In November 1991, at an economics conference on oil, Margaret Thatcher, who had just stepped down as British Prime Minister, gave a 45-minute speech as a guest. Historical sources show that during her speech, the iron-fisted female politician made a big fuss: without being reminded, Thatcher did not know that there were several Soviet economists among the participants, and her interpretation of many sharp political issues immediately caused a great sensation around the world. And these questions revolve around a theme: how the Western countries gradually disintegrated the foundations of the Soviet Union and eventually played the Soviet Union to death.
For the world pattern of nearly half a century, the collapse of the Soviet Union is undoubtedly a major event with unparalleled influence. Perhaps with pity for this once-mighty country, many scholars are still exploring the real causes of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Of course, the Soviet Union itself has many problems that cannot be ignored, but the offensive of Western countries is also an important factor in the collapse of the Soviet Union.
According to U.S. archives, as early as the mid-to-late 1960s, some so-called "anthropoeopoetic" organizations began to organize a campaign, claiming that population expansion would put enormous pressure on the earth and endanger the future survival of mankind. The "Club of Rome", controlled by the Masonics, proposed in 1972 that all of humanity urgently needed to establish a complete system to alleviate the crisis by controlling and disposing of global resources. Just as the so-called "people are fearful of words," the fundamental purpose of this series of operations is to create a hegemonic system dominated by the United States for Western countries, and ultimately to squeeze out the Soviet Union and establish a public opinion base.
However, the significance of the existence of the Soviet Union at that time has long been beyond the scope of a country, it is the spiritual pillar in the hearts of communists all over the world, the powerful Soviet Union is a banner, a monument, supported by faith, coupled with the strength of the Soviet Union itself, it is not simple for Western countries to deal with this behemoth. Especially at the end of the Stalin era, the rapid development of the Soviet Union was a headache for the think tanks of the US government, which Waschel reflected in her speech.
Margaret Thatcher mentioned that although "the Soviet Union is a country that poses a serious threat to the Western world", for a long time, the Western countries did not think of a countermeasure. As we all know, the Soviet Union pursued a planned economy, and this economic system first guaranteed the speed of economic development; coupled with unique spiritual and material stimuli, the Soviet Union's economic development indicators were very high. In many specific historical periods, when the capitalist world was hit, the Soviet economy remained strong, "its GDP growth rate was twice as high as ours." ”
The healthy development of the economy is the foundation of the country's strength, and on this basis, the Soviet Union was able to spend a lot of money to develop the military, which is exactly what the United States, Britain and other countries are worried about. At the beginning of the Cold War, the leaders of the United States, Britain, and other countries were very worried that the Soviet Union could use its own strengths to continuously encroach on the strategic advantages of Western countries in the capital world, compared with this, the Soviet Union's strong military strength was not worth mentioning, and even nuclear weapons were "not a real threat." Therefore, how to weaken the ferocious development momentum of the Soviet Economy, disrupt its economic order, and finally destroy the Soviet Union's planned economic system, so that it will go down a crooked road and go farther and farther, is a priority issue for Western countries.
We have a saying: turnips rot before rotten hearts, obviously, the United States and Britain and other countries have learned from this. The Western powers launched a fierce offensive from the loopholes in the composition of the Soviet Union and the Constitution. First, the Soviet Union was not a traditional state, but a coalition of many nations. According to the Constitution of the Soviet Union, any union republic that wanted to secede from the Soviet Union could immediately secede from the Soviet Union as long as the majority of the country passed a resolution. Despite this stipulation, looking at the whole of history, in order to maintain the integrity of this alliance, the Soviet Union has devoted great energy, even at the expense of force to interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, rudely interrupting the reform of other countries, and doing the opposite, and these acts have undermined the relations of the socialist family. The terrible thing is that this is exactly what the West is aiming for.
In the mid-1970s, the U.S. Congress passed a resolution in which the government allocated tens of billions of dollars to develop "advocates for interests," that is, to buy Soviet elites and famous scholars, provide them with bonuses, publish academic papers, and provide international consumption, so that they would favor Western countries in public opinion. After entering the 1980s, these spokesmen traveled to the major cities of the Soviet Union, questioning the rationality of the socialist system, and even arbitrarily characterizing some social problems as the shortcomings of the system. Driven by interests, more and more soviet high-ranking figures joined the ranks, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Yeltsin angrily said: "Except for me, the big people have been bought off by the Freemasons." ”
While leveraging the foundations of the Soviet regime, the Western countries set off round after round of arms races. It is worth noting that the purpose of the arms race is not to compete militarily with the Soviet Union, but to use this means to further disrupt the economic order of the other side. Ostensibly, NATO has been frantically expanding its armaments, but in fact, they have been consciously controlling the proportion of military spending, which almost never exceeds 5%. The Soviets were not so rational, they were clearly caught up in the trap, and military spending even accounted for more than 15% of the state's finances. Margaret Thatcher pointed out that the huge amount of military expenditure directly squeezed the Investment of the Soviet Government in maintaining the country's life, and the living standards of the people were reduced, causing popular dissatisfaction and intensifying social contradictions.
Interestingly, though, the process didn't happen overnight, and savvy Western countries almost played themselves to death. It has to be admitted that the Soviets' talent for weapons was enviable. Margaret Thatcher revealed that in the first few rounds of the arms race, the United States, Britain and other countries not only failed to cause trouble to the Soviet Union, but stimulated the rapid expansion of the Soviet Union's military strength. The Soviets were not at all left behind, and even achieved greater development with less investment. A number of new Soviet-made weapons posed a great threat to the national security of Western countries, and they had to invest huge sums of money to develop defense systems and create a reliable "shield" to resist the "spear" of the Soviet Union.
At first, the United States, Britain, and other countries tried to provoke contradictions between the grass-roots people and the leading class, but they soon found that the power of faith in the hearts of the Soviet people was much stronger than they expected. A U.S. dossier points out that in a survey in the late 1980s, when the Soviet Union was already crumbling, more than 80 percent of the population supported the country in overcoming difficulties and adhering to the socialist system. Such investigations have been conducted more than once, but the results have never changed. Therefore, the Western countries had to change their goals and start working from the real power class of the Soviet Union.
The development of history is intriguing, and in the late 1970s, when the Soviet Union showed a turnaround under the stimulus of a series of reforms, a perfect target for the Western countries appeared, and he was Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev. American politicians found that the ambitious Soviet leader had a "low IQ", was not rational enough to deal with problems, was very easy to induce and was extremely vain. The Western countries immediately launched an offensive against it, inducing Gorbachev to disrupt the economic and political order of the Soviet Union through "reform" and even completely destroy the Soviet Union.
In addition, the United States, Britain and other countries also sacrificed "double insurance", and then secretly supported Yeltsin. The Western countries are obviously very thoughtful, and it was Yeltsin and his supporters who crushed the last hope of the Soviets in the "August 19 Incident". Historical records record that even the United States and Yeltsin himself did not expect this process to be so simple, and according to their original plan, if the "August 19 Incident" failed, they would build an organization that could stand up to the Soviet authorities for a long time.
The collapse of the Soviet Union was a protracted conspiracy, the result of a collusion between internal and external forces. Today, people still suspect that the disintegration of the country is not the will of the Soviet people, as shown in the picture above, this group of triumphant politicians cannot represent the majority of the people; the depressed look of the masked soldier is the portrayal of the heart of most Soviets.
Historians have a view that the Soviet Union died in the "peaceful evolution" of the Western countries, and it is obvious that the United States, Britain, and other countries expended much more energy on the Soviet Union than dealing with the small countries in Eastern Europe. The process is long and tortuous, but also covert and brutal. However, the collapse of the Soviet Union does not necessarily mean the end, perhaps only the end of one era and the beginning of another. Looking at the present, taking history as a mirror, can we find many similarities in the present?