As soon as the West was finally breathe a sigh of relief at the thought of Russia and its decreasing global influence — it is understood that relax early. The American press with a nostalgic longing recalls still very recent past — of Yeltsin's yard, which consciously or not so pleased with the views of the West. During the recent past, that is — almost all of the nineties, when Russia was under the "robber" yoke almost always inadequate Yeltsin systematically robbed her, but mercilessly.
Robbed her of robbery tycoons, called "oligarchs", plus leading eltsintsy: from the family and the government. They gained control of the country's banking system and access to raw materials for export, playing a crucial role in preventing the emergence of an efficient free market. Revenues from the creativity they directed not to the state treasury, and the personal accounts — and the gap between the haves and have-nots in today's Russia does not like democracy and feudalism.
When, finally, circumstances forced Yeltsin to sober up, he decided to renounce the throne. America, as befits the world's policeman, immediately started to give Russia unsolicited advice. Mainly — in the form of elevated rhetoric: "No — seven decades of shame!" Etc. To say that while Washington did not show enthusiasm regarding Yeltsin's successor, Vladimir Putin — is to practice omissions. Politmashina States — the government and the press — easily figured out that Russia's future may not be what it was in the "good" end times: after almost 20 years of runaway collapse on all fronts of the newly-born president suddenly announced that it was time to revive Russia as and a sense of national pride for her.
These words were discouraged local nobility. Press zapestrila unflattering sketches of Putin and warnings about the possibility of returning to Russia "bad disease." Local hacks — from a relaxed and liberal David Remnika completing neottaivayuschim conservative George Will — sounded the alarm over the fact that the Kremlin has got to, say, a legacy of the KGB agent. And, complain and complain about it so hard that you would think that their presidents themselves they choose exclusively from the ranks of the Brothers of Mercy and florists.
Such lamentations prove above all others: in spite of a short national history, Americans, talking about her, often let in on itself amnesia. Optional — depending on the topic or period. In this case, however, they have gone too far, for example, bushizmy not even had time to become history. Papa Bush was not just a colonel, and the head of the CIA, George and son so much proud dad that he should tag along. Why then Dzh.Uill, experienced, that is familiar with the basics of logical thinking, writer, surprised that Putin came to power with the same (to some extent) a track record? Not only is there because, according to the logic established here, spies, employees should be called not the CIA, but only overseas intelligence?
As I sometimes think, hypocrisy has started up in the States such deep roots, which was quoted in a natural posture. However, even Wilde observed that the most difficult to keep it natural position — why, in fact, after a month-long general battle, which the American press has subjected Putin, the American press was forced to admit that the reason for her dislike of the Russian president is not whether that — in contrast to the once timid American presidential candidate Gore — he had never kissed her passionately in public, but the fact that he had promised to return Russia to its former strength.
It is a promise to "democratic" American ears sounds mighty terrifying. Much nicer for them would sound the promise of further degrade Russia, for a strong America, Russia, proclaiming his victory over her in the Cold War did not need it. One of the prominent "marshals" of this war, Zbigniew Brzezinski, has just unveiled a work entitled "Living with Russia": the latter is in no way, they say, has no right to consider themselves power. If so, then — why so much bile against former foe? More precisely — why not calm down now? Because Brzezinski does not believe himself as himself. More precisely, understands that Russia is still a formidable potential challenger. The reason for dissatisfaction with Putin in the western media due to the elementary fact that she saw him as a leader who — for the first time in the last decade and a half — is able to return to Russia of its former strength. Regardless of exactly how Putin will try to achieve this, his rise to power will be regarded here as a step backwards.
Clearly stated here is not right. Speaks directly to the other. The fact that Putin — the strangler of freedom and the "new Stalin". These specifications are issued to him in connection with the "persecution" semi-criminal "heroes" such as Gusinsky. Gusinsky's called a "victim" of the Putin regime and loudly mourn press here ashamed because he is too much stole from his state — far more than had stolen from "taxpayers" of his American "sodelnik in spirit" and the mafia Gotti, locked up for life.
As for the rampant abuse of Putin for what he is trying to somehow influence the Russian press, local publicists should first of all think of myself any, even the useless, the American mnogotorizhka bailiff, somebody's interests, often referred to here as "special . " Compared with the Russian, the American press — blind sheep, blindly wandering blindly as a shepherd. Government. Why on earth, America, under the domain of advertising propaganda, terrified that Putin seeks to mute criticism of his government's propaganda and to limit the arbitrariness of Berezovsky and Gusinsky Russian world — the main characters of the Russian drama about lawlessness, feel free to infinitely multiply its own capital and power? ! You can reply to paraphrase Gore Vidal, writer and cousin of U.S. Vice-President: America, like Berezovsky and Gusinsky, aims to nurture the whole world in his own image — the image of a unified corporate eagle, in which both the right wing.
As for those who scold Putin for "attempts to rearm Russia and thus poherit dream never touch the Kalashnikov" (Masha Gessen, advanced in the "Washington Post"), — to them I would like to report the news greatest of all we people who live in a far from perfect world, which, however, is even less perfect if Kalashnikovs issue only one group of two-legged. In this case, you know, start shooting, and not a duel. A duel, no matter how ridiculous were not — a more civilized activity than the other mentioned form of murder.