Posted 20 июля 2020,, 09:32

Published 20 июля 2020,, 09:32

Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Alaska is ours! Why the TV was displeasured by American Aleuts

Alaska is ours! Why the TV was displeasured by American Aleuts

20 июля 2020, 09:32
Telepropagandists were outraged by the decision of the council of the American city of Sitka to move the monument to the Russian colonialist of Alaska Alexander Baranov from the city center to the museum.

The political television week was not very funny, it consisted mostly of the old problems. The only thing that stood out against that backdrop was that the "monuments' fall" in America, which was still only made fun of in Russia, has reached the conditionally “Russian” monuments. And then there was no laughing matter. A noble fury boiled over. Moreover, Russia refused to annex Donbass for the reason that it is a pity for the rest of the Russian-speaking, you will not leave them to their fate.

Sergey Mitrofanov

In the Czech Republic, you see, Konev was dismantled, and in Alaska - Baranov! Absolutely insolent foreigners.

Indeed, on July 14, 2020, the Sitka Council adopted a resolution, which is insulting to Russia, on the transfer of the monument to Alexander Baranov from the city center to the museum. The regret was expressed by the director of the Russian cultural center in Alaska, Anna Vernaya (*I love Russian patriots abroad. - S.M.), and the US ambassador, on behalf of the authorities of Arkhangelsk, Irkutsk and Magadan, - apparently, there was free currency, - expressed desire to redeem the Alaskan monument. To which the Alaskans, however, did not agree, since their goal was not to destroy the monument or get rid of it, but to find a more suitable place for it.

The problem, however, is that, while protecting the memory of Baranov, we especially never remembered anything about him, since in Soviet times, tsarist officials and merchants who were looking for something outside their homeland were not honored. If you remembered, then, it seems, only Rezanov, and even then only thanks to the anti-Soviet rock opera "Juno and Avos", moreover, that Rezanov had no goal of colonizing something, but only to marry the Californian Conchita, i.e. to fade.

On the other hand, the native Alaskans were also always surprised that they had a monument to a foreign colonizer in the center of the city, because Baranov did not come to them there with gifts and a humanitarian mission, but to enrich his government, and he probably also earned money. And besides, he had complicated relations with the locals, called the "Russian-Tlingit war".

To put it simply, the locals always believed that they did not invite Baranov, who had come in large numbers, here, and he had no right to give his names of their area and take something for himself for his sweet soul.

In 1986, the nose was beaten off at the monument to Baranov, and today, when a wave of self-awareness rose among minorities and “Aleuts also matter”, Alaskans have a legal opportunity to transfer the monument to Baranov from the category of revered artifacts to the category of historical and cognitive ones. Which they gladly did.

The TV outraged it, and especially the deputy chairman of the Just Russia faction O. Nilov exuded sarcasm. “Let us then, in revenge, declare Columbus a colonizer!” He fired. What can I say to this? Indeed, for empires, all these historical characters are “explorers and travelers”, and for Indians and Aleuts, colonizers and looters. The problem was compounded by the fact that in the West today it is fashionable to respect different opinions and points of view, especially of indigenous peoples.

Ukraine refused the Minsk agreements, and Russia - from the annexation of Donbass

It is hardly surprising that the topic of the colonization of Alaska and the construction of the Russian world among the Aleuts smoothly flowed into the situation of the Russian Sitka in the Donbass.

And the situation there is such that in Kiev they announced the holding of local elections, but Donbass was not included in the list of subjects where elections are held. For obvious reasons, this is not a territory controlled by Kiev.

In Russia, the political class was offended and stood in the rack. The Kremlin announced the exhaustion of the chances for peace on this matter. Apparently, for some reason not clearly articulated, everyone in the Donbass and in Russia really wanted to fulfill the decree from Kiev, and they considered the absence of such a decree to break the sacred Minsk agreements.

By the way, it would be interesting to see if everything happened "according to plan" not by the night of the commemorated Steinmeier. Then, in the Donbass, they would also hold elections supposedly according to Ukrainian laws, of course, they would choose their own, “real Zaputinians,” but then they would have to surrender border protection to Ukraine and disarm. For some reason it seems that this option is the perfect game. So in Kiev, they also thought so.

Now, however, it is curious what will happen next, if the parties have fixed the "gap".

In this case, TV has a "Borodai plan" in store, which, as it turns out, is not simple, but very simple. Since Ukraine doesn’t need the Donbass, - says Boroday, - Russia is integrating Donbass for itself, all the more so since 30,000 Russian passports have already been handed out in the Donbass and “500,000 approved” (O. Skabeeva). At the same time, the war ends at one point (Y. Popov), because the Ukrainians are not Aleuts, and they will not fight with Russia.

In general, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, as it were, then ends to everyone's delight. Everyone is dancing and singing. But then it turns out that for some reason this option is not good for Russia either. And why not good, explain in this studio, and in others. Y. Popov, for example, simply does not believe that it will be so. In the West, there is still talk of adherence to the Minsk agreements, whatever that means. In Ukraine, too (“you simply deceived Steinmeier, and you need to read these agreements differently”). Boroday admits that not everyone wants to integrate with him. Sands threatens Ukraine - so, in any case, one can understand - a big war if Ukraine forgets about Donbass. (*And earlier he said that Russia is not a party to the conflict). In general, what do they want then?

And they want, neither more nor less, so that Donbass does not leave Ukraine and sailed to its native harbor together with compatriots who will have to be fed and watered, and so that Donbass would annex Ukraine for itself.

This is said both with sarcasm, and in all seriousness. Joining the Donbass - this will also mean that we left Ukraine, says the majority of television propagandists and, in particular, the “spy” from Israel, Yakov Kedmi. And this is not humanly, not fraternal. Therefore, we will push Donbass back into Ukraine back and forth, no matter what the cost of sacrifices.

In general, the Aleuts apparently assumed something similar with respect to the representative of tsarism Baranov, therefore they resisted, and in the end, I suppose, they saved America. Otherwise it would have been attached to the Novoarkhangelsk fort (the former name of the current Sitka). It's time to erect a monument to the Unknown Aleut in the center of Sitka.