How shift in global political configuration relates to Putin’s New Year’s address?
„Question-Answer“ of 02.01.2023
Presenter: Let’s move on to the next question. Valeriy Viktorovich, what does Medvedev’s recent visit to Beijing on December 21, 2022, and his meeting with Xi Jinping, which lasted an hour and a half and, as some claim, took place under the flags of the PRC and the USSR, mean?
Valeriy Pyakin: Those who state that are completely ignorant of state symbols and symbols in general, which, by the way, is the subject of our book “State Symbols and State Sovereignty.”
The flag of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party), which also contains the hammer and the sickle, fundamentally differs from the flag of the Soviet Union. It differs not only in the set of symbols (for example, the CCP flag has no star), but also in the meaning of those symbols. The appearance and function of the sickle on the Soviet Union’s flag look very different from the CCP’s flag. Also, the hammer looks different. That is, the whole design of the sketch seems to use one-type symbols; no, these symbols are different; they can be depicted differently, just as, for example, the stars on the flags of different states are depicted differently, as, for example, on the flag of the Soviet Union and on the flag of the United States, which have different stars; everyone understands this very well. In this situation as well, the use of the same symbols does not mean that they are identical or that they are even in the same design. Absolutely not; they are fundamentally different. I repeat, it is enough to have a look on the internet at the CCP’s flag and the Soviet Union’s one and spot the differences… I repeat, even if we do not take into account the star, which is absent on the CCP’s flag but present on the Soviet Union’s one, the sickle and the hammer are fundamentally different: their positions and their images fundamentally differ, just as does the sketch itself in general.
So here’s the thing about Medvedev and his completely unexpected visit to China. Apparently, Dmitry Anatolyevich learned about it exactly at the moment when he was told, “There’s the plane; get on it and fly to China.” Because there is no other option in this regard.
But what happened on December 21, when Medvedev’s visit to China took place? We have to step back to this date, even though it should have already been addressed two weeks ago. The event happened on December 21, though we are discussing it only now, in the new year. But why? Because it is a very important event. It corresponds directly with Putin’s New Year’s address to the Russian citizens, to the Russian people. So on December 21, Zelensky paid a visit to Washington. And for some reason, this visit was fundamentally important in terms of approving a $1.7 trillion budget for the United States. You might wonder how a rogue, junkie like Zelensky could have anything to do with the approval of the United States’ budget? Though the connection is very straightforward.
In fact, the world is currently divided by the United States on the basis of an anti-Russian consensus. They are bringing other countries into submission based on an anti-Russian consensus. The symbols of this anti-Russian consensus are Ukraine and Zelensky personally.
What’s the point here? When the Soviet Union, led by Gorbachev, made up its budget based on the price of oil at $11, while the price was lowered to $7 per barrel of oil, it instantly had a negative impact on the abundance of the store counters, the comfort of life, and indeed the economic life of the whole country in all its aspects. With the amount of currency received at a price of $11, it would have been possible to ensure the product’s saturation and the functioning of the economy based on cooperation with other countries by receiving goods from them against those dollars. At $7 for the same volume of oil, much less currency was obtained, and, accordingly, there were economic problems across the spectrum.
What is my point? The American economy is resourcefully poor. American prosperity is based on extracting resources from all over the world. And as long as the United States was the “boss” of the world, extracting those resources from the rest of the world was not very difficult. No one could challenge the United States; they would be immediately rolled out. Accordingly, when the U.S. budget is drawn up, it is based on how many resources they can get from certain countries. But these resources can only come from one or another country within a specific political condition, within a specific political configuration in the world. Based on its support for Ukraine and the anti-Russian consensus, the United States, in general, manages to ensure its resource stability at the expense of robbing its former allies. They are robbing even their former allies, not to mention that they are robbing everyone who comes into their way.
Download PDF to read the full article…
Foundation for Conceptual Technologies