"The President" (2015) - Russian documentary about Putin

Communist defined would be the State assuming all control over the economy… as outlined in the 10 planks of the communist manifesto by Marx. All these have been implemented for some time in the USA, and the illusion of private property is just that…. if you don't believe me, then ask someone who live in New York, has their house paid off for generations, and has to pay$30,000 per year in property taxes. Private property is an illusion.

I was born in the early 60's, and through hs, and university, was taught about the cold war, and how controlling the soviet apparatchik was. Where if you checked into a hotel, on each floor there would be a person who would make notes as to your coming and going. Fast forward 45 years to the USA, and the surveillance state makes pre Glastnost Russia look like a bunch of amateurs. To the poster that said that the USA was not communist, and that I have not travelled that much…. I have travelled all over Europe, 44 of the 50 States, central and south America, and Indonesia. I have travelled more than 99 percent of the Americans, who most never travel more than 50 miles from where they are born. From my perspective, and having studied also about the Soviet Union (Origins of the Fourth World War by Nyquist), I would say that today, Russia is "controlled opposition". But the disgusting, and corrupt leadership of the USA, and it's unalterable position as Israel's military errand boy, makes Russia look like a beacon of freedom for the white races in comparison to what the USSA has become. If you live inside the US, you really can't see it too well, because you are invested in the lie emotionally and intellectually, and your ego will not let you see it.

I really enjoyed the video you put up OP…. I do see that Putin appears to have been in the right place at the right time to turn the Russian economy around. The Russian mafia is one of the most fearsome in the world… Are they the same Mafia which controls the USA??? That is the question that I am looking to answer.

I would ask you "What is the reason that the USA is slowly becoming Islamic?" And the answer would be that it is because the USA and it's puppet master wishes to destroy the ethnic and ideological unity that has been in the USA since it's inception… and like Merkel, no other reason can be proposed other than pure treason to the American People.

Putin, and his "invasion" of the Ukraine, and all the bs propaganda surrounding it are nothing but lies from the US media, and NATO, that desire to take away a geopolitical and strategic economic asset from Russia itself…. if Alaska were to form a "breakaway Republic" and kick out the oil companies by Nationalization, and get rid of the Military bases, sub bases, and airstrips…. would the Federal government allow it In the name of FREEDOM AND DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS??? Are you retarded? The US Federal government would not allow the independent Nation States to leave during the Civil War now did they??? No, they put the Constitution on hold, blamed the movement to leave the Union of "slavery" and invaded, murdered, and beat the South into submission… so what is the difference between Ukraine's "struggle for independence" and the Southern war for Independence???? There is none!

I see the problem a bit differently looking from historical perspective.
Whatever the society is, it's always inevitably divided into several groups. Call them castes, classes or any other name - it's not important. Also it is not really important if people can move from one group from another.
Leaving aside some details and very minor groups, there are: Statesmen, Clergymen, Businessmen and Peasants. Please understand, that I'm using very wide sense for every word. For example, "Statesmen" are politicians, police, army and civil servants. "Clergymen" are not only really priests and so on, but also not religious philosophers who shape how people think. "Businessmen" are everyone who have and/or manage a lot of money. "Peasants" are the people who actually work either with their hands or brains.
Notably, that while in the West natural sciences made the major breakthrough, social sciences have mostly failed. At least, not one theory was able to celebrate its second full century before failing. While Eastern social philosophies are safe and sound - despite donning the cloths of Western ones. In traditional Eastern philosophy the highest, most important caste were Peasants, because they feed everyone else. Statesmen ensure Peasants' safety and for that they are fed. Clergymen organize Peasants's life and that's the reason why they are fed. Businessmen organize the way Peasants work and that's the reason why they are needed. But they all are nothing if they are hungry.
The behavior of state (i.e. whether it's capitalism, socialism or whatever) is determined by the way other three castes are connected with Statesmen. If the Businessmen has the most influence, it's Capitalism (of one form or another, including medieval merchant oligarchies). If Clergymen have biggest influence, it results in Theocracy or Ideocracy (among which there are Communism, Socialism for example). If Peasants are the closest - it results in Meritocracy (to which, BTW, Russia was moving steadily just before 1917).
Thing is that US were founded as a Capitalistic state where Businessmen were the most important people - while bearing a full understanding of the importance of Peasants. But with time the new type of Clergymen emerged - Clergymen of Democracy, and they've hijacked the state, forming a new kind of Western Democracy which is as dogmatic as SU was during it's worse years. And it's really doesn't matter what ideology is straightened beyond the border of absurd. May it be medieval Western Christianity that decided that burning heretics on the stakes is an alright thing to do, Russian Communists who murdered their own relatives for not supporting revolution, or Western self-proclaimed Democrats who are willing to murder millions of people for the sake of installing another supposedly "democratic" leader somewhere on the globe.

Although, that's just my perception of the matter.


As for Putin... I see it this way: he was lead towards presidency by Primakov most likely. At the same time roughly in 1998 Primakov was appointed PM and Putin - a director of FSB. He was its director for a year, most likely collecting in his hands all the necessary information. And so, when he became PM, he had all the necessary leverages. Well, that's among other things of course.

Last Edited by Tamonten on 08/26/2016 07:26 PM

Excellent post! This is a great thing about GLP… another perspective, and that of someone who has grown up in such a different part of the world… but can see eye to eye with objectivity. Thanks! Was wondering where you were, until I figured, that I am watching and posting while you are sleeping…. I have a few observations that I will make shortly on the video you posted. Also watching the "western version" as I think the truth is something of the two combined… everybody has an agenda when it comes to presenting their political heroes in a good light…. other wise WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD SUPPORT A HAG LIKE CLINTON??? But that is for another day.

Well, actually, I have rather chaotic day circle, so I'm here very irregularly.

As for my post - I was studying Eastern history in college/university (I'm rather puzzled how to name it actually, since formally it's closer to Western college in name, but closer to university in terms of teaching) for years.
Even when people call China Communist... well, it's not really true. They are nationalistic isolationists by now, while still using Communism as a front.
It's like people call Japan democratic country, totally ignoring the fact that current Japanese PM's grandfather was PM too. And that his family can be traced to Fujiwara clan that first came to power in Japan in year 645, more than 1300 years ago.

In current international system most of countries developed some front to seem not what they really are. Russia, for example, has inborn political system that is persistently reborn in any kind of supposed government. Actually, it's a variation of Russian pre-revolution monarchism. Under that concept the monarch is a person who protects common people from elites - in contrary to Western monarchism, where monarch was just a highest among the elites with the same interests. Actually, I believe that the fall of Russian monarchy was determined mainly by that Nicolas II did not inherit understanding of this system.

Generally, I think that every nation has some government style embedded into their national culture. As long as culture is more or less preserved, government style will be roughly the same.
And that's one of the reasons why I'm disgusted by Western regime change policies. If you teach cannibal tribes democracy, the most likely result is that they'll use it to determine who to eat next.

As for Hillary and the whole propaganda story...

[link to www.youtube.com (secure)]

from your post OP…

Russia, for example, has inborn political system that is persistently reborn in any kind of supposed government.

This is what I see from studying Russia. And the information I have read about what happened to Czar Nicholas and his family… and the Russian retaliation against the 50,000 Cossacks that were returned by America and her allies after WW2, and gunned down on the spot… These events, and the reason the Cossacks were murdered, make me conclude that the cabal behind Russia, is the same cabal behind the USA… This makes me think that Putin, like Trump imho is controlled opposition. The signs are there. What do you think?

Is Putin a name as common as Smith. Just asking as Rasputin has come to mind. Any connections?

Well, I can't really say anything about Trump (though, obviously, he has my sympathy since at least he looks human), but I don't think Putin is a controlled opposition. At least, by now. Maybe at first, when he was just brought to power. But not now.
As I see it, Putin was able to find the very concept Nicolas II lost - being a protector of "Peasants" from the demands of "Clergymen" and "Businessmen". He is still having a hard time teaching his "Statesmen" to do the same, but that's the general line.
Thing is - and it's not widely discussed or even known - that Nicolas was the first Russian monarch who was brought up in isolation. His Grandfather - Alexander II had a habit of walking the streets of St. Petersburg unattended, talking with common people etc., etc. But after Alexander II was murdered, his son Alexander III not only stopped doing so, but also moved his family to Gatchina palace far from the city. Nicolas did not know his people, did not trust them. And that resulted in his demise ultimately.

As for those Cossacks and other Nazi-collaborators - it's an isolated case, actually. Mostly because if those Cossacks' allied Nazis won, it would have resulted in same or worse for Soviets. War is war, it can't be helped. And, AFAIK, Allies did not return captives who weren't SU citizens - i.e. those who worked under Nazis and were of Russian diaspora.

You may also like another Russian-made documentary - Thread: "World Order" by Russian TV

I've answered this question in some other thread:



Oh, and the most common family names in Russia are actually "Kuznetsov", "Kovalyov" and "Koval'" - which so have the same meaning as "Smith".
Actually, if you'll want to translate "John Smith" to Russian, it would be "Ivan Kuznetsov".

Last Edited by Tamonten on 08/27/2016 12:16 PM