Download "Андрей Илларионов. Когда Россия свернула не туда"
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FXX56piMBd7Y%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
Please wait. We're preparing links for easy ad-free video watching and downloading.
Table of contents
Similar videos from our catalog
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FMQQsoOmULHo%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FO1ShdGliOxI%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FRb6_bD-i76k%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FTC_x2bSEdI4%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FY54HVPY4g7g%252Fsddefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FZxoB0Y7Xww4%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252F_ZF7zj5vbnM%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FfGQWv2lHPbI%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi%252FjbS-ZIzvv94%252Fmaxresdefault.jpg&w=1139&q=75)
%3Aformat(webp)%2Fi.ytimg.com%252Fvi_webp%252FlT4-ZKUx9rw%252Fmaxresdefault.webp&w=1139&q=75)
Video tags
Subtitles
Russian
00:00:00
when the country turned in the wrong direction, a00:00:03
life-or-death struggle for a place in the00:00:06
political sun to retell00:00:08
Berezovsky’s fairy tales, but somehow it just00:00:10
turns out ridiculously, this is the defeat of our00:00:13
country, this is a disaster, they created the00:00:16
next successor from Alexei Navalny,00:00:19
this is already a recreation of the tsarist system, three00:00:22
unelected people choose a face00:00:25
which leads to the death of hundreds of thousands of00:00:28
people around the world00:00:31
[music]00:00:34
good afternoon This is an inhale-exhale program00:00:36
My name is Vitaly Dymarsky,00:00:38
lost in the present and in00:00:43
trouble and confused with the future, the00:00:46
Russian political class took up00:00:49
the past, as if following Putin, who00:00:55
saw the origins of his specially military operation as lies and kz Vladimir00:01:01
ato Chuba the notorious ones have not gone far The00:01:04
dashing nineties do not let anyone00:01:07
pass by on today's journey through00:01:10
time We will go with an expert Well,00:01:13
you can say a public figure, a00:01:16
senior researcher at the Center for00:01:18
Security Policy in Washington00:01:20
Andrei Illarionov00:01:24
[music]00:01:29
are Nikolaevich00:01:32
then the first question is I here This is my00:01:35
introduction, it was a little ironic, but00:01:38
I admit that even before the broadcast we agreed that00:01:41
we would still00:01:43
turn to these topics and that it is00:01:47
still00:01:48
important to discuss them. Nevertheless, this is the first00:01:50
question I wanted to ask: Is it necessary?00:01:53
Now these historical excursions00:01:56
Do they help to understand the00:01:58
current state of the policy of00:02:01
Russian society and the country as a00:02:04
whole Hello Vitaly Naumovich00:02:06
I greet your viewers, listeners and00:02:09
I hope mine,00:02:11
too, I think00:02:14
that at any time you can discuss any00:02:17
issues, there are no restrictions and just00:02:21
an attempt to introduce any restrictions on00:02:23
connection with any other agenda that00:02:26
they have or go to00:02:30
this or that topic or begin to discuss00:02:31
this or that topic, perhaps they also have00:02:33
some kind of agenda of their own,00:02:34
perhaps even the one that has been00:02:37
announced, perhaps some other but00:02:39
restrictions on the place of time and topics of00:02:42
discussion with my point of view00:02:45
should not be clear Andrei00:02:47
Nikolaevich I am not going00:02:49
to limit anyone in any discussions, of course,00:02:53
but still the time is so unusual, to put it mildly, there is00:02:57
a war going on Yes,00:03:04
bloodshed is necessary, we need to00:03:07
deal with00:03:09
today, today's Russia,00:03:11
today's government, today's regime,00:03:14
today's society, with today's00:03:17
all00:03:18
components of our Russian life,00:03:22
of course,00:03:24
but to what extent history helps with this00:03:32
depends on the goals that certain people set00:03:52
having become the center of discussion.00:03:55
And what are the other goals that are00:03:58
being pursued? It seems to me that00:04:01
a lot has already been said about other goals;00:04:04
the question here is related to the different00:04:07
ideological00:04:10
worldviews of the authors of this film in00:04:12
comparison with those who, to a large00:04:14
extent, if not the majority, spoke out00:04:16
on this matter and in this case we see00:04:20
Well, at least a generational gap, so00:04:23
children answer their fathers, daughters answer their00:04:27
mothers,00:04:30
and on the other hand, let's say this The new00:04:34
generation, which is much00:04:37
more, let's say, left-wing, adhering to00:04:42
goals or raised on goals much00:04:45
more left-wing, answering their parents00:04:48
who adhered to goals goals of00:04:51
Freedom, that is, supporters of00:04:54
justice respond to supporters of00:04:57
Freedom, this is the second direction And the third00:05:00
direction, of course, Well, it was difficult to00:05:02
avoid this observation, there is a00:05:06
life-and-death struggle for a00:05:10
place under the political sun,00:05:13
mainly under the sun that shines from00:05:16
Brussels and00:05:17
Washington, who will show signs of00:05:19
attention to one or another representative of the00:05:21
Russian opposition and from this point of view00:05:25
[music]00:05:30
chi00:05:32
penalizes Well, you know, if we are already talking about00:05:35
this current political agenda,00:05:37
then we still have to figure it out when we00:05:40
say to figure it out in the past. This00:05:42
still means, I00:05:44
think it’s important for this to look for00:05:47
and find ways out of the trap in00:05:50
which Russia has found itself today. But let’s00:05:54
say today everyone recognizes his00:05:57
circle as00:06:00
responsible for the birth of the Putin regime,00:06:03
even a posthumous trial of the00:06:05
first president will be organized, this00:06:08
will help solve today’s problems. It00:06:11
seems to me that this is digging in the past00:06:13
it is important maybe the word is not a good00:06:16
dig to understand the past it is important it is necessary00:06:20
You said correctly there are no00:06:21
restrictions on00:06:23
the discussion it is00:06:25
necessary to understand those aspects of the past00:06:29
that should help solve something00:06:31
today and especially tomorrow, well, you know,00:06:35
the search for anything in general was And even more so,00:06:37
the search for answers to the questions00:06:40
you are talking about, they do not imply00:06:45
restrictions on the place of search, we look only00:06:48
where it is light or where it is lost, and00:06:51
only the process of the00:06:54
search itself and what is discovered will allow00:06:58
us to say whether we were looking correctly00:07:00
where we were looking Is that what we were looking for, but you00:07:03
know? With all this, it must be said00:07:05
that although the work aroused considerable00:07:09
attention and considerable discussion, from my00:07:11
point of view, the work does not00:07:13
answer the question of where it was00:07:16
lost; the work does not even try,00:07:19
that is, it tries, at least00:07:20
outwardly00:07:21
it tries to find the answer to the question where it00:07:25
all came from but gives, from my point of view,00:07:27
at least inaccurate00:07:30
insufficiently accurate insufficiently complete00:07:32
And in some sense the wrong answer and with00:07:37
this, if you look at what was in00:07:40
the work then what was later expressed by00:07:42
many who spoke about this00:07:45
Moreover, it should be noted that those who00:07:47
spoke out adhere to different points00:07:49
of view not only in relation to the film00:07:52
but also in relation to each00:07:58
other,00:08:01
disagreements and disagreements of a very heated00:08:04
nature arising from those very00:08:06
nineties. But if you simply compare the00:08:09
level of discussion that was00:08:11
presented by commentators on the film and00:08:14
film, then this is heaven and earth, that is, the00:08:18
commentators turned out to be at least00:08:20
two if not three orders of magnitude higher in terms of the00:08:23
level of discussion in the depth of discussion00:08:25
on the issues that they touch upon in00:08:30
presenting the audience to00:08:33
the audience with explanations of certain00:08:36
aspects in all the complexity there,00:08:39
even if not of all the complexity, but in the00:08:40
complexity in which they presented it, that00:08:42
is, well, we see such a conversation, let’s say, of a00:08:46
representative of the middle group of00:08:49
kindergarten A with people who00:08:52
have passed Well, at least received a higher00:08:55
education, but just even the level of00:08:58
discussion is on a completely00:09:00
different level and if for anything... then you can00:09:02
thank the creator of this film, there are00:09:06
several topics from my point of view for00:09:08
which you can thank him, the00:09:10
first thing you can thank him for is the00:09:12
fact that persons who were somehow00:09:16
related to the nineties took part00:09:19
in actions in the nineties in various00:09:22
political public business00:09:26
now being those called upon by this very00:09:30
film to speak out finally00:09:32
spoke out because they were silent for00:09:34
quite a long time and what they00:09:36
say is from my point of view of00:09:38
much more interest And than what00:09:41
was in the film because in the film In00:09:42
general, strictly speaking, nothing new00:09:44
was said there right things have been said,00:09:47
a lot of wrong things have been said, but00:09:49
nothing new. But what people say00:09:52
about this about this film simply00:09:55
shows a completely different00:09:57
level of understanding and problems00:10:01
and00:10:03
trials, and at least for this discussion00:10:06
that began. This well, let’s say,00:10:10
average film could be00:10:14
thanked I wanted to say, first of00:10:17
all, we need to thank you for initiating the00:10:20
discussion itself. But besides00:10:29
criticism, in what sense do you say that the00:10:32
commentators there were stronger, were taller, and00:10:35
so on? These are different genres, just00:10:38
commentators00:10:40
there, political scientists, experts,00:10:44
scientists, they speak in their own genres,00:10:48
and the authors of the film in in its genre, this is00:10:53
popular, designed for00:11:05
you know that, but here are the discussions00:11:08
that were carried out, for example, by two00:11:11
notable public and00:11:14
political figures of the deno, such as00:11:16
Alexander Minkin and Alfred Koch, they have00:11:20
Mutually opposite views00:11:29
in the deno, they continued this and all in00:11:32
tenths and in twenties they continue to00:11:34
argue, there is no common point of view00:11:37
here, but what they say is00:11:38
listened to by hundreds of thousands of people and this00:11:42
is not, let’s say, an elitist00:11:45
discussion, this is not an00:11:46
academic discussion, and what they00:11:48
say and how they say it, I would like to00:11:51
emphasize once again they have directly00:11:53
opposite views regarding00:11:55
many of the most important issues and events of the00:11:58
day. But their discussion may be in absentia00:12:01
because one speaks on one00:12:02
channel, the other speaks on another channel.00:12:04
But their discussion is much more00:12:06
informative and it is understandable to any00:12:09
person, including those same millions00:12:11
who watched this film A and00:12:15
who have the opportunity to listen uh and00:12:17
watch these two uh figures you00:12:21
know at the same time Well, I won’t give00:12:24
the name I didn’t ask permission for this00:12:27
uh but after the Second episode00:12:31
one person called me, well, you can call him a former00:12:34
oligarch Yes, now it’s difficult to call him an oligarch,00:12:39
but not only in the day and00:12:43
everyone was well known, let’s say, since there are a00:12:46
lot of such people,00:12:48
it’s difficult to guess, he called me and that00:12:52
I was completely00:12:53
amazed, he closed the00:13:00
mto00:13:02
MF admitted, of course, we were wrong in many ways.00:13:07
Of course, we didn’t do a lot then there he00:13:10
began to name famous surnames,00:13:12
first of all, there of his social circle,00:13:15
which means they spoke, and so on. But00:13:19
they did something else, this is also an interesting00:13:21
reaction,00:13:30
draws attention to his own00:13:32
experience, to the experience of his generation, to the experience of00:13:35
his colleagues, comrades who surrounded him,00:13:39
this is how Let’s just00:13:40
say that what distinguishes an adult00:13:44
from a00:13:46
teenager is a person who can00:13:48
analyze his own actions00:13:51
and draw conclusions, and what’s more,00:13:58
ladies, including those from the nineties,00:14:00
returned to this and here it00:14:03
only causes, Well, let’s just say it’s regret that the00:14:06
authors of the film did not present the00:14:09
position of those people who was engaged in this00:14:11
analysis And if we talk about who00:14:15
actually started this topic, it’s really not on00:14:18
the sidelines, not in closed discussions, but00:14:22
publicly, but you just need to name names,00:14:25
including if you are making such a film,00:14:28
especially00:14:29
for mass perception, then you need to name00:14:32
names first of all it is necessary to name Vitaly00:14:34
Mansky Vitaly Mansky who in00:14:37
2018, which is respectively 6 years00:14:41
ago, presented his film00:14:43
Putin's Witnesses in which the main00:14:46
positions that were then00:14:50
presented in one way or another were discussed,00:14:56
currently being told by the film00:15:00
Nador and this conversation in the public00:15:03
space of Russia on Vitaly Mansky00:15:05
Putin's witnesses with their film, after00:15:08
that it is necessary, if we speak objectively, to00:15:10
pay attention to that series of00:15:14
publications, a series of no small ones00:15:17
consisting of 8 parts about why and how00:15:21
they came up00:15:27
with it. Well, almost a complete,00:15:32
if really a complete anthology of00:15:35
statements, memoirs,00:15:37
messages, interviews of all those people who were in00:15:41
that or to some other extent was involved in00:15:43
the process that was called the00:15:46
choice of a successor, and really,00:15:48
any person who would become acquainted with00:15:51
these 8 parts would turn out to be a huge00:15:55
simply00:15:56
book of documentary stories.00:16:00
This is for anyone who became acquainted with this.00:16:02
Ott on00:16:05
the question of who chose how he chose why00:16:08
he chose all these the answers to these questions00:16:11
become completely obvious and it must be00:16:13
said directly that these answers differ00:16:16
from what is presented in this film;00:16:18
in fact, the last third part of00:16:21
this film, it actually00:16:23
echoes both the title of00:16:25
Mansky’s film and the series of publications that00:16:27
I had even with certain parts00:16:30
that were in the film in Ilya00:16:33
Zhigulev’s book Hot Tsarm, which appeared a00:16:36
couple or even a little more than a couple of00:16:39
years after that. But in general, we need to talk00:16:42
about who was doing this before, who00:16:45
said what about this, and at least00:16:48
imagine to the general public Well, in general,00:16:51
what was found and not, and from this point00:16:54
of view, you said that00:16:56
I am critical. Well, the point is not that I should be critical. It’s just that00:17:01
what is presented does not00:17:04
correspond to reality00:17:05
because, well, the most important thing is that the essence of the last00:17:08
third film is aimed at who and00:17:11
how he chose Putin and if, from this point of00:17:15
view, you remembered about the oligarchs and00:17:17
oligarchs who are told about the00:17:19
first series and the second series. Well, in00:17:21
general, there are many complaints against the oligarchs that are00:17:24
absolutely deserved and what they did.00:17:27
But directly to the choice of00:17:29
Putin, here is one person who one way or00:17:32
another called called before00:17:34
called Now oligarchs but strictly00:17:37
speaking not involved00:17:41
Berezovsky as well as Abramovich who00:17:43
is at the center of this film were errand boys00:17:47
errand boys who00:17:49
carried out the00:17:50
orders of those people who00:17:57
made the film And before that, for example, the book by00:18:00
Marina Litvinenko and Alexander Golf A00:18:04
which describes the visit in detail. And00:18:06
in fact, the first person to talk00:18:08
about this visit of Berezovsky to Birit was00:18:11
when he flew in to talk with00:18:13
Putin regarding the possible00:18:15
occupation of the post of prime minister in order to then00:18:18
contact the president, but Berezovsky00:18:20
flew to Birit on the direct instructions of00:18:23
Valentin Yumashev on the direct instructions00:18:26
of he didn’t fly on a direct order himself, he didn’t do that,00:18:28
don’t lobby, he received00:18:31
the corresponding order, the00:18:34
corresponding order, the assignment, he00:18:36
went to carry it out just like other00:18:39
famous people who were previously called00:18:41
oligarchs, sometimes now they are called00:18:43
oligarchs, many of these names are00:18:46
still rumored to have been carried out by different00:18:49
instructions, including Roman Avramovich,00:18:51
including some other persons, conducting00:18:53
negotiations with various potential00:18:55
candidates for the post of prime minister and00:18:58
president, who00:19:00
wrote a book about the time00:19:03
of Berezovsky, he also talked about how,00:19:05
on instructions from the same Valentin00:19:07
Yamashev, VL, negotiations with Sergei00:19:09
Stepashin regarding the same00:19:11
questions, it’s just that people read or00:19:15
hear or watch completely00:19:18
obvious things but draw directly00:19:19
opposite conclusions from this. It was not Peter00:19:21
Avin00:19:27
who chose Berezovsky and Roman Abramovich00:19:31
carried out the instructions of Valentin Yumashev00:19:35
Tatyana Chenko, which were given to them to00:19:39
conduct negotiations00:19:40
between one sides by the authorities, which in00:19:44
this00:19:45
case is personalized in the person of the00:19:49
then head of the00:19:51
presidential administration Valentin Yumashev and00:19:54
potential candidates, well, you00:19:56
just need to, well, this is an elementary thing to00:19:57
understand Who had the power and Who00:19:59
carried out the instructions of this power Well, yes,00:20:03
despite the fact that Boris00:20:05
Abramovich always tried in any00:20:08
case, imagine yourself as a00:20:11
person who is lobbying And00:20:14
if it weren’t for him, Putin wouldn’t00:20:16
exist at all Well, in this capacity, of course, and so on,00:20:19
etc. Yes, well, you still have to have00:20:22
self-PR; self-PR has always been like this. Well, of00:20:26
course, but it’s necessary still, to distinguish who is00:20:27
engaged00:20:29
and presents for listeners, readers,00:20:33
viewers a picture that at that moment00:20:36
seemed more correct to him, but also to00:20:39
distinguish by what actually happened, but00:20:41
in general, this is described, it is described00:20:43
simply in a huge number of sources00:20:45
written and told by those00:20:47
people who were directly00:20:49
involved in this process Well, in general,00:20:52
we are in the wrong year, we are in the wrong year,00:20:56
after all this, we’re talking about00:21:00
Berezovsky’s fairy tales, but somehow it’s00:21:02
ridiculous,00:21:05
it just turns out well, and this is a question for00:21:10
you, then your opinion is your personal opinion.00:21:13
If I’m interested in something, I think that it’s00:21:16
not just me, so I’m asking the question as00:21:19
if on behalf of not only myself, but also on00:21:20
behalf of, I hope, a large part of00:21:23
the audience. Here in this discussion is00:21:26
historical. Although the newest one, of course, it’s00:21:30
actually still going on. Yes, but still00:21:33
less in this historical00:21:35
discussion For me, the most interesting and00:21:38
important question Maybe this is to understand At00:21:42
what point Russia took a wrong turn Here is00:21:46
your opinion, but I would also add00:21:51
this question as a second question What is00:21:55
there? Is Russia What is00:21:59
there You know Well, if to talk about the second00:22:02
question, it is so philosophical that00:22:04
we can devote not only this00:22:06
program to this, but many other programs and we will00:22:08
discuss what is00:22:10
there from the point of view of different hypostases of00:22:14
people’s goals, concepts, and so on. But we00:22:17
will probably get to this a little bit,00:22:19
but let’s we will try to deal with00:22:21
your first question and we will try both00:22:24
with you and with our viewers.00:22:28
Today we are in May of twenty-00:22:30
four and different people,00:22:33
including those who are watching and listening to us today.00:22:35
And there are different ideas about00:22:37
what is not there Well, if uh,00:22:41
many people are already watching, someone is watching in00:22:44
Russia, someone is watching outside of00:22:46
Russia and for many is a frontier, and00:22:50
Well, at the extreme, we will talk about those who, let’s say, are00:22:52
broadly related to the00:22:54
liberal democratic00:22:55
public and let’s00:22:58
say, who see the ideal or the desired00:23:02
state is something similar to what is00:23:05
observed in Western Central00:23:08
Europe in North America in some00:23:10
other free00:23:12
democratic civilized countries00:23:14
Well, let’s look from this point of view00:23:17
for many people, the milestone is February 24,00:23:20
twenty-two, when Putin began00:23:22
large-scale aggression against00:23:26
Ukraine and for For many,00:23:29
this was reflected not only in certain00:23:31
statements, but also in real actions,00:23:33
someone was forced to leave, someone00:23:35
did it on their own from Russia, this is a00:23:37
significant step, this is a generally00:23:40
fundamental step that changes the lives of00:23:44
quite a large number of people00:23:46
before and after, undoubtedly accordingly00:23:50
we say Yes, on February 24,00:23:58
Putin started the war against00:24:00
Ukraine or not. Any responsible00:24:03
person will of course say no, it was just a00:24:06
continuation of the war at another level of00:24:08
higher intensity, but00:24:11
Putin started the war against Ukraine00:24:14
8 years before, he started on February 20,00:24:19
2014 Of course, someone can00:24:22
pretend that he noticed it but didn’t notice, but00:24:24
the fact remains a fact, someone could say00:24:25
that Crimea is a sandwich or not a00:24:27
sandwich and what it is, but war00:24:31
and murder of people, mass murder of people, both00:24:34
Russians and Ukrainians and representatives of00:24:36
other nationalities, citizens of both00:24:38
states, Putin began on February 20 of which00:24:42
year this date is a watershed00:24:47
divide history into before or after00:24:51
many are already less than those who say that00:24:54
this event happened in the year Skat this00:24:56
happened in the year is it true or not00:25:00
no is it not true because before that00:25:03
Putin launched another big war against00:25:06
another state of a neighboring00:25:08
state, an absolutely unprovoked00:25:11
attack of aggression with the murder of thousands of people00:25:14
Russian Georgians00:25:16
Ossetians representatives of other00:25:18
nationalities he began in 2008 the00:25:22
invasion of Georgia with the occupation of00:25:24
Georgian00:25:26
territories This is asked00:25:28
Then this milestone occurred and00:25:31
objectively if again, look at00:25:33
what was happening no Putin didn’t start00:25:37
then murder mass murder of people I’m not00:25:40
even talking about mass mass00:25:41
murder mass murder of people00:25:44
began in the war against the Chechen00:25:47
Republic which Putin00:25:49
started a series of bombings of houses in Moscow Buken00:25:59
Prim began as is known with the murder of00:26:02
Russian00:26:03
citizens and there was no one else00:26:07
yet the following Then the question Yeah, he00:26:11
started it then and does it mean that a00:26:14
milestone happened then and then the question arises00:26:16
Yeah and how Why did Putin succeed00:26:18
because he ended up at the head of the00:26:21
Russian government where he was00:26:24
brought in we’ll talk separately and would have been accepted00:26:28
the date becomes August 9, tenth of00:26:31
the year when he was appointed to the post of00:26:33
Prime Minister and it was this appointment that00:26:36
launched a series of subsequent events the00:26:39
consequences of which are all of us and now00:26:43
not only citizens of Russia and not only00:26:44
citizens of Ukraine, not only citizens of00:26:47
Georgia but in general a significant part00:26:49
of the world experience themselves, the question arises: How did he00:26:53
end up in this post and then00:26:56
the same question arises about who a little00:26:58
earlier who invited Putin to00:27:03
this post and who then did everything00:27:07
possible to ensure that Putin remained in00:27:09
this post and held on, but we know these00:27:12
names, these names because00:27:14
a lot of these people have been written on this occasion,00:27:17
three of one We have already named Valentin00:27:20
Yumashev the second, we did00:27:28
n’t remember Alesandra put these00:27:31
three people made their00:27:35
choice, made this decision and then00:27:38
did everything possible to00:27:42
convince Boris Nikolaevich00:27:45
Yeltsin in the summer of 1999 who did not know about this choice00:27:49
who was convinced of this choice00:27:59
until this moment when he first00:28:02
tried Vladimiro Tim Lee, as far as I00:28:05
know, had never met he did00:28:08
not know this person at all Yes, he saw this,00:28:11
perhaps he saw this person in his00:28:13
environment, he accompanied him in one00:28:17
trip to Kostroma in the summer in June, in my opinion,00:28:20
[ __ ] year, but00:28:30
louse he lodged00:28:33
Vladimi the post of Prime Minister with the00:28:35
subsequent opportunity and intentions00:28:39
to take the post of President of Russia Yes, we have00:28:41
established this fact, many people have established it00:28:44
before it is well known that this is the00:28:48
event that turned the sun of events everything00:28:51
our events are not here, here’s a00:28:59
friend, the story of gender, the story would have gone00:29:02
differently if a different person seemed to be on this page,00:29:04
but00:29:05
please tell me, what if Yeltsin, on the00:29:09
recommendation of at least the same three00:29:12
people Yumashev Chenko Voloshin,00:29:16
would have offered this post not to Putin but to someone then to another,00:29:19
for example, Viktor, Chernomyrdin00:29:28
repeatedly said that Yeltsin himself said00:29:30
and Yeltsin said and Boris said that00:29:32
onko says. But in this case,00:29:35
let’s even leave Viktor Stepanovich00:29:37
aside, but if Boris Yeltsin00:29:42
would have chosen, at the suggestion of certain people,00:29:44
including those indicated by Boris Efimovich00:29:46
Nemtsov and would have carried out the entire Same00:29:51
operation with00:29:53
unity with all voting with all00:29:55
elections and the President of Russia00:29:58
at the instigation of Boris00:30:00
Nikolayevich at the instigation of his colleagues, the00:30:04
head of the administration, with the00:30:06
provision of the necessary support00:30:08
in the media,00:30:12
Boris Nemtsov would have ended up as president, so we would say would00:30:15
the country go one way or00:30:21
another? This is00:30:26
speculation here, not somehow, there is no answer, this is00:30:30
very much an answer. But because00:30:32
the question arises: who makes the decision to00:30:35
nominate a presidential candidate; the00:30:38
mechanism of what was made in general; the very00:30:40
word successor; where does this come from?00:30:43
successor; successor; it’s just itself the word00:30:46
itself is the concept that appears. This is00:30:49
evidence of the autocratic00:30:58
possibility of nominating the00:31:01
accompaniment of this nominating00:31:03
vote is accepted by a narrow group of00:31:06
people. Is this narrow group of people00:31:08
consisting of TH people as it was in00:31:10
de dem year in real life in Russia00:31:13
or maybe a little more VS00:31:15
is equal to nothing having in common with the00:31:18
normal natural process of00:31:20
nominating various00:31:22
candidates VM00:31:28
Bori Nikolaevich Eln and, moreover, what00:31:30
Boris Efimovich Nemtsov himself said00:31:32
repeatedly, both in the tenth year before the tenth00:31:36
year and after the ninety-ninth00:31:38
year until his tragic death, he00:31:42
said how What mistake did Yeltsin make00:31:45
by choosing the wrong person for the post of00:31:47
his successor and then the question arises: this is the00:31:49
very question that you are asking.00:31:52
What does it00:31:53
mean? This is the oral tradition in which the one who00:31:58
ended up in the post of00:32:00
president chooses then a successor,00:32:03
Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin. Did00:32:06
Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev choose as his successor00:32:07
or not? We all witnessed00:32:11
this process, Gorbachev did not choose00:32:13
Yeltsin as his successor, and then00:32:17
in 1991, when the first00:32:20
presidential elections were held in the00:32:22
territory of Bylovo,00:32:29
there was real competition, then people00:32:33
took an active part and, ultimately, it was the00:32:36
people, citizens of Russia, who00:32:38
decided that they were in favor of00:32:41
support for Boris Yeltsin and against00:32:45
supporting the candidate whose candidate00:32:47
Mikhail Gorbachev proposed, then there were elections less than00:32:50
a year in which00:32:52
Sai Gorv also participated, we know how00:32:55
they ended and the00:32:58
citizens of Russia spoke out whom they00:33:01
supported, we can talk about those00:33:04
elections and the elections of the year, but there were00:33:07
clearly elections If there were absolutely00:33:10
free elections, there are a number of00:33:13
complaints, but nevertheless they were00:33:15
certainly competitive, which00:33:17
naturally was not the case in this form in00:33:21
presidential elections, the00:33:29
question arises whether we are talking about this or that way,00:33:32
and besides this, that is, we want00:33:36
us to have an authoritarian system00:33:38
or in order for us to have a Democratic00:33:41
system, we must have people choose I00:33:44
mean the citizens of the country, the people of the country00:33:48
or 13 or some or Potro Tom Who00:33:52
will be the00:33:56
heir for more than a year, we know that the00:34:00
heir to the successor was chosen by the Politburo,00:34:02
we know what kind of struggle there was in00:34:04
this regard, what kind of coups were there as a00:34:08
result of which one or the other00:34:09
ended up as candidates and then00:34:12
ended up in this post, but these are00:34:15
some variations of the same at least00:34:19
authoritarian political system that00:34:22
has nothing in common with democracy then00:34:24
we must say directly we In general, we00:34:26
advocate maintaining an authoritarian00:34:29
system or are we still trying to move to a00:34:32
more or less democratic00:34:34
political system? Well, if00:34:37
we have00:34:38
n’t even gotten to that point yet, let’s just00:34:41
take a look,00:34:44
but we stopped now at the end of00:34:47
the year to say whether it was possible to avoid00:34:49
this. let's think about this year, three00:34:54
of these citizens made the decision to choose00:34:56
Putin, how did it happen, why did they00:34:59
choose And as we know they had If00:35:02
we list all the candidates, there were00:35:04
about 2000:35:06
candidates DTI candidates that they00:35:10
together Then they chose with Boris Yeltsin,00:35:14
discussed and ultimately00:35:17
accepted the decision that is, Putin was00:35:20
far from the first Putin was DM on this00:35:22
list And before that there were other people there was the00:35:25
same Shin00:35:28
Birr Nikolaev there were other people and in the00:35:32
event that Nemtsov was not there then And if there00:35:35
had been, for example, Bordyuzha, then say so00:35:39
dem year, these three people plus00:35:42
Yeltsin00:35:44
clearly in quotes made the wrong00:35:47
choice But if they chose Borj00:35:49
It was the right choice And if they00:35:51
chose Nikolai This is the right choice And00:35:54
if they chose It was the right00:35:56
choice and if they00:35:59
chose someone there Also, would this be the00:36:02
right choice or is the00:36:04
procedure for selecting a successor itself00:36:08
incorrect, that is, do you think that it00:36:12
already predetermines the character of00:36:14
the regime? Well, of course, but how else,00:36:18
strictly speaking, is the political system00:36:19
determined by how the person00:36:23
with the greatest completeness of executive00:36:26
power is chosen is here before our eyes00:36:28
again - there is no need to go anywhere to00:36:30
any Western Europe or to any00:36:32
United States. In 1991, the choice of the00:36:36
first person with full00:36:38
executive power was carried out by all00:36:41
citizens of Russia who wanted, who could, who00:36:44
thought it was necessary to participate in this, there were00:36:46
direct free elections, we all00:36:49
remember this, we we all know this well We all00:36:51
took part in this and we know that the authorities00:36:54
opposed the candidate Boris Yeltse00:36:58
Bori00:37:00
Eln participated in these elections and voted for him00:37:03
We remember there 57 ml00:37:06
57% of participants That is, I don’t remember00:37:09
how many were there and 53 53 I apologize00:37:11
5% of participants and you can count How00:37:14
many millions of people voted,00:37:17
in my opinion the same 50 or over 5000:37:20
ml people, look,00:37:24
only 8 years have passed, the00:37:29
first person in the executive branch in00:37:31
1991 was elected supported, elected in00:37:36
truly free competitive00:37:38
elections by several dozen million00:37:41
people about 50 million and in August of00:37:47
ninety-nine00:37:48
This candidacy is chosen by three00:37:53
people What a fantastic reduction00:37:57
la00:37:59
Voters thanks to whom this happened because of00:38:02
what this happened this Gorbachev00:38:05
did this the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union this is00:38:08
the Communist Party this I'm sorry00:38:11
the oligarchs00:38:12
did I even Moreover, I will say that the KGB00:38:15
did it and we see there is no Central Committee of the CPSU of the00:38:19
Communist Party, there are no00:38:26
oligarchs, there are no00:38:28
representatives, there are no participants in the current00:38:31
discussion. There are only three00:38:34
people, then the question arises00:38:36
a second. If these three people00:38:38
ended up there, how did it happen that it is even00:38:41
possible that these three people00:38:44
whom, by the way, no one elected them, they were not00:38:46
elected in any elections, neither in the00:38:48
elections of the first year nor in the elections of the00:38:51
last year.00:38:57
Ashi were never00:39:00
elected representatives of any00:39:02
group of people at all; they00:39:07
never had anything to do with the electoral process. But precisely these three00:39:09
people chose the heir to the successor00:39:13
who00:39:15
has now been in power for a quarter of a century, which led00:39:18
to all those colossal catastrophic00:39:21
consequences for ours for the whole00:39:26
world, which means how it will end, but these00:39:29
three people And here is the main question00:39:31
that should have been00:39:34
raised at all at the center of any00:39:36
discussion of any film, any of all00:39:39
those comments that occur00:39:41
after this time, how is it even00:39:43
possible that three00:39:46
unelected people choose a person who00:39:50
then determines the fate of millions of00:39:54
tens of hundreds of millions of people around the00:39:56
world, or hundreds of thousands of people around the world,00:40:00
but this question is even it’s not defined, it’s not even00:40:03
formulated, not to mention that00:40:05
no one00:40:09
is discussing it, it’s the troika that we’re00:40:12
talking about, the one you’re talking about. And not only them00:40:15
and00:40:16
political scientists, a whole army of political scientists and the00:40:20
same oligarchs, not all But many VKs00:40:24
somehow exchanged time00:40:26
both Metamorphoses that took place in the00:40:28
nineties and the main one of them is the main00:40:32
explanation that this was the only way to00:40:35
prevent the Communist revenge and00:40:38
these conversations began in October of the00:40:40
ninety-third year, that is, October. It00:40:44
seems to me that the turnaround occurred in00:40:46
October of the ninety-third year, well,00:40:48
first of all, we must say Well, we00:40:50
prevented the Communist revenge00:40:53
here in the person of the aggressive ones who are00:40:56
now talking about Yes, but but looking at it also00:40:59
says that under communist00:41:01
revenge, that it was00:41:03
supposed to kill people, mass00:41:06
murder of people, and that this mass00:41:08
murder of people has00:41:10
now been prevented, by the way,00:41:13
the author of the same film also says But00:41:15
maybe under Grandfather Zyuganov, everything00:41:17
would not have been so scary. Well, you and I are people00:41:21
who are outposts of the Communist regime,00:41:24
we have a different idea of what the00:41:25
Communist regime is. But among the new00:41:28
generation, the younger generation00:41:30
has a feeling that when the00:41:34
communists return, these communists if00:41:36
they came to power it would not be so00:41:38
scary and it would not be so terrible. As is00:41:41
happening under the current regime, so00:41:43
the question is. Now we are not talking about00:41:45
our views and about our attitude to00:41:47
this and about our idea, but from their00:41:50
point of view. So what prevented00:41:53
this and now if we are already talking about that T00:41:57
do not prevent it on the contrary it turned out Even00:41:59
worse from the point of view of the authors of this00:42:01
film and from the point of view of those of the younger00:42:05
generation Who does not remember about this and who does not00:42:07
perceive communism as an00:42:09
absolute evil says no, maybe00:42:11
if if Zyuganov turned out to be it would not be so00:42:13
scary, which means from their point of view And this is00:42:16
also not a zero part of Our Our00:42:19
population of our citizens say00:42:23
this is not Lola00:42:27
this Rona Let's still come back day00:42:30
Three years or no children year cheat and Valya and00:42:35
Tanya and Sasha indicated that three citizens00:42:39
were in power not in the third year,00:42:41
not in October of the third year, if they00:42:43
ended up in power. Well, Alexander Voloshin found himself00:42:46
in power only in the first year, and then already as00:42:50
the head of the administration in the first year00:42:59
after the second elections, that is,00:43:04
directly by the third year, this is not had00:43:07
a relationship, one could say that Yes,00:43:10
in the third year there was a civil00:43:12
war, a mini civil war, there00:43:16
was a catastrophe, there was a catastrophe, shelling00:43:19
from tanks, the parliament building and00:43:26
that itself. Why did the civil war happen?00:43:28
Well, then we need to discuss Why did this00:43:32
happen if we again -00:43:36
we will say objectively and frankly. Well, again,00:43:39
why did this happen? After all, this was the00:43:42
same parliament that elected Boris00:43:45
Yeltsin as chairman of the Supreme Council;00:43:48
this is the same parliament that, at the00:43:50
Congress of People's Deputies in00:43:53
October00:43:55
1991, handed Boris Yeltsin00:43:59
emergency powers to carry out00:44:01
economic reforms, it was this00:44:04
very parliament that appointed him00:44:07
prime minister, the00:44:09
head of the Russian government,00:44:11
giving him exceptional powers,00:44:13
fully supporting him during the outbreak of00:44:17
August of ninety-one,00:44:20
and giving him Carte Blanche to carry out all the00:44:23
reforms in the country. In this00:44:26
situation,00:44:28
2 years pass and these two branches the authorities00:44:32
find themselves on opposite sides of the00:44:34
Barricades, which means the question arises: What00:44:36
happened during these 200:44:38
years? Why are these two not just allies,00:44:43
just to say? Here are the people who00:44:45
were together in the White House and Boris Yeltsin and00:44:48
Ruslan Khasbulatov were together,00:44:51
they advocated for a free Russia in the00:44:56
State Emergency Committee, by the way, they were there00:44:59
and all those who later will separate They00:45:02
were together, the question arises: What00:45:04
happened And what00:45:07
happened And what00:45:09
happened, you understand that of course a tale has00:45:14
been written about this again00:45:16
Well, let's say this is a struggle for power. It00:45:19
always goes on, but it should not be00:45:21
the basis for it, and in fact, before what00:45:23
was the struggle for power00:45:28
about what the00:45:30
executive branch is doing? And what What is00:45:32
there What is there00:45:36
given and the conversation was about those very00:45:39
economic reforms. That is, it is00:45:41
now like what partly then it00:45:44
was presented by some as economic00:45:47
reforms and by others it was presented as it00:45:49
was called says this by00:45:53
our Kafa,00:45:57
inflation is a drop in production, this is00:45:59
unemployment, this is the inability to get00:46:04
basic basic support, the00:46:06
lack of wages when00:46:07
wages are paid there, the products of a00:46:10
tire factory00:46:12
or a00:46:16
crockery factory, this is a wild surge in crime.00:46:19
This is00:46:20
banditry, I specifically call it00:46:23
because you and I have repeatedly00:46:25
discussed one side, but we00:46:27
can be blind and not see the other00:46:29
side, and for00:46:32
some this is00:46:35
the implementation of the political00:46:37
economic policy of the new authorities00:46:40
means obtaining new opportunities,00:46:43
acquiring new rights, freedoms,00:46:47
resources, money, resources of enrichment, let’s just00:46:50
say so; for others, this is incredible00:46:54
impoverishment. Well, it’s not a secret. What the In the00:46:58
first year, inflation was 206 times00:47:02
2.6%; for the next year, 10 more times, and00:47:07
economists themselves are the same00:47:09
academic researchers, including00:47:11
me. We conducted these00:47:14
studies. What happened to00:47:16
citizens’ savings. During the first 2 years of00:47:19
these very radical00:47:21
economic reforms, which are called00:47:23
the savings that Russian citizens had00:47:26
over these 2 years were destroyed by00:47:28
98%, if memory serves00:47:31
98.5 Yes, part of these savings was00:47:34
destroyed in the ninety-first year, and as00:47:37
a result of the inflation that was still00:47:40
unleashed by the Soviet00:47:42
governments, the Pavlov government00:47:45
confiscated the Gerashchenko reform first00:47:47
Gerashchenko's reforms in January of ninety-00:47:49
one, then there was confiscation,00:47:51
Gerashchenko's reform in July of the second of ninety-00:47:54
three, already with the00:47:55
reformers, now with All thanks to all00:47:58
these00:48:00
steps, the savings that people had were00:48:03
destroyed by more than00:48:06
98%, people became beggars, they worked all their00:48:09
lives 10 20 40 50 years at the end of their00:48:14
lives they remained them, they00:48:16
had nothing left. What attitude00:48:18
should these people have towards those who, in their00:48:22
opinion, deprived them of all this, who destroyed not00:48:27
only the former Soviet Union00:48:29
empire there and so on, but destroyed their00:48:32
lives and the reaction of a significant part of00:48:37
parliament and the Supreme Council and the Congress of00:48:40
People's Deputies was precisely for this.00:48:42
It was not just a struggle for power, it00:48:45
was a reaction to what was happening in00:48:48
the country; moreover, if we say so00:48:50
there, they00:48:51
talked about these oligarchs00:48:53
in general or about privatization. Well, in00:48:56
general, you need to remember00:48:57
how how How was the00:49:00
decision on00:49:01
privatization made? Real privatization is00:49:04
not even now, not about loans-for-shares auctions,00:49:08
this is a different story. But ordinary00:49:10
privatization with vouchers. But there, the00:49:13
same parliament adopted00:49:16
legislation on privatization, which00:49:18
was00:49:19
prepared on the one hand by the first00:49:21
minister of privatization Russian00:49:23
Federation, with the participation of one of the00:49:26
reformers,00:49:27
was it in June of this00:49:31
year, what then happened and there,00:49:35
accordingly, it00:49:37
was a privatization plan, each00:49:41
citizen of Russia had a personal00:49:43
account with the help of which it was00:49:46
then supposed to privatize state00:49:48
property, what then happens in de in the00:49:52
year the head State Property Committee00:49:54
Anatoly Borisovich is00:49:56
introducing outside parliament without Parliament at00:50:01
a time when parliament is on00:50:05
vacation, completely different00:50:07
legislation on privatization with the00:50:08
help of checks with the help of00:50:11
vouchers does this specifically in August of the00:50:14
ninety-second year when parliament is00:50:16
not in Moscow, based on its00:50:21
rational psychological calculation that00:50:24
for the sake of peret00:50:27
stuck in Moscow because, according to the00:50:31
emergency powers that the00:50:33
same parliament handed to00:50:35
Yeltsin in October of ninety-one,00:50:39
if the Presidential Decree is not00:50:43
refuted by parliament within 700:50:46
days, then it becomes law.00:50:48
Using this trick, Anatoly Boriso00:50:51
introduces a00:50:53
completely different, directly opposite00:50:56
law on how to00:50:58
privatize and when deputies are the00:51:02
highest People's power representative of00:51:05
the power for which people voted00:51:07
in those very first00:51:09
free elections in the Russian Federation00:51:13
at the Congress of People's Deputies in the spring of00:51:17
1990 during this very wave of00:51:19
democratization for which we all followed and00:51:22
for which we advocated whom we00:51:23
voted and they see that they are simply being00:51:27
deceived by an official who was not elected by anyone. Taking00:51:31
advantage of the moment when they are not in00:51:33
Moscow and deceiving not on some00:51:35
minor issue On a fundamental00:51:38
issue of national life How to carry out00:51:42
privatization after which they show it on all channels00:51:44
and talk about it that00:51:46
we will hammer one nail there, we will hammer another00:51:49
nail, but they are in00:51:58
charge of representing the people, only00:52:01
they and no one else but them can00:52:03
make the appropriate decisions. They were00:52:06
deceived, what they are forced to do, they00:52:09
naturally demand resignation after that,00:52:12
they will never00:52:14
vote, which neither Chubais nor Gaidar00:52:18
one of the ministers of this government is the00:52:26
supreme council, look in any00:52:29
democratic country in Europe in00:52:32
America And now all over the world if00:52:34
it is a Democratic country, when a00:52:37
new cabinet appears, the cabinet is00:52:40
approved in parliament and the00:52:43
Prime Minister is approved and ministers A In00:52:45
some cases, there is a detailed00:52:47
discussion in parliament This is how, for example,00:52:49
in the Congress of the United States of America,00:52:55
secretaries of state, secretaries of00:52:56
certain ministries,00:52:59
and many other officials are approved for this or that post, but in00:53:03
Russia this did not happen, none of them00:53:05
were approved, none of them were ever00:53:08
considered00:53:10
parliament, that is, from the very beginning,00:53:13
literally from the very first beginning,00:53:15
the only person approved by the parliament was00:53:17
Boris Yeltsin as prime minister, the00:53:22
first VIM ministers were not approved on00:53:27
November 6,00:53:30
1991, the power that turned out to be These are the people00:53:33
who ended up in power in the Russian00:53:36
Federation, ended up there in an00:53:38
undemocratic way. We ask00:53:42
You ask People ask we00:53:44
are trying to understand when the country turned in the00:53:47
wrong direction if under there Wrong direction00:53:50
to consider such an important element of00:53:52
any modern00:53:54
civilized country as a00:53:56
democratic political00:53:58
system, then we must directly say we went in the wrong direction on00:54:02
November 6,00:54:04
1991 when00:54:08
the government was never supported in power and00:54:10
more that is never00:54:12
discussed by the parliament by the people's00:54:14
representatives and the people's representatives have never00:54:17
discussed or approved the program of00:54:20
action of the cape to speak Tom00:54:27
who civil war civil war00:54:29
about About where to go there00:54:33
or not00:54:35
there but the fact is that the government00:54:38
that came to power the Gaidar government00:54:41
is the government as please call it, it00:54:44
never proposed a program00:54:47
that parliament would be able to00:54:49
discuss00:54:52
Ifa00:54:55
to the steel of the corresponding document, this00:54:59
program began to be prepared. I just00:55:01
have to say one of the co-authors of this00:55:04
text, because starting there in the00:55:07
spring of ninety-two, I and a number of00:55:09
colleagues participated in the development of writing the00:55:12
preparation of a document for submission00:55:16
to the Supreme Council and then to the Congress of00:55:18
People's Deputies of the document Tom, it00:55:22
was possible to protest the00:55:26
form it was made By August of the00:55:30
year, so look, the government was00:55:33
appointed in November of the ninety-first00:55:35
year and the first more or less00:55:37
prepared document turned out to be generally00:55:40
written in written form, in contrast, so00:55:44
to speak, to the book on privatization, which took00:55:45
much longer to write, here it was, this00:55:48
program was prepared in August one00:55:50
day, but it was prepared. It00:55:53
was transferred to the Supreme Council;00:55:57
there, in the committees, they discussed it, there was a00:56:00
big public discussion. At the plenary00:56:02
meeting, it was not was And no one00:56:04
approved it, and then the question arises,00:56:07
if we are discussing, again, we have a00:56:09
Democratic political system or an00:56:11
authoritarian one, if it is a Democratic00:56:13
political system, then parliament in00:56:16
any form has never voted for this program,00:56:18
it has never been00:56:26
confirmed on the floor in this way since00:56:28
November In recent years, the most important elements of a00:56:32
democratic political system have00:56:34
not been respected in our country, and in this sense,00:56:37
the position of the parliament, whichever way one would like to00:56:40
treat it, was Tom, should00:56:42
n’t we return to democracy, at00:56:45
least to what was in Denom de00:56:47
Perm, by the way,00:56:49
under00:56:55
Koch when00:56:57
representatives, let’s say candidates00:56:59
who became members of the Russian00:57:01
government, received appropriate00:57:03
discussions and their action programs00:57:05
were discussed in the Russian parliament. That00:57:07
is, this is a classic dispute between00:57:10
parliament and the king which in00:57:14
Great Britain then in England took place00:57:17
in the 15th century in France in the 15th century in many00:57:22
other European states in the 20th00:57:25
century, these issues were then resolved; they00:57:28
were resolved by how00:57:31
decisions are made on the formation of the00:57:32
executive branch and how00:57:35
this executive branch decides00:57:36
what to do next, where to00:57:38
go this way or00:57:40
not. This is the first time we have00:57:44
had a popular election of the00:57:46
executive branch President of the00:57:48
Russian Federation Boris Yeltsin in00:57:51
June of the ninety-first year passes00:57:54
only from June to November, the day of the first00:57:59
year passes 500:58:00
months and the first check of this00:58:05
system is immediately broken and it is00:58:07
never restored, that is, the00:58:11
question is when they turned the wrong way when of00:58:14
all importance and, let's say, catastrophe,00:58:17
the decision that was made in de dem00:58:19
year00:58:27
after this happened, the00:58:29
civil war itself took place, the00:58:32
shooting of parliament took place in the civil00:58:35
war in England in the 10th century, when there was a00:58:37
civil war between parliament and the00:58:39
king, ultimately Who defeated00:58:42
parliament in the 10th century century When the00:58:45
Civil War began between the king and the00:58:48
National Assembly of France in the question of00:58:51
who00:58:52
defeated the assembly00:58:56
many different stages how many00:58:58
disasters there were there What dictatorships there were but00:59:01
ultimately the parliament won And00:59:04
despite the fact that the republic is00:59:06
presidential but it is00:59:08
democratic with the enormous powers of the00:59:11
parliament the parliament which forms,00:59:14
among other things, the government and determines the00:59:16
direction of action of the executive00:59:18
power in our case, during the00:59:21
Civil War between our00:59:23
parliament and our king, the00:59:26
elected king won the king who00:59:29
used00:59:32
tanks against the parliament Well, and all the other00:59:34
tools, and another king who00:59:36
also happened to be there He continued this00:59:39
process which again, it didn’t start in00:59:41
1990, not even in 1990, but it00:59:45
started in 1990, but you remember what happened00:59:48
in 1990, and it was after00:59:56
Nikolayevich Yeltsin went on00:59:58
his famous journey along the wolf on a steamboat.01:00:01
Yes, I remember. Yes, that’s about when01:00:06
Akuna met some comrades there I remember in the01:00:09
river and so on, well, there01:00:13
was a lot there. No, there was a lot there,01:00:15
for example, Zhirinovsky went after01:00:17
him and an order was simply given there. And those01:00:20
locks there were to01:00:21
close Novsky’s ship and not let him in.01:00:26
Zhirinovsky is not a hero. of my novel01:00:28
at all, but here’s how normal it is for us01:00:31
to close the01:00:32
locks on the wolves in order not to let in a01:00:36
ship or a steamer with a political01:00:39
opponent, this is correct, in the01:00:42
United States you can01:00:43
imagine that the President of the01:00:44
United States would give an order, and01:00:46
moreover, this order was would be carried out01:00:48
as soon as this happened, the01:00:51
process of impeachment of01:00:53
this president would slowly begin immediately, just01:00:57
again, it01:00:59
doesn’t matter which President and it doesn’t matter which01:01:01
opponent in this case this is a clear01:01:05
manifestation of authoritarian power that01:01:08
no one provided to this president01:01:10
but this was just the beginning this was01:01:13
flowers steamer or motor ship with Boris01:01:17
Nikolaevich Sailed to Nizhny Novgorod01:01:19
Nizhniy01:01:26
and so on what Boris Nikolaevich said after that01:01:29
you talked about this at the beginning of01:01:31
our conversation Boris Nikolaevich01:01:33
announced Boris Efimovich as his01:01:37
successor What is a successor In what01:01:40
democratic state do01:01:43
successors exist, can you imagine01:01:45
what kind -the President of the United States01:01:47
or the President of France or there Mist of01:01:52
Great Britain here01:01:55
and the last day that this01:01:59
person is in the executive branch is grounds01:02:02
for01:02:04
immediate impeachment because this is not even an01:02:06
authoritarian system anymore, this is already a recreation of the01:02:09
tsarist system, you understand what’s the matter,01:02:12
what’s wrong with this matter, restoration and even01:02:15
as a restoration in a new form.01:02:18
And in reality there is no heir to the royal system.01:02:21
And by the way, Boris Nikolaevich has01:02:24
repeatedly said and many01:02:26
people admire Boris Nikolaevich,01:02:29
say he didn’t have a son. Therefore,01:02:32
unfortunately, this is the story. He01:02:34
only has Daughters, and that’s why he looked01:02:36
Wherever he could have found his son in Boris01:02:38
Efimovich, he saw his son at one01:02:40
time, he saw his son in Yegor Timurovich in01:02:43
Boris Efimovich, then he saw it in01:02:46
Valentin Borisovich, then01:02:48
ultimately he saw it in Vladimir Vladimirovich01:02:50
But the same01:02:54
Tsar’s logic seems to me if our colleagues01:02:58
or not our colleagues, the authors of this film01:03:00
or another film and books, and those who01:03:03
discuss all these issues have taken up01:03:05
another question. How did it happen that01:03:07
our political system, even during this01:03:10
discussion, is constantly discussing what01:03:13
different version of tsarist power is suitable for us,01:03:15
look what happened now01:03:18
even they discussed this, say Well, how is it that01:03:20
this film is real?01:03:29
Well, because many people who today01:03:32
oppose the film01:03:34
supported Alexei Navalny all the time and,01:03:36
moreover, if we speak from there, they supported the oligarchs or01:03:38
mini-oligarchs, including with01:03:40
money and Navalny and FBK and gave it01:03:43
to this matter Now he says, How are we01:03:45
going to support now because they01:03:47
took it and spat in our souls Well, what were they01:03:51
doing before that, they created from01:03:54
Alexei Navalny the next successor of the01:03:57
next heir of the next prince,01:04:01
as before they created the corresponding01:04:04
heir or they treated him from01:04:06
Boris Efimovich And before that from Anatoly01:04:09
Borisovich And before that from Yegor01:04:12
Timurovich And before that from Boris01:04:14
Nikolaevich And before that they tried to make it01:04:16
out of Mikhail Sergeevich who did it Is it the01:04:21
people or the01:04:23
oligarchs This is the question And the most important thing01:04:27
now I’ll say the most liberal01:04:30
intelligentsia is the same Democratic01:04:33
liberal Vestroia European01:04:36
intelligentsia which is considered in our country01:04:39
as a kind of ruler of thoughts and which01:04:41
discusses where we need to go what this01:04:44
intelligentsia always offers us01:04:46
it offers And let us01:04:48
choose different options for tsarist power I01:04:56
didn’t want to interrupt you but in this is a01:04:59
huge question And who is01:05:03
to blame for this The government itself that acts01:05:06
or the society people Call it whatever you01:05:09
like, which allows you to do this and the01:05:12
authorities and allows you to do this to yourself01:05:16
and Let’s try, so on the one01:05:18
hand we can say that both of them are01:05:20
not or or And both of them,01:05:24
please tell me, but Gorbachev made01:05:27
himself a tsar. Well, objectively speaking,01:05:30
he made himself a tsar when he was there. He tried to01:05:33
cling to power, he used force01:05:35
so that there, I don’t know, to arrest the01:05:38
conspirators of the Belovezhskaya Pushcha, he01:05:42
directed there I didn’t I know the01:05:45
special squad Alpha for the capture of the White House.01:05:49
He is01:05:51
doing this, they point it out to him as mistakes,01:05:54
so now we are not talking about mistakes, not01:05:56
mistakes. Did he do it or01:05:59
not? He didn’t do it. You can say he01:06:02
was weak, he was strong, he directed it01:06:04
there. He didn’t do that. he didn’t do01:06:08
what he did Then Boris Nikolaevich01:06:10
Not to mention Vladimir Vladimirovich,01:06:12
this particular case, we won’t01:06:16
go far somewhere and you just And01:06:19
please tell me what you think01:06:20
Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov, who01:06:22
was at the head of the01:06:26
movement there, he would01:06:29
do this And Sergei Adamovich01:06:32
Kovalev and Galina Vasilievna Starovoitova01:06:36
and Vladimir Konsta Bukovsky and Yuri01:06:40
Niko wait a second we are talking about01:06:42
people right now while In power one way or01:06:45
another These people were close to power01:06:54
there is not a zero list there are other people Here01:06:57
they are we did something similar01:07:00
now, not about corruption, which01:07:02
are trying to cover up completely different issues,01:07:04
much more important issues: Questions about01:07:07
power, about the disposition of power, a question about01:07:09
force, about violence, about what can and01:07:12
cannot be done in the post of head of the01:07:15
executive branch, and we see that a01:07:18
whole number of people have never done anything like this01:07:20
and we01:07:22
have never done anything like this,01:07:25
one01:07:28
dimension is connected with a specific person01:07:30
who is in power, so you can01:07:33
talk again, you can talk01:07:34
directly to the authorities, you can talk01:07:36
directly about the same economic01:07:37
reforms,01:07:38
I’m so lucky I was there, after all,01:07:41
and in power, next to power for01:07:43
quite a long time, I saw Who is01:07:45
doing what in the early years, I saw what he is01:07:49
doing01:07:55
for the actual implementation of01:07:58
economic reforms, real01:07:59
economic01:08:01
reforms, three orders of magnitude more than the guide,01:08:04
no one remembers him at all. This is who01:08:07
Baris Grigoryevich01:08:09
Fedorov That's who unleashed hyperinflation01:08:13
Yegor Timurovich01:08:15
Gaidar unleashed hyperinflation with his monstrous expenses01:08:18
that reached 4% of01:08:22
GDP, that is, the budget deficit reached01:08:25
40% of GDP and government spending01:08:28
reached 70% of GDP, Yegor01:08:31
Timurovich did it In the ninety-second year from01:08:32
scratch and no relation The01:08:35
Communist Party of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the01:08:38
previous governments had01:08:40
nothing to do with this; it was Yegor Timurovich’s personal contribution01:08:42
to the destruction of the01:08:45
country’s economic system; who suppressed this01:08:48
hyperinflation that Yegor01:08:51
Timurovich created, Boris Grigorievich Fedorov, throughout the01:08:54
ninety-third year, he accomplished simply a01:08:56
real feat by suppressing this inflation, that’s01:09:00
who- does anyone today remember about NM01:09:02
that he did it, how he reduced01:09:04
subsidies, how he reduced and stopped01:09:07
issuing all these free loans to01:09:10
whom the military-industrial complex,01:09:12
which as Yegor01:09:15
Timurovich gave to the special services,01:09:17
agrarian-industrial01:09:26
we But some praise Yegor01:09:29
Muro for what he destroyed the Russian01:09:31
economy, someone today remembers01:09:33
Boris Grigoryevich Fedorov for01:09:34
stopping this madness, no one01:09:39
remembers who even during the Tago.01:09:43
Therefore, the first level you are talking about01:09:47
Who we should thank, we01:09:50
top up those People who found themselves in power01:09:56
and the second we should talk about01:09:58
who, of course, people support or do not01:10:00
support, but in order for people to01:10:03
support or not support, they01:10:05
must have the appropriate opportunity01:10:07
in the first year they had such an01:10:10
opportunity they were given this01:10:11
opportunity who provided the opportunity01:10:13
in the first year for people to vote for01:10:16
Yeltsin we we know the name of this person. He01:10:19
needs to be named. There is01:10:29
definitely no potential opportunity to participate. And we see what01:10:32
happened when, for example,01:10:34
Putin ended up in this post. Putin gives the opportunity to01:10:38
any alternative, at least01:10:40
insignificantly popular01:10:42
person, no matter what views he has, even what01:10:44
views he will take part in such elections,01:10:47
no therefore the01:10:55
intentions of these people What actions01:10:57
they carry out What restrictions they01:11:00
impose on themselves on their actions and01:11:03
What restrictions society as a whole and01:11:06
its individual fate can impose on the01:11:09
actions of a person who finds himself in the highest01:11:11
position of executive power - this is the main01:11:14
question, the main question is whether there is a way or a wrong01:11:17
place does society have any01:11:21
opportunities to limit the actions of a person01:11:26
who will have a desire01:11:45
[music]01:11:55
and this was an inhale-exhale program with we01:11:59
end it with a promise to continue these01:12:02
conversations we I mean Andrei01:12:05
Illarionov and I am the host of the program01:12:08
Vitaly do Barsky All the best thank you01:12:11
All the01:12:24
best [music] HDescription:
Главный вопрос разговора Андрея Илларионова с Виталием Дымарским – когда Россия свернула не туда? Хотя фильм «Предатели» и полон детских ошибок и инфантильных выводов, на самом деле полезен: благодаря работе М.Певчих удалось вернуться к дискуссии об истоках сегодняшней катастрофы. Андрей Илларионов дает ответы на самые важные вопросы: Кто на самом деле привел Путина к власти? В чем роль Юмашева, Дьяченко, Волошина? Какими были смысл и цель действий Гайдара и Чубайса? Почему истоки авторитаризма нужно искать в правлении Ельцина? Удалось ли предотвратить имперско-коммунистический реванш? Повернула ли Россия «туда», если бы наследником стал Немцов? Почему сам факт выбора Ельциным «преемника» – не что иное, как реставрация царизма? Навальный как очередной авторитарный лидер? Почему, выбирая себе кумиров, «либеральная» интеллигенция все время создает царских наследников? Цикл публикаций Андрея Илларионова «Почему и как они придумали Путина»: https://aillarionov.livejournal.com/tag/%D0%BF%D0%BE%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%BC%D1%83%20%D0%B8%20%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BA%20%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%20%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B4%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%20%D0%9F%D1%83%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0 Фильм Виталия Манского «Свидетели Путина»: https://www.currenttime.tv/a/putin-witnesses/30161074.html Тайм-коды: 00:00 – Тизер 00:34 – Виталий Дымарский о поиске причин катастрофы 01:28 – С нами экономист Андрей Илларионов 03:30 – В чем цели создателей фильма «Предатели»? 05:39 – Поможет ли суд над Ельциным? 07:39 – Дискуссия о фильме содержательнеее и умнее, чем сам фильм 10:08 – Александр Минкин vs Альфред Кох 12:30 – Олигархи начали каяться. Зачем? 14:02 – Кто раньше «Предателей» ответил на этот вопрос 18:02 – «Олигархи» не были хозяевами, они были «мальчиками на побегушках» 19:22 – Кто на самом деле выбрал Путина 21:44 – В какой точке Россия свернула не туда? 23:20 – Поиски точки поворота: Февраль 2022? Февраль 2014? Август 2008? Сентябрь 1999? 27:00 – Кто пригласил Путина на трон? 29:07 – А если бы преемником был бы приглашен не Путин? 30:35 – Само слово «преемник» – признак автократии 33:30 – Главу государства должны выбирать гарждане 34:47 – Путин был двадцатым в списке на трон 37:27 – Авторитаризм в России создавали с 1991 г. по 1999 г. 40:34 – Предотвращен ли имперско-коммунистический реванш? 42:33 – Тройка авторов – Юмашев, Дьяченко, Волошин 45:39 – Точка невозврата: начало интервенционистских «либеральных» реформ 48:44 – Роль Чубайса и Гайдара 51:29 – Корень проблемы – неизбранный, безответственный, получивший неограниченную власть чиновник 53:29 – Недемократичность всех руководителей страны 56:09 – Характер политической системы – демократия или авторитаризм? 58:13 – Начало поворота «не туда» – 6 ноября 1991 года 1:00:15 – О приказе Ельцина закрыть шлюзы перед Жириновским 1:02:10 – Институт «преемничества» – это признак царизма/авторитаризма 1:05:02 – Только ли власть виновна? Или народ тоже? 1:07:43 – Борис Федоров vs Егор Гайдар 1:10:12 – Горбачев позволил Ельцину участвовать в выборах
Preparing download options
* — If the video is playing in a new tab, go to it, then right-click on the video and select "Save video as..."
** — Link intended for online playback in specialized players
Questions about downloading video
How can I download "Андрей Илларионов. Когда Россия свернула не туда" video?
http://unidownloader.com/ website is the best way to download a video or a separate audio track if you want to do without installing programs and extensions.
The UDL Helper extension is a convenient button that is seamlessly integrated into YouTube, Instagram and OK.ru sites for fast content download.
UDL Client program (for Windows) is the most powerful solution that supports more than 900 websites, social networks and video hosting sites, as well as any video quality that is available in the source.
UDL Lite is a really convenient way to access a website from your mobile device. With its help, you can easily download videos directly to your smartphone.
Which format of "Андрей Илларионов. Когда Россия свернула не туда" video should I choose?
The best quality formats are FullHD (1080p), 2K (1440p), 4K (2160p) and 8K (4320p). The higher the resolution of your screen, the higher the video quality should be. However, there are other factors to consider: download speed, amount of free space, and device performance during playback.
Why does my computer freeze when loading a "Андрей Илларионов. Когда Россия свернула не туда" video?
The browser/computer should not freeze completely! If this happens, please report it with a link to the video. Sometimes videos cannot be downloaded directly in a suitable format, so we have added the ability to convert the file to the desired format. In some cases, this process may actively use computer resources.
How can I download "Андрей Илларионов. Когда Россия свернула не туда" video to my phone?
You can download a video to your smartphone using the website or the PWA application UDL Lite. It is also possible to send a download link via QR code using the UDL Helper extension.
How can I download an audio track (music) to MP3 "Андрей Илларионов. Когда Россия свернула не туда"?
The most convenient way is to use the UDL Client program, which supports converting video to MP3 format. In some cases, MP3 can also be downloaded through the UDL Helper extension.
How can I save a frame from a video "Андрей Илларионов. Когда Россия свернула не туда"?
This feature is available in the UDL Helper extension. Make sure that "Show the video snapshot button" is checked in the settings. A camera icon should appear in the lower right corner of the player to the left of the "Settings" icon. When you click on it, the current frame from the video will be saved to your computer in JPEG format.
What's the price of all this stuff?
It costs nothing. Our services are absolutely free for all users. There are no PRO subscriptions, no restrictions on the number or maximum length of downloaded videos.