Dmitry Orlov's Blog, page 44

「崩壊時の相違」を見極める：ソ連はアメリカよりも崩壊の備えに長けていた

I would like to thank Dr. Masayuki Ohtani for translating my "Closing the Collapse Gap" presentation into Japanese.

みなさん、こんばんわ。ぼくは何かの専門家や学 者でなければ、社会活動家でもありません。むしろ、ぼくは目撃者ですね。ぼくはソ連の崩壊を観察したわけです。それで、観察したことを簡潔なメッセージに しようとしているわけです。ぼくのメッセージがどれくらい緊急性を要するものか、その判断はあなた次第ですけどね。

今夜のぼくの話というのは、アメリカ合衆国では 崩壊への備えがなっていないなぁ、というものです。そこで、ソ連が崩壊する前の状況とアメリカの現状とを比べてみようと思います。仰々しく言えば、「崩壊 時の相違点」とでも言うべきことを扱うわけでして、これは冷戦時代に顕著だった超大国間の様々な相違、核開発における相違点だとか、宇宙開発における相違 点のようなものです。

[image error]

How we treat each other in hard times

I contributed a segment to this week's broadcast of The State We are In, a weekly program of Radio Netherlands. My segment begins at 6:30, but the rest the broadcast, which deals with how the Icelanders treated each other when their economy collapsed, is certainly worth a listen as well. I would like to thank WBUR at Boston University (my alma mater) for providing the studio and the technician.[image error]

Interview on ABC's Late Night live (Australia)

This interview was recorded last night (US) and aired some hours later in Australia. Audio is available for download here. The host, Philip Adams, was well primed for the occasion and asked thoughtful questions. A good, short introduction to the subject. Although Philips did suggest opening one's veins at the end, he also suggested opening a bottle of wine as an alternative. I am in favor of the latter.[image error]

Interview on Russia Today

A while ago Marina Portnaya of Russia Today came to Boston to film an interview with me, and today she wrote to me to tell me that it has finally aired. Russia Today broadcasts in English into some 100 countries. Marina was exceptionally well-pepared and has done an outstanding job. (As for me, it's more of the same.) Please take a look.



[image error]

Similitudini tra superpotenze

Many thanks to Michele for translating an entire chapter of my book into Italian.

La propaganda ufficiale ha sempre provato a dipingere il conflitto tra superpotenze come una conseguenza ovvia e inevitabile delle differenze non conciliabili tra le due parti.

Una parte era rappresentata come la manifestazione di tutto ciò che è buono e giusto nel mondo, l’altra come tutto ciò che è malvagio e repressivo. C’era sempre un’etichetta per descrivere il nemico, efficace nei confronti della propria audie