Текст книги "The Last Gambit"
Автор книги: (IP of the USSR) Internal Predictor of the USSR
сообщить о нарушении
Текущая страница: 5 (всего у книги 21 страниц)
May be, he didn’t read it, or Holmes has some other materials on the problem of psychiatry besides the note about “Matrix”?
And at this point there appeared a question, which I didn’t notice, when studying medicine and having a practice as a doctor: why is psychiatry in western countries a branch of medicine, and not of general psychology? Doesn’t it mean that psychological science is insolvent and, as a result, it can guarantee only isolation of its patient from society, but not always his recovery and returning to the society? And isn’t a reason of psychologists to reject from interfering to the sphere of psychiatry and to prefer developing pseudo-scientific literature? And when touching it carelessly, common people start to feel suddenly and absolutely on blank space “Oedipus complex”, or “latent and subdued homosexuality” and other socially dangerous patterns of behaviour. In other words, don’t the relations between psychological science and common people in western countries resemble very much the relations between the Owl and Winnie-the-Pooh, whose head was full of sawdust:
Winnie, can you read?
Generally, I can’t, but if I’m told, what is written there, I will read it.
Then listen, foolish tiny bear: it is written here, that…
But there are no psychiatrists on the West, who could cure the victims of psychologists and such psychologists themselves, who earn their living by banal writings on the themes of human soul depths.
And who is this Internal Predictor of the USSR, if he dares to speak so directly about this mental disease of the whole civilization whose propaganda convinces everybody in its not-having-an-alternative on the basis of its incontestable superiority in everything? Br-r-r… this thought made me get the creeps on my skin… And is Holmes connected with them somehow?
Curious, I decided to have a look on this site www.dotu.ru, and it was a pity that I didn’t have Russian version of “Microsoft office” on my note-boor with Pentium-IIIM. In English version of the site, besides two analytical notes which Holmes has printed for me, there was a short report about the theme of basic works devoted to the Conception of Social Security, as an alternative to the biblical conception of ruling, and at the same time all guests of the site were offered to learn Russian for better understanding the new conception.
In my thoughts I thanked the creators of the site for a good advice and was intended to see firstly some works, expecting to find some files with “pictures” and probably even the enigmatic “picnics” among them. I accounted on the fact that graphic files, especially like those of “picnics”, were to take much place in the informational base of the site. It took me much time to fulfil this operation, but finally I’ve found files with “pictures”. Unfortunately, they had nothing to do with “picnics”, but represented the copies of pictures by some Russian painters. Then I understood that I had only two ways to achieve my goal. The first – long and hard: to install on my computer the means of support of Russian language, and using my knowledge in Russian (far from perfect), to try to understand by myself the works of Inner Predictor, and after that to return to the “picnics”, being ready for it. However, having remembered all difficulties dealt with the article about “Matrix”, I considered that all other works would hardly be easier for comprehension, and regarded the first way hopeless. The second way seemed to me simpler, but its realization demanded for outside help.
September 25 – 30. Holmes’s books
In last ten years there appeared many new Russian émigrés in London: some of them went in for business, others taught in Universities and colleges, others worked in mass-media sphere. Unfortunately, I hadn’t any acquaintances in these circles, and so I had to turn to the meditation of Mr. Hopkins, who was well acquainted in these surroundings.
I really know some people among Russian émigrés, – started Hopkins, – but I’d like to know before, Watson, what exactly do you want to learn about Russia?
I’m interested in last ten years of Russia after USSR collapse.
What do I hear, Watson? Maybe you’re fed up with chess and decided to go in for politics? Ten years passed after Russians had left Afghanistan, and you never wanted to hear anything close to politics when you returned from there, as I remember. Well, well! At last, it’s your problem. I’ll try to talk with one Russian, which, I think, can satisfy your interest to Russia. I’ll call you in about two days and we’ll meet somewhere, say, in Woldorf. Do you agree, Watson, to meet in Woldorf?
Though I was far from the sphere usually called “politics”, I still supposed, that I knew something about events in Russia in last ten years: USSR, as “superpower №2”, split up to the plenty of states, and among them Russia became the successor of the “empire of evil”. Thinking about Russia this way, I caught myself thinking with cliché, formed by our mass media under influence of rich and powerful partner of my old good England.
And at this point I remembered one of former USA presidents, who declared in live broadcasting on TV, that he has just signed an edict, according to which USSR was outlawed and armed forces of USA were ordered to inflict a nuclear strike on the “empire of evil”. Afterwards it turned out, that Reagan happened to joke, thinking that tuning and checking of apparatus went on, while the broadcasting of his speech to the country has started already. Fine jokes for a leader of “superpower №1”… And we all are extremely lucky, that this “joke” wasn’t followed by return-preventing massed strike by “superpower №2”.
Have Russians missed this, in effect, declaring war to them in live broadcasting? Or did they have so strong nerves and knew whom they dealt with? And what do I think about America indeed?
The question, suddenly come to the light from the depths of sub-consciousness, made me think about the subjects, which for common people belong to the sort of things which “goes without saying”, and I founded out, that I don’t have any distinct answer to it. I didn’t like this condition somehow. And maybe the point is in the enigmatic name of “Internal Predictor of the USSR” which awoke nostalgia for passed Empire? We, Englishmen, have yet recovered from the similar illness, but maybe nostalgia is especial enigmatic attribute of Russian soul? Or Russian empire hasn’t yet passed, and its intelligent services, having far-going plans on future and realizing them step-by-step, have played giveaway checkers with naïve West? These questions didn’t make my condition easier…
Having returned home, I took the books, which Holmes had left for me, and got the second note from the site www.dotu.ru. There were three books, and I give their titles in the order, in which Holmes left them for me:
Zbignev Brzezinski. “The Grand Chessboard” (American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives).
Ralph Epperson. “Invisible hand. The introduction to the view on history as a conspiracy”.
M. Buygent, R. Lay, G. Lincoln. “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail”.
Since the note represented the review on the work of professor of American foreign policy from the School of contemporary international researches by Paul H. Nitze attached to the John Hopkins University in Washington, the former adviser on the questions of national safety of American president in 1977 – 1981, consultant of the Strategic and International Researches Centre, and so on, and so on; and the title of review (“Egoist is like one sitting for long in a well”), in effect, was a characterization of the author of the book and reminded about Oscar Wilde’s fairy-tale “Selfish Giant”, it can be said, that I had no choice. Friday evening, Saturday and Sunday I devoted to reading “The Grand Chessboard”. It can seem strange to somebody, but the book by Brzezinski helped me to answer the question which has never before risen in my mind:” What’s my real attitude to America?”
Brzezinski had a little understanding of chess, it soon became clear from the text of his book, and he apparently gave it this loud title, trying to express many longing desires of future world pattern, but he said nothing in particular about strategy – as a method – of realizing his desires in reality. If follow him in this chess analogies, it all resembled the situation when someone hardly aware of rules of the game declared his guaranteed victory against any rival, not knowing any chess theories and not possessing the feeling of the game in playing chess. Not paying much attention to phrase-mongering of Brzezinski, with the thought that “pawn” wrote memoirs imagining itself a “queen”, at last I started reading the review, and I’ve found that its beginning expressed my mind essentially, but without chess analogies. I liked the insinuation on “intellectual muscles” of the former National Security Adviser of American President:
“There is a legend coming from the antiques times of Greek-Persian warfare. The numerous armies and fleet of Persia which by that time already conquered many peoples and established its presence on the Mediterranean Sea, were overhanging the Hellenistic Civilization, the latter, at the first sight, being much less powerful and controlled less “human” and material resources than its potential conqueror. The war began and one sage suggested showing to the Greek warriors their future enemies as they really were.
A group of captured Persians appeared naked in the field where the battle-ranks were drawn up. It is known, even from antique sculpture, that the Greeks of those times paid special attention to bodybuilding exercises to prepare themselves for military service. When this people who were used to purposeful physical training from their childhood saw the Persians naked they almost fell with laugh as they could not imagine that such feeble men even though grouped in numerous armies would be a dangerous enemy on the battle-field. The ensuing military actions brought decisive victory of Greeks over feeble Persians who at that time pretended to establish the unrivalled world primacy of their state and subsequently, to shape the outlook of the whole world”.
The authors of the review thoroughly familiarized me with the USA NSC-20/1 Directive of August 18,1948, which was clearly headed: "Our goals with respect to Russia"[29], and also with extracts from other, not less aggressive, if to get away from formed by themselves political predilections and fears, document of the same department – USA NSC-68 Directive of September 30, 1950.
The boldness of assessments in the review was considerably supported by convincing description of contemporary global strategy, but I was amazed most of all by distinctly formulated priorities of generalized means of ruling a society, which can be perceived by the opposite side in definite circumstances as a kind of weapon:
“Every society is managed in one way or another, and therefore the global historical process may be perceived as a global process of ruling which, at the first place, comprises many processes of regional ruling (policies of regional states and international policies, forces which are not institutionalised within state: mafias, Jewish diaspora); secondly, it proceeds within life processes of the Earth and Space, standing higher than it in the hierarchy. Accordingly, in terms of the Sufficiently Universal Theory of Ruling with respect to the life of societies in the course of historically long intervals (hundreds of years and more) one may specify the following instruments of influence on society, whose reasonable use allows controlling its life and death:
Information of worldview nature, or methodology, which, once adopted, allows men to project – individually and socially – their "standard automations" of identification with regard to particular processes within the completeness and integrity of the World, and to define in their individual perception the hierarchic order of these processes in their mutual interconnection. This information lays foundation for the culture of thinking and for the completeness of ruling activities including also intra-social absolute power both on regional and global levels.
Information of annalistic, chronological nature, in all domains of Culture and all domains of Knowledge. It allows seeing, in which direction the processes are developing, and to correlate particular domains of Culture as a whole and of branches of Knowledge. To those, whose worldview is based on the sense of proportion and is conformable to the World, this information allows identifying particular processes while sieving the "chaotic" flow of facts and phenomena through the worldview "sieve" – subjective human measure of identification. (Within the present context the culture means all information, which is not transferred genetically in the succession of generations).
Information of fact-descriptive nature: description of particular processes and their interconnections constitutes the substance of information of the third priority, which includes the faith-teachings of religious cults, secular ideologies, technologies and facts of all domains of science.
Economic processes, as an instrument of influence subordinated to purely informational instruments of influence through finances (money), which embody a totally generalized type of information of economic nature.
Genocide practices, affecting not only those who live today but also the generations to come, eliminating the genetically determined potential for learning and for development by them of the cultural heredity of ancestors: nuclear blackmail-threat of use; alcohol, tobacco and other kinds of narcotic drugs genocide, food additives, all ecological pollutants, some medicines-real use; "gene engineering" and "biotechnologies" – potential danger.
Other instruments of influence mainly by force – weapons in traditional sense of this word; killing and crippling human beings; destructing and exterminating material and technical objects of civilization, cultural monuments and bearers of their spirit.
Although there are no evident distinctions between the instruments of influence because many of them, by their capacities, could be related to different priorities, their classification in hierarchical order, as presented above, allows nonetheless to identify the dominating factors of influence that may be used as instruments of ruling, and in particular, as instruments of suppression and elimination of those phenomena in the social life that are conceptually inadequate in the sense of ruling.
When used within one social system this set is tantamount to generalized means of ruling this system. But when applied by one social system (social group) to others, which have different internal concepts of ruling, it is tantamount to generalized weapons, i.e. means of warfare, in most general sense of this word, or – instruments of support for self-ruling within another social system, when there is no conceptual incompatibility of ruling in both systems.
This approach determines the priority order of the above classes of instruments of influence on the society because the changes in society's state under the impact of the instruments of supreme priorities, entail much more significant consequences than those incurred by the instruments of minor priorities, although such changes proceed more slowly, without "noisy effects". In other words, within the historically long intervals the level of effectiveness is increasing from the first point to the sixth, while the level of irreversible results of their application, which by and large determine how efficiently problems of the social life are solved in ‘now and forever’ terms, is falling”.
By this moment I couldn’t tell exactly, what attitude can this fragment have to the solution of “picnics” riddle, but something suggested me – there was some connection between them indeed. And it was the fragment with mentioning of the “effect of monkey’s paw”, which strike me most of all, for the image of monkey presented in the third “picnic”:
“Policy is a type of ruling. In the meantime, the theory of ruling suggests that it is objectively impossible to exercise ruling when the objectives and the hierarchy of their significance are unidentified and the simultaneously determined goals are incompatible. The doctrine outlined by Z. Brzezinski does not meet these criteria. In case the ruling is exercised tacitly, i.e. when its goals and the means of their achievement “go without saying” – and hence, the above principle is not relevant, – inevitably come unpredictable consequences which depreciate even the results achieved so far (as it was the case of the US NSC Directive 20/1 of August 18, 1948, in the sense that the execution of its main provisions between August 18 and 23, 1991 has generated even more serious problems for the USA) and may even invalidate them completely ( in the West this is called sometimes the “effect of monkey's paw”). It happens because the tacit (when it “goes without saying”) and declared (direct definitions) approaches are practically mutually suppressing by virtue of different objective and subjective factors; besides, in the social life they generate phenomena which are the result of their interaction”.
The text following this paragraph made me remember my latest conversation with Holmes, and then I started to understand, why these two notes were translated into English and why Holmes recommended me to study them:
“The same is true, if the present Z. Brzezinski's book relates to that information flow, by which the true American bosses are washing brains of those crowd members who are interested in politics and thus require for their self-psychological comfort some quasi-truthful explanation of the current events and of how they correlate with the officially declared ideological doctrine of state and with political strategy promoting this doctrine. As far as the bosses themselves are concerned, they are relying in particular on the doctrine, which has been designed for a very limited circle of initiated persons and thus better corresponds to the world's reality. However it could not being articulated in the society in its true dimension without provoking meaningless riot against their dominance or – what is even more dangerous for the bosses – without generating sensible freedom-loving actions of those whose future choice is humaneness.
If the latter is the case, then the concealed political doctrine and the doctrines declared with the purpose to "reason" the crowd in general and its substratum (parts) are inevitably contradicting each other in some of their aspects. But the crowd and its substratum are being self-managed on the basis of collective consciousness and unconsciousness generated by its individual members, and thus in those aspects of social life, where the activity of structures initiated into the real doctrine is inadequate, these structures are loosing their competence. Meanwhile, the foundations of society’s established structure are undermined by phenomena which are gaining strength, along with the crowd falling out of ruling exercised by the hierarchy of structures of mutual deception – whether big or small – whose chiefs are persons initiated in true villainy.
Such processes of loosing the ability to rule may develop in reticence and than suddenly become obvious in particular circumstances, when the crowd, inspired by its collective consciousness or unconsciousness, demonstrates unexpected behaviour”.
The final phrase of the fragment of review, printed in thick type: “Objectively, such was the internal mechanism of state collapse in the USSR, the same mechanism exists as well in the USA, and it is "working" already...” – made my future plans more definite. Now I knew exactly, what I should do! In recent ten years I, as well as the majority of common people in Western countries, was little interested in Russian affairs. In many respects it can be explained by tendentious approach of our mass media to coverage of even domestic events, to say nothing of its “potential” enemies, among which undoubtedly remained Russia. Occupied with chess reviewing, I was interested a little in global politics, and about Russian events knew only those facts, which I could meet in news reports on CNN or BBC when zapping sometimes. Thus I stood before the choice for the second time: to seek for materials about Russia in serious libraries, and for doing this I needed time and again good knowledge of Russian language, or… to wait for the call of Hopkins. Wednesday morning at last the telephone rang:
Hello, Watson. Let’s meet tomorrow at seven p.m. in the bar of hotel “Woldorf”. They serve fine coffee by French recipe there. I will have the man you need with me, Russian émigré Eugene Galba.
Evening. October 4. Hotel “Woldorf” and “Flight 1812”
Having finished my work, I put my way to the hotel “Woldorf” on the corner of Oldwich and Kingsway Street. Hopkins and his acquaintance sat by the table near the window to Kingsway Street and were discussing something with great animation. My friend introduced me to a short man, a little bit bald, with abnormally yellowish face and bulging eyes almost without eyelashes. He wore a tweed jacket of grey-green colour, and blue shirt without tie. He belonged to the type of people, which can’t make to stop your look at in a crowd or, all the more, to remember them.
Call me Eugene, – Galba held out his flabby and moist palm of the hand to me. – What exactly about Russia represents interest to you?
How long ago have you left Russia, Eugene?
Soon after the events of October of 1993.
And can you tell me about those events? I’ve never heard anything of it.
Many people, including myself, still can’t understand the underlying cause of them, and I’m not surprised at all, that the most part of Englishmen knows nothing dealing with it. Your government considered in August of 1991 and October of 1993 that democracy has won in Russia, didn’t it?
I know that in August of 1991 the great empire has finished up its existence.
USSR, as a great power, ceased in December of 1991, but in effect you’re right: the events of August 1991 determined the further fate of Soviet Empire.
Excuse me, Eugene, can’t you describe more thoroughly what was happening in Russia in August of 1991. Our press covered these events such way, that they seemed at the same time tragic – emotionally – and exaggerated grotesque – mentally. And then, two weeks later, as it usually happen, everyone forgot about it. Don’t you think that common people usually can’t keep in their minds the events beyond two-weeks-ago? Even terrorist acts in Manhattan that had stricken the whole world on the September 11 began to be covered by clichés like “black Tuesday” two weeks later, though demand for “antidepressants” has risen abruptly. And when ten years will pass, many people will mix up the “black Tuesday” of 1929[30] and “black Tuesday” of 2001.
Don’t worry, Mr. Watson, the matter with long-lasting memory is not better in Russia, but however I’m ready to tell you about tragic events of August 1991.
How long did they last?
According to the official version – four days, but in fact – five.
Why so different?
You may remember, Watson… excuse me – Mr. Watson.
Please, call me just Watson.
So, Watson, the majority of people learnt about GKChP from TV on August 19. And for the most of people it was like bolt from the blue.
Like “boom”, – I corrected him significantly, remembering the tile of the film on backside of the “Historical Picnic”, – and what does the abbreviation GKChP mean?
Well, if that’s better for you, let it be “boom”. And GKChP in Russian is – State Committee of Emergency State. Well, of course, you understand that it can’t be created in the morning of August 19. They has been preparing beforehand, and perhaps, secretly, but appeared not on the 19th, but on 18th, when those crazy GKChP members left for Foros in Crimea to make arrangements with Gorby – so, probably, you here on the West still tenderly call this camel.
Why camel?
Because he’s “Gorby” for you, but for us he is merely camel, loaded with your nonsense about all-human values. Sorry, Watson, may be, I touched inappropriately your political passions?
Please, Eugene, go on. And don’t worry about my political passions, for I myself have just begun to understand them. And why did you call those members “crazy”?
Ah, because even those, who arrived to Foros on the 18th to try to persuade Gorby to commit the emergency state, couldn’t agree with each other. And when, on the 19th, they appeared on TV screens to the music of Tchaikovsky with their good intentions, which, as usual, cover the road to the hell, it was written in their faces and even in the hands of their leader – Janayev.
What does it mean – “written in hands”?
Well, his hands were trembling, and camera showed several times close-up of his hands, as luck would have it. It can be said that those eight crazy people, or may be playing the role according to the script written in advance, for non-thinking crowd staring on TV screens, sat their enemy – Eltsin – on the tank near White House on the 20th.
Russian President? But didn’t they see that he was their enemy?
Who knows, he might be at one with them: it might be just show. And to say about the excited crowd on the square before the White House, where Russian government had a place, for them Eltsin was undoubtedly an “invisible enemy”, whom they mistook for a saviour. The crowd understood that he really was an enemy, when in two years economy became unsteady to the declarations of the success of reforms and the same crowd was lead to the same square near White House and directly pointed to the enemy. I think that even on August 20 this drunkard pretending to be a Thunderer knew that he would throw away to the sewage all the stories of your Gorby. That’s why Eltsin has climbed on the tank, like Lenin in the April of 1917 on the armoured car, exciting the crowd by slogans defending USSR President. I still feel nauseous of all this “circus shapito[31]”, carrying out the clown-theatre to the Moscow streets: the troops, tanks in the streets of our capital, the curfew announced in Moscow on the 21st of August, the rumours about the storm of White House were spread… “Революционн-н-эры хреновы” – he shouted the last phrase in Russian.
How did you say? Repeat please, – I asked having heard the familiar word from the third “picnic”.
It’s for mostly for me. “Революционн-н-эры хреновы” – it means “bad, grotty, good-for-nothing revolutionists”: both those who planned that “putsch” and those who opposed it. Have you ever seen such “putschists” and “revolutionists”? All that the last head of KGB needed was to appoint the skin diver to look after Gorby and then give him an order to pull down the legs of this camel and hold him under the water for some minutes, while he would be swimming in the Black Sea on the special dacha in Foros. Then they would validate the official report, and Janajev, for example, on August 19, with his sorrowful mug, would inform the whole world that “great misfortune befell the Soviet people” and that the funeral of “untimely perished” General Secretary would take place on the Red Square, and then USSR could still exist, carrying out the reforms in some other ways.
Was I right, Eugene, – I threw the test retort, – or it seemed to me, that you have called this putsch the “circus Shapiro”?
No, Watson, you got mistaken in Russian idiom, – Galba smiled leniently. – Any Shapiro has nothing to do with it. You know, “shapito” is a large tarpaulin tent, and under it there’s usually circus arena and stands for spectators. There were plenty of such circuses in Russia before, they lead a nomadic life, and a standard of professionalism in some of them was ridiculously low. And it became a custom in Russia, when people want to laugh at some failed official measure they call it sometimes “circus shapito”.
What about revolutionists, – he continued his thought, interrupted by my question about the circus, – everything is conditional in our time: if you have won and have thrown out the ruling regime, and the international public is favourable to you, you will be called a “revolutionist”, but if your hands were trembling, and you were frightened to the extreme, or the world public is not in sympathy with you, you are doomed to become a “putschist”. In other words one should distinguish, from which positions the assessment of historical event is made. Thus, for example the events of October, 1917 in Russia for the West are just some “Bolshevik’s tricks”, which made a totalitarian state out of empire. As a result a great problem for the West appeared, and lasted 72 years, in total accordance with the prediction of Nostradamus about the fate of what now is known as USSR. However for those who had overthrown the demoralized monarchy in Russia, the same events are – The Great October Revolution. Another example from the history of your state: in the middle of XVII century Cromwell, supported by Parliament, chopped off the head of your king and declared Republic – it’s revolution; but if the king would has coped with Parliament and chopped off Cromwell’s head, the same event will be most likely called putsch of aristocracy by the same bourgeois historicists.
There was a long pause. Galba looked somewhere aside, drinking his coffee in small gulps as if he was restoring in his memory what he has gone through.
It can be said, – he continued his story, – that “curfew” was the last act of GKChP. It was clear already, that the “putschists” have sold themselves to future “tsar Boris”. But it’s not such people who make history! – Eugene suddenly raised his voice passionately and began to speak with abrupt phrases, as if he was replaced by someone else: “The real struggle with bourgeois democracy is in future still! You’ll do nothing with Russia. New mothers, and not only in Russia, will bring up new “Pauls”, ready to give their lives for people’s happiness.”
