Superpower and muppets, this is the title of this podcast.

The Ante Cold War shows that the Soviet Union always wanted to be a superpower. But as it was impossible in reality, it used muppets to support this idea. Its muppets were the small brothers and their small barbarities which worked for the fatherland. The use of muppets permitted to its people to consider the Soviet Union as a superpower.

You can see that you use small things and the normal thing becomes a giant.

An efficient way to do this was to avoid real war with many treaties and to make only proxy war. Because the reality would show that it was a fake superpower. Any move in reality was dangerous, that’s why the virtual moves were those it preferred at the higher level. In this method the virtual was compatible with the fake history and the interpretation gave always a solution in case of contradiction: The Soviet Union’s lack of reality was compensated by its imagination to create always new scenarios to explain its failure with the eternal change of its targets. For that, the Soviet Union was at the state of art. But this preparation was not sufficient to start the Cold War and its defeat was predictable.

So what we have is the fake superpower with real muppets. If you talk only to muppets you seem to be a giant. You don’t want real wars because there will be an impact with reality. So to create your fake history you can use only proxy wars, small wars in very specific targets but no big war. So you are in a Cold War with proxy wars which are the whole point, the flash point of the Cold War. You can control everything at the very low level. At the high level you create fake history with new scenarios all the time. When you have a problem even in the virtual case, you can imagine another scenario which explains not your defeat but the secret scenario which was below the previous one. Everything seems to be an explanation, its continuum of explanation, because you always make corrections to prove that in fact, in the beginning of the process you have predicted this result. So you say for example I will go to the moon, not exactly, just in the space, not exactly, at the high level of the atmosphere, not exactly at the low level of the atmosphere. After that you say that, you know, I just wanted to go to the next city. You explain everything and you say, this was a false fly, this was a strategy to avoid the intervention of the enemies but my real target from the beginning was this. And we can see that even now, in Russia, not in the Soviet Union we have the same principle to do the same things. so we say for example we will go in the whole Ukraine, just in Kiev, at the end just Luhansk at the end just Crimea and then maybe we can go back to Russia and we can prove that because we did that, we won, because Russia is free. Because we went to Ukraine, we showed to the others our weapons, now they are afraid. Now in Russia we are free due to that. So you see that it’s an explanation, post-event. You create events, you have to correct them and at the end of the process because you always have your explanation from your famous journal Pravda you can explain everything. So it’s interesting because you know you can’t do everything but you can explain everything. So in your interpretation you are always a winner. By the way because your people read only your interpretation the fact not the real war, in their interpretation they believe to a savior, they believe to a winner. So the disappointment and the defeat of the Cold War was huge because all the time from the beginning to the end the Soviet Union was a winner. It was a Soviet Winner and not only a Union. So at the end of the process because all that time they used the denial to prove the explanations you had people that were very disappointed because they thought that all the time they were winning. So it’s like if you remember the building where you jump and at each level you say everything is good until now but at the end you know what is going to happen and this is a clash 1991.