If there were some foreign policy
experience or brilliance Hillary Clinton had ever shown maybe we overlook the fact that she and her husband have never met a foreign political donor they don’t like and haven’t taken from. Look, this is the woman who played the race
card on Barack Obama. This is the woman who if you for “Change that you can believe in” whatever change it was you were voting against. This is the woman whose foreign policy experience
consists of making a fool of herself and fabricating a
story about Bosnia. This is the woman who, with her husband, have
so many connections fundraising connections overseas: Indonesia,
China. Just look at today’s and yesterday’s New
York Times at the list of people with whom the former President Clinton has
acquired a tremendous burden of debt. These are people who pay him all
the time. From odd parts of the Middle East to strange
donors all over the place. My colleague at Vanity Fair Todd Purdum, anyone can google this, just put in “Purdum
Clinton.” See if you can bear to read the sort of friendships
that a former President is having. Its undignified to think about it! From the Riady Family in Indonesia to numerous
Chinese donors who left this country rather than show up
for the hearings on it. But I don’t know of any such expertise on
her part except her pretense to have been under fire
in Bosnia when she had not. Actually when there was pressure on the Clinton
Administration Lez Aspen was Secretary of Defense, you remember? To do something about Sarajevo, to stop the
killing, to prevent the ethnic cleansing Hillary Clinton moved in — hard on her husband
and said “Don’t you do a thing about Bosnia, It’ll
spoil my wonderful healthcare plan.” At least on Healthcare, she knows enough about
the subject to have really… changed American Healthcare for the worse
in her time but foreign policy about foreign policy, she doesn’t even know
that much! MATTHEWS: But I am very suspicious when John
Kyle, a major supporter of the war in Iraq and complete
hawk and neocon in many ways, complete hawk supports her for this. Henry Kissinger has come out of the woodwork, he supports her for this! (HITCHENS: Yes!) Why do these establishmentist conservatives
want her? What are they up to? Why do they want her? I don’t know what they want. HITCHENS: Kissinger… Don’t compare Kissinger
to Kyle I mean, Kissinger is a critic of the war and
a so called realist and someone who likes MATTHEWS: But why do they want her? They’re
both Republicans. Why do they want her? HITCHENS: Because, she’s a status quo type
and They know they can, so to speak, trust her She’s a member of their club. To remind people at this point of the lowest
stage of the Clinton Administration when… Eric Holder signed off at the Justice Department
on the pardon of this fugitive… shall we call him financier? Who’d also given, rather a large loan that
didn’t seem to have been repaid to one of Hillary Clinton’s brothers, who in turn with the other brother
had gone for a Walnut monopoly or was it a hazelnut monopoly
in the Republic of Georgia? Odd bits of the Caucasus involved in American
foreign policy here. Plus donations to the Clinton library. It builds up and it goes on. Is this how the
President elect really wants to start? The amazing brothers of her’s who nearly
got the — was it the — nut monopoly in Kazakstan or something farcical
like that? Just look it up! It’s a ludicrous embarrassment for the President
and for the country. JOURNALIST: You were asked and talked about
the qualifications of now your nominee for Secretary of State. And you belittled her travels around the world equating it to having teas with foreign leaders. And your new White House Council said that her resume was grossly exaggerated when it came to foreign policy. OBAMA: Look, I mean, I think this is fun for
the press to try to stir up whatever quotes were generated during
the course of the campaign. No, I understand! And, you’re having fun. If you look at the the statements that Hillary
Clinton and I have made outside of the heat of the campaign… W We share a view. HITCHENS: Can I just add though that I thought
Obama’s answer there was incredibly cheap and evasive? I mean he was right the first time to say:
This woman doesn’t in fact have any foreign policy experience and he could have added, which also came up in the campaign that the
experience she has claimed such as in Bosnia was fake, was fabricated and he could also have added that she, like
his other nominee (for the Attorney Generalship) main qualification
in politics is being a friend of Marc Rich, which I don’t think is “change.” As I say, if it hadn’t involved her too,
the campaign finance scandals. We’re not talking about the ongoing stuff,
Mr. Clinton’s huge speaking fees in the Gulf and elsewhere. We’re talking about previous convictions:
In the Clinton fundraising scandal If it wasn’t for the fact that she couldn’t
refuse her brothers everything or sorry anything. Couldn’t refuse them anything. Anything they wanted they seemed to have got,
including some kind of deal for Marc Rich. All of this might be forgivable, or it might
assume a different proportion David if it wasn’t for the fact that This woman doesn’t really have any foreign
policy experience worth mentioning. And what is memorable about it, is pretty
bad! Remember Kissinger had to decline the honor that Bush wanted to give him of being Chair of the 9/11 Commission because
it would have involved mentioning the names of all the people who he had business
dealings around the world. And he wasn’t willing to do that with Kissinger
Associates. He didn’t want to expose his clientele. The same thing, believe you me The same thing, believe you me, is gonna come up with the She’s been very very very uncritically pro-Israel
though. At all times. It’s true that she’s got a major name
on the World stage, that’s true by definition It’s only true that she’s respected in
the Pentagon if people go around saying so, I’ve never heard that before I must say. On some things she’s more hawkish than the
President elect, yes. But, she tends to have a quietless reputation
in what I’d call an opportunist matter I mean, who really thinks she felt that strongly
about Iraq? She just didn’t want to cast her vote the
other way. WALSH: He’s not worried about that! I genuinely think that if he’s got an eye toward politics it’s global politics and he wants the strength
of the Clinton name the Clinton brand. HITCHENS: Well thats what thats what the Secretary
of State is for and what you want as President is to know Your secretary of state spends all her working
to make sure your policies stick. With this woman that can’t be said she’s
always thinking first about herself, second about her husband. And third about ?, that’s never changed
and it’s never going to WALSH: That’s your opinion, Christopher. HITCHENS: … Nor will anyone. Guess what, guess who’s saying it? That’s a very clever thing to say. Shall I ask? Would you prefer I uttered your opinion? what a fatuous remark! MATTHEWS: Christopher!

[YTP] The Actual Democratic Debate


Anderson Cooper: Ladies and gentlemen, please
welcome the Democratic candidates for President of the United Socialist States! *cheers* Anderson Cooper: Now everybody, please rise
for our Soviet Union national anthem! *Soviet Union national anthem* Anderson Cooper: There is certainly a lot
of excitement in this room tonight and before we dive into the issues I want to quickly
explain some of the ground rules tonight: Each candidate will get 1 minute to answer
questions, Secretary Clinton will get 2 minutes to answer
questions, and Senator Webb will get 1 second. Let’s begin with Governor Chaffee. I’m the only one running for President that
has been a mayor, a United States Senator, and a Governor. I was appointed by my dad three times. I’m coming to take away your guns. *applause* Cooper: Governor O’Malley There are some things that I have learned
to do better in life than others and after 15 years of executive experience I have not learned how to be an effective
leader. I learned how to be a magician. I have learned how to get things done, whether
it was saddling our kids with a lifetime of crushing
debt. Thanks to Martin O’Malley, we had allowed
ourselves to become the most violent, addicted, and abandoned city
in America, and I ran and promised people that together
we could turn that around. I did not turn that around, but I attended a lot of funerals. *applause* Cooper: Governor O’Malley thank you very much,
Senator Sanders. Middle class, middle class, casino capitalist,
middle class, Wall St. Raise the minimum wage, middle class, insitutional
racism Middle class, a handful of billionaires, middle
class. Thank you. *cheers* Cooper: Senator Webb you have one second. Thank you. Cooper: You’re over your time. Webb: Well you’ve let a lot people- Cooper:
You’re over their time. Webb: -I would say this-
Cooper: You agreed to these debate rules. Cooper: Secretary Clinton. Clinton: Well first of all-
Webb: Anderson, can I get into this discussion at some point? Cooper: You will get one second, she will
get two minutes, so. Webb: I’ve been standing over here-
Cooper: You’re over your time. You agreed to these debate rules. Clinton: Well I am in the middle here, and I am coming from all directions. Um, you know I have to say When I think about capitalism I think about
me. You know, both Bill and I have been very blessed. I have spent a very long time, my entire adult
life looking for ways to stack the deck to help
me have a chance to get ahead. We have to figure out how we’re going to make
the tax system a fairer one. Right now, you pay too little and Bill and
I pay too much. What we have to do in America is save you
from the opportunity and the freedom in our country, Bill and I need it the most. Finally, fathers will be able to say to their
daughters, you too can grow up to stack the deck. *cheers* Anderson Cooper: Thank you all, time is up,
that is the first Democratic debate of the 2016 campaign, I’m Andersoon Cooper, thanks for joining us.

Indira Gandhi Interview | TV Eye | 1978


Mrs.. Gandhi can you imagine any circumstances in which you might once again become prime minister of India [I]? Can certainly imagine the circumstances, but the question is whether I want to be or whether I’ll agree to be or not? What would be the terms under which you would agree to [be] no, it’s not about such terms. [I] don’t want to be You [are] not in politics. You can’t make a very categorical answer I didn’t want to be in parliament, and I told everybody I wouldn’t stand But here I am What do you think the Indian people? Saw renewed they feel that you had a particular Sympathy for their cause what made you the figure that you are in in their eyes what I’ve done for them It’s what they’ve seen that. I’ve Done I Get they booted you out in 1977 Well, I think booted is a strong word We were defeated but within less [than] a month after the defeat they were coming back to me because there was such a Such a very sustained malicious propaganda that people were taken in by [it] When people like your own parliamentary spokesman described you as the woman to whom the gods have entrusted the destiny of India What’s your reaction? I haven’t even heard this phrase. I don’t know [how] was yours – do you do you regard that kind of phrases of Meaningless extravagance? Yes? and we in India there is most beaches are full of this if you see the You know [the] [addresses] [that] [are] presented to anybody not me anybody at all you [would] be full of [phrases] like phrases like this do you ever Feel [that] you have in any way abused the trust that the the Indian people have forgotten you certainly not I’d like obviously because that’s a question directed towards the state of emergency Which you declared in 1975 when you gave yourself very great powers And you explained if I’m right when you wrote to the president requiring the permission to to carry out the state of emergency Information has reached us which indicates that there is an imminent danger to the security of India? What was the precise nature of that danger? Well? You can’t say anything with great precision? But you talked to your people of a deep and widespread conspiracy which you were sure they were aware What conspiracy well it’s obvious isn’t it now the whole concept continent has been destabilized But this is also internal why people you were told no it was both It was supported from outside, but you required the the the special powers on the basis of internal upheaval No the question was had it been only internal with no foreign interference one could have dealt with it in a much easier way But it is not [you] didn’t do with [respect] and you didn’t mention No, why should one mentioned everything one doesn’t mention everything at any time? why should one can I [try] but it’s very obvious [when] people have followed the Doings of international agencies and who was present at India at what time and what is happening today is borne out Everything that we suspected earlier can I put to the the findings of the Shark Mission Just set up to inquire whether there are any cause to [take] you to court and have you condemned for excesses abuses of power in that report they quote on the basis for your Requiring this emergency. No evidence Whatsoever police reports home ministry reports your intelligence services had given you no Evidence, what sort of not true at all? What had they given you what did they told you precisely? It’s not about [him]. They’re telling me I’m prime minister I have the business to know and all reports do not come through police They come through other heads of other states and very many other agencies But they also had given those reports how the justice Matthew know for instance And many other people who spoke at that time this report is an entirely prejudice one-sided report They’ve completely ignored Whatever people had to say on the other side most of the people who have given evidence are government servants Whose whole Livelihood and future depends on what they said here? Do you notice bad Justice sure? He was after all a former Chief [justice] behind Supreme court judge who had expressed himself very strongly? Against me and my policies before being appointed what it said? He’d miss speeches against us recorded speeches against you well not me [personally], but against our policies, and he appeared against us when we maybe there was a in fact Parliament wanted to impeach him at one time did he not a lot of the realities that he found against you in the courts on One Occasion I don’t think Tonight, but he opposed bank nationalization very very strongly [too] and after that that he spoke He’s been speaking continuously against me [in] my garden, Mrs.. Gandhi was it mere? Coinciding that in any other country they would appoint or even nine in India They seldom been a case where somebody was known to be and he has been appointed to Inquire against that person in fact at the same time another judge was approached But because I had superseded him he refused to take up these things because he said that people would not think he was fair Mrs.. Gandhi was it mere coincidence that at the same time the allahabad high [court]? Had said that you could stay in office as prime minister provisionally But had found you guilty of Electoral malpractice and that therefore there was a serious risk that you would not be able to remain prime minister was that just a [coincidence] that just came in same range. It was not a coincidence [he] [was] absolutely sure that I mean now How does it help me to escape now? If I wanted to remain prime minister? All I had to do was to listen to the party buses they would not have wanted me out at all I would have been prime minister for life, but you wouldn’t holding office under the findings of the corner. Yes but on what issues and If you look at your own newspapers, they all said they were very trivial issues, Mrs.. Gandhi I must ask you did you not concoct a Threat to the survival of the state in order to ensure your own survival, okay? That’s a very rude question and it’s entirely baseless. [it’s] nothing at all to base it on well the Charr commission to which I must refer because it was a commission set up by the government It’s a judicial inquiry and he is an eminent judge says that says very clearly that that The reason for if I can get just exactly I just lied if I may you’ve said I’ve asked your real question I Didn’t know no you death [see] I would just like to say one thing about what is in the report if I may because what he says is that that that the [only] evidence he can find is the Allahabad judgment and on the basis of that [he] [says] thousands were detained and a series of totally illegal and unwarranted actions followed Involving Untold human Misery and suffering. That’s why I put the [question] I didn’t put it out of a desire to be rude to Mrs.. Gandhi is In a parliamentary democracy is a judge competent to override. What parliament has done the decision I took Was ratified by the cabinet and by the parliament it was not only accepted it was applauded by the entire nation Had we held the elections in 1976 we would have won hands down Now we did not hold the elections because the state of the economy was such at that time the political situation was [alright] But the state of the economy meant that we had at we could see that if we continued We by I don’t mean us as people But the policies we were pursuing if they continued we could give India a start sound and stable Had we held the elections then this would not have been possible therefore we jeopardized our political future and chose giving political stability to I mean economic stability and soundness to to India Rather than saying well let us be sure of our election. Why then was it necessary to IMprison Mr.. Murad You decide then became prime minister of India was he in the economic threat [-] no? They were they these were the people [who] were destroying democracy Destroying them destroying the straw democracy because well I’m sorry [that] [you] people have short memories, but Because they felt they could not win an election. They said we must take the battle [to] the streets Mr. Morarji Desai is on record in a interview having said we are going to surround The prime Minister’s house. We are [going] [to] surround parliament. We will see that No, business is done by that the prime minister cannot come out nobody can go in another member of the opposition now a minister said that if we cannot win by the ballot we shall win by the bullet somebody else Incited the police and the army that’s joking around Disobey illegal orders, he said why [couldn’t] you alien? Why could I just ask you why couldn’t you have used? The law that you already had available to you to arrest these people if they were breaking the law I’m afraid you see India is not a small country like the uk it is a very big country in very complex problems and In the whole country they had created an atmosphere of extreme [indiscipline] so that assembly like Mr.. Galbraith said it seems to be a functioning Anarchy, but it was not functioning. It was becoming an unfenced non functioning Anarchy and at that moment if we had not stopped it, India would not have survived. Yes Unfortunately the dealings of the present government are taking India along that path once again The only difference is [that] because we left a very sound economy that momentum is sustaining the government Why was it necessary to remove from every individual in India and in particular from the tens of thousands who were put in prison? Their right to go to court and and pro-and before their case [that] their their right indeed to know why they’ve been detained [why] did you remove those rights? Well? I would like to say with all respect that all this is happening today there is no emergency in India but 23,000 teachers who are non-political have been arrested for merely? Nonviolent peaceful demonstrations, but this I presume are that isn’t a justification sure what happened under you and under you no But you have to see that if some things are happening all the time It’s not necessarily that something happened in emergency if the police have indulged in excesses They have been doing so before during and now but this is a different case I’m bad, you know your home minister said at the time. I think rather neatly if perhaps cynically pinpointing the issue no fundamental rights He said have been taken away from any individual just their right to go to court to enforce their rights now That was under the special powers that you took that was but it will also be about abuse by minor officials we’re talking about state policy that is true, but it was [some] it was just for a very limited period and we have in what time a lot of political rights and civil rights are taken away from people and this for India was as serious as a war war period It was a death threat not very survival. Why was it necessary? Mrs., Gandhi to forbid newspapers to report the speeches of MPS. I Don’t know I think Censorship was not properly managed and the same initially we thought it would be for a very brief period And some code of conduct would be worked out that’s remarkable right would you say the purpose of pre censorship? This is government? regulations Is to guarantee certain safeties for the state all the chief censor must see everything that’s published and speeches of members of Parliament [must] not be published in any manner or form only speeches of ministers I mean was that necessary to defend India from color a short period Yes Because as I [said] the situation was [more] or less Going out of control and it was necessary there is which developing country has been able To go ahead it own only India has tried this experiment of having social and economic changes through peaceful and democratic means now when these means were threatened we took a temporary measure it was I who Revoked I declared the emergency, but also I [would] revoke immediately before the elections – yes, so later We said certainly but then I did hold the elections [bush] I don’t think there’s a single instance in world history of this happening the shark mission and [once] [no] I know how to change it. I have intended at all because since you’re talking about the press I would like to say something about the press here a news item came in That the judge who had given his [judgement] in my election case Died and it was very broadly hinted that. I had had him done away with When the high commissioner clarified the position that my judge is perfectly hale and hearty Living where he always lives and a judge of a similar name Has died of a heart much older man has died [of] a heart attack in another part of the country Your newspaper us did not have the grace even to print that contradiction that seems a curious curious grounds. I’m not Justified. I’m not yet removal of freedom. I’m sorry. I’m not justifying. I’m just showing what you don’t like the newspaper [no] I’m not I’m saying that the newspapers are a part of a Force which is there to obstruct the social and economic Changes which we want to bring about and do you try to [initiate] [or] force to support what we were doing? No, we are not interested in support, but we are interested so not having the obstruction the evidence Mrs. Gandhi shows that during that period for instance all [India] [India] radio during that period in one month December 76 had over 2,000 lines reporting government statements 34 lines Recording [Opposition’s] you’ll find exactly the same in all India radio today So this is just a frailty in any case of the freedom whether it is or not they don’t know but it’s no use picking out something out of Context this is what I’m trying to the shah commission said that the reasons for the measures taken against the media in General And the press in particular was to keep and this is on the basis of the evidence put to him was to keep the public in ignorance to instill fear in them thereby suppressing dissent in every form individual political Parliamentary judicial it was used as an instrument of news Management aimed at thought controls if you want to give a lecture in the shark commission. You needn’t have me here You can give it any way as other media are doing We do not accept the shah commission’s Report and the people of India do not accept they have shown that he is quite irrelevant his remarks and his findings to the situation which prevailed earlier and the Situation is prevailed during the emergency before the emergency or after how does Mr. Shah know what is happening in the political world? What are the forces at work which just? Want to destroy a developing economy? [is] it is a judge competent to decide that then why have democracy why have elections? Why have political people in power it was a commission of inquiry which lot of democracies? No, it was not it was [a] purely vindictive action by the present government It’s it’s very interesting that of the cases referred to the shah commission They have they did not want to inquire into any cases except those against me or those whom they considered my supporters? they did not even record the evidence or the The of those who said anything in my favor. He just said this is irrelevant in the courtroom itself They had a [picked] crowd with Giada’s Anybody who wanted to and we didn’t want cheering, but if anybody did that person was thrown out? I mean when you take up a thing you should try and find out the whole background and what has actually happened [I] went into us it doesn’t matter what the british media says it’s quite irrelevant to India but it shows that you [are] divorced from the facts and Divorced from what the people [are] thinking and if you don’t you if you’re not bothered about [what] the people are thinking then you shouldn’t? Talk about Democracy I certainly am bothered what people are [thinking] and of course one’s concerned to try and establish The basis on which they might or might not hold particular judgments And that’s why I’d like to ask you about the 20 months of your Special powers there were I want you to remind you I think some 8 million people who were sterilized more than 250 court night I was like this is not any of this [fart] figure has not been borne out by anybody in any commission There is evidence to suppose that very large numbers of people were sterilized right [by] your view over you well It’s been alleged that there was widespread compulsion if there was compulsion at all for the purposes of argument what be your reaction to Compulsory sterilization sterilizes [yes] myself in government statements as well as privately that I’m not for compulsion records from the time from the Chief secretary of the government of utter Pradesh government attached highest importance to achievement of family planning targets failure to achieve monthly Target will result in stoppage of salary suspension and Severus penalties other states all eligible cases for sterilization in my office and department have been sterilized persons who have refused to get themselves Sterilized have not been paid their salaries the evidence surely Mrs.. Gandhi [that] a combination of intimidation coercion Economic sanction not giving people licenses not doing people rights to free education and health and so on were used by officials throughout India to to Disappear in effect you have sterilization. Yes. They were those are major wide-scale excesses, then aren’t they no I don’t think so [and] Furthermore now people realize that if our population goes up at the rate that [it] [is] going Their children won’t be alive. They won’t have the they won’t have enough food or education or any of those rights Do you accept no responsibility? At all I have accepted own Responsibility because I happen to be head [of] the government, but you know there was nothing No You see you cannot be categorical about these things certainly mistakes when you take up any major program Mistakes will take place, but they were there was a very large force working against us Which was [determined] to use anything it could against us And they I think that they played a very large part in Creating these so-called excesses [a] lot of them seem to be in prison you had tens of thousands in prison with the endless more forces Against you trying to destroy him scandi the most of the people in Prison were smugglers Hoarders black Marketeers, not academic students teachers politicians no they were politicians but not many academics or students [know] the evidence unless they were in the naxalite movement or something like that Under what you have some you are accepting without question a particular evidence which has not yet gone [to] court which is sub judice [II] and Which we do not accept under what conditions now would you would you justify imposing a similar state of emergency? Would you do that if you were in charge in India now where you said is this this? Display [of] [some] terrible problem would you do it no, no? Because today’s Chaos is created by the government You had a different That’s quite a different situation as I said at [that] time as you said that had we taken action in what you think it says Legal earlier on maybe all this would not have been necessary And this is why I feel [that] I was at fault in this that I did not take action earlier on But we felt that in Elections were not far off, and we could wait till the elections. We didn’t know that these people would precipitate The situation as they we knew that in elections. We may or may not win You don’t [fight] another state of emergency in India no as I’m saying today. That is a state of emergency It is not legal it is not constitutional It doesn’t have parliamentary sanction, but in every other way there is a state of emergency [if] Justice, Mr. shah says that the people are in fear. [you] [are] only to go and walk the streets of delhi today Or calcutta or any city and where [is] that time written only those [who] were in fear who were doing something? anti-social but today it is the common citizen The poor man was in fear What then do you expect the future of India to be Mrs. Gandhi? For the future of India is for us to decide and we will fight it out in India I don’t think it’s anybody else’s business. you of course [assume] going back to face criminal charges on the basis of the shah commission’s allegations on the basis of that evidence I’m obliged to ask you why [would] it not serve the interests of truth and justice? justice for you to be found guilty Because I’m not guilty

Peter Kazimir from political party SMER blame from his mistake statistical office


Gas price during the governance of Robert Fico has dropped by a staggering 90%. At least according to the chart, which was introduced by vice-chairman of SMER Peter Kažimír on the political discussion in TV. He pleaded that the information is directly from the Statistical Office. Finally, turned out that he just forgot read footnote. Peter Kazimir came to the duel with Richard Sulik armed by a hard caliber. Graph, who proved that after catching price regulation into the hands of SMER(Kažimír’s political party) and boss of regulatory authority Holjenčik, gas prices began to fall miraculous. You can see here, Mr. Chairman work of Mr. Holjenčík. That means those prices have gone down sharply. Sulik distrust to Kažimír chart with an incredible reduction of 90%. Mr. Kažimír, here price is 45 cents, here price is 5 cents. You say that the average price of gas for one … yes price for Unit …changed from 45 cents to 5 cents? From 45 to 5? Yes, of course yes! from 45 to 5? From 45 to 5? From 45 to 5? From 45 to 5? But, well, he refers to the Statistical Office. Maybe it’s true. Why Do You not ashamed? Richard Sulik finally found out how incredible chart was created. In 2008, was changed the gas bills. By the end of 2007, the price, the unit price of gas was indicated for m3 and since January 2008 for kWh, which is about one tenth. Gas price then dropped as if miraculously. In fact, it changed only the unit for which they apply. Peter Kažimír Nevertheless, yesterday (the day after the broadcast of the session) insisted. And defended in that data are taken from the official website of the Statistical Office. These are information that are from Statistical Office. We don’t invented them. On the website of the Statistical Office information on gas prices truly are. But there is also note that the unit in 2008 was changed. But this information economic expert ignored. Kažimír’s chart would in fact look like this. We sat down to trap of statistical office. I’m sorry, that was not a bad intentions. Michal Kovacic, TV Markiza.