Alexander Dragunkin about the Russian language, nationalism and scientific conservatism. Alexander Dragunkin Russian origin of all languages ​​← Hodor Dragunkin about Stalin

Are the British descendants of Russians?

“It all started with the English language, which I taught for many years,” Alexander Dragunkin told MK in St. Petersburg the background of his discovery. - The further I went, the more I was dissatisfied with his teaching methods - and some new ideas appeared latently. In 1998, I sat down to write my first book - a guide to English language. I stopped going to the office, locked myself at home and on the most primitive computer in a month I typed SOMETHING that I was stunned by. In that work, I proposed my own way of quickly memorizing English words - by analogy with Russian ones. And while developing it, I came across the obvious: English words are not just similar to Russian ones - they have Russian origin!

Can you prove it?

Certainly. Just first remember three simple basic rules of philology. First: you can ignore the vowels in a word; the most important thing is the backbone of consonants. Second: consonants are very clearly grouped according to the place of formation in the mouth - for example, L, R, N are formed by different movements of the tongue, but in the same part of the palate. Try to pronounce them and see for yourself. There are several such chains of consonants: v-m-b-p-f, l-r-s-t-d-n, h-ts-k-g-z-zh, v-r-h, s-ts-h (j). When a word is borrowed, letters can be replaced in accordance with these chains. And the third rule: when moving from one language to another, a word can only be shortened, and most often the first syllable disappears.

And now for examples.

Please. The English word girl has no origin in its homeland. But in Old Russian there was a wonderful word that was used to call young ladies - Gorlitsa! The backbone of the consonants is the same, and English word in short - so who took the floor from whom? Another example is the English REVOLT. Let's say you don't know what this means - now let's see who stole from whom. Any Latinist will tell you that RE is a prefix, VOL is a root and a “mysterious T”. Western philologists don’t even say where it came from. But I’m a simple person: let’s assume an idiotic option - that the British took this word from someone and distorted it over time. Then, if RE is a prefix meaning “repetition”, and the British took this prefix from someone, then over a thousand years it could only become shorter (remember the philological law). This means that we can assume that it was originally longer. So, in the whole world there is only one prefix that meant the same thing, but was longer - the Russian PERE-! L and R are interchangeable consonants from the same chain. We rewrite the word in Russian - PERE-VOR-oT. REVOLT translated means “coup, rebellion” - so who borrowed from whom? And the “mysterious T”, on which all English linguists stumble, turns out to be the most common Russian suffix. There are incredibly many such examples.

And why on earth should the English, living on an island far from our vast homeland, supplement themselves with Russian words - they didn’t have their own?

The British may well turn out to be descendants of the ancient Russians. There is completely official data (which, however, is often hushed up) that the Saxons - the ancestors of the British - came not from anywhere, but from the Volga River. In the scientific world this is an axiom. Saxons are plural from the word "sak". That is, on the Volga they were SACs. Further, according to the law about the shortening of a word when moving into another language, we conclude that this word could have originally been longer. I see no other explanation for the origin of the word SAKI, other than from the truncated RUSAKA.

The Tatars didn’t invent swear words

Okay, but what about other languages? You don't claim to know every language in the world, do you?

I don't approve. But I know many languages. I can easily communicate in English, French, Italian, German, Swedish, Polish. I know Japanese, but I don’t speak it. At the university I studied ancient Chinese, and in my youth I seriously studied Hindi. So I can compare. Here's an example. Let's take the Latin word SECRET (secret, something hidden). The whole world is staring at this word, but its origin is unknown. In addition, it is not decomposed into components - there is no prefix or suffix. Some see the same “mysterious suffix T”. The most dashing Western philologists highlight the root CR - this is the Latin CER, “to see.” But why on earth is the “secret”, what is hidden, based on the root “to see”? This is absurd! I do it differently - I get impudent and write the same letters in Old Russian - SъKRYT. And I get complete similarity of meaning, an obvious prefix C-, a wonderful root and our native suffix. Remember that vowels are completely unimportant for philology.

Or also the word “harem”. The fact that the Russian princes before the Romanovs had whole crowds of concubines - historical fact. Now, if I have many beautiful wives, where will I keep them? In the best rooms, which in Rus' were called KhoRoMy - remember the chains of alternating consonants - so where did the word GaReM come from?

So that means they borrowed everything from us, and not we from strangers?

Naturally! I even refuted the established “Tatar” theory of the origin of Russian swearing.

There were no Tatars?

It wasn’t - it was just our invention. I can demonstrate. We have the word star - this is a star. Zvez is a distorted word for "light". That is, a star is something that “lights.” And if you follow this word formation scheme, what will the name of what they “pee” be called? It's one word. Next, where did the word “stick” come from? Initially it was called “phalka” because it was used to puff and shove. The English word stick (stack, stick) is clearly our poke, “poke”. Let's return to the word “pkhat” - form the imperative mood, as with the word “poke”: poke - stick, phat - what? And the “p” disappeared over time. The most interesting thing with the verb is that only in Russian you can say: “I fucked her.” M and B, as you remember, alternate - replace the letter M in the word “fuck” and see what happens:

Well, swearing is not proof that Old Russian is the proto-language of the whole world:

Okay, here's another thing: the names of all sacred religious books are of Russian origin.

Even the Koran?

Yes. In the Arab world it is believed that this word has no etymology. But it is there. The Koran, as you know, is the revelations of the Prophet Muhammad, collected by the scribe Zeid - and KEPT by him! The Qur'an is So-kran. With the Jewish Torah it is even simpler: this is a book about CREATION - the Torah is T(v)ora.

The Bible is a little different - you need to know that it is written on paper, and paper is made from cotton. Cotton in Slavic is called BaVeLna - BiBLe. The Bible is just a stack of paper! I’m not talking about the Indian “Vedas” at all: here the origin is obvious from the word to know. Each of these explanations can be disputed separately, but the interesting thing is that all the names have a correct interpretation only through the Russian language.

Well, what about the names of gods and servants?

Allah... If we assume that this word is not Arabic and has lost its first consonant over time, then only one word remains, which also corresponds to the meaning - WALLAH - Magi, and the Magi were priests. There is also the Russian root MOL, from which the word “pray” appears. MoL is the same as MuL - MULLA who asks God. In English, priest PRieST - in Russian letters ASK: I don’t believe that there can be so many random coincidences. The fact that the words are similar and have the same meaning is half the battle. But pay attention: in all cases when a word cannot find an origin in its “native” language, in Russian it acquires a completely logical etymology - and all its mysteries, suffixes that come from incomprehensibly, which traditional philology cannot explain, become completely normal parts the words are in Russian! Our language is amazing. It brings us to the bottom of the world - I am sure that it was created artificially and the matrix of the universe is encrypted in it.

What is hell and heaven

Were you able to decipher anything?

Very interesting things. For example, only in Russian the whole surrounding a person the world was described using one syllable with the root BL (taking into account the chain of alternating consonants). What was around ancient man? BoR, MoRe, Pole, SwampLoto, PaR (as air used to be called) and so on.

All animal world described on a geometric basis only in the Russian language: in other languages ​​these are words taken out of context, but in ours they form a system. Living things were described using three roots, which are the shapes of the body. For example, everything ROUND is described using the root KR/GL and its derivatives - Head, Eye, Throat, Knee, Shin.

Further, only in the Russian language was man separated from the rest of the animal world by the main characteristic - reason. The mind is in the head, which used to have another name - MAN. How we were singled out from the world - we were called MAN!

So, did our ancestors receive knowledge about the world from language itself?

Our ancestors knew everything, because everything was described in language simply. Paradise is nothing more than a stripped-down EDGE where everything is healthy and cool. Hell is simply what is BELOW us. Let's remember the word "star" - light, yes - long before telescopes, people who spoke Russian knew that stars were not just holes in the sky, but that what shines, emits light!

You said that the language was created artificially. Why was it created at all? Love could well be expressed in the number of killed mammoths.

The Russian language also answers this question. Remember Tyutchev’s famous phrase: “A thought expressed is a lie”? What did the poet want to say? I'll show you. In the Russian language there are three verbs that mean the process of speech - to speak, to say, to utter (or expound). But what’s interesting is that only in the Russian language three verbs meaning lies have the same roots: to speak - to lie, to lie / to lay out - to lie / LIE, to say - to distort. Language was initially created not for the exchange of information, but as a tool for its distortion, a method of influence. Now, of course, we already use it for communication. However, rest assured - of all the peoples of the world, only we speak the most direct descendant of the proto-language.

And who created it?

Those who created humanity.

Kolobok was exposed

These words are considered borrowed from the Russian language last centuries. However, Alexander Dragunkin is convinced of their Russian “origin.”

Galaktika - from the Russian dialect "GaLaGa" (fog)

Dollar - from DoL

CALCULATOR - from HOW MANY

LABORATORY - from RaBot (L and R alternate)

Lady - from LaDa (ancient Russian goddess)

HoTel (hotel) - from HaTa

NeGR - from NeKrasiviy

ELEMENT - UNBREAKED

sMoG - from MGla

GloBus - from KoLoBok (G and K alternate)

interview

Photo: Igor Kalakauskas

Wikipedia speaks rather sparingly about him: “Russian philologist, author of textbooks on the English language, author of pseudoscientific historical and linguistic ideas.” On the World Wide Web you can find a variety of opinions about his methodology; on various forums you will meet both ardent fans and those who consider him a charlatan. I myself unexpectedly came across the statement that one of his students was Vladimir Putin at one time...

In addition to English, our hero, by his own admission, can speak fluently in French, German, Italian, Swedish, Polish and Spanish. Alexander Dragunkin, who are you really?

Last weekend, Doctor of Philological Sciences Alexander Nikolaevich Dragunkin visited one of the private educational institutions Tallinn and gave a master class. Our guest did not experience a shortage of listeners: almost a hundred people were interested in two days of intensive classes. According to the teacher, he expected to encounter skepticism and hostility, but the audience greeted him very friendly.

“Loose your tongue!”

If we abstract from everything that is written about you, how would you characterize your activities?

I proposed learning English according to different rules, that is, I proposed a fundamentally different methodology for teaching grammar. It's not simpler or better - it's just different. Although it turned out to be simpler, since there are no exceptions. You can say this: she is understandable.
I dare to be sure that my students understand what needs to be done when learning English and, most importantly, why exactly this should be done. I would sum up my professional slogan in one phrase: “Correct English from the first approach.” My master class is not a miracle cure and certainly not a way to master foreign language in a couple of days. It just helps loosen your tongue!

“Loose your tongue”? How familiar this is to us!

Yes, and not only to untie, but also to learn how to build complex structures. Words are bricks put together building structure. But not all of them are fundamentally important. However, I do not believe that a person with a small vocabulary will be able to achieve the same level as a person who knows more English words. The main thing is the correct construction of the sentence. Structurally, the expressions “I took out a loan from a bank” and “I took a pie from the shelf” are almost identical. A person can expand his vocabulary with the help of a regular dictionary. I am sure that my master class will allow people to go to improve their language at any other courses or go to the country of native speakers of this language to improve it on the spot.

Are your textbooks published only in Russian?

From what? It is already available in Mongolian, Hungarian, Lithuanian, Armenian and Tatar. Not long ago, under the patronage of the Latvian Academy of Sciences, one of my textbooks was published in Latvian. And soon a manual in Ukrainian will be released - this is a source of special pride for me. Books not only come out, they sell well. You know, as they say, “a product is a product!” Although here I would make a small clarification: my textbooks are more needed by adults who did not master English at one time. After all, young people, especially European ones, understand the basics of the main language international communication knows quite well. Therefore, I am not at all surprised that one of the visitors to a recent master class in Tallinn was a 66-year-old man. And, it seems to me, I was very pleased.

The Estonian language is normal, but with its own specifics

Is your professional interest limited to English only?

You might be interested to know that a textbook was published not so long ago Chinese language, it is completely built on my methodology.

So, maybe you’ll take the Estonian textbook as well?

As a philologist, I am very interested in the Estonian language. And I would be glad to be useful to the Russian-speaking residents of Estonia. I do not rule out that such a textbook will appear. But for this I need to master Estonian myself. I took with me a couple of Estonian textbooks published at the end of the last century. I'll look through them at my leisure and try to get the gist. So be patient. But I can say with confidence that a dictionary of about five hundred words is already ready to be compiled.

And have you encountered any difficulties?

I definitely don’t see any difficulties in the structure of the Estonian language. But you will have to work in more detail on the presentation of grammar. In general, I am familiar with your “language” situation. And it seems to me that Russian-speaking residents of the country are too scared of Estonian grammar. But as a philologist, I am not at all afraid of it. These difficulties are mainly psychological. A guide to increasing your vocabulary would be very helpful here.

The Estonian language is an absolutely normal language, but with its own specific features. It also has a number of advantages - there are no articles, the text is both written and read.

So on your next visit, will you be ready to present an Estonian textbook?

Well, no matter how hard I try, I won’t be able to do it before the end of October. After all, I am going to visit Tallinn again in a month. So - see you later!

My communication with Alexander Nikolaevich took place on the train that was taking us to St. Petersburg. My interlocutor seemed to me to be a very obsessed person. This is how either geniuses or charlatans behave. To understand this, I now want to attend the next master class of the Russian philologist myself. What if this really is a revolution in teaching?

A person runs through life without sparing his legs. Home is work, home is work, serving time. Weekends are a respite, a vacation, like a rest. Old age, retirement, shortness of breath, did you run here? ...Are you born for this? And lived for this? Did you wait, dream, study, believe and love for happiness? If not, then perhaps slow down your running. And start your journey from the beginning - a new person.

Oksana Belkina

In the flow of the bustle of everyday affairs and worries, we somehow forget that our world keeps a lot of secrets and mysteries. Sometimes it seems to us that everything in this world is already more or less clear and known, that nothing new can be discovered. But this is far from true. We humans do not yet know the answers to many fundamental questions of our existence: Where did everything come from? Where is a person even from? What is a person? What is its role in the Universe? Has he appeared? Was it created? Has it existed forever? How did the language appear? What was the proto-language? .

And many people are looking for answers to these questions, solving the mysteries of this world, and sometimes what they find completely overturns the usual established view of the surrounding reality. One of these people is our guest, philologist Alexander Dragunkin. He is a researcher in the field of linguistics. As a result of linguistic research, he came to a rather interesting conclusion thatThe world's parent language is Russian!

On this occasion, he developed his own theory. It is set out in the books by Alexander Dragunkin “Five Sensations”, “The Origin of Words, Numbers and Letters”. And this is not some kind of neo-pagan fantasy that cannot be verified, but a coherent, one might say, scientific theory that can be felt and touched.

And even if some of the author’s conclusions and generalizations may seem too unusual and bold, but as Syumbyul said in the series “The Magnificent Century”: “Every story wants to be told...”.

- Please tell us about your research?

Firstly, I do not deal with the various stages or periods of development of the Russian language. Because not 99, but 100 percent of Russian scholars, if they study the history of language, then they study precisely the history of language, i.e. its existence at one or another stage of development, in one or another time period. I'm the only one who encroached on the very beginning. The very beginning. That is, where the Russian language comes from, what it is, what kind of phenomenon it is, and so on. And from this comes the information (theory) that the Russian language is a proto-language.

I had no goal to prove that it is a proto-language. My goal was to see where it all came from? And this already showed me that the Russian language is still more primary than other languages. At least Eurasian ones.

- All or not all languages ​​originated from the Russian language?

You know, it all depends on how you see the universe in general. Because if, suppose, we were created. Then: why couldn’t we create several different models, several options. Well, since there are several options, then why not give each subspecies its own tool for transmitting and storing information, that is, a language? This is one look.

But the fact is that there is one rather mysterious phenomenon. It lies in the fact that all people are still built according to the same principle. Their oral cavity is the same for everyone. She's exactly the same. In chimpanzees, for example, it may differ and in other primates too. Humans are also the only one of all primates to have a so-called hyoid bone. This is a small tiny bone that is located at the bottom of the mouth. In chimpanzees, this bone disappeared approximately 500 thousand years ago; in humans, it is the only one left.

And only thanks to this bone can a person pronounce (articulate) sounds. That is, clearly pronounce the necessary sounds in any combination. In addition, the human oral cavity is designed in such a way that he can pronounce very specific sounds. These sounds, official, let’s say, science says that they differ in the way they are pronounced. I was the first to say that they differ in place of education. So, a person has three places where these sounds are formed: the first is the lips and tongue (labial and dental sounds: they are even officially called that), the second is where the alveoli are (alveoli are the tubercles behind the teeth on the roof of the mouth), and the third is the throat (k, g, x and so on).

I'm talking about consonants because vowels are bullshit. Vowels are needed only to separate consonants (I have special thoughts on this topic, but this is not relevant to our topic right now).

So, sounds formed in one place can be interchanged without loss of meaning (i.e. m b p they are in different languages absolutely easily interchanged since they have the same place of origin).

The most interesting thing is that a possible combination of all three places of education gives the so-called bases. Let’s conditionally call the sponge-teeth “base No. 1”, the alveoli – “base No. 2”, the neck – “base No. 3”. Here are all the combinations (1+1, 1+2, 1+3, 2+2, 2+1, 2+3, 3+3, 3+2, 3+1) there are nine of them. And here the funniest thing begins, which no one can deny. Even the most ardent academics.

The fact is that only in Russian are all these possible combinations (1+1, 1+2, 1+3, 2+2,2+1, 2+3, 3+3, 3+2, 3+1 ) they give bases consisting of consonants, which, when vowels are introduced into them, give roots. Nine roots. Significant roots. But they are significant only in Russian. Say whatever you want here.

The most interesting thing is that they are not only significant, but they also give categories. See, for example, the combination 1+2. Base No. 1 is “m”, “b”, “p”, “c”, Base No. 2 is “l”, “p”, “n”, “d”. So the combination 1+2 gives a category (mind you, this is not in any language in the world) m+l = small, but b+l = large, v+l = large, that is, the category of size. The combination 3+2 gives quality x+p=good. All this is fully described in my books.

The funny thing is that only in the Russian language do all these combinations or types of combinations of sounds give meaningful roots. Take for example the English word “small”. The "s" comes and goes. This is a regular prefix and is not required. For example, we say “spoil,” but in the villages grandmothers say “s-spoil.” That is, “s” does not affect the meaning of the word at all. So in the English word “small”, drop the “s” and it turns out to be “small”, small, but they do not have the root “m+l”. Bases m+l. For them, the word “small” is just a word that fell from the sky. They don't know where it came from.

Moreover, take some etymological dictionary (a dictionary about the origin of words), then a lot of things will be written there: High German, Old German, Old Islamic and God knows what else is written. But where did it even come from - they never write this, because they know very well that it came from the Russian language.

Or, for example, if we consider the combination b - g (1+3)b O Gaty - b replace with m =m O Glearned (and rich is powerful), and so on and so forth. That is, all these possible combinations give meaning. But this meaning exists only in Russian. No matter how much you and I squeak.

And this of course official science cannot accept it, because then all its postulates collapse, then the mention of the Slavs in the 6th century becomes ridiculous, and so on. All this is becoming nonsense.

Then, for example, let’s take Latin, 6th century BC, hoary antiquity. How do you say "thief" in Latin? "Thief" in Latin is "fur". And “v” and “f” are the same thing. We have: “vr = steal”, “br = take”, we have the root, we have the meaning, we have everything. But they don't have it. For them, “fur” is a torn word, it just fell from the sky; none of them even know where it came from. And so on. In the book “5 Sensations” and “The Origin of Words, Numbers and Letters” - this is all described in detail.

I’m not saying whether I’m right or wrong, I don’t care at all: I’m not the first there. There are no such concepts in my worldview. There is reality, there is a given, there is a big plan of which we are an element. And right is wrong - it’s all nonsense. But facts are facts. What I am demonstrating. I’m not proving, please note, I’m just demonstrating - this is either completely inexplicable from the point of view of traditional historiography, or it is explainable from the point of view on which I stand. Not because I am great, huge and brilliant, but simply because I took this point of view and that’s it.

- How similar are those proto-languages ​​and modern Russian? After all, if you look at old manuscripts and books, the languages ​​are quite different.

First, you need to look at where these books were written. Because most of our old books are not purely Russian. Purely Russian books were destroyed. This is the first. Secondly, you need to look: who wrote it? The thing is that at a certain time, instead of the normal Russian language, Church Slavonic was introduced into Russia, which was prestigious to speak. Church Slavonic is simply, in fact, the Old Bulgarian language (it had its own historical reasons for this).

The notorious Cyril and Methodius, whom they praise, are plagiarists. Although the church now clearly knows that they did not invent our Cyrillic alphabet. But there is simply already a “reality” that no one wants to overthrow. So Cyril and Methodius were entrusted with translating the Bible into Russian. These two lazy people, of course, didn’t know Russian, they never went anywhere further than Thessaloniki, but what is next to Thessaloniki? Bulgaria. Slavic country. They thought it was the same thing. And instead of Russian, they translated the Bible into Old Bulgarian. And this old Bulgarian language was later recognized as the language of the Bible, Church Slavonic. And Old Russian and Church Slavonic are completely different things.

And you know, if you read (search somewhere on the Internet, of course everything is hidden, but look) birch bark letters of the 11th century from Novgorod, then you will simply be stunned - they simply write there in modern Russian. From my point of view, the Russian language is actually the language of the universe, and from my point of view, if aliens come to us, they will speak a language that you and I understand. Because, I believe, the Creator had no need to create many communication tools. He doesn't need events like the Tower of Babel. And if you want to remember the episode with the Tower of Babel, then that single language that split in those days was the language that we speak today.

Of course, small changes and deviations could occur. Due to geography, peculiarities of national pronunciation. For example, we say “package”, but Azerbaijanis say “packet”. Or let’s say someone went to the taiga with his whole family, a huge big family, and took away his tongue, and the children of the person who left began to have a lisp, well, it just happened: maybe they were bitten by a wasp, maybe they broke a tooth - they started to lisp and instead of “s” they started saying “sh” (well, I’m speaking conventionally, understand?) so their children will already perceive this as the norm. Do you get the idea?

That is, of course, there may be a departure. But this departure is not so great that we do not understand it. And they could not identify this ancient Russian language. Although I don’t have the concept of Old Russian, there is all-Russian. The same elders who supposedly sleep in the caves of the Himalayas for thousands of years, I think that the biggest secret that they will reveal if they wake up is that in the entire universe, in the entire universe, there is only one people and they speak the same language. This is a hundred times more important than any discoveries in physics. Any colahedra.

- Does anyone else in the world say that their language is the most ancient?

You know very well, many said, for example, that Sanskrit is older than Russian. There are many names, all of them must be respected because they want to get to the bottom of the truth, they try. The only thing, of course, is that you don’t need to do all this with pomp and shouting. You just need to show your origin. I presented it, you can see it when you read my books. It's not realistic to find fault. You can just tell me to turn around and leave, or say “that’s cool!” It's not realistic to find fault.

The same thing here, no matter who promotes what theories, but refuse the fact that only in the Russian language all 9 possible combinations sounds give significant roots - you can’t refuse this, you can’t jump anywhere, neither to the left nor to the right. And in “5 Sensations” there is my etymological Sanskrit dictionary, where it is clearly visible that Russian words are older than Sanskrit ones. Therefore, everything is simple here.

- There are also ancient Ukrainians who also say that their language and culture are the most ancient.

And who dug up the Black Sea...

- Yes... Don’t you see any parallels here: your theory with Ukrainian nationalism? And in general, nationalism is generally bad in itself?

Well, first of all, from my point of view, nationalism is not bad. Because, you know, there is a state-forming nation. I won’t argue about this now, but for me nationalism is a good thing. But look, those settlements are ancient, which are found on the territory of Ukraine.

Please note that they are found precisely on the TERRITORYUkraine. This does not mean that these people were Ukrainians. This is the first. Secondly, what is Ukraine? Ukraine is a distorted word for “outskirts”. And everyone knows it. That’s why we say “in Ukraine”. All these idiotic “in Ukraine” are nonsense from the point of view of the correctness of the language. Not from a nationalist point of view. No. And from the point of view of the correctness of the language: who speaks “in the outskirts”? Everyone says “on the outskirts”, “in Ukraine”. Everything is fine, no problem.

There was never a Ukraine, there was an outskirts. Was Kievan Rus. Still Rus'. Even Poroshenko wants to rename Ukraine something related to Kievan Rus. Therefore, Ukrainians are good people. And the word is just idiotic.

And those settlements that were found there are very ancient. They are much older than any European settlements there. Older than Mediterranean, Near Eastern, Middle Eastern settlements and civilizations. This is all true. But this does not mean at all that they were Ukrainians. These were people, people already higher in development than the Cro-Magnons. It was already modern man. And he wore pants and he knew how to carve bone, he made jewelry (which means the concept of beauty already existed). What I said about pants is very important, because it is believed that the pants were brought by the Turks. No, there were already pants on the territory of modern Ukraine. But you shouldn’t forget this and start arguing “but here you are,” “but here we are.”

Then remember Arkaim, which has nothing to do with Ukraine at all. It was a whole huge city in the Urals. Just a city! And not a pastoral or agricultural settlement. Therefore, we can spit on nationalism in the poor understanding of the word. But you need to think realistically. The reality is completely different. Arkaim is a city, and Ukrainian settlements are settlements. These are different things. Moreover, they are not Ukrainian, but they are located on the territory of Ukraine. But in the same way they are located on the territory of Romania, where they are even more ancient. But the culture is one. Do you understand me? But you can’t beat Arkaim.

Therefore, there is no need to argue here “and with us”, “and with you”. Moreover, what we are talking about now are the different stages of development of an existing person. And I try to go to the very beginning. Where did it all come from anyway? Where is a person even from? What is a person? His role in the universe? Has he appeared? Was it created? Has it existed forever?

From my point of view, there was no beginning or end at all. From my point of view, the universe exists forever. It had no beginning, no end. From my point of view, man is simply an integral part of the universe.

- Why, from a psychological point of view, if we are the guardians of the language from which everything came, then why do representatives of other civilizations treat us so destructively? The West looks down on us and wants to destroy us, and the East also wants to civilize us in its own way, believing that we have weak spirituality (all sorts of Vedic teachings, for example). Why is this so?

Well, first of all, who will allow us (namely us, I’m not talking about everyone) to be recognized as higher beings or that we come directly from God? Or that everyone left us? No one will allow this at all. This is the first. Secondly, forgive me, but the West does not look down on us, they are afraid of us. And being afraid means respecting and respecting on the genetic plane. Wherever a Russian comes, there is always wariness towards him. They don't even understand why. And before whom are you wary? Before the one you are afraid of.

And the east is not a subtle matter at all. The East has only one joy - food. They either meditate or eat. 99% of Chinese people's conversations with each other are about food. About money and food. That is, they have no smell of spirituality at all. They only have more sophisticated ways of surviving. Even their meditations. Here is a man sitting meditating. What is he meditating on? After all, in fact, he doesn’t even think, he escapes reality. And escaping reality, from my point of view, has never been something worthy.

And now the most destructive thing: where does he escape from reality? From reality it’s still okay if you get drunk and escape from reality. But here they are consciously escaping reality. Where? Unclear. And no one in the world can answer this question. It is unlikely that the Lord God created us so that we would escape reality. He created us so that we would do something, accomplish something, maybe even prove with our good deeds what we are.

So there's nothing wrong with that. Take the history of Russia. Throughout history, Russia has been battered. The whole story! From ancient times to the present day. And yet she stands. Isn't this the will of God? She would not have existed long ago if she had not been pleasing to God, the Creator. And every time she is reborn herself, not thanks to, but in spite of.

If the king had not been overthrown, what would we have? We would have been a colony of France, because French capital had already captured 90% of Russian industry (precisely French capital).

If the king had not been overthrown, 90% of the population would have remained illiterate. And you read what happened after the revolution. Read the authors of the 30s, at least the same Valentin Kataev “Time Forward”, this is something! This is a transformation of the entire country. And we emerged from such a cataclysm! Sami. Not thanks to someone, but in spite of. And 46-47 years? When in 1949 they wanted 150 on us atomic bombs drop on our cities? And we survived ourselves. Who even helped us then?

But in the Great Patriotic War we did not fight with Germany, we fought with the entire united Europe. With everything! Who stood out at Stalingrad? French SS divisions. Belgian and so on. We were at war with the potential of all of Europe. France supplied 90% of Germany's steam locomotives. In the Czech Republic, the Skoda plant and other concerns until the very last moment (until Soviet troops did not run into the territory of the factories) produced weapons for the Germans. This is Prague. Our soldiers stopped production, and the Czechs stood at the machines and worked and produced tanks. We fought against all of Europe.

In general, no one helped us. The Marshall Plan helped Europe, but not us. When the Americans gave us Lend-Lease, they took everything that we didn’t eat, they even pressed the broken jeeps at the pier and loaded them onto their ships. We came out of all this ourselves. I'm not talking about older times. In 1812, too, all of Europe came towards us. All of Europe. Nevertheless.

And now take it. All these sanctions are generally great, wonderful. Russians have stopped transporting tons of dollars abroad. For Russians, it turns out, there is also Crimea, the Black Sea coast of the Caucasus, the Caspian Sea, it turns out that there are wonderful resorts within the country. Billions of dollars were spent on this stupid tourism. When the owner of three stalls immediately bought dollars (supporting the American economy) and went there, spending them there, rather than spending them here. And now everyone is coming back again. Everything is fine.

The world is concrete. Zbigniew Brzezinski said it right: the world is a chessboard. Right. But on the chessboard everything is very motivated and balanced. And here everything is balanced. If there were no Russia, what would happen? Direct confrontation between Europe and Asia?

- As far as I understand now, they want to destroy our (Russian) civilization, including with the help of small-town nationalisms. Belarus, Ukraine. There is a pitting and opposition of local nationalisms against Russian culture, Russia. Is the separation of Belarusian and Ukrainian culture from Russian culture a natural process or an artificial one?

Of course it's artificial. Separating, for example, languages ​​is, of course, an artificial process. He is stimulated. Exactly the same as now Ukrainian language it simply changed due to the vocabulary - it was greatly replenished: with Polish words, artificially created words, old, ancient words, and so on. That is, this is deliberate nationalization. Well, listen, understand, these are not our games, these are the games of the elites. Of course, the Americans are in charge. This is natural, but these are just games of the elites. You understand, if you open the borders between Ukraine and Russia or Belarus and Russia, natural assimilation will occur.

- And the nationalists are precisely against this, so that assimilation occurs. They are afraid that Russian culture will absorb our national Belarusian identity: language, zvychai. This gives rise to aggression on the part of nationalists.

I'll give you an example with the Baltic states. Look, during the Soviet regime, when the Baltic states were Soviet, I don’t know how it was in Belarus, but in the entire European part of Russia it was wildly prestigious to go to the Baltic states, that is, to go with a girl to Tallinn or Riga - it was like space travel, right away declaration of love. Do you understand? Latvians and Estonians were generally quoted. In terms of money, the Georgians were quoted. From the point of view of intelligence, Leningraders were ranked. But from the point of view of, let’s say, elitism, the Balts were rated. Who needs these Baltic states now? Tell me honestly! Half of whom will soon become blacks there.

First. Second. It's not just that. The fact is that under Soviet rule, both Estonian culture and Latvian culture flourished. Literature was supported artificially by subsidies and language was taught. The number (listen to my words) of Latvians and Estonians increased, growing naturally due to the birth rate. It doesn’t matter that there were also Russians in the republics. I'm talking now about Latvians and Estonians. Now a third have already left. If not already half. And their children will never be Latvians or Estonians.

So what kind of oppression can we talk about? Bullshit! The Baltic republics were subsidized. Now they don't fish. In Estonia, under pressure from the Americans, they allowed the cultivation of GMOs. In Estonia, girls are told that it is better to have an abortion than to give birth to a child. Where will they go?

What happened under Soviet rule? A child is the pinnacle of everything! Family is the top of everything! Do you understand? Latvian literature existed, Estonian literature existed. Books were published in Lithuanian, Latvian, and Estonian languages. Yes, Russian was also taught. So what? It was exactly the same language as everyone else. Moreover, friendly people. Why not teach him? Just like today everyone learns English.

And once again - why am I the only one talking about this? - the number of Estonians and Latvians has been constantly increasing! And no one oppressed them, no one sent them to Siberia, no one rebaptized them as Russians, and so on. What now! Everything is very easy! Let's see what will happen in 5 years with Estonia and Latvia. Let's see what happens in 10 years.

And don’t think I’m not happy. But it's funny to listen to what they say there. This simply did not exist in the Soviet Union. Yes, maybe Russification was underway. But I think she was natural. Because the quantitative ratio was 1 to 20. Perhaps at that time it was really necessary to raise the issue of greater concern for the preservation of national identity, but this may have been missed. This is mistake.

But this is not a malicious mistake. No one even thought of turning Latvians into Russians. Yes, be Latvian as much as you want: lead your round dances, weave wreaths on your heads, fish. Who needs you to become Russian? Produce magnificent Speedol receivers throughout the Soviet Union, receive huge subsidies from the center, develop culture. And the Academy of Sciences! - They had a real Academy of Sciences, a huge building. What's there now? This is ridiculous, shameful - a commercial center, everything is rented out for offices. Who else will talk about anything?

What is happening in Belarus or Ukraine is a war of elites. The elites need to create their own beachheads. But you can’t create a bridgehead faster than with nationalism. Money is universal, it is international, it flows. In today's world, the concepts of “ruble”, “yuan”, “dollar”, “euro” are already nonsense. There is a concept of money - that’s all. They flow like mercury. But national identity is the only springboard on which you can build your own empire, you can isolate it, you can separate it, and so on.

Look, in Kazakhstan, for example, the Russian language is still strong, but soon there will probably be bilingualism there - Kazakh and English. Well, who will this help? Russia is Russia. And knowing Russian is no worse than knowing Chinese or English. That's all. So these are games of the elites. Rotten elites at that. There are no real elites. There are moneyed elites, and these are bad elites, they need to stay in power. And their only argument is nationalism. That's all. This can be played anywhere. And in Poland - there are not only Poles, there are also Kashubians and many others. Then you will also find some in Belarus.

- There are Litvins in Belarus.

You see, but everyone forgets that the Litvins spoke Russian. Just take the official documents of Moldova, Romania, Belarus, Ukraine - after all, they were kept in Russian. And neither you nor I have anything to do with it.

- What is the difference between a dialect and a language?

There is a norm. There is a departure from this norm. That's all.

- We can say that Belarusian language– is this a dialect of Russian?

- No. This is a dialect of all-Russian. Russian is also a dialect of all-Russian. Ukrainian is also a dialect of all-Russian. Dialect of the East Slavic language. Russian is also a dialect of the East Slavic language. Well, look, in St. Petersburg we say “bakery”, in Moscow they say “buloShnaya”. In St. Petersburg we say “front door”, they say “entrance”. We say “curb”, they say “curb”. Now this can already be said to be dialects. Dialect is either a different pronunciation, or most likely it is vocabulary, slightly different words.

- Will the awareness that the Russian language is a world proto-language help resolve the national issue or will it aggravate it?

If we assume in Belarus and Ukraine they accept the fact of the existence of a single East Slavic language, which then gradually distinguished itself into three main dialects: Russian, Ukrainian, Belarusian, then this is the strongest factor of unification, not separation. And here there is no need to put pressure on the Russians. In my book I call this language all-Russian or East Slavic. The most correct thing is to be all-Russian.

After all, Russia-Rus consisted of Great Russia, Little Russia and Belarus. There was also Red Rus' (this is Transcarpathia). Even the name “Belarus” - where can you get away from the word “Russia”? Well, if you don’t want to be Belarusians, let them be Litvinians, what will change from this? The language is actually the same. It’s enough to go back 500 years. 500 years ago there was no difference. And everyone knows this. It’s just profitable to push the idea that these are different languages.

- It turns out that there were no nations as such 500 years ago?

Well, of course not. Even official historiography knows this. There were no Ukrainians. There were Russians. Grand Duchy of Moscow. Principality of Kiev. Rus' was there. There is no need to be afraid of the word “Rus” - it is a unified concept. Why did Kievan Rus not please the Ukrainians? Well, this is a historical fact.

- Ukrainians believe that they are real Slavs, and those who are now called Russians are Finno-Ugrians and Mongols.

You're talking about genetics, and genetics don't bother me at all.

- Isn’t genetics related to language?

Of course not.

- Why?

Take Israel, for example, anyone there is considered a Jew if he professes Judaism. They don't care if you're a Negro, or a Semite, or anyone else. Or try telling American actor Robert De Niro that he is not American, but Italian. Try telling the writer Saroyan that he is not an American, but an Armenian. Or try telling Tyson that he is African, not American. Cultural factors play a more determining role in this sense. Not genetics.

And the fact that we have more Finno-Ugric blood - so what? For example, my grandfather is from the Kama (a tributary of the Volga), and on the other line from Siberia. But my ancestors have been in St. Petersburg for four generations now.

I don’t really care how many genes I have – the main thing is history, culture, geography. Even if I’m a Finno-Ugric a hundred times, even if I’m a Mongol or a Tatar a hundred times: I speak Russian, I live in Russia, my history of my country is called the history of Russia and my culture is purely Russian. I am Russian. I don't care about genes.

Suppose there are probably already such people in Minsk, an African studied at Minsk University, knocked up a real Belarusian woman (just like a Belarusian from Belarusian women) and left. And now his chocolate-colored son is walking down the street. Who is he? That's right, he's Belarusian. And we both know it. That's why all these R1s and so on are all nonsense. The main thing is language and culture.

- That is, there are no pure Slavs as such?

This is not my topic. I do not associate Russians and Slavs. After all, the Czechs are also Slavs, and the Poles are Slavs, and the Serbs are Slavs, and the Serbs are Slavs, and the Bosniaks (albeit Muslims) are also Slavs, although they are closer to the Turks. You see, you must clearly decide for yourself: what are you talking about - about the Slavs or about Russians specifically.

Russians belong to a certain group of people who share a common language, history, culture and geography. I had a very interesting case. I had a Buryat friend. Very good man, very knowledgeable doctor. Have you ever seen Buryats? They have round faces, a large round bronze head with all purely Asian features. And then one day we were sitting and talking to him (and he’s a big fan of ancient history) and here he says to me in all seriousness, “And we are arias,” etc. That is, he identifies himself with the Aryans. Try to explain this from a genetic point of view.

If we go into racial theories, then people with blond hair and blue eyes appeared later than people with dark hair and olive skin. Everyone knows about it, they just don’t always talk about it.

- What can you say about Chudinov’s works?

As one of the characters in the series “The Magnificent Century” said: “Every story wants to be told.” If he has his own theory, then why not state it? I respect seekers. Even if they are mistaken about something, they are still searching. Even if he is wrong, who am I to say that he is wrong?

You see, I'll give you an example. One day he approached me very a famous person For consultation, for a review, he sent me his version of the origin of Japanese words. He sought to prove that Russians and Arabs are one people. One day he sent me his work, in which he demonstrates that Japanese words are of Arabic origin. I looked at this work. The fact is that this person did not know that 90% of Japanese words are of Chinese origin. Especially nouns. So he made these analogies without knowing where these words actually came from. I sent this work back, writing that I do not believe that a respected person could not know this and that and draw absolutely wrong conclusions, I think that someone wanted to compromise him. Do you understand? That is, if I disagree with something, in any case I will never undermine a person’s authority. You see, there are others interesting people. There are academicians Fomenko and Nosovsky. Fomenko reads my books very well and quotes me. With them we have not only cooperation, but a fruitful exchange of ideas, so to speak.

In other cases, I try not to comment on anything at all, because I have my own fully formed opinion or idea about the universe, about who a person is, about who a Russian is, and what a language is. Therefore, I do not impose my opinion. I don't need to win an argument.

Understand. I don’t need superiority, I don’t need to prove that I’m smarter, that I’m more cunning, that I’m more brilliant, that I’m more right. I do not need it. The only thing that benefits me is that these people are quietly leading people away from the huge cobblestone of traditional linguistics, traditional science.

I’ll tell you more simply, theories such as Fomenko and Nosovsky (in the field of linguistics), Zadornov, Chudinov are quite easy to overthrow. But my works cannot be disputed, you can only agree with them or reject them and say that all this is nonsense. But this is nonsense that explains everything. Here's the interesting part.

- Have you tried to enter into dialogue with scientists, enter their structures and work with them?

I don't want to be with them. I want to be alone

- But this could somehow legalize your version. And so they built a kind of barrier that you are some kind of marginalized person and your version doesn’t seem to need to be considered.

- Don't want. Because their recognition is worth nothing to me. I don't need it.

- Maybe it's because your theory is not scientific and you won't be able to pass their certification?

- Of course I won't pass. Just like I won’t pass, for example, an examTOEFLwithout preparing for it. Of course I won't pass. I'm not even embarrassed about it. And I won’t pass for three reasons: because I don’t agree, and because I don’t know their criteria, and because they won’t let me through. Certainly. This is fine. This is the protection of a crowd of dwarfs from one giant.

- But official linguistics is reliable knowledge. After all, scientists do not take some unverified data, some fabrications, before accumulating them for themselves. Maybe they don’t accept you because you use a lot of unverified information in your conclusions?

There is a certain basin. This basin contains all their information. And so they take something from this basin, stirring it, all the time. First. Second, notice that they quote and refer to each other. And thirdly, I’m the only one who encroached on the beginning and they don’t like it.

Understand, I already communicated, at the dawn of my existence in this area, I already communicated with them. Once I talked with the Deputy Minister of Education when I proposed introducing my method of teaching English. He said, “Alexander Nikolaevich, this is not in my power at all. There is a system, there is syllabus etc. I can't change it." That is, he clearly said no, that’s all.

I talked with our philological department of our great St. Petersburg State University. I won’t name names, but everyone there knows me, respects me (to be honest), even, one might say, loves me, but they cannot, even technically cannot, give me a chance as a researcher, employee, or teacher. Because I don’t fit into any program, into any system, or anywhere. They can't even give me a lectern to speak on. Although all departments have my books, because my followers bring them there and read them with pleasure.

I’ll even say that very high-ranking officials from the Russian language absolutely behind the scenes, unofficially invite me to various very important parties. Seminars, assemblies, etc. But with one condition (they ask, not order) that I do not stand up anywhere at all, do not raise my hand, do not present my books, etc. But they invite you out of respect. There is no other way. And I understand that.

In exactly the same way, the reality of the Great Patriotic War has already been created. Everyone already knows that Zhukov, for example, is not such a brilliant commander as historiography has made him out to be. That he often achieved victories at the expense of thousands, tens of thousands of dead. And yet, historiography has been created. People are raised on it. A luxurious monument was erected to Zhukov in front of Red Square in Moscow.

It's the same here. Yes, their system does not suit me. But I just know that, firstly, I still won’t be able to destroy it, and secondly, I will spend a lot of effort and energy without achieving anything, and during this time I could write new books. So I’d rather go quietly, you know, how one boy in Holland saved the country by plugging a small hole in a dam with his finger. Because if he had not plugged this small hole, the water would have gradually destroyed the entire dam. And very quickly. So, I’d better create this hole and expand and expand it. I'll go from below. To gradually destroy the old vision in people's minds. From below. Let's do it together. It's effective.

Because my golden day will come when at school, during a history or Russian language lesson, a student gets up from his desk and very politely asks: “Tamara Ivanovna, what do you say about the book “The Origin of Words, Numbers and Letters by Alexander Nikolaevich Dragunkin?” . This is what a golden day is. Why fight them?

- Don’t fight, but enter into dialogue.

They do not want to. It will not happen. You will find on the Internet the program “Gordon-Quixote” from 2008, where Mikhail Zadornov was invited as a guest. What kind of discussion is there? They were yelling obscenities there, whatever. And our arguments were simply cut out there.

- Did you cut out a lot?

I was completely cut out. We left a couple of points there. And I fought there like a lion. He jumped up to the barrier without an invitation. There was such a squabble there. And these orthodox people shouted well there.

- In the end, did you find some kind of consensus?

- Of course not. Zero. Complete zero. But this is also a result. The result is that at least positions have emerged. It is also good. Although all that was left were attacks. But one of the greats said, I don’t care what they write about me, the main thing is that they write.

- Do people who live with their everyday problems need information now that the Russian language is actually a world proto-language and other similar things? Do you think people need to worry about this now?

I understand perfectly well that a person may have more important needs such as sausage or where to go with his mistress.

Therefore, at the very beginning of my book “The Origin of Words, Numbers and Letters” I write the following: “Gentlemen! I understand that this book may not affect your daily life, but – since great effects arise from the totality of small causes – these “small causes” must be present... This book is one of these “small causes” ...”.

This is a grain of sand. Maybe ten grains of sand. Maybe a hundred. Do you get the idea? A drop wears away a stone. There are people who want to read such literature. There are some that aren't. Understand. I have a different goal. You keep slipping (into in a good way) to win. I have other functions. Just like with English - I modified everything and left. I created. It’s the same with Chinese - I created an awesome teaching method - but I don’t run around and yell that I’m a king and a god and so on. That I am the king of beasts. I created and walked away. I demonstrated this and walked away.

The second question is: will I promote this? And there may be a lot of reasons. Because you can promote for millions of reasons: it can be for commercial reasons, and for reasons of prestige, and for reasons of pain in the ass, and for reasons of highly political goals, and for reasons “I think this is important,” and so on. It's already a matter of choice. And in this regard I am free. I want to promote this in a way that doesn't interfere with my other books.

- There is an expression by Newton that I saw so much because I stood on the shoulders of giants. Do you have any predecessors on whose shoulders you stood? Has anyone worked in this regard?

No. People worked on many plans. But what I did was the very beginning. This did not happen. If someone gets up, they will stand on my shoulders. And you understand, this is not narcissism, this is simply a statement of fact. There were a million works on the history of the Russian language, and there were hundreds of works on the fact that the Russian language is a proto-language. But where did it all come from? And even more so about writing. And in general, my works turn philological science on its head. Not upside down, but upside down.

- Thank you for the conversation and all the best in the New Year!

Thank you for your attention!

VL / Articles / Interesting

17-08-2015, 03:00

But far from what opponents of everything Soviet attribute to him

Many liberal researchers have poured so many buckets of dirt on Stalin that it is already difficult to figure out - where is the truth and where is the fiction? Look through the yellowed files of “perestroika” Soviet newspapers and magazines, such as Ogonyok and Moskovskie Novosti. Almost every issue contains at least one material, but always with spitting on the Soviet Supreme Commander-in-Chief.

At first they talked about his departure from “Leninist norms.” Then - about tragic miscalculations. And finally they came to accusations of crimes. As a result of this hysterical campaign, those who strive for an objective and adequate assessment of Stalin’s role in history became somehow uncomfortable talking about his real miscalculations - they did not want to even indirectly become on par with the de-Stalinizers of our Fatherland.

But times are changing. We can now talk about the successful and not-so-successful decisions of the main architect of the victory over fascism, without looking back at the hysteria of those who hate not so much Stalin himself as the USSR he constructed.

Let's try to analyze the real, and not imaginary, miscalculations of Joseph Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili as the head of our state. Mistakes did occur; he himself admitted them. In particular, in the famous toast to the health of the Russian people on May 24, 1945.

The first mistake is the deportation of Leon Trotsky abroad.

This was truly a gross miscalculation, but paradoxically, it largely exonerated Stalin. If he was such a ruthless, bloodthirsty monster as liberal anti-Soviet historiography presented him, then why didn’t he send his key enemy and main rival in the internal party struggle to the Gulag? And calmly and even coolly allowed Trotsky to go to Istanbul?

As a result, I was mistaken - it was not possible to make Trotskyism a thing of the past, nor to consign Trotsky himself to oblivion. Everything turned out exactly the opposite. The Trotskyists hid inside the USSR, but were ready, together with other oppositionists, to try to take revenge. Well, on the world stage, Trotskyist groups actually split the communists into two irreconcilable camps that exist, in a certain sense, to this day - into adherents of pseudo-revolutionary phrases in everything and supporters of traditional spiritual values. Especially severe consequences This split occurred in Spain, largely allowing Franco's fascists to win the civil war.

It is possible that this was the last straw that broke the patience of the Soviet leadership. One way or another, in 1940, shortly after the Francoists took over, in distant Mexico, Ramon Mercader's ice ax fell on Trotsky's head.

This happened 11 years after the expulsion. All this time, Lev Davydovich fought not so much with Stalin, but with the state he led, which he considered a product of Thermidorian degeneration. He published the subversive “Bulletin of the Opposition,” where in one of the issues, at the height of the trials against his supporters in the USSR, he placed a huge photograph of Vladimir Lenin with something like this caption: “This is the main accused.”

The second mistake - after suppressing the attempt at a very likely military putsch, Stalin allowed the head of the NKVD Nikolai Yezhov to spin the flywheel of repression.

It is not entirely clear whether there was a “marshals’ conspiracy” against the Soviet leadership in 1937? It is only known that the military elite was sharply opposed to the People's Commissar of Defense Klim Voroshilov and would like to achieve his resignation. Only from indirect evidence can one assume that the appetites of Mikhail Tukhachevsky and his supporters were not limited to this.

The coup scenario that Stalin outlined on June 2, 1937 at the expanded board of the People's Commissariat of Defense surprisingly coincides with what Nikita Khrushchev later used to arrest the all-powerful Lavrentiy Beria: “If they had read the plan, how they wanted to seize the Kremlin, how they wanted to deceive the school All-Russian Central Executive Committee. They wanted to deceive some, put some in one place, others in another, others in a third, and tell them to guard the Kremlin, that they must defend the Kremlin, but inside they must arrest the government.”

One thing the very likely conspirators did not take into account was that their plans would become known to the Soviet leadership, and therefore, they would not be able to implement them. In contrast to the arrest of Beria in 1953. Beria did not suspect anything until the very end. The fact that the coup scenario was known to Stalin’s supporters was later reported to the writer Felix Chuev by Vyacheslav Molotov.

One way or another, a very likely military conspiracy was suppressed. And here it was necessary to put an end to it, but, apparently, emotions overwhelmed Stalin. He gave free rein to the head of the NKVD, Yezhov. A person, of course, devoted to him, but not ready to comply with socialist legality. Which led to truly tragic consequences.

Only in 1939, after the removal of the head of the NKVD, Yezhov, did the repressions begin to subside. Moreover, under the “bloody” Lavrentiy Beria, many thousands of honest Soviet workers were able to return from prison. It is precisely this, the broadest, in fact, amnesty that our country owes for the salvation of two outstanding commanders of the Great Patriotic War- Konstantin Rokossovsky and Kirill Meretskov.

Error three - Stalin did not believe in the possibility of the Nazis attacking the USSR in 1941.

Even when the Nazi attack became a fact, when the bombs of fascist vultures were already falling on Soviet soil, and Wehrmacht boats were already sailing across the Western Bug, the leader Soviet state I hoped to settle the matter peacefully. On the night of June 22, 1941, he sent Foreign Minister Molotov to the German Ambassador to clarify his country’s claims to the USSR. Count Schulenburg responded by reading a memorandum in which war was declared after the fact.

For his part, Stalin did everything to prevent it from happening. He was able to successively sign non-aggression acts with Germany and Japan. For a minute - key participants in the Anti-Commintern (i.e. anti-Soviet) bloc. We managed to achieve a delay and move the border far to the west.

Now, when American tanks, like German ones once, are moving towards the borders of our country, the situation is much worse. In 1940, the Baltic republics became part of the USSR. So 75 years ago our country had a much more powerful “airbag”.

Stalin also did a lot to create a huge military machine, which by its sheer numbers was supposed to scare off any aggressor. Again, it is not his fault that the completely obsessed Hitler ended up in this role, risking plunging his country into a obviously losing war on two fronts.

So here we can talk not about a mistake, but simply about the fatal failure of the head of the USSR. Even the belated directive to bring the army and navy to combat readiness cannot be reproached to him either. If the Soviet command had released this document earlier, the Nazis would have used this decision as a pretext for an attack. And so the aggression turned out to be completely unmotivated in the eyes of world public opinion. And accordingly, it was a losing battle for Hitler in moral and political terms.

The fourth mistake is that the fight against Nazi collaborators in the Baltic states and Western Ukraine was clearly insufficient.

In liberal historiography, it is customary to speak, on the contrary, about the cruelty of the Soviet regime. Even about the “occupation” of the Baltic republics and Galicia. In reality, of course, the Soviet government did not show any particular severity towards Nazi collaborators from among national minorities.

The result of softness was not long in showing itself in the form of banditry by Hitler’s minions who went into the forests. Bandera’s followers were especially atrocious in Galicia, whose annexation to Soviet Union many also rightly consider I.V. to be a mistake. Stalin.

The fight against the anti-Soviet underground in the Baltic states and Western Ukraine continued until the 1950s and, as we now understand, ended only in a temporary victory for the Soviet government. At the end of the 1980s, the Soviet Union, weakened by Gorbachevism, no longer had the strength to fight the pro-fascist nationalists in these parts who had crawled out of their rat holes.

Well, after the collapse of the Union in the Baltic states and Western Ukraine (and after the bloody “Maidan” and not only in Western Ukraine), the process of rehabilitation and even glorification of Nazi puppets began. Marches of former SS and Bandera men take place decades after their defeat.

Where would the participants in such shameful events with a “brown” tint come from if the Stalinist leadership were in reality as harsh and totalitarian as they are portrayed in Western and liberal propaganda? It was precisely the severity that was lacking after the end of the most terrible war in history. It even got to the point of cancellation death penalty in 1947. True, here Soviet authorities, unlike the post-Soviet ones, quickly came to their senses when they saw the increase in serious crimes. And the highest measure was immediately returned.

Fifth mistake - Stalin did not remove Khrushchev, who secretly hated him, from state affairs.

This was far from the first and not the last case in the history of mankind when a successor in the management of a particular state hung all the dogs on his predecessor. But definitely one of the most egregious. Actually, Khrushchev can rightfully be considered the founder of the de-Stalinization movement in our country. In his speeches at the XX and XXII Congresses of the CPSU, he did not portray the one to whom he had been groveling for twenty years as a devil with horns. From his reasoning it turned out that the country was led by a mediocre, cruel and treacherous man, all of whose thoughts were occupied only with those who could be sent to places not so remote or even shot.

But in this whole story there is also the fault of Stalin himself, who managed to forgive the simple-minded, dutiful and helpful Nikita Sergeevich a lot of sins. First of all, a series of miscalculations in his role as a member of the Military Council of the Southwestern Front. Khrushchev’s fault that Kharkov more than once during the war had to be surrendered to the enemy by our troops is undeniable.

Stalin also forgave Nikita Sergeevich’s intercession for his son-pilot Leonid, who killed a colleague in a drunken shop. As a result, he was convicted and sent to the front, where he soon went missing.

It is very likely that Khrushchev laid the blame for the loss of Leonid on Stalin, who himself had both sons at the front. And one, having been captured, died.

One way or another, it was the defeat of the Stalinist leadership carried out by Khrushchev under the banner of debunking the “cult of personality” that led to the weakening of socialism in our country, the formation of the environment of the “sixties”, from which the Gorbachevism that destroyed the country grew.

So it is no coincidence that in those days people asked in a ditty: “Dear Comrade Stalin, who did you leave us with?”

In general, Stalin had many real miscalculations, but this does not prevent apologists of liberalism from attributing imaginary mistakes and even crimes to him.

Well, for example, about the supposedly equal responsibility of the USSR and Hitler's Germany for the start of World War II. They say that if our country had not concluded a non-aggression pact with the Third Reich, the Nazis would not have attacked Poland. But OKW (Hitler High Command) officer Helmut Greiner would categorically disagree with this. In his book “Military Campaigns of the Wehrmacht”, published by Tsentrpoligraf in 2011 on page 26, a factual refutation of these insinuations is given: “At the end of March, the head of the OKW, Colonel-General Keitel, notified the head of the country’s defense department, Warlimont, that the Fuhrer had given orders to the commander-in-chief "The armed forces of the Wehrmacht must prepare until the end of August for military clashes with Poland, which seemed inevitable."

At the end of March (meaning 1939), i.e. six months before the conclusion of the agreement signed by Molotov and Ribbentrop, the Nazis began to prepare for the invasion of Poland. There were no hints yet that Moscow might become disillusioned with Britain and France’s sabotage of the agreement on joint action in the event of Hitler’s aggression and would decide to conclude a pact with Nazi Germany. In other words, there is no connection between these events. Nor is it Stalin’s fault.



Rate the news
Partner news:

Ecology of consciousness. Life: We are accustomed to the fact that the main world language is English, and our native Russian has been doing just that lately...

We are accustomed to the fact that the main world language is English, and our native Russian has been doing nothing but borrowing a word from there, a word from here. But is it?

Alexander Dragunkin, a graduate of the Oriental Faculty of Leningrad State University, linguist, author of several sensational books, claims that everything was just the opposite. Moreover, he came to the conclusion that Old Russian language was the proto-language of the entire Earth!

Are the British descendants of Russians?

It all started with the English language, which I taught for many years,” Alexander Dragunkin told us the background to his discovery. – The further I went, the more I was dissatisfied with his teaching methods – and some new ideas appeared latently. In 1998, I sat down to write my first book - a guide to the English language. I stopped going to the office, locked myself at home and on the most primitive computer in a month I typed SOMETHING that I was stunned by. In that work, I proposed my own way of quickly memorizing English words - by analogy with Russian ones. And while developing it, I came across the obvious: English words are not just similar to Russian ones - they are of Russian origin!

-Can you prove it?

- Certainly. Just first remember three simple basic rules of philology.

  • First: You can ignore the vowels in a word; the most important thing is the backbone of consonants.
  • Second: consonants are very clearly grouped according to the place of formation in the mouth - for example, L, R, N are formed by different movements of the tongue, but in the same part of the palate. Try to pronounce them and see for yourself. There are several such chains of consonants: v-m-b-p-f, l-r-s-t-d-n, h-ts-k-g-z-zh, v-r-h, s-ts-h (j). When a word is borrowed, letters can be replaced in accordance with these chains.
  • AND third rule: when moving from one language to another, a word can only be shortened, and most often the first syllable disappears.

And now for examples.

- Please.

The English word GIRL (girl - girl) has no origin in its homeland. But in Old Russian there was a wonderful word that was used to call young ladies - Gorlitsa! The backbone of consonants is the same, and the English word is shorter - so who took the floor from whom?

Another example is the English REVOLT. Let’s say you don’t know what this means – now let’s see who stole from whom. Any Latinist will tell you that RE is a prefix, VOL is a root and a “mysterious T”. Western philologists don’t even say where it came from. But I’m a simple person: let’s assume an idiotic option - that the British took this word from someone and distorted it over time. Then, if RE is a prefix meaning “repetition”, and the English took this prefix from someone, then over a thousand years it could only become shorter (remember the philological law). This means that we can assume that it was originally longer. So, in the whole world there is only one prefix that meant the same thing, but was longer - the Russian PERE-!

L and R are interchangeable consonants from the same chain. We rewrite the word in Russian - PERE-VOR-oT. REVOLT translated means “coup, rebellion” - so who borrowed from whom?

And the “mysterious T”, on which all English linguists stumble, turns out to be the most common Russian suffix. There are incredibly many such examples.

– Why on earth should the English, living on an island far from our vast homeland, supplement themselves with Russian words - they didn’t have their own?

– The British may well turn out to be the descendants of the ancient Russians. There is completely official data (which, however, is often hushed up) that the Saxons - the ancestors of the British - came not from anywhere, but from the Volga River. In the scientific world this is an axiom. Saxons is the plural of the word "sak". That is, on the Volga they were SACs.

Further, according to the law about the shortening of a word when moving into another language, we conclude that this word could have originally been longer. I see no other explanation for the origin of the word SAKI, other than from the truncated RUSAKA.

The Tatars didn’t invent swear words

– Okay, but what about other languages? You don't claim to know every language in the world, do you?

- I don’t approve. But I know many languages. I can easily communicate in English, French, Italian, German, Swedish, Polish. I know Japanese, but I don’t speak it. At the university I studied ancient Chinese, and in my youth I seriously studied Hindi. So I can compare. Here's an example.

Let's take the Latin word SECRET (secret, something hidden). The whole world is staring at this word, but its origin is unknown. In addition, it is not decomposed into components - there is no prefix or suffix. Some see the same “mysterious suffix T”. The most dashing Western philologists highlight the root CR - this is the Latin CER, “to see.” But why on earth is the “secret”, what is hidden, based on the root “to see”? This is absurd!

I do it differently - I get impudent and write the same letters in Old Russian - SъKRYT. And I get complete similarity of meaning, an obvious prefix C, a wonderful root and our native suffix. Remember that vowels are completely unimportant for philology.

Or else – the word “harem”. The fact that the Russian princes before the Romanovs had whole crowds of concubines is a historical fact. Now, if I have many beautiful wives, where will I keep them? In the best rooms, which in Rus' were called KhoRoMy - remember the chains of alternating consonants - so where did the word GaReM come from?

“So that means they borrowed everything from us, and not we from strangers?”

- Naturally! I even refuted the established “Tatar” theory of the origin of Russian swearing.

– There were no Tatars?

– It wasn’t – it’s just our invention. I can demonstrate. We have the word star - this is a star. Zvez is a distorted “light”. That is, a star is something that “lights.” And if you follow this word formation scheme, what will the name of what they “pee” be called? It's one word.

Next, where did the word “stick” come from? Initially it was called “phalka” because it was used to puff and shove. The English word stick (stack, stick) is clearly our poke, “poke”. Let's return to the word “pkhat” - form the imperative mood, as with the word “poke”: poke - stick, phat - what?

And the “p” disappeared over time. The most interesting thing with the verb is that only in Russian you can say: “I fucked her.” M and B, as you remember, alternate - replace the letter M in the word “fuck” and see what happens...

– Well, swearing is not proof that Old Russian is the proto-language of the whole world.

– Okay, here’s another thing: the names of all sacred religious books are of Russian origin.

- Even the Koran?

- Yes. In the Arab world it is believed that this word has no etymology. But it is there.

The Koran, as you know, is the revelations of the Prophet Muhammad, collected by the scribe Zeid - and KEPT by him!

The Qur'an is So-kran.

With the Jewish Torah it is even simpler: this is a book about CREATION - the Torah is T (v) ora.

The Bible is a little different - you need to know that it is written on paper, and paper is made from cotton. Cotton in Slavic is called BaVeLna - BiBLe. The Bible is just a stack of paper!

I’m not talking about the Indian “Vedas” at all: here the origin is obvious from the word to know. Each of these explanations can be disputed separately, but the interesting thing is that all the names have a correct interpretation only through the Russian language.

- Well, what about the names of the gods and servants?

- Allah... If we assume that this word is not Arabic and has lost its first consonant over time, then only one word remains, which also corresponds to the meaning - WALLAH - WOLHv, and the Magi were priests.

There is also the Russian root MOL, from which the word “pray” appeared. MoL is the same as MuL - MULLA who asks God. In English, priest PRieST - in Russian letters, ASK.

I don't believe there can be that many coincidences. The fact that the words are similar and have the same meaning is half the battle. But pay attention: in all cases when a word cannot find an origin in its “native” language, in Russian it acquires a completely logical etymology - and all its mysteries, suffixes that come from inexplicably, which traditional philology cannot explain, become completely normal parts the words are in Russian!

Our language is amazing. It brings us to the bottom of the world - I am sure that it was created artificially, and the matrix of the universe is encrypted in it.

What is hell and heaven

– Were you able to decipher anything?

– Very interesting things. For example, only in Russian the entire world around a person was described using one syllable with the root BL (taking into account the chain of alternating consonants).

What was around ancient man? BoR, MoRe, Pole, SwampLoto, PaR (as air used to be called) and so on.

The entire animal world is described on a geometric basis only in the Russian language: in other languages ​​these are words taken out of context, but in ours they form a system. Living things were described using three roots, which are the shapes of the body. For example, everything ROUND is described using the root KR/GL and its derivatives - Head, Eye, Throat, Knee, Shin.

Further, only in the Russian language was man distinguished from the rest of the animal world by the main characteristic - reason. The mind is located in the head, which used to have another name - MAN. How we were singled out from the world - we were called MAN!

– So, did our ancestors receive knowledge about the world from the language itself?

– Our ancestors knew everything, because everything was described in language simply. Paradise is nothing more than a stripped-down EDGE, where everything is healthy and cool.

Hell is simply what is BELOW us. Let's remember the word “star” - light, yes - long before telescopes, people who spoke Russian knew that stars are not just holes in the sky, but that which shines, emits light!

– You said that the language was created artificially. Why was it created at all? Love could well be expressed in the number of killed mammoths.

– The Russian language also answers this question. Remember Tyutchev’s famous phrase: “A thought expressed is a lie”? What did the poet want to say? I'll show you.

In the Russian language there are three verbs that mean the process of speech - to speak, to say, to utter (or to expound). But what’s interesting is that only in the Russian language three verbs meaning lies have the same roots: to speak - to lie, to lay out / lay out - to lie / LIE, to say - to distort.

Language was initially created not for the exchange of information, but as a tool for its distortion, a method of influence.

Now, of course, we already use it for communication. However, rest assured, of all the peoples of the world, only we speak the most direct descendant of the proto-language.

- And who created it?

- Those who created humanity.

Also interesting: How the brain works while reading

Russian catchphrases: secret meaning

These words are considered borrowed from the Russian language in recent centuries. However, Alexander Dragunkin is convinced of their Russian “origin.”

  • Galaktika - from the Russian dialect "GaLaGa" (fog)
  • Dollar – from DoL
  • CALCULATOR – from HOW MANY
  • LABORATORY – from Work (L and R alternate)
  • Lady – from LaDa (ancient Russian goddess)
  • HoTel (hotel) – from HaTa
  • NeGR - from NeKrasivy
  • ELEMENT – UNBREAKED
  • sMoG - from MGla
  • GLOBUS - from KoLoBok (G and K alternate).