The Russian branch of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace took the form of the Carnegie Moscow Center and penetrated into Russia at the height of its systemic crisis under Yeltsin - in 1993, when the Supreme Soviet was shot from tanks, having secured the consent of the "civilized world" and the "international community."
At the beginning of the twentieth century, American capital has already become global, having gone out in its unquenchable expansion beyond the national borders of the United States, where it collided with British, German and French capital. This process was well described by V. I. Lenin in his work "Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism".
It was then that in the United States, the "sharks of capitalism" took care of creating think tanks offering theories for expansion, understood as a well-formed total intervention, from the export of ideas to the formation of the ruling class, political systems and social institutions in other countries.
So, in 1910, the so-called Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was created in the United States. Since then, all the American funds created to finance the intellectual support of the banal US intervention in all countries rich in resources they need have been called all kinds of "funds for all good and against all bad."
Andrew Carnegie, multimillionaire, founder of the Foundation.
The think tanks of the United States have become an important part of the network - a strategy of network wars for the export of the liberal revolution, understood as the formation of American puppet regimes in all countries of the world with a powerful multi-level system of brainwashing the elites and the population with the American value system.
The Russian branch of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace took the form of the Carnegie Moscow Center and penetrated into Russia at the height of its systemic crisis under Yeltsin - in 1993, when the Supreme Soviet was shot from tanks, having secured the consent of the "civilized world" and the "international community."
Promotional video:
The purpose of the foundation and the Moscow Center is to conduct independent research in the field of international relations (the most interesting here is the word "independent"). I wonder if an independent study is written in a style critical of US imperialism, it has a chance to see the light of day, and the work of an analyst will be paid? The question, of course, is naive, but the word "independent" is an obligatory PR attribute of all Western NGOs created for propaganda under the guise of research.
The New Vision division of the Carnegie Endowment was created in 2007, announced as the world's first international and, in the future, a global think tank. Both the New Vision and the Carnegie Moscow Center directly recruit agents of influence in each country by sending test lists of 30-40 questions to candidates. By the nature of the responses, they determine the degree of suitability of the candidate, who must send information to Washington every week about those areas where he is competent.
Carnegie Endowment. Washington.
The sponsors of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace include American and European private foundations, TNCs such as Chevron, BP - North America, General Motors, the Ford, Soros, Rockefeller foundations, the US State Department, the French Foreign Ministry, the US Department of Defense and the US Department of Energy, National Intelligence Committee, UK Department for International Development, and many others.
Such is the "roof" of the Carnegie Moscow Endowment, such is their "independent" analyst. If they want peace, then all is desirable.
And this same Moscow Carnegie Endowment has recently released one of its many products: the report "Five Putin's Elites Against the Background of Transit". As it turned out, this is a rather boring read, containing no new information. Considerably inferior in cognitive texture to the same report by E. Minchenko on "Politburo 2.0".
But along with this, it is quite clear that the report has a very clear goal: to speak out negatively about the "siloviki" and "guardians", calling them "conservatives", and to make numerous hints and advances to the "technocrats", which are named in a series of words such as "Liberalism", "modern" and "progress".
First of all, the thesis "conservatives" is controversial. For those who are so named by the author are not fighting for conservation and not for regression, but for progress, only they understand it differently - as the elimination of the influence of the West. But the author cannot say instead of “conservatives” the word “anti-Westerners” or even patriots: such a position is too popular in Russia, and this will no longer be denigrating opponents, but praise and advertising.
The reason for such selections is simple: the siloviki are ideological people, and over the past five years they have significantly strengthened their positions in the state, and the technocrats, the "tabula race," are a blank board on which you can write whatever you want. Yes, they are not Westernizers, they have no ideas (the so-called "empty vessel" where you can pour something), but they are potentially closer to the West than ideological security officials and guardians. And thus it is a suitable field for work.
The target audience of the Carnegie Moscow Center is Russian experts and elites. They are the ones who will read this boring message to the end in the hope of finding there something useful for themselves. Perhaps they will be imbued with some ideas after reading emotional theses, lined up in a certain sequence of semantic rows. The discussion will continue - someone will answer and thereby prevent the “spiral of silence” around this product. And the answers have already been sent. Thus, the purpose of the article has been partially achieved.
The priests' smacking begins with the use of a very controversial classification: the headline "Five Putin's Elites" is a journalistic provocation to attract attention, not a serious sociological group. First of all, because it contains overlapping criteria: "Putin's retinue" (in fact, the management apparatus engaged in organizing his work and security) contains the criteria of the group "friends and associates", or rather, its subgroups - "state managers" and "political technocrats" …
William Joseph Burns, President of the Carnegie Endowment, Former US Ambassador to Russia.
The group of “friends and associates of Putin” is divided into three subgroups: “state oligarchs”, “state managers” and “private business” and have common characteristics. Many of the "state managers" end up in "Putin's retinue," in the sense that the author implies in this word.
Technocratic performers overlap with government managers. And Medvedev and Kozak, referred to the group of state managers, are fully consistent with the concept of "retinue", because they are part of Putin's inner circle, and Medvedev still falls into the category of "friends and associates."
In a word, in the classification of groups such exaggerations and such blatant subjectivity are allowed that this makes the classification not a scientific value, but a journalistic technique, when the answer is adjusted to the task, that is, they write an open order. Thus, transferring material from the sphere of independent and objective research into the sphere of banal propaganda.
But the culmination by all the rules is in the third quarter of the material - there are the "guardians" - the main "culprits" of the report's appearance. These are Patrushev, Naryshkin, Bastrykin, Zolotov, Bortnikov, Prigozhin, the Kovalchuk brothers. Shoigu and Lavrov are not included here, for some reason they were placed in the group of "state managers", although Shoigu is definitely a "guardian" - and even may well be referred to the group "retinue" due to the president's trust in him.
Compromise and defamation of "siloviks" and "guardians" in general is devoted to the entire super task of the article. This is what should settle in the subconscious. But for a safety net, to influence the most slow-witted, but susceptible, these theses are also spoken out directly, a suggestive apparatus is used. The heading "Transit and the Great Elite Split" is highlighted in huge letters.
The trick here is that you don't understand, are these terms opposed or mutually related? Is “I” in this case a dividing union or a connecting union? The subconscious mind reads this as a union, and this is already an NLP technique, a pure manipulation of the audience's subconscious mind. Here is what the author writes in the final part:
Dmitry Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center since 2008.
Let's leave the controversy of this statement aside - the conflict between the conventional "Slavophiles" and "Westernizers" in the Russian elite regarding the degree of the country's sovereignty has always existed in a vivid form. Let's turn to the text. Change the word "Putin" for the word "Trump" in this passage - and you will get a full description of the conflict of elites in the United States, where presidents were sometimes even shot.
This is much more applicable to the United States than trying to tie this thesis to Russia. Is it okay that this should be the main topic for domestic American research? But the task has been received in Russia, and it must be fulfilled … People are fighting for peace throughout the world, no less.
"Disunity and fragmentation lead to the fact that there are practically no coalitions in the elite, and each player acts on the basis of his own corporate or political priorities."
Here, the author, in addition to the same controversy of the thesis, does not have commas, and therefore it is not clear whether this is a typo, or is he what he wanted to say? After all, one's own and corporate priorities are different things that may not coincide, and political priorities can be both one's own and corporate. How can you lump it all together?
But as we can see, the main task of the article is not to look for meanings. And in whipping up mutual suspicion of the key forces of political transformations in Russia, which are not going in a direction favorable to the United States. And thereby strive to stop them and turn them in the right direction for the United States. Banal “divide and conquer”.
It is unpleasant, of course, that some Russian journalists are working for the interests of the United States, which is understandable, as well as entire "analytical" centers, take the same "Russia in global politics", which is actively promoting this propaganda and anti-Russian writings of the Carnegie Center to the expert masses …
Apparently, it is true that the ratio of traitors to normal in every society has remained constant for two thousand years: every twelfth. But the remaining eleven understand everything and put it in their place, because thirty pieces of silver are not included in the circle of their main life values.
Author: Alexander Khaldei