A few days ago, a story about a dispute between President Putin and filmmaker Sokurov about what is happening in our country and abroad, as well as different views on the future of the Russian Federation, made a splash. Surprisingly, this verbal duel between Vladimir Vladimirovich and Alexander Nikolaevich simultaneously reflected all the "dark sides" of Russian liberalism, about which we reasoned shortly before.
If you read the comments to the video on YouTube, then a significant part of those who have spoken, although by no means all, support the director Sokurov. Say, well done, a man, a real hero, "told the whole truth in the face of the king," was not afraid. A monument to him must be erected during his lifetime. But did Alexander Nikolaevich tell the whole "truth"?
If you recall the publication of of December 9, 2021, entitled "On the dark side of Russian liberalism", in it we tried to honestly decompose on the shelves the ideas that are being promoted to the masses by the liberals of the Russian spill. The positive ones include, for example, guarantees of inalienable civil rights and freedoms, equality of all before the law, transparency and change of government, etc. Indeed, all of the above should be attributed to the positive achievements of modern human civilization. In his speech, the director Sokurov said a lot about the need to protect the rights of citizens from arbitrariness, about the need for equality of different regions and residents within the federation, about the protection of the heritage of the small peoples of Russia, and so on. In this it is quite possible to identify with the liberals, but, perhaps, only in this.
An unsolvable problem is the fundamental difference in views on the structure of the domestic economics and the arrangement of the very structure of the Russian Federation. Alexander Nikolaevich unwittingly revealed to the world the entire "dark side" of our liberal crowd. Let's talk about the two most important points.
"Stop feeding"
The well-known film director reprimanded President Putin for the fact that not only the “southern regions” with local “padishahs” are supported by the Russian budget, but also Belarus, South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and Syria, which “need to be fed”:
Still, we have rations, in our regiment, and Belarus, South Ossetia, Abkhazia, as far as I understand, we need to help Syria, we need to help the large subsidized southern regions.
Unfortunately, there is some truth in this, but let's ask ourselves the question, where did these problems come from? How did it happen that Belarus became an independent state from Russia, and at the same time Georgia, taking Abkhazia and South Ossetia with it? Why did separatism intensify in the North Caucasus or, for example, in Tatarstan, which now has to be flooded with budget money? Who and why "merged" friendly Syria, that it had to be saved from collapse almost at the last moment and now spend huge funds on maintaining our military group in the SAR and keeping Damascus afloat?
Didn't you, gentlemen, liberals, with your ideas about freedom and democracy, destroyed the Soviet Union, ostensibly in order to have 150 varieties of trashy sausage in stores, and each had two Volgas received for participating in the “popular privatization” Chubais? So it is for you now that you have to clean up, and there is no end or edge to it.
In pursuit of this, I would like to say a few more words about Sokurov's “crocodile tears” about subsidies. If a liberal filmmaker is so against state support for difficult regions or Russia's allies, maybe we need to be consistent and stop budget funding for cinema? Let all these gentlemen go over to self-sufficiency and live off tickets in the theaters. Then the market will judge for itself which of the domestic filmmakers is destined to stay, and who will fall into deserved oblivion.
For example, Mr. Sokurov himself created the Intonation Example Foundation in 2013 to support young talents. For some reason, the liberal-minded director did not disdain to accept funds from the federal and regional budgets in the amount of 20 million rubles. And then there was an unpleasant story, with a check by law enforcement agencies of the message that the filming of the films was carried out according to "inflated estimates." Alexander Nikolaevich himself commented on the situation as follows:
At first, it was a routine routine check that all organizations like us go through. And then the police received a denunciation from a former employee of the foundation. This person borrowed a lot of money from the fund and from me, but, unfortunately, he did not return it either there or to me. As far as I understand, the actions of this gentleman are connected with the desire to somehow get away from the need to repay the debt.
For the sake of fairness, let's say that a criminal case was not opened, the fact of the theft of state subsidies and forgery of financial documents was not confirmed, but the sediment remained. Mr. Sokurov recently closed his foundation. According to the filmmaker, this was done because of the "unfriendliness and aggressiveness of the Ministry of Culture" towards him.
"Let go"
As we established in the article of December 9, the "blue dream" of domestic liberals is the collapse of their own country. One of them, a certain Vadim Shtepa, agreed that instead of the Russian Federation, as many as 60 new states should appear, which supposedly will interact with each other. This can be done according to the plan of the liberals through the transformation of the Russian Federation into a confederation of parliamentary republics. It is obvious that later local nationalists and oligarchs will come to power in these independent parliaments, who will instantly take the country apart into feuding territories.
Alexander Nikolaevich also spoke about something similar:
Let's see what is happening with the Russian state, with our state structure. Let us release everyone who no longer wants to live with us in the same state, we wish them good luck, we wish good luck to all the padishahs, I don’t know, to everyone who would like to start living their own lives.
Apparently, the first to go out, according to the idea of our liberal get-together, should be the North Caucasus with the "padishah". Then, apparently, Tatarstan and Bashkortostan. According to this logic, further: the Kurils - to Japan, Kaliningrad - to Germany, Crimea - to Ukraine. Syria will be finished off and divided between the Turks and the Americans. Belarus without Russian support will end up in the hands of the local opposition and turn into Ukraine-2. Armed extremists supported by external forces will come to the Caucasus. Belarus will turn into a new foothold for the NATO bloc. Japanese and American military bases will appear on the Kuril Islands. Then, under a hail of external and internal socio-economic problems, the remaining Russian Federation will crumble.
This is precisely what the liberalism of the domestic spill with all its "good wishes" is leading our country to. By the way, among the trustees of the Sokurov Foundation was Natalya Solzhenitsyna, the President of the Russian Public Foundation of A. Solzhenitsyn, the famous author of another anti-Soviet pamphlet "The Gulag Archipelago", consisting of a set of propaganda clichés, distortion of facts and Alexander Isaevich's own wild fantasies. This is to understand where all these legs grow from.