Original
Translated by John Delacour / Edited by @GBabeuf
Alchevsk, 9th April, 2015
An interview with the well-known Donbass Militia field commander, Aleksey Mozgovoy, commander of the Prizrak Brigade, now part of the People’s Militia of the self-proclaimed People’s Republic of Lugansk. Notwithstanding his official position, today he is, probably, one of the leading critics of the LPR leadership.
Orhan Dzhemal: I am very interested in the political situation in the LPR, because the war continues, but there is much talk of the post-war reconstruction of the state. As far as I understand, it is in the Lugansk Republic that the complexity of this process is demonstrated most clearly.
Aleksey Mozgovoy: It’s too early yet to talk of post-war reconstruction. The fact that there is a cease-fire does not mean that there is peace. Almost all our attention is still focused on the front line.
OD: It seems that many of the recent heroes of the LPR, well-known field commanders, have had difficulties with the authorities of the Republic.
AM: They do not have difficulties with the leadership itself, but with the policy pursued by the leadership.
OD: And what is that policy?
AM: Well, let’s say that it does not answer to the demands that the people put forward in March and April of last year. Everybody then declared loud and clear that the most important thing was the welfare of the people. But what do we see in fact? All that remains of the people is the ‘P’ in the title LPR.
In my opinion, if we are to build something new, and even more so if we are to build, let us say, a part of new Russia, of New Rus, of Novorossiya, then we simply must get away from all previous methods of government, all previous ways of relating to the people, and create something new. First of all, in my view, there should be total transparency in all matters from the start. Transparency and clarity for every citizen. If an official takes a step, it should be clear why he took it. If a decision is made, even if it is not discussed with the people, at least it should be arrived at in a transparent manner. To be clear—does it serve the interests of the people or just the interests of the bureaucrats?
OD: What is happening in fact?
AM: In fact, we have reverted to our old ways. Corruption is rampant. The use of administrative resources by the head of the Republic is the same as it was with the governor of the previous Lugansk region. The television and the press operate only to display how much we love our leader. Just like before.
OD: Are there problems between your military unit and the command?
AM: At the beginning they tried to disband us. Here is what they told us: “We will integrate you into the LPR Army, but only as an addition to units already formed.” That is, their object was to disperse us, and merge us into existing units so that we ceased to exist.
OD: But will you now be integrated in the emerging structure?
AM: We are integrated. We exist as a brigade. We obey the supreme commander of the LPR troops. But I want to say something about the total blockade of the humanitarian aid which our subdivision was receiving. With this, we provided food for the local population; we had four canteens, where people came to eat: from mines, from factories, from small villages, kindergartens, schools. We shared all this aid with the civilian population. All this is also blocked.
OD: What do you mean “blocked”?
AM: It is now impossible to bring in humanitarian aid.
OD: But the aid was collected in Russia, loaded up, and delivered to you. Where have obstacles arisen?
AM: Everywhere. Including with the Russian Federation customs. You probably heard about the last load. In Yekaterinburg, a complete unit of volunteers collected and brought with them a cargo of humanitarian aid, including for the civilian population. They brought with them their belongings, brought food, medicines and equipment for hospitals. The cargo was turned back at customs because it exceeded the maximum permitted tonnage. Five tons were stopped at the border. How can you impose a weight restriction on humanitarian aid, if it is humanitarian? Basically, cutting us off from supplies makes us dependent. This is one of the control mechanisms.
OD: Is there a central supply of humanitarian aid? Does anything get to you from that?
AM: Each time that we see in the media how pompously the convoys arrive, but not once have I seen how this aid is distributed. Why are the same cameras not recording the distribution of this aid in remote villages?
OD: And does it ever reach these remote villages?
AM: I do not know. I am not going to speculate. We were recently in the town of Frunze talking with this grandfather who had worked for forty years on the railway. He has received nothing for nine months.
OD: Do you attribute this to bureaucratic disorganization or simply to corruption?
AM: War is such an interesting thing: some die, others reap huge profits. Humanitarian aid—this is one of the sources of such income. The more there is, the more there is to steal.
OD: Do you know who has harnessed these streams and who is profiteering from them?
AM: There has been no investigation, therefore there is nothing I can prove. Without being able to prove who is guilty, my accusations would be just rumours and gossip. But, even though I cannot name specific names, the responsibility must be borne by the administration of our leader and the government.
OD: What formula would you propose for the distribution of humanitarian aid?
AM: The way we did it from the beginning—targeting the aid. A children’s hospital or some other institution would provide us with a list of what they needed. We passed on the list to the humanitarian organisations, they sent what was on the list, and we delivered the cargo—it was filmed—to those who needed it.
OD: Do you want private organisations to work directly with you?
AM: I do not want anything, and I am certainly making no demands. I simply see the difference between the deliveries made by the state, which in fact no one controls, and those made by private providers, who do not allow their cargo to vanish into thin air .
OD: There are many large enterprises in this territory. Are you a supporter of nationalisation?
AM: Nationalisation should not be undertaken lightly. Look, most of the shares in the Alchevsk metallurgical plant are currently owned by one of the Moscow banks, the rest by people from Dnepropetrovsk, not just Kolomoisky. But now you cannot touch the factory now, because it is linked to Europe. If we act hastily, the factory will be left without a market for its products. To regain the same position in the market would be very difficult. And 15,000 people work there. Some people wanted to proceed [with nationalization ‒ed.], but we explained to them that it was not possible to do so. You can nationalize, but who is going to need it if there is no external market? We need to tread very carefully.
OD: The Verkhovna Rada has adopted a law on the occupied territories. Your attitude to this law?
AM: To be honest, I have not even examined it. I can not take seriously any documents adopted by the Rada and the government in Kiev.
OD: Can you avoid a situation whereby elections here will be held according to Ukrainian laws?
AM: At the moment we live under the old Ukrainian laws. Nothing has changed, therefore nothing would surprise me. Many former employees and police officers have returned to their positions without any verification. I understand that we need experts, but accepting thus everyone who yesterday served in Severodonetsk (where the regional administration is now based ‒auth.) and today works for us…
OD: Do you accept such people with you in Alchevsk?
AM: Yes, we do not interfere in this matter, we are a military unit. I have always said that civilian life should be managed by someone in civilian clothes.
OD: Do they get into senior positions?
AM: Well, if you are talking of military posts, many who once wore a sergeant’s uniform are now colonels.
OD: Are elections going to be held in Alchevsk?
AM: They are planned. This is the position taken by our government. At this point everything is in deadlock. It turns out that the date of elections can be declared by the head of the Republic at short notice, even a few hours before the election. Who has time to prepare?
OD: Are you going to stay in the military, or do you intend take part in politics?
AM: Of course I will.
OD: How?
AM: That is a secret. You will have to wait and see!
OD: What would be for you a victory in this civil war?
AM: In this war there will be no victory.
OD: When will it end?
AM: It will end when the majority of the people will understand that they are being exploited for the benefit of others. On both sides. Nothing new. War has always been, and always will be, a business. The greatest victory will be if we create a government that thinks of the people. Not victory in the war, but victory over ourselves, over our own minds.
OD: Are the people already realising that something is amiss?
AM: That something is not right, yes. Not as much as we would wish. But sooner or later the two opposing sides will find a common language, and only then will they talk a little bit differently with each other. Only then can we create something that is truly popular. So long as people are distracted with “suicide”, we can build nothing here. Those who were conducting black affairs behind our backs will continue to do so.
SLAVYANGRAD.org 
Forget all the transparency stuff – some aspects of government are necessarily and justifiably thoroughly opaque – the Ghost Brigade, for example, doesn’t inform Kiev of its moves – just ban fractional reserve banking in Novorossiya, make gold the official unit of value and institute policies to soak up foreign fiat from circulation and replace it with gold and other real assets.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Posted by Jalaluddin | May 6, 2015, 16:37Gold is no real asset. This is a myth. It’s just a “substance” with some interesting qualities. The real asset is the human potential called creativity. This is the only asset which should be valued and promoted.
So forget about Gold as some form of currency or as a backing of a currency. This is really outdated and why should we return to the “old ages”?
The plan goes as following:
Create a National Bank which will issue real credit without interest or maximum 1-2% interest rate. Instead of an interest rate one can use a fixed fee depending on the amount of credit. The created credit must be invested in long term projects in the real physical economy like building of infrastructure, developing the energy supply of a country, innovating the machine tool capabilities and of course investing primarily in the future generations through education and science.
This will generate so many surpluses in the whole economy that very soon through higher incomes there will start to grow secondary layers of economy like trading of all kinds and third degree layers of economy like all the forms of services: financial, assurances, hair cutting, cleaning asf.
If we avoid the interest rate, which is sucking away all the surplus of the most people, it will become easy for ordinary people to accumulate enough wealth through a couple of generations to become really free.
But in the end, this is just a theoretical concept which will only function if we as a humanity overcome our greed and take the needs of our neighbour as important as our own.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Posted by Prometeus | May 6, 2015, 20:38What I forgot to say in the first post about Gold as currency:
The availability of Gold is finite; therefore if we would rely on Gold as currency we as a species would soon reach a point of impossible growth which would lead to further crises and mandatory to fighting over the finite resource.
We as a species have infinite potential, so we will develop infinitely. The underlying principles of our development are finite but the expression and experience of our development is infinitive.
So again: this is the reason why we should use something as a currency, which will not limit our development, but instead something virtually. Money has no intrinsic value, nor gold, as I explained above. Money is just an accounting unit. We were led to believe, that Money is a value per se.
LikeLike
Posted by Prometeus | May 6, 2015, 20:54Note:
1. gold is a real asset – this is not a myth
2. the state capitalists (“socialists”, communists” etc) love fiat as dearly as the corporate capitalists (a.k.a. as just plain capitalists)
and this love (working class Tories included) is to be hidden behind the screen of “creativity” and “human potential” and of course the labour theory of value.
3. the “barbaric relic” – yawn.
4. Please tell us what you mean by “real credit” (??) so we can see whether or not it is more real than real things such as gold, silver, platinum, palladium, wheat, barley, rice, salt, sugar, coal … or anything else with a good shelf-life and reasonable value to mass ratio (and thus suitable as an intermediate in trade).
5. I think you wish to create the means of exchange out of thin air, but haven’t you noticed that this is not working?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Posted by Jalaluddin | May 7, 2015, 07:49Compare the lack of either logic or empirical proof of “The availability of Gold is finite; therefore if we would rely on Gold as currency we as a species would soon reach a point of impossible growth which would lead to further crises and mandatory to fighting over the finite resource.” with the statement of an observer at the Treaty of Versailles along the lines of: “If capital is concentrated in private hands as it was before this war, there will be a worse conflagration within a generation.”
Compare the present “something virtually” with the previous “real credit” – so which is it?
Can you be pinned down- or do you think that, as in warfare, debate requires one to continually shift one’s position. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Posted by Jalaluddin Morris | May 7, 2015, 10:21There was less than 5% unemployment under the gold coin standard of the 19th century. This was also true for Russia which used the gold standard during that period. It worked perfectly well. What is the alternative? Paper money, computerized digits. Who gets to print them? The banks do. Who owns the banks? We all know the answer to that. The reason why gold or silver money is important is that it forces honesty and allows the people an honest standard of value to measure their goods and services. Paper money is a scam that allows the elite to steal from everyone else. People like you prop them up.
LikeLike
Posted by Ken | May 9, 2015, 04:26Largely agree, though with a few caveats. To my mind gold has some utility in international balance of payments, which is largely its most important function in 19th century. In this context it is kind of like the safe tree in a game of tag. To my mind it’s kind of an ironic asset: you buy it not because it’s great but because the alternatives, in a world dominated by American financial hegemony are bad.
But this is a pretty modest contribution to a very sizeable issue which is how one efficiently and fairly distribute credit in an economy. In this context I don’t think gold has much if any contribution to play. In fact, unlike in international trade where it might have a role, in the context of a domestic economy the gold fixation has nothing useful to say.
Public banking, as in North Dakota is certainly a great model. The basic idea is that the economies of scale created by the business of providing public goods and services such as infrastructure, education etc. should accrue to the public rather than allowing this to be privatized – i.e. stolen – by private interests. This is the banking as a public utility idea that is promoted by many, notably Naseem Nicholas Taleb. Notably, Taleb doesn’t rule out private, merchant banks he just thinks they need to be completely ring-fenced from the deposit-taking, credit-management roles as was effectively done by Glass-Steagall lest the kind of accounting control frauds that put the “risk takers” – ha, just kidding: control frauds are a “sure thing” – can put themselves in the position of holding the entire economy hostage as in 2008.
But, again, I think this still isn’t the main issue. I take this to be the recognition that a) properly analysed capitalism is defined by it saw-tooth pattern of credit booms and busts and that b) the only solution to this – if you want to unleash the benefits of this process – is counter-cyclical government spending to replace the lost demand allowing the private sector to delever after a period of excessive credit growth. There is simply no alternative to this. This is the only place in a fiat money system where the money can come from. (This is a really basic point that the Europeans don’t seem to get along with the insanity of thinking that we call export our way out of trouble simultaneously – the “German disease-of-the-economic-mind” – which is akin to believing we can all get up in the stadium simultaneously and get a better view. Serious economics is about “network effects” dumbasses.)
Of course this probably isn’t sufficient – I’m assuming the western context is most relevant here, because that’s where the crisis is – given the massive debt-overhead that’s been allowed to accumulate in the system care of financial deregulation and the repeal of Glass Stegall. We need an at least a partial debt jubilee.
None of this will be apparent or indeed reachable if the gold-fixation is allowed to dominate your thought.
Of course implicit in this is my “original sin” of accepting the idea that “fiat money” is not the scourge of the earth. But that would be another, long discussion (likely with myself, as here I suspect.)
: )
LikeLike
Posted by Oddlots | May 9, 2015, 22:59Igor’s sock puppet stirs and stirs.
For sure there will be no victory in this war if it depends in any part on Mozgovoi, the Hero of Debaltsevo. Zakharchenko made a ‘beau geste’ at Debaltsevo, offering the critical, most visible, most news-worthy action of the war to Mozgovoi, the closing of the lid on the pot. DNR troops from one side, LNR from the other, unity of the forces, all the attempts by Mozgovoi to foment mutiny and sedition swept under the rug. Day after day, embarrassed DNR leaders had to postpone the promised moment. Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow . . . Alex is on YouTube explaining to a journalist just what was holding up the final assault. He explained that going on the offensive (something new to him) required you to sit on your thumb and think and ponder and reflect — and perhaps make stream-of-consciousness notes for your book? — until DNR troops finally did the job. Then Alex waltzes into the centre of town behind the still-active front lines, sets up a soup kitchen, and announces to the cameras, always at his elbow, that he was the first one in, as though he had fought his way in.
Think about it for a minute. How does a battalion get nicknamed “Ghost” because of false reports that its commander has fallen? Must it not be that they mysteriously melt away before/during an attack? It seems quite credible to me that the enemy army would think this meant they had disrupted the command structure, until it happened so often they realized it was a strategic intention to avoid conflict. I remember a Mozgovoi interview published on this very site where he explained his strategy: the important thing was to avoid casualties so as to have the strongest loyal armed forces when it came time to set up a government.
Does Alex really want everything revealed about why they wanted to disperse him? What about the agenda for the Military Council, Alex, timed to preempt the elections? Did you rip it up in a fury when none of the field commanders showed up, or could we have a peek at it? Military dictatorship? Triumphant return of Strelkov?
I myself find Alex transparent, but many do not, and he certainly tries to conceal more than he reveals.
LikeLike
Posted by Cass | May 6, 2015, 20:00Reblogged this on susannapanevin.
LikeLike
Posted by susannapanevin | May 6, 2015, 20:27Reblogged this on The Fourth revolutionary war.
LikeLike
Posted by Akira | May 7, 2015, 02:26Dear JALALUDDIN,
Real credit is where you should put your trust upon. Credit means “leap of faith”. You give an “amount of an accounting unit” in advance, in the very sure expectation that this “amount of an accounting unit” will be returned plus a surplus.
Just an “accounting unit”, no “real value” is needed here. If we all agree on this “accounting unit” and this “money” has stability, that’s enough to proceed.
The “real value” derives from the surplus, from nothing else. But ask yourself, where is the surplus coming from? Labour? Of course, but the possibility of labour is again limited. The day has only 24 h, so if we would rely only on the labour, our possibilities would remain very limited.
So again, take the following example:
A farmer farming his land 10 h a day in an “old-school-style” with an ox. What will he achieve? Take on the other side a farmer, farming 10 h a day with high-tech. Who will be more productive? Who of the two will raise more surpluses? Which one would you give more trust, more credit? Again: where is the more of surplus coming from by the second farmer? Yes, it’s the high-tech, which gave him the possibility to be much more productive in the same time. The “high-tech” is a product of innovation and innovation is a product of creativity.
We are not used to think about creativity as a “real asset”, because we can’t see and touch creativity. A gold bar is pretty visible.
To trust in gold is the old way, full of limitations. To trust in our creativity and to nurture and to develop it grounded in ethics is the way of the coming days.
There is nothing bad about “fiat money” per se! The ways how it was misused are bad. Fiat money mustn’t be tied to interest and it mustn’t be misused for speculation. This is not the fault of the fiat money. Would you blame a knife, which was used to harm?
Look how slow the economic process was developing the last 3.000-4000 years, where humanity used “real assets” as gold and silver. Look how fast the development exploded in the last 200-300 years through the use of fiat money.
And now to come to an end, one last argument:
If you put your trust in a gold-backed economy, what will be the purpose of living? To gain more gold and by this to increase your ability and potential to exercise force over your circumstances. Then you will have to protect your gold and hide it from the rest. If you put your trust and efforts in creativity, what will then be the purpose of living? You can guess the answer… In the “gold-model”: is it useful to share your gold? In the “creativity-model”: is it useful to share your creativity with others (brainstorming)? The focus of your life is pretty different in these two models.
In which world would you like to live, if you could choose? I made my decision! Please choose wisely, your wishes could come true faster, than you imagine!
LikeLike
Posted by Prometeus | May 7, 2015, 10:22“If we all agree on this “accounting unit”” – the mercantilists don’t, and are currently racing with each other to the bottom.
“…and this “money” has stability,” – such currency hasn’t, doesn’t, and it won’t.
“There is nothing bad about “fiat money” per se!” – trade in promissory notes (including fiat currency) breaks the western law of contract (which derives from Islamic and Christian Law) breaks Jewish Law, breaks Christian Law, breaks Islamic Law, and “flexible” interest rates (manipulated by a cabal in London) break the rule that one party may not unilaterally change the terms of a contract.
You mistake the virulence of the capitalist system for vigour.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Posted by Jalaluddin | May 8, 2015, 02:34You like to relay on logic, right? And as I can see, you are definitely not interested to deal with the bigger picture, but instead you prefer to chop my detailed statements peace by peace and countering a word here, an expression there and a sentence over there…
What’s the sense of this?
What outcome could our conversation have?
So nevertheless let us examine YOUR logic, which you love so:
You said:
[“If we all agree on this “accounting unit” – the mercantilists don’t, and are currently racing with each other to the bottom.]
Aha, ok… So the “mercantilists” are the BAD GUYS? Did I get your logic? So let’s play the game and assume, your statement is right. Then I have the following questions:
What is you solution to this? Oh, I forgot: you said, let’s have a gold standard, then everything is fine, right? But who is to blame now? The accounting unit, which we can substitute with gold, or the mercantilists? Logic?
If it’s the mercantilists fault, what sense does it make to implement gold as currency? Do you really assume, that by using gold you are able to eliminate mercantilists respectively their morally imperfection? I’m really curios to watch this show!
You said:
[“…and this “money” has stability,” – such currency hasn’t, doesn’t, and it won’t.]
Don’t quote me out of context! Only cowards do so… I made two preconditions in this statement. First: If we all agree on this “accounting unit”. Second: and this “money” has stability. I haven’t said, that this money has automatically stability
But assuming your proposition is 100% correct: which fault is it, the lack of stability? The currencies’ or the humans which are using the currency? I assert it’s not the tools (money) fault; it’s the fault of the subjects, which use the tool (money) wrong! Please proof the opposite with logic. Until you do so, I assert further, that if it’s the subjects fault, then gold as a different tool for the same purposes will be misused also. So your above statement regarding the lack of stability is only negative without a positive loophole…
You said:
[“There is nothing bad about “fiat money” per se!” – trade in promissory notes (including fiat currency) breaks the western law of contract]
Interesting! I would like to know more about this. Can you please tell us the source of this law, where we can read this?
You said:
[“flexible” interest rates (manipulated by a cabal in London) break the rule that one party may not unilaterally change the terms of a contract.]
I agree on this statement, when it stands alone. But in this context, as a reply on my previous statement I again miss the logic! I’m talking about instruments (gold vs fiat money for example), while you counter with the faults inherent in the acting subjects (cabal in London). Is your logic really this, that by using gold as “real currency”, the “cabal in London” will become innocent lambs?
You said:
[You mistake the virulence of the capitalist system for vigour.]
Where have I said so? You confuse your assumption with real written facts! Is this your way of logic?
What becomes very clear following your skinny arguments is that you confuse cause and effect. You confuse subject and object. You confuse doer and doing. So therefore you put everything upside down. 🙂
You really think the “capitalist system” is virulent per se?
You really think the “socialist system” is the salvation per se? (You haven’t said so, I really ask!) If not: which system do you think will be the salvation for humanity?
In your next post, I would like to see more detailed elaboration on your side of the “system” you think is right for the future of humanity, instead of only chopping my arguments peace by peace and only to negate and refuse them. This is what I have done right now with your statements, just only to reflect your approach and show you, where this “logic-nonsense” is leading us:
Only to fighting and losing time and energy for exactly WHAT?
Showing who’s got the bigger ego?
LikeLike
Posted by Prometeus | May 8, 2015, 08:29Compare the lack of either logic or empirical proof of “The availability of Gold is finite; therefore if we would rely on Gold as currency we as a species would soon reach a point of impossible growth which would lead to further crises and mandatory to fighting over the finite resource.” with the statement of an observer at the Treaty of Versailles along the lines of: “If capital is concentrated in private hands as it was before this war, there will be a worse conflagration within a generation.”
Compare the present “something virtually” with the previous “real credit” – so which is it?
Can you be pinned down- or do you think that, as in warfare, debate requires one to continually shift one’s position. 🙂
LikeLike
Posted by Jalaluddin | May 7, 2015, 10:28Excuse me please, if I confused something!
When I’m talking about “something virtually”, I’m referring to the “currency” aka “accounting unit” aka “money”.
When I first was talking about “Create a National Bank which will issue real credit…”, I understand, why it is misleading. The issued credit would of course be the “accounting unit” aka “something virtually”. What I meant with REAL credit, is that the credit is issued for REAL purposes, like building REAL infrastructure and not for VIRTUAL speculation, which has nothing positive to do with REAL physical economy.
I have to thank you for this hint: to stay logic and consistent in a debate, even if its nit led in the mother-language is demanding but important.
What makes me feel a little bit sad is the discreet hostility I sense coming from your words. It feels like you want to fight with me or like you think you have to defend your position very firm and therefore you put your focus in finding week spots in my argumentation.
I’m not here for a fight with you or with anybody else! I’m doing my best to share my “2 Cents” from brother to brother with the hope to build a better world for us all. I have to acknowledge, that often this is very difficult…
LikeLike
Posted by Prometeus | May 7, 2015, 12:22Prometheus, I spent several years in Africa helping the poor to form savings cooperatives. The central government in that country had the same central banking model you seem to be defending. They constantly print more money, government goes deeper into debt and the politicians steal everything that is not nailed down. Sound familiar?
We noticed that people there had no reason to save because the paper currency of the government was losing value at 12-20% per year, and this was one of the strongest currencies in Africa. Why is there reason to save if at the end of the year your savings buy 12 – 20% less than before. Might as well spend it on beer.
So, as it turns out, the lofty reasons you give why the government should be able to print money just turn out to be a way for the government to steal from the working man. And the government spends some of that money on infrastructure, but most of it got stolen at multiple levels.
What we see in reality, whether in Ukraine, Novorussia, or Kenya is that the paper money system robs the working man, and causes the prices of basic food, energy and shelter to be always rising.
Our savings group started using gold as the currency of the savings. And even though gold had a bad year, it still came out ahead in that local currency. The poor people were very happy with the result.
I think this is why people like Aleksey Mozgovoy and his followers will prefer to use something like gold or silver coin as the money of Novorussiya. It is real and cannot be faked by people in power.
Paper money is a scam. It is a tool that allows banks to create limitless credit, which drives the price up for everyone. The end result is debt slavery of everyone to Kolmosky who owns the bank.
Gold and silver coin are the money of freed people. Cossacks were once free people. I think they will be again soon.
LikeLike
Posted by kendo451 | May 9, 2015, 04:45Wow. What an interview. Thanks for translating it.
Normally the comments section to any article on Slavyangrad is VERY interesting, and often adds to the article. In this case, all I see is deliberate distraction, perhaps so fewer people read the article, and in some cases, outright slander of Mozgovoi. Note that after the last entrapment of the US controlled Ukraine army, there was a fascinating report translated by Kazura on her blog. It was a very compelling (but anonymous) account from a recent LPR volunteer who fought in the latest cauldron. Essentially the report explained a long list of very serious military leadership and logistical problems in LPR. However it also noted that Mozgovoi’s Ghost Brigade was being superbly organised, equipped and lead. It explained that Mozgovoi’s men as a result are an embarrassment to the powers that be. He had retained independence, and as a result when ordered to send his men in to fight tanks with no artillery or tank support, he flatly refused. Two other battalions were sent in, and not surprisingly got slaughtered for no gain.
The same volunteer soldier had a long list of interesting observations on the last major battle. But what’s relevant here is that he also mentioned that because Mozgovoi had remained independent, he is deliberately refused equipment the rest of the army gets. He noted that as a result his Ghost Brigade has a workshop repairing equipment captured from US run Ukraine and that his tanks were operational and reliable, unlike much of the hardware the rest of the LPR army was lumbered with. The soldier’s account, for what its worth also noted the slander against Mozgovoi. This of course ties in with the assassination attempts on him. Are all the weird comments on this particular article just a fluke? I see over time the occasional obvious NSA troll writing on Slavyangrad. But what I see this time is Ukrainian/Russian trolls.
Just think about what Mozgovoi had to say in this interview. Just think about how he handles himself. Well, he wouldn’t be alive, and his Brigade would have been gone long ago if he didn’t handle himself similarly on the battlefield. If he didn’t have capable, dedicated and loyal men in his Brigade, he would have been assassinated long ago. He reminds me of Daniel in the Bible. When things are going wrong (major attack from US/Ukraine for example), they want Mozgovoi and his Brigade in the thick of the fight. But when things settle down, they want to kill him. Sadly, that’s often the case with good men. They embarrass the wicked.
Every effort has been made to eliminate Mozgovoi and his men physically. He’s a man of principle, and the fact he’s still alive and commanding such an effective brigade speaks volumes.
Alexei Mozgovoi is every Oligarch’s worst nightmare.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Posted by NZGOV | May 8, 2015, 09:02I notice you don’t mention, if it’s not too crude, fighting. Mozgovoi has the best access to aid for his army (which he always “shares” with civilians) and the best film crew. But he doesn’t fight. I wonder if the people who donate to Strelkov realize that their donation is earmarked for Mozgovoi’s followers with an unspecified “share” going to civilians.
I doubt that anybody “wants” Mozgovoi in the thick of a fight; he and his brigade have so far managed to avoid any experience at offence and he obviously want any. But what a wail when the High Command suggested that his offensive equipment was too much needed to be parked with someone who used it only as props in videos. He thinks artillery is defensive. He is not fit to command. Even Strelkov, for whom loyalty only runs one way, admits Alex is useless, but says the solution is to prop him up with a couple of Russian officers. That would be just one more thing in short supply being wasted on Mozgovoi.
It is depressing that so many people who think they are partisans in this war are just fans. It never crosses their minds that they are choosing heroes on the basis of frequency of appearances on camera. Perhaps the real heroes are too busy to be media whores. You may not know their names.
Kazzura controls your opinions, which means Strelkov does.
LikeLike
Posted by Cass | May 8, 2015, 14:20Distribution has a cost. That is why the middleman makes 50% of the markup in all distribution chains. Alex was at least getting aid to the people. Sure he took a cut. Every NGO in the world takes a cut.
LikeLike
Posted by kendo451 | May 9, 2015, 04:51Whose opinion are you giving us?
LikeLike
Posted by NZGOV | May 9, 2015, 10:42I read the same account from the Russian volunteer that NZGOV referred to. Did you read it? One of things that the author stressed was the terrible lack of organization, training and materials which cost many, many NAF lives. Do you think it’s better to get thrown into a meat grinder or to be as prepared as possible in order to survive to fight the next battle? Oh, that’s right, though, you don’t think Mozgovoy and his crew have ever actually done any fighting, is that right? In order to make such an assertion one would have to BE THERE. Are you? I’m gonna take a wild guess and say that the answer to that question is no and that you’re armchair warrior. Now, I’ll be the first to say that you could be right. I simply don’t know because even though I’ve followed all of this since the first demonstrations on Maidan, I’m observing from Michigan and I’ll be damned if I can really determine the facts where people who are there even have disagreement. How is it that you are so certain about your accusations? If you’re wrong, it’s character assassination and if you’re right, then give us all some cold hard proof. I really am curious. I’ve never seen any video of Mozgovoy and his guys in battle but I still find what you’re alleging hard to believe. Please back up what you’re saying because you’re essentially calling him a fraud.
I completely understand your point about those who appear on camera and the unrecognized brave people who no one sees. That would be the vast majority of fighters. However, I don’t think it’s right to use a term like “media whores” with the implication that those who appear the most on Youtube, Russian news reports and documentaries are somehow not deserving of admiration (I won’t use the word “hero” because I don’t like putting people on pedestals). When it comes to this awful war and NAF fighters with the most exposure, two names immediately come mind: Motorola and Givi. You wanna call them “media whores”? Just saying that that isn’t a fair or accurate yardstick to use to discredit anyone’s value or contribution in this fight. It’s also natural that exposure begets the attention of those who are fortunate enough to be observing online (as opposed to being in a war zone) but it sure doesn’t mean that we all don’t know there are thousands of brave people we never see.
II also don’t understand your comments about how Mozgovoy’s brigade is supplied and you’re snark with quoting the word “share”. Are you implying that they’re stealing humanitarian aid and then glorifying themselves by “sharing” a small amount with those for whom it was originally intended? It sure sounds like that’s what you’re implying. That’s another serious accusation for which you need to provide hard proof for or STFU.
BTW, his name is Aleksey, not Alex. That you choose to Anglicize his name shows another level of contempt making you all the more suspicious in my book.
LikeLike
Posted by R_of_R (@R_of_R) | May 12, 2015, 21:35Это английский язык блог. Все содержание было англизировал.
LikeLike
Posted by Ken | May 13, 2015, 02:24That was a nice rant by R_of_R, but it is not clear who he was responding to. It seems like he is responding to several people’s comments as if they are one person. To clarify my own comment, I have no information from the field about how supplies were distributed other than what I have read here.
I was not saying Mr. Mozgovoi skimmed. My point was that even if M did take a percentage THAT IS NO CRIME as long as most of the aid got to the people it was meant for. He is not running a charity. He is trying to survive with a regiment of volunteers running a guerilla war in a very dangerous and hostile environment with enemies all around him and very little outside support. So he has distributed food and supplies. But, his men have to eat too, so if they keep some to feed themselves, it is no different from all the charities and aid organizations around the world. Admin costs for aid organizations are 15-20% on average. I am sure that the people who have given money and supplies for the victims of this war do not mind if a portion of that aid being used to keep alive the men who are protecting the civilians whom the aid is for.
I would add that Mozgovoi’s strategy of keeping his men alive is taken straight out of Sun Tzu and Von Clausewitz. His methodology is similar to that used successfully by general Robert E. Lee and Nathan Bedford Forrest against a much larger army. (Curious that they fought under nearly identical battle flag to his.) There is nothing dishonorable about choosing only battles he can win and avoiding battles he cannot. He is not part of a larger front like in the Great Patriotic War. He is unsupported and alone and has to survive in the field until the end or else his men’s lives were spent in vain. The situation is more like the units who fought a delaying action against the German Army when it was on the approach to Leningrad. His job is to harry and disrupt the enemy forces to delay them as long as possible so they cannot capture the city. Merely by being alive and armed in the area, the presence of his regiment prevents the invading army from being able to achieve their objectives because they don’t know where he is.
Virtually everyone reading and commenting here is doing so from an armchair. The purpose of this website is to make available to the English-speaking world the untold side of the story about what is truly happening in this conflict. Maybe R_of_R is commenting from a foxhole north of Lugansk. If so he should tell us more what is going on there instead of raging at other people’s comments.
LikeLike
Posted by kendo451 | May 13, 2015, 03:05@kendo451 – My reply was to “Cass” who was trashing Mozgovoy. Sorry, I thought was clear as this stream of comments are all intended under (replying to) his/her post.
Please re-read my post, Kendo. It wasn’t a rant. Just genuine comments and questions. I also said I’m in Michigan and questioned the assertions and criticism by Cass who, obviously, is not in Donbass and not in Mozgovoy’s shoes. It was Cass who implied theft or misappropriation of supplies. I have no clue about the supplies. I would guess if they’ve been solicited from the Russian public that, yes, those who donate want the fighters provided for as well as the general public in need.
LikeLike
Posted by R_of_R (@R_of_R) | May 13, 2015, 04:56@kendo451 – I’d also like to add that I’m in complete agreement with you about staying alive. I think I made that clear in my previous post (the “rant”, lol).
LikeLike
Posted by R_of_R (@R_of_R) | May 13, 2015, 05:16With Mozgovoy looking to future state organization, is it distraction (perhaps from personalities to substance) to opine as to some elements of a just economic system for the future state?
LikeLike
Posted by Jalaluddin | May 8, 2015, 14:45… and please remember, gentlemen, we aren’t talking about a “maximum 1-2% interest rate” – we are talking about 100% in the blink of a eye, perhaps a ten blink blessing from the BIS (a hundred blinks for The City) and getting to sleep with the Rotschildts.
LikeLike
Posted by Jalaluddin | May 8, 2015, 15:00… and deathly silence descends, as the intrepid Dr. J. (so named after the famous basketballer by his mates at the University of Guelph, who regarded their fellow student as having none of the moves) explains the filthy fiasco of fiat, including the dirty secret of
100% in the blink of an eye
a 10 blink blessing from the BIS
100 blinks for The City, with Stranded and Poorly always looking elsewhere
If Icarus doesn’t like it, well that’s Icarus’ problem.
Icarus doesn’t understand the specious nature arguments such as “The availability of Gold is finite; therefore if we would rely on Gold as currency we as a species would soon reach a point of impossible growth which would lead to further crises and mandatory to fighting over the finite resource.” The implicit argument appears to be that the fiat issuing banks are of the necessity the motive force of world economics and not the proles – which should displease the Marxists – and the argument is of necessity implicit so that Icarus can deny that this is what he intended to convey.
Even arguments such as: “if the purchasing power of gold increases it would encourage saving which in turn would cause a reduction in demand and thus prices to fall further with further increase in the purchasing power of gold” might impress Alfred Marshall, but would probably have caused Schumpeter (in my opinion a far better economist) to quietly shake his head in dismay.
Economics is more like engineering than mathematics – engineers (and I have made at least a cursory study of them) will rush around after disasters such as earthquakes noting which buildings fell and which remain standing. This means that rather than just copying some fancy equations from control theory or thermodynamics, economists have been known to study economic history, making for example a connection between the creation of the Fed in 1913 and WWI. On the other hand General Equilibrium would not be able to make such a connection and, from the bankers’ point of view, the discreet charm of general equilibrium theory is that it cannot.
The upshot of this is that in economics, frequently historical analysis trumps attempts at analysis devoid of historical content, and those who post here should be aware of this.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Posted by Jalaluddin | May 11, 2015, 03:09After the back and forth on the trashing of Aleksey by Cass (above) I’d just like to add this: I don’t know what he and his brigade do but I’ve watched lots of videos where he talks and I REALLY, REALLY like him and his ideas. I feel exactly the same way he does about the system and the corrupt sociopathic greedy assholes that all of humanity suffers under. He’s a thinker and a dreamer and so am I. I’m always thinking about the possibilities for Novorussiya (and Russia!) and hoping they become shining examples of peace, equality, freedom and creativity. I hope that Aleksey becomes more influential and is able to implement his positive ideas.
Do any of you here at Slavyangrad know him or communicate with him? I would very much like to see someone get a copy of of “Small is Beautiful” into his hands. Nobody can read that and not want at least some of that economic system and philosophy to be realized! Novorussiya is the perfect place for it because it’s not under the control of the AngloZionist banksters. Imagine a system in which the highest paid person in any enterprise doesn’t make more than five or ten times what the lowest paid employee does. Think about that. Imagine a people’s government mandating that. Income inequality and oligarchy goes right out the window in a system like that.
Another thing I’d like to talk to Aleksey about, if I had the chance to, is agriculture. Nothing is more important than everyone eating. I think about this a lot. It’s CRITICAL to self sufficiency. In my own “perfect world”, educating people in agriculture (and I don’t mean raising animals to kill them!) would be a top priority. If a community wants to feed itself and avoid crop failures due to weather (it happens), the best thing to develop is a network of greenhouses and people who know how to operate and maintain them, tend the plants, soils, etc. One layer of glass or plastic increases the growing season and types of plants you can grow by one zone and that means more food. You can look at this map to understand what I’m talking about if you don’t know what zones are:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/News/docs.htm?docid=9815&page=3
Add heat and you gain another zone. You could grow oranges and avocados in Lugansk. You could double the length of the growing season for vegetables. You can become the organic growing capital of the world! You can also grow marijuana (medial and/or recreational – better than booze and no drunk drivers). Medical marijuana is an emerging industry and has helped lots of people. How cool would all this be? Make food a critical resource (because it is), and subsidize the educations and facilities to make it happen. Hundreds or thousands of greenhouses all across the land and lots of happy workers and eaters. Pump in music and what a nice working environment! If someone wants to put up the money to start their own and bring in others, then the owner doesn’t make more than five or ten times (whatever ratio is decided upon) than the least experienced and lowest paid worker. No oligarchs here and you’ve now made sure nobody will ever starve or be dependent on imports. Then you do it better and bigger than anyone else and when someone wants to become educated in the field or needs expert consultants, Novorussiya will be the go to location.
Those are the kinds things I dream about when I think about the possibilities for Novorussiya. Now, if someone could pass on this message to Aleksey Mosgovoy, I would appreciate it! I think he would, too 🙂
LikeLike
Posted by R_of_R (@R_of_R) | May 13, 2015, 07:01Reply to KENDO451:
“They constantly print more money, government goes deeper into debt and the politicians steal everything that is not nailed down. Sound familiar?”
Of course this sounds familiar! This is the main argument of the Private Banking Dynasties, to discredit credit emission by government. I’m suggesting something slightly different, but huge in effect:
If you issue new credit, this credit must be tied to great projects of national interest: infrastructure and energy for example. With this connection of “credit & purpose” there won’t be and never was inflation! Inflation only results like you correctly said, by printing money and paying debts or speculates otherwise with this money.
Please look for, if you like:
https://larouchepac.com/creditsystem
And for really original and in-depth analysis you can go for: “Federalist Papers” by “Alexander Hamiltion”. You need to find those, which deal and explain the “National Bank” topic.
Nevertheless, I value and respect your first hand experience and I’m glad, that you shared it with me.
For an end of suffering and a better Future of all mankind!
LikeLike
Posted by Prometeus | May 20, 2015, 14:07Hi Prometeus. Yes, I am familiar with Lyndon Larouche’s economic ideas. Interestingly, my childhood home was three miles from Mr. Larouche’s private compound in Northern Virginia. As a boy, I used to ride my bicycle down to the beginning of his driveway. His several hundred acre compound was not unlike that of a Ukrainian oligarch, with armed guards. That being said, I usually agree with LarouchPAC’s commentary on most issues. But their dream of a direct treasury issued fiat currency merely changes the master. It will not free the people from the monetary slavery system which results from everyone being forced to use an accounting unit that one very privileged person (the treasury or the central bank) can create more of without limit. A gold or silver coin standard with an open mint is the only way to prevent anyone from using the money system to enrich themselves at the expense of the working man. As the founder of the Gold Standard Society, I am not a disinterested on this question: https://goldstandard.io
LikeLike
Posted by Ken | May 20, 2015, 15:05Hello Ken!
This is really amazing, that you nearly lived next door to LaRouche. The “world is small”, goes a saying in Germany. I was aware, that he belongs to some privileged family, maybe even dynasty. I’m not saying “da core” to everything, which comes from this direction, certainly not. Nevertheless, there is very much info on an amount of topics, where one can really educate oneself.
In principle, without knowing the last truth, I stick to my saying; the subject matters, not the object. While an object (money, gold, knife) can be used for good and for bad, the main point is: what is the motivation of the subject (us all)? Is it something good? Or something bad?
Your argument:
“…one very privileged person (the treasury or the central bank) can create more of without limit.”
implies the distrust to this privileged person. Understandable. So to deduce it further, the weak spot is the “distrusted person”, not the system. I could imagine that this system could work pretty well, if it is not corrupted. In the end with the implementation of this system, the relevant nations made astonishing material progresses in a short time: like the USA in certain phases, like Germany under Bismarck and then again after WW 2: “Deutsches Wirtschaftswunder”.
Your “bet on gold” as the better alternative leads me to the question: all the thousands of years, where gold and silver where used as currency, were there no Elite? No usury? No corruption? No betrayal? No wars? We are talking about human defects and vices.
To “close the loop” and come back to LaRouche:
What inspired me was the emphasis of the “human creativity potential” as the real asset of humanity, instead of believing in some intrinsic value of money. This marvellous shift of focus from carbons (diamonds…) and metals (gold…) and paper (money) to something intrinsic inside of us as beings, smells for me like a real revolution of consciousness.
If you ask me: what purpose in life we should have? My answer would be: to develop our most beautiful qualities. To explore the depths of our souls and consciousness. To be bound to our fellow men by love like brothers and sisters with our highest source – no matter if you call it God or Love – always in our hearts, minds, words and deeds. To be able to make a transition from here to there, we should overcome our struggling for the basic needs, so that we can enter the “garden of Eden” again. It is said, since we were expelled from there (and “there” is mainly a state of consciousness, not an location), we are forced to crawl and dig in the dust of the earth and we shall earn our bread in the sweat of our brow.
Call me an idiot or at least a romantic who longs for utopia: nevertheless it’s my honest truth, that in reality I don’t care about gold or fiat money. What bothers me is the question: how could we enter Eden again?
And once again: the shift of focus of something material to a quality inside of us seemed to be maybe a step in this direction.
LikeLike
Posted by Prometeus | May 22, 2015, 13:30Reblogged this on HERSTELPOLITIEK.
LikeLike
Posted by ADMINISTRATOR | May 23, 2015, 20:34