Point of view. A look from the other side.

I think all peoples, except for a very few in the jungles of South America or Borneo, are changing very rapidly -- on the scale of history. On the scale of a single human life, not quite so fast.
It's too bad that you have not had time, nor the motivation -- given the lack of interest -- to translate this article, which you say is interesting. Perhaps it could be published in one of the many journals that have a large readership.

This forum is superior to many -- I've learned a lot here about world politics -- but in the end, it's just a forum, where people come and go, and where the participants are of a wide range of seriousness and knowledge.

Your own contributions are quite interesting, and should be seen on many other forums, especially in the US. The Americans are in turmoil right now, because many of the old assumptions of the Left and Right -- especially of the latter -- are melting away.

For forty years, most Americans assumed they had to bestride the world, to hold back Communism. Then, when Communism was abandoned in the main Communist countries, they believed they had to bestride the world to help bring about universal democracy. Then, when that turned out to be more complicated than we assumed, they believed they had to bestride the world to hold back militant Islam. At first this Stop-the-Islamists view overlapped with Bring-Democracy-to-All view.

But ... Iraq and Libya and Afghanistan have taught some hard lessons. The view that the world is made up of Good Guys and Bad Guys, like 1950s TV Westerns, hasn't stood up very well in Yugoslavia, Iraq, Ukraine.

The American ruling class no longer has a coherent view of what to do. Of course, that substantial fraction of it that depends on continued high levels of military spending MUST see threats everywhere. But whether we are any better off grappling with these supposed threats by having our bases all over the world is another matter.

I think we may see a profound change in popular American thinking about our foreign involvements in the next few years. Trump almost tapped into this, then backed away.

My American 'focus group' -- my relatives, all Republican voters for forty years, are not keen on endless foreign wars. Most of the criticism of American foreign policy has come from the Left, and has no resonance with ordinary Americans. But if we see some prominent figure on the Right wake up, and ask why we have, for instance, an 'Africa Command' -- why? $300 million a year, for what?

Russia went from Yeltsin to Putin overnight. America now has its Yeltsin. I won't say it "awaits its Putin", but it does await a national leader who can look at current foreign policy, and judge it only the basis of what is in the interests of the American people, and be read to make profound shifts -- perhaps an American Gorbachev.

 

Balancer: There is one point you make with which I would quarrel. You say "the Russian state has existed for more than 1000 years. And during this time the Russian mentality has changed little. Many therefore consider us to be such mental dinosaurs. Therefore, I do not think that our mentality, which survived 1000 years, can change very quickly."

This is a point which, with slight variations, Russo-phobes always make: "The Tsar, Lenin, Putin ... the Russians want a strong master. They don't want to live in freedom. 'Slavs = Slaves'." There used to be a whole book written around this theme, popular in Russian studies classes, by one Berdayev.

I don't buy that for a second. Of course, every nation has, to some degree, a 'national character' -- there is a grain of truth in this. Most of my Russian friends tend to be somewhat fatalistic -- "things will never change in Russia, unless they get worse", and I understand why they say that. Germans don't like anarchy and tend to obey orders. [Old Communist Joke: the German delegate to the first meeting of the Communist International in1919 makes his report: "Comrades, things are going extremely well .. the readership of our press has tripled in the last six months ... the youth organization is growing rapidly .. the Women's Section is flourishing ... we have won leadership of the dockers and coal miners and are forging ahead among the steelworkers and agricultural laborers..." Bukharin interrupts and says ..."Wonderful, comrade. So it seems as if we can look forward to the Revolution in Germany soon." "Oh no" replies the shocked German delegate. "But why not?" says Burkharin ... "You are making such splendid progress." "Because", replies the German, "in Germany Revolution is strictly forbidden!" -- ] The Italians tend to be a bit chaotic. The Danes are nice. The Chinese are polite and industrious.

But ... the Danes were once Vikings. The Italian reputation doesn't apply at all in North Italy. The polite Chinese saw off the Japanese and made a very unpolite revolution, as did the fatalistic Russians, who overthrew the Tsar and built a modern society from unpromising historical materials -- illiterate peasants. We don't remember it now, of course, but the French were considered very warlike for three hundred or more years.

It's not in the genes, it's in concrete material circumstances. Of course the tradition of past generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living, as Marx noted. But circumstances change, and are changing.

Russians will access the internet, they will travel, each generation will be more educated than the previous. (As is happening all over the plant.) Progress will not be linear, and will not be smooth. No one can jump over his own head. But people will pursue their own interest, as they see it, and the actual interest of all peoples is to live in a secure, prosperous, and free society, in that order. Achieve the first, the second will follow. Achieve the second, the third will follow. The Americans were lucky to start their nation with all three, and so they think they are somehow better than everyone else. But we're all alike, just walking -- slipping and stumbling sometimes -- along the path of history at different places.

Russians fatalistic? Of unchangeable national character? Ha. I am sure there are many many books on 1917 available in Russian. For English-readers, I highly recommend John Reed's Ten Days that Shook the World (a short read, and you can see the movie REDS which is about him), or Leon Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution, both available for free as ebooks from Marxists.org.

Because of the tragic outcome of the Revolution of 1917, it's easy to interpret it as a putsch, a conspiracy of a tiny minority organized by the demonic Lenin, behind the backs of the masses. Not at all.

Not that 'Russian character' (or the 'Slavic Soul' as some call it) is non-existent. I wish my Russian friends were more optimistic about the possibility of change in a good direction, because their pessimism about the chance of building a free society in Russia under the rule of law tends to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. But it's a minor factor.

And, that Russian 'fatalism', can also manifest itself as dogged determination. And we can be immensely grateful for that aspect of the Russian national character, as it revealed itself from 1941 to 1945. Without it, we might just be in the 84th year of the Thousand-Year Reich.

 

A little bit about the weather in Moscow in recent days.





The main thing is to raise the wipers so that they do not stick.





Well, I threw my pictures of these days in the topic "without politics"

- http://www.politicalforum.com/index...thout-politics.412256/page-11#post-1068639181
- http://www.politicalforum.com/index...thout-politics.412256/page-11#post-1068642584

 

Korean fans meet in Seoul, Russian athletes who went to the Olympics-2018. Despite all the witch hunts unleashed in the Olympic movement against Russia.



As the pressure on the Russian athletes increases from the side of the Olympic Committee in Russia, hatred for the Olympics in general grows. The last drop in the form of non-admission even justified by the international arbitration court of sportsmen in general caused a big wave of protests. Most of my friends believe that Russia should boycott the Olympics at least and engage in complete reformation and destruction of the modern form of the Olympic movement, as a maximum.

I do not agree with them. I believe that in this round of political struggle Russia was beaten and defeated. But the boycott of the Olympics is the final defeat in the round of information war. We must go and fight. Even if we have knocked out all the strong athletes, only the Olympians of the second and third echelon remained. This will not bring us medals, but will allow us to remain on hearing. But here I am in a very pronounced minority. Even my wife believes that Russia should boycott the Olympics

 

I haven't followed this issue closely -- weren't the Russians accused of systematic doping? But now it seems the Olympic Committee has changed its mind ... or changed its mind on the way to deal with the problem.

 

Yea...poor Russia...

 

Do you want a real example of a really strong influence? A real propaganda? Imagine, your family in New York goes to bed. A daughter in Russian sings "V lesu rodilas' yolochka, v lesu ona rosla ...", then - "Malenkoy yolochke kholodno zimoy. Iz lesu yolochku vzyali my domoy". And you suddenly realize that the daughter does not know by heart "Jingle Bells" or "I Wish You A Merry Christmas" in your English. Have you imagined it?

Now my daughter before the bed sings in English "Jingle Bells" and "I Wish You A Merry Christmas". And she does not know our Russian New Year songs. Only a few lines. In part, this is my omission, I did not teach our Russian songs with her. At school they do not learn Russian songs. And in English lessons, obviously, they learn songs in English. But imagine the degree of influence of the West on Russia

And you - "Russian advertising looked 1000 people." Ugh!

 

I for one welcome your participation here. While there will always be political paranoia and those who promote it, I've always felt that the Russian and American people should be closer and mutually supportive- and could be if the conditions permitted it. I am aware of the massive losses and sacrifice of the Russian people in WWII for example, and I'm surprised at the number of people here who do not grasp the magnitude of that. The strength, resilience and resolve of a people who can endure that and win deserves a great deal of respect, and I believe that it is politics more that stands between our nations more than anything else. Hopefully, that will some day be resolved, with the help of people who reach out, as you are.

 

How do I see what's happening. There is an axiom. All sportsmen of the Big Sports take dope. Different stimulating drugs. Some are permitted, some are forbidden. In all countries of the world. Which drugs are allowed and which are not, WADA decides. For example, 3/4 athletes from Norway "suffer from asthma." And taking drugs against asthma. These are prohibited drugs that are considered doping. But WADA allows the use of banned drugs to specific athletes in the form of exceptions. In total, 3/4 of the Norwegian athletes take medications that are considered doping for other athletes.

When in 2014 the confrontation between the US and Russia began to gain momentum, America immediately struck on many fronts, including the Olympic movement. Russian athletes are traditionally very strong and therefore their discrediting is a powerful PR move.

In sport, the blow was inflicted immediately from many directions:

Immediately after the 2014 Olympics in Sochi and Russia's next success in the sports field, the ill-wishers began to actively seek ways to put pressure on Russia. The obvious step is doping. First, the soil began to be prepared through odious media. Who was behind this specifically, I do not know, but the German company ARD in late 2014 and early 2015 released two large materials on the massive use of doping in Russia. The charge was massive (more than 5,000 athletes!). No evidence has been voiced. But the material was very actively advertised in the West. The formation of the reflex "Russian athlete = doping" began.

WADA immediately joined. "Oh, it's awful! We're investigating this problem!". There are no proofs, there are only fantasies of the German journalist Zeppelt, but this is an excuse to remove the Russian athletes from the competitions "for the duration of the investigations."

Here begins the most detective story with the participation of Grigory Rodchenkov. First, WADA accuses him of deliberately destroying doping tests in order to avoid accusations of using doping by Russian athletes. Also WADA accuses Rodchenkov that he was engaged in extorting money from athletes seen in the use of doping.

As a result of the scandal that has arisen, Rodchenkov resigns. Against Rodchenkov's relatives in Russia, in 2011 an investigation was carried out, they were accused of illegal trafficking in certain prohibited drugs. There are rumors that after WADA's accusations against Rodchenkov in Russia they are preparing to conduct a new investigation. Rodchenkov flees to Russia and is hiding in the United States under the witness protection program.

Based on oral testimony of Rodchenkov and indirect signs (mainly the presence of microscopic scratches on some test tubes with samples of Russian athletes), there is a charge that there is a state Russian sports doping program. And that all Russian athletes are taking dope. Funny moment. The absence of scratches on the test tube is also a charge "the Russians then learned to open the samples without leaving scratches."

Then they banned a number of drugs that had been previously allowed. And which were officially used in Russia. First and foremost harmless meldoniy. This, in fact, not even doping, because it does not stimulate, but, on the contrary, inhibits the body. It allows you to more efficiently restore the redirected muscles, first of all - the heart muscle. Insidiousness is that the meldonia is excreted from the body for up to a year. Therefore, it was found in the samples of many of those who honestly stopped taking the drug immediately after the ban. Many dozens of Russian athletes were loudly and publicly disqualified. Later, under the influence of medical research, most of these disqualifications were abolished. But it was already not important, because such cancellations are not widely covered in the media. But the whole world once again remembered that Russian athletes are taking dope!

Then follows the mass of loud exposures, the deprivation of Russian medals, disqualification. Arbitration courts later overturn most of these decisions, but for the media such justifications are no longer interesting, as everyone remembers that Russians are doping!

The result. No direct evidence of admission of Russian athletes doping is not. There is no evidence of a national doping program. All Russian athletes are discredited. All participants of the Sochi Olympics (that is, all the strongest athletes of Russia) are not admitted to the new Olympiad (And this despite the fact that even after all accusations and discredit, Russia still remains the leader in the medal standings). The team that is currently going to the Olympics is placed in conditions of incredible mental pressure - athletes do not have the right to use any symbolism, except neutral, athletes do not have the right to say that they are from Russia, etc. At what, worst of all, in these conditions, Russian athletes lost the support of the majority of Russians, because in Russia they believe that under these conditions it was necessary to boycott the Olympics, and the athletes who are ready to act in such humiliating conditions are traitors.

 

Meh, we lose more than that routinely in school shoot-em-ups.

 

The electronic translator refused to translate such a large text, so my resume is separate

I do not justify the athletes taking dope. I would also like to see the sport clean. I do not believe that Russian sportsmen never took dope and that all the accusations against them are false. But I am 100% sure that in Russia the system of doping is not more extensive than in other countries, including the United States. As I started the previous message - all athletes take dope. And you need to investigate specific cases, improve anti-doping control and the like. But what WADA and the Olympic Committee have now arranged is a purely political action, the task of which is not to fight against doping, but the maximum possible political humiliation of Russia.

 

A small illustration of the previous post about sport and doping. Here is the official US data from the WADA report for the 2016 Olympics. 398 cases of official permission for the use of prohibited drugs. For comparison, Russia then received only 15 such permits.



Updated: I will clarify that this is 398 athletes not at the Olympics, but in general. At the Olympics, the Americans were officially granted 15 permits.

 

A mysterious picture was observed yesterday in Moscow. A horse galloping along the Moscow Highway with tubing. Riderless. People assume that this is the horse of one of the horsemen of the Apocalypse, which fell out of the saddle. Judging by its color, it is a black horse, which John the Apostle is responsible for hunger and other economics.

 

On doping: interesting. Politics should be kept out of the Olympics -- the Americans were wrong to boycott the Moscow Olympics in 1980, or rather Jimmy Carter was -- but I suppose it's impossible. The great American cycling champion Lance Armstrong was unable to resist doping himself.

As for that poor horse: There will be a rational explanation. He seems to be dragging a saddle-blanket.

One of the things that surprised me about the Soviet Union was that large of numbers of people were superstitious -- not necessarily more than in other countries, but I had assumed that sixty years of official atheist education would have eradicated it in all but the very old or very stupid. In fact the trade union newspaper, Trud, even seemed to encourage it sometimes, with articles about flying saucers, people who could read through their fingertips, and so on. But it's just an example of what official indoctrination does -- whether religious or anti-religious -- over the long-term, when done by a duplicitous regime. It makes people doubtful about even the true things they teach.

Slowly, slowly, slowly ... homo sapiens crawls forward ... some day we'll live up to our name.

 

Another American strike against the Syrian troops.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-on-secret-cold-war-army-vanish-idUSKBN1FR1OQ

https://www.express.co.uk/news/worl...-ISIS-Trump-Deir-al-Zor-Euphrates-news-latest

 

Fresh news from the Olympics of doping.

The Norwegian team brought with it 6000 to the medication for asthma, which is doping, because it allows you to quickly build muscle. 70% of Norwegian athletes are officially asthmatic and can take WADA medications to build muscle mass.

Norwegian Team Takes Over 6,000 Doses of Asthma Medicine to Olympics - Reports

Norway's cross-country Olympic success clouded by asthma drug ethics

Norway has sent over 6000 asthma doses to the Olympics - Norway Today

 

In Russia, the first time in history, a person sentenced to life imprisonment was released.

I note that in our bloody totalitarian country there is no practice of the death penalty. After the collapse of the USSR, the maximum penalty is life imprisonment. One of the last sentenced to death in the USSR in 1991 was Anwar Masalimov. It was the murderer of the recidivist. Earlier in the USSR, he had already served a sentence of 15 years for premeditated murder and later again committed murder under aggravating circumstances. For which he was sentenced to death. But the USSR disintegrated, the death penalty ceased to be enforced and in 1998 the sentence was re-qualified for life imprisonment.

Now Masalimov was conditionally released ahead of schedule.

 

I remember hearing, more than once, from Soviet friends who were beginning to voice their real thoughts in the late 1980's, "We just want to live in a normal country." I recall only one who was explicitly hostile to socialism as such. My friends basically wanted to become another European country. I do not believe this feeling has vanished. It exists, alongside national pride and the desire to be respected -- something found in every nation. A Russian government that does not at least pay lip-service to this feeling is not going to last. And lip-service precedes reality.

A number of European countries have made the transition from a non-democracy, to liberal democracy.

Greece suffered a coup by its military in 1967, with CIA [not necessarily 'American'] support. The junta lasted seven years, and then collapsed. Some of the generals involved were imprisoned for life. [Details here.]

Portugal was a torpid fascist-ish dictatorship for decades. Its own military got fed up with its backwardness and pulled its plug, opening the way for the country to become a democracy. [Details here.]

Spain had a horrific dictatorship that executed tens if not hundreds of thousands. When the dictator died, it peacefully became a constitutional monarchy, i.e. a democracy with a Hollywood figurehead. [Details here.]

A dozen other examples could easily be adduced from Latin America.

You have to ask yourself: how did this happen? All of these regimes had at least some mass support at their beginning. Why is it that, in the modern world, there seems to be hard-to-resist general consensus in favor of democratic government?

Which is not to say you can't go backwards under the pressure of events, and in particular, out of domestic pressure by people who have lost everything, or fear losing everything. Poland and Hungary and Turkey are today in retreat from the principles of democracy. But it won't last, if the world keeps advancing on the same path it's been on for the last two centuries..

In any case, economic prosperity and the feeling of security are the necessary foundations for democracy. Don't expect a country which feels threatened, and is poor, to become very democratic.

 

In Russia people ask themselves a question. If American troops illegally stationed in Syria can strike attacks on Syrian troops only on one threat to America's allies, then why can not Russia strike at Ukrainian troops that threaten Russia's allies in Ukraine? For this, Russia will not even have to enter the troops to Ukraine, up to the border of 300 miles from the Kremlin. And Poroshenko from the point of view of the Russians is the same bloody illegitimate dictator, like Assad from the point of view of the United States.

 

You could have used the many, many examples of American troops being sent into Latin American countries, or the Americans supporting nasty dictatorships there. But everyone tends to think what their own government does is always good and justified.

The key to solving the Ukraine issue is the Leninist principle of the right of self-determination. If the majority of people in Eastern Ukraine, or Crimea, want to be with Russia, they should have the right to secede from Ukraine and join Russia, or be independent. The problem comes when there is not overwhelming support for secession. But I don't know the situation in Eastern Ukraine with respect to popular opinion.

However, no government wants to raise the principle of the Right to Self-determination, because they all fear that it might be used on them. Noone wants to lose a tax-base. The Americans are remote from any danger of this right now -- when my ancestors tried it a hundred and fifty years ago they got hammered -- but it may arise in the future. If I could look a hundred years ahead at a world map, I wouldn't be surprised to find that Hawaii was a Chinese protectorate, and that there was a Republic of Alaska.

 

I have already written many times that I am amazed at how much Westerners are credulous about the media and official information. For those who grew up in the USSR and its culture, it seems obvious that politicians and journalists can not be trusted, even if they are telling the truth. Even the truth can be said so that an impression will be created that does not correspond to reality. In the USSR, for example, official sources of information almost never lied. But they gave a one-sided interpretation.

There was such a very popular anecdote. Brezhnev and Reagan arranged a competition for running. The next day, the newspaper Pravda publishes the results of the competition: "Our Secretary General took the second place in the race. The American president came to the finish of the penultimate". Not a word of lies, only truth. But what an interpretation!

Today journalists and politicians of all countries often do not just give a one-sided interpretation, but they are directly lying. And if few people believe in empty words in Russia, then in the West this belief is sometimes amazing.

 

In a way, people who live in free society are more easily taken in. They tend to believe their journalists -- or used to. It was said that in the old Soviet Union, people read the press very very carefully, trying to read between the lines to guess at the truth, whereas in the West, they just swallow everything whole.

I think few journalists just outright lie. What they -- or their editors -- do, is to withhold part of the truth.

However ... with the internet, we can more easily find out what's happening, by reading several points of view. It would be good if someone created a website which consisted of links to useful information sources -- they wouldn't necessarily have to be 'neutral' or 'truth-telling', and in fact the biases of each source should be clearly stated.

Maybe when I have time I'll start a thread inviting people to contribute their favorite websites for news, or interpretation of the news.

 

And that's another reason I mentioned earlier. Because of which many Russians have a more balanced assessment We see information from both Russian sources and Western sources. By the way, not only on the Internet. On TV at my house you can watch CNN, BBC World news, Deutsche Welle, EuroNews, France 24 ... But the Western user has very limited access to information from Russia. On TV there is nothing but not very popular Russia Today. In the Russian Internet, English-speaking users are a huge rarity

I had such an idea. To create something of the type of a collection of facts with their analysis. At least in Russian. The problem of distortion of information, obviously, exists also in the Russian Internet. But then I realized that this is a rather meaningless occupation. The fact is that 70% of users simply repeat what they are told on the main information channels and they are not interested in the facts. Of the remaining 30%, many people are not interested in such disputes at all. And the part has very biased views and is not ready to change them under any facts. There are only a few percent left who are ready at least to accept someone else's point of view. These are units for which it makes little sense to make specialized resources. It is better to simply lead a live dialogue and exchange opinions

Although in part, though, some things I want to do. For example, to make the most accurate timeline of events in Ukraine. Although the Western user does not give a damn about what is happening there for a long time, but very often, very rough distortions of the temporal sequence come to light. Well, like, "The Russians attacked Ukraine, Ukraine began to defend itself," "In the Donbass organized an armed uprising and Ukraine was forced to launch an anti-terrorist operation," etc. Such statements are very easily refuted when considering the entire sequence with exact dates. Even with reference to Western resources So I think that it would be useful to make such a collection of materials. But while there is very little free time - two works, several personal projects, two children, different hobbies, one needs to feed a domestic bear and compile reports to the FSB ... There is little time left for politics

 

I believe there are people who have some interest in the truth, and not just in a selection of true facts that happen to support their own beliefs. But how many ... I am not sure. What I would like to see is a site where you could go to, at a minimum, find a comprehensive set of links to high-quality, or important, sites, on various issues.

For example: I have not followed Ukraine closely, despite actually have 'lived' (resided?) there for a few months in 1985. But I feel it is something I should know about. Of course I know enough about the world to know that there are always two (or more) sides to every issue. But ... at the moment, if I want to find out about Ukraine, I will have to spend several hours ... perhaps days .. searching for a range of websites that present informaton on Ukraine -- they will probably include many sites that are one-sided, but which present largely 'true' facts that support their side. But it will take time to distinguish such sites, from worthless sites which are mainly nationalistic propaganda. It would be very handy to know of a single 'Master site' where I could go to see a list of links, each of them with a brief commentary on the nature of the site ... then I could spend several hours just reading what these sites had to say, rather than first spending several hours searching for them and trying to decide which ones were worth looking at.

At the moment I read both leftwing and rightwing sources, but that's not really adequate. (By the way, I have found that one of the best sources of information on current 'New Cold War' topics is a 'listserve' which features debates within the far Left about, say, Syria and Ukraine -- like the Right, the Left is split on these issues -- some supporting Ukraine against Russia and the pro-Russian Ukrainians in Donbass, and also the 'democratic forces' and Kurds in Syria against Assad, -- and some just the opposite. And both sides are often pretty knowledgeable.

However ... you are right that most people do not like cognitive dissonance: they know they are right, and don't want to be exposed to any facts that might challenge their views. And there are few people who can overcome the strong emotional allegiance we feel towards the particular tribe in which we were raised.

 

In recent months, a very aggressive and obviously coordinated attack on Russia in general and against Putin's government in particular has been carried out in social networks. I am not his supporter, rather, I choose him as the least of evils, but the mass character and consistency of the shares attracts attention. Obviously, someone before the elections is very active in influencing the election results

Now Putin is speaking to the Federal Assembly. In Twitter, instantly appeared hundreds of comments on the discrediting of any of his statements. At what almost all statements or are simple insults, or operate with outright lies. For example, according to the published figures, it turns out that:

- "The average Russian works for 12 hours a day". In fact, we have a working day of 8 hours, many actually work less - late for the start of the working day or in the evening leave work earlier. People at us lazy, here I will not embroider smile Work more than 8 hours happens, but just not at the state enterprises for which the government answers, and in commerce.

- "The average salary for these 12 hours of work is 20,000 rubles/month ($354)". In fact, now the average salary is about 37 thousand rubles per month ($656) .

- "People rarely live up to 50 years". That's only the average life expectancy has grown to 72.5 years and is constantly growing

"Russians were completely impoverished during Putin's reign". On this issue, I've written here more than once. The average increase in welfare over the past 25 years was 10-15 times. Even life 10 years ago seems much more poor than now.

- "In pharmacies do not find drugs cheaper 200-300 rubles ($3.5-$5.5)". Really in Moscow, prices for the most affordable medications start from 6-10 rubles ($0.1 - $0.2). In the province, usually even cheaper.

The saddest thing is that the phenomenon is massive, no denials (except for me sometimes: D) no one writes, so with all the inconsistency of such statements with reality, the notorious "70% of the conforming population", having read this, will also be considered as well. In my opinion, Russia is now clearly losing the information war in social networks.