Posted 20 августа 2020,, 08:54

Published 20 августа 2020,, 08:54

Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Either for or against... TV wonders what to do with Belarus

Either for or against... TV wonders what to do with Belarus

20 августа 2020, 08:54
Television propagandists do not really understand whether they should take the side of Lukashenko or the Belarusian people.

Although in the very intention that Russia is obliged to do something with the neighboring state and its citizens, there is something not entirely normal. Nevertheless, the plans of the talking heads range from “come in and fix everything,” to “prepare the pro-Russian replacement of Lukashenko”, who will fix everything on the spot, but as if without outside help.

Sergey Mitrofanov

The iconic talking head is directed by Karen Shakhnazarov. He is considered a great philosopher of Russian TV. But in fact, no one smarter than Shakhnazarov can put on TV, so let's listen to his advice, which in the current situation can be regarded as "humanistic" and "relatively liberal".

According to Shakhnazarov, Russia should not save Lukashenko in order not to become an enemy of the Belarusian people. Very valuable, if you think about a remark from the coolest philosopher, which means neither more nor less that Lukashenko is an enemy of the Belarusian people. Obviously, with this thought, Shakhnazarov went to bed after “Sunday evening with Vl. Solovyov", fell in love with her and woke up on the program "60 minutes".

Yes, but what can you do if you don't save Lukashenko?

Prepare a pro-Russian candidate who will intercept the agenda in the imminent next elections and complete the integration of the Slavic brotherhood.

Is it reasonable? Reasonable!

- We are puppeteers, what eh, what? - the presenter E. Popov says thoughtfully, being able to sometimes blurt out something like that.

However, by doing so, the TV simply expressed doubts about the rationality of the "reasonable approach" rather than the "unreasonable", i.e. stupidly crush the opposition with the enemy of the people, "Lukashenka".

Skabeeva also found holes in the "liberal" reflections of Shakhnazarova. "Where do we get the pro-Russian candidate?" "What if the pro-Russian candidate does not win the elections?" "Can you risk it like that?"

You can't!

On the contrary, anti-liberal radicals are more popular with TV. One of them is Spiridon Kilinkorov from Ukraine. He has a theory. He urges the workers of Belarus to stick to Lukashenko, because otherwise it will be like in Ukraine.

Liberals will come and privatize everything. The industrial complex, which is supposedly worth billions, will be taken by the West. He will give 50 lemons to the directors (they allegedly bring their workers out to protest), and then they will close all enterprises.

E. Popov (with sympathy): "We will hold loans-for-shares auctions."

One might think that the only way for Belarus is state socialism. Or maybe this is the only way for all of us? - here the TV should be more specific. But the idea that the directors are traitors is promising.

Our friend and former colleague I. Korotchenko is clearer and more definite in his convictions. What he says represents a coherent concept that might well be called the Korotchenko Plan.

So, Lukashenko should be left, and the opposition should be crushed. Moreover, with the help of the military forces of the CSTO, which are used only in case of foreign intervention. And it is - this is interference. The escaped Tikhanovskaya says from Latvia - why not interference? And it is obvious to everyone that the election results are established in Washington (* Kilinkorov). To create an opposition council is definitely an intervention. And also Lukashenko himself announced to the workers that NATO tanks clang at the borders, although it is not clear what did not suit him here?

Maybe the fact that they clang after 23 hours and do not give sleep? You go to bed, and they clang, clang ... In general, we are waiting for the CSTO.

But we only need to help Lukashenko, Korotchenko continues, if he promises to give the green light to Russian business, to pro-Russian forces. (Note from ourselves that this is a very interesting turn of thought.)

Korotchenko believes that one person in Belarus (“Belarus is me”) really has the right to give this or that light. I wanted it - I gave it green, to Russian business, Russian investors. Wanted - red, West, anti-Lukashenko opposition. I wanted yellow - to the narrow-minded Wagnerians. But there is one small flaw in this "Korotchenko Plan". After all, if state socialism is left along with Lukashenko, then what kind of Russian investors will go into it with capital? You can't call Russian investors a fool. And what kind of capitals are there under socialism? There is a problem, citizen boss!

Most likely, according to the "Korotchenko plan", exactly what Kilinkorov fears will turn out. The Russian "investors" will come to the green light, give 50 million to the directors for their pocket, take everything away, let socialism go sideways, and then break the Belarusian industry with the help of loans-for-shares auctions. Moreover, the technology has been worked out, and in Russia everyone did just that.

Criticism of the opposition's postulates is a separate line on TV.

Let's take the death of the Belarusian hero Alexander Taraikovsky. First, the TV talked about the self-detonation of the insurgent and the "absolutely disgusting laying of flowers" by foreign ambassadors at the place of his death. Now the concept has changed. Judging by the video, the unarmed Taraikovsky was still killed, and he is not an insurgent, but a really peaceful protester. But who killed? What if the opposition itself killed, sir, in order to create a sacred victim? Of course, the TV does not assert anything, but it has the right to assume. Let us agree that "it is a dark matter."

However, even from the frames provided by the TV itself (there are other frames where it is clearly visible that riot police are shooting), a strange picture emerges. Here is the street. Here comes Taraikovsky with his hands up. Here in 10-15 meters from him there is a riot police. Taraikovsky is mortally wounded and falls. What do we expect from the composition (“Ale, director Shakhnazarov?”), What will happen next?

For example: here you are in the yard and your counterpart falls, bleeding. Probably, you will bend down and try to determine where you were shooting from. Then hurry to help. But what is the Belarusian OMON doing? Nothing! He is completely calm, does not bend down, does not rush to help, but slowly moves past, putting his hands on the weapon. Fell and fell, some corpse on the road, who needs it? This is how the SS men were shown in war films. What conclusion can be drawn from this? Only one - that they were shooting. (*This is my value judgment).

But TV exposes another victim of the riot police, a girl with red hair, Vasilisa Golikova. They detained her, beat her, insulted her, took her pants off, threatened to let her go around ... But she is the very coordinator of the protests for Soros's money. Of course, they got a little excited with her, if everything is true what she says, but she asked for it herself. And as proof, the TV cites the wiretapping of the Belarusian state security, according to which a similar voice “with a hoarseness” gives instructions on how to kill the riot police. What is not parity? However, he draws attention to the fact that the voice on the phone gives instructions in spoken language, but as if from a sheet, reading. Is it possible? I think no. Isn't this the same case of endless state propaganda? (*My value judgment)

We continue to observe Belarus.