Caucasians are strong. Why are modern Russians so weak? Which breed do you like best?

Both shepherd dogs - Caucasian and Central Asian - have the same security functions and are able to scare off a potential intruder with just their appearance. The dogs are large, powerful, hardy. When comparing breeds, it is difficult to accurately determine who is stronger, the Alabai or the Caucasian Shepherd. Each variety has its own advantages.

Similarities

Comparison of Caucasian and Central Asian Shepherd Dogs makes it possible to identify similarities between them. They primarily concern the exterior of animals and their purpose.

In appearance, the dogs are similar in large dimensions, which is clearly visible in the presented photos.

• alabai 0.65 -0.80 m and 40-80 kg;
• Caucasian 0.60-0.75 m and 45-75 kg.

Both shepherds are guard dogs. They were bred to look after flocks of sheep in pastures, escort trade caravans, and guard homes. Life in the natural environment has developed in animals unpretentiousness, the ability to quickly adapt to conditions, endurance and immunity to disease.

The need to protect the owner’s property determined the style of behavior - wary, attentive. One of the names of the dogs is wolfhound, which indicates their ability to engage in open combat with the gray predator and defeat it.

Caucasians and Central Asians are distinguished by self-esteem, nobility and self-will.

Differences

Differences between representatives of the breeds are noticeable in the character and behavior of individuals. The Caucasian wolfhound is a self-sufficient individual who does not like to be subordinated. The owner must show will and restraint in order to force him to respect himself and unquestioningly carry out commands. At the same time, the Caucasian’s devotion extends exclusively to the owner; other people are perceived by him as strangers.

Alabais are also used to living in freedom, but they are more attached to people and not only to one owner, but to the whole family. The dog is tolerant of children and other pets in the house. He is not inclined to show aggression unnecessarily. It is difficult for Alabai to be alone; he misses his family.

On average, the lifespan of the Central Asian Shepherd is slightly longer than that of the Caucasian: 13 and 11 years, respectively.

Thus, if we compare the two breeds, then the Alabai is better suited for living in a house with a family. But the Caucasian will prove himself to be an unrivaled watchman for protecting the territory. He is more aggressive and independent.

The advertisements for sale also offer crossbreeds. A mixed breed of Alabai and Caucasian Shepherd Dog inherits the external features of its parents. He is large, shaggy, adapted to life on the street. However, with a mixture of two different breeds, the character of the cub may be unstable.

In the photo is a mixed breed of Alabai and Caucasian Shepherd

Who is stronger?

Large, powerful dogs with similar characteristics are attracted not only for security activities. They are often forced to take part in dog fights. The confrontation between a Caucasian and an Asian is considered the most unpredictable, since it is difficult to predict in advance who will be stronger.

Both dogs have the same benefits.

• The Caucasian wolfhound is fearless, aggressive, lightning fast, and smart.
• The Central Asian wolfhound is decisive, brave, fast, rational.

The Caucasian is the first to enter the fight. It is easier to anger him and set him on the enemy. In the heat of battle, he quickly loses his head and acts more instinctively than deliberately.

Alabai strives to win the battle in order to gain the approval of his master. He thinks through his actions. His main tactic is to harass the enemy with constant attacks, and then show an iron grip.

Which breed do you like best?

Fans of large dogs are wondering how the Alabai differs from the Caucasian Shepherd. These two breeds are similar in appearance, but there are still some differences between them. We will try to compare the Caucasian Shepherd Dog and the Alabai, examining in detail the most notable discrepancies.

Caucasian Shepherd or Alabai: the difference

The comparison shows that the differences between the Alabai and the Caucasian Shepherd appear primarily in the temperaments of both animals. The Caucasian is an independent creature who values ​​his freedom and is not used to being submissive; he often allows himself to ignore everyone except his master. He needs a lot of space for physical activity. He makes a good watchdog, because he is smart and has a tendency to protect his owner from any dangers. Can be aggressive, rush at strangers and bite painfully.

Caucasians do not require special care; they live quietly on their own, without additional care. The average lifespan of such a dog is 11 years.

Alabai also needs freedom. He is much more obedient, eager to receive his master's attention. He loves not only the person who tamed him, but also the entire family in which he lives. Gets along well with other pets and does not offend small children. Patient and quite flexible, not prone to aggression. Loves to demonstrate all his dexterity and courage. Lives for about 13 years.

The difference between the Caucasian Shepherd and the Alabai is obvious: the first breed is much more aggressive, impetuous and freedom-loving than the second.

Who is bigger: Alabai or Caucasian?

Alabai is a dog of impressive size, with a height of as much as 65 cm. Some adult dogs reach 80 cm. They weigh from 40 to 80 kg.

The Caucasian is slightly smaller: his height is approximately 60 cm, rarely exceeding 75 cm. Weight ranges from 45-75 kg.

So who is bigger: Alabai or Caucasian Shepherd? Overall, Alabai. Much is determined by nutrition, intensity of exercise and regularity of walks. It is important to note that bitches are shorter and thinner than cables.

Who is stronger: Alabai or Caucasian Shepherd?

It doesn’t matter whether an Alabai or a Caucasian lives with you: each of the breeds will protect you if necessary. If you compare the Caucasian Shepherd and the Alabai, it turns out that the dogs have almost the same strength indicators. The difference is noticeable only in the manner of their behavior. The Caucasian quickly gets angry, attacks the enemy without hesitation, and acts fearlessly. He is superior to the Alabai in intelligence, he can understand and even predict the tactics of the offender.

Alabai is somewhat larger, and this is its advantage. He reacts with lightning speed and is ready to do anything to earn praise. Thinks through his actions in advance, hits powerfully, bites hard.

Alabai outperforms his no less worthy opponent, but not in strength, but in thoughtful tactics that help him win even the most brutal fights.

Alabai or Caucasian: who to choose?

It is impossible to say for sure which is better: the Alabai and the Caucasian are completely different dogs in character. If you are going to raise your pet alone, you can safely choose a devoted Caucasian. Be careful when buying it for a home with children: they may not be able to make friends. If your family also wants to take part in raising a new pet, consider purchasing a more friendly Alabai. Your own behavior also plays a role. Alabai people tend to want to show off. They get used to doing rash acts if they are constantly provoked to do so. Remember: imbalance can lead to tragic consequences.

The Caucasus still remains a troubled point on the map of Russia. In this regard, the question of the coexistence of Russian culture and the culture of the North Caucasian peoples does not lose its relevance.

The life together of two peoples is always the coexistence of their cultures. Within the borders of the Russian Federation, Russians coexist with a multitude of peoples, and in the North Caucasus with a whole cluster of peoples whose cultural orientation, at least in some aspects, does not coincide with that of the Slavs.

The culture of the Caucasian peoples is characterized by the dominance of the masculine, courageous principle over everything else. At different stages of historical development, this both helped and hindered the bearers of this principle.

Slavic culture, including Russian, is a combination of femininity (femininity) with masculinity (masculinity), and sometimes it is difficult to clearly draw their boundaries. In general, femininity dominates in the culture of the Slavs, and the losses of Russians in clashes with Caucasians on a personal, street level are evidence of this. But femininity has one remarkable quality - to win on a larger scale, at the state level. Therefore, the Caucasians did not win against Russia in a single collective confrontation.

Femininity should not be directly identified with weakness. “Feminoid” Russians more than once defeated the Teutons and Swedish knights, as well as the Turks - prominent representatives of masculine culture. Just as in a philosophical context the words “freedom”, “strength”, “essence” carry a different connotation than in everyday speech, so with the concept of femininity in ethnosociology. Feminoidity does not mean the absence of masculinity, but the absence of its dominance. In North Caucasian culture, unlike Russian culture, femininity is completely suppressed by masculinity (energetic and warlike dances, the cult of physical strength and military valor, rigid patriarchy, etc.).

The predominance of masculinity makes peaceful dialogue with opponents difficult. The history of relations between the Germans and neighboring peoples is a history of destruction at the root. The most recent examples are the Great Patriotic War, the Ost plan and the genocide of Russians in Chechnya under Dudayev. Masculinity only knows how to push; it is almost incapable of integrating into itself. The history of the conquest of America by the Anglo-Saxons, also carriers of masculine culture, is another example of building a state on the bones of autochthons.

I dare to suggest that it was precisely the overflowing masculinity of the North Caucasian peoples that was the main obstacle to the emergence of persistent statist traditions among them. When you are surrounded by masculinoids like yourself, a state will not work. The result will only be an endless and meaningless war, because... each masculinoid will strive for dominance over others, while the state presupposes a strict hierarchy and vertical of power.

Since Caucasian society is archaic and largely static, it does not always have time to adequately respond to the historical challenges facing it (the Caucasian War of the 19th century, the intoxication of “national sovereignty” due to the collapse of the USSR, etc.). Therefore, the “feminoid” Russians built the largest empire, managing to subjugate the “masculine” Caucasians and include them in this empire. Femininity, as a kind of softness, allows one to absorb alien elements and integrate them. The idea of ​​building a state by the people who bear feminoid culture is based not on the destruction of neighbors, but on their “digestion,” turning them into “our own,” but while preserving their ethnic appearance.

For the Russian state, it is unthinkable that national minorities would be forcibly forced to renounce their native language in favor of Russian (Russification of Poland is a separate topic, more related to attempts to reverse the centuries-old polonization of Western Rus', and the integration of Poles into the Russian imperial-state body, rather than destruction Polish culture). Meanwhile, in Turkey in the 1930s, the “Speak Turkish!” campaign was carried out, when the use of Circassian, Kurdish or Arabic in everyday communication was punished, including arrest (1).

Ethnosociologist Wilhelm Mühlmann introduced the concept of ethnocentrum. Ethnocentrum is an ethnos’ awareness of itself within the space where this ethnos lives. This is a form of ethnic thinking, where the ethnos includes everything that surrounds it: from the terrain (mountains, rivers, forests) to highly differentiated concepts (state idea, wars, alliances, economic ties, cultural and diplomatic contacts). Each ethnocentrum strives to remain intact. Ethnocentrum is afraid of conceptual split, bifurcation, because a split in the ethnocentrum would mean a split in ethnic self-awareness and modifications in the internal life of the people. The relations between Caucasians and Russians can also be described in ethnosociological terms. The Caucasian ethnocentrum subconsciously feels the power of the Russian ethnocentrum, as a more numerous imperial people.

The Caucasian ethnocentrum is afraid to “let in” those who are more numerous. As the ethnocentrum of a less numerous people, the Caucasian ethnocentrum is afraid of “drowning” and dissolving in the Russian ethnocentrum, afraid of being absorbed by it or split in two, i.e. accept both your own and Slavic identity at the same time. The ethnocentrum of the Caucasians sees only one salvation - building such relations with the Russians that it would be impossible for an excessive amount of Russian and Slavic influence to penetrate into the Caucasian ethnocentrum. This is a subconscious mechanism of ethnic protection, in practice expressed in prohibitions on daughters marrying Russians, absolutization of one’s own ethnic principles, etc.

“Feminoidity” becomes a disadvantage during periods of weakening state power, when peoples who are accustomed to living in a state without having state traditions become ethnically united. Here masculinity begins to crush femininity, unprotected by the power of state power. The most obvious example is the Chechens, who have lived their entire history without their own state. When the state foundations of Russia are shaken, Chechens are more guided by the centuries-old principles of existence outside the state, but within its borders (folk traditions are absolutized, placed above state laws, etc.). Outside the framework of the state, the winners are the carriers of masculine culture. Within the state, they are carriers of both feminine and masculine culture.

Exaggerating a bit, we can say that the culture of the North Caucasian peoples is “ethnic Nietzscheanism” with its cult of heroic death, iron will, and the theses “push the weak if he stumbles.” Excessive, ossified masculinity expels femininity from itself, pushes that which falls from weakness (hence the excessive and inexplicable, from the point of view of Russian culture, aggression of young Caucasians against their Slavic peers with a clear numerical superiority of the former, i.e. when the Slavs are clearly weaker) .

Russian culture is an eclectic mixture of Tolstoyanism (when non-conflict is seen almost as the main virtue) with Carlyleanism (the Scottish philosopher Thomas Carlyle considered heroes to be the engine of history, whom he praised). Moreover, the latter, i.e. Carlyleanism is rather a tribute to circumstances when “Tolstoyism” does not allow us to adequately respond to the challenges of the time.

And here a stalemate arises: on a subconscious level, Russians find a rational explanation for the excessive masculinity of Caucasians (the laws of the mountains, military traditions), and begin to perceive this disapprovingly only at a certain level, namely: when the so-called the threshold of strength of the Slavic peaceful perception of a foreign culture (in other words, when uncontrolled masculinity turns into a danger to femininity, and “Tolstoyism” does not save, but aggravates the situation).

Russians are not always able to respond to emerging challenges. Firstly, the thousand-year tradition of living in a state that is strictly subordinated hierarchically, and the multimillion-strong number of the Russian people, have atrophied the sense of ethnic solidarity. It can only arise during periods of serious testing (for example, the Great Patriotic War). Among small nations, ethnic consolidation is at the highest level, as an indispensable condition for the survival of the small in the face of the large, especially if the state is not a spiritual and historical value for the former.

Secondly, Russians are not allowed to show their “Nietzscheanism” and Carlyleanism, i.e. masculinity hidden under the veil of femininity, crushed from above by legal norms, which, I repeat, in Russian society, accustomed to living within the state, is a priori given preference.

But the problem is that masculinity is always looking for a way out. The riots at Manezhnaya are an explosion of Slavic masculinity that flouted legal norms, or the well-known “Russian riot, senseless and merciless.” But if these trends continue, the peaceful coexistence of Russians and Caucasians will really come into question.

Every state, for the sake of political correctness, talks about peacefulness (there is always a Ministry of Defense, but not a single state has a Ministry of Attack), although everyone knows that for the survival of an organism, and a state is a geopolitical organism, it must have a certain amount of aggressiveness. Excessive femininity is just as bad as excessive masculinity. At least for the state-forming people. Eras when states were built on masculinity alone, i.e. the complete cleansing of the territory allocated for the future state of the “superfluous” remains in the past (the destruction of the Polabian Slavs by the Germans, the appearance of the United States on the bones of the Indians, etc.).

In conditions of coexistence of masculinity and femininity, a balance is needed, skillfully maintained by state institutions. The Russians acted as the locomotive of Russia's modernization, and while modernizing themselves, they lost, to a large extent, what hinders modernization - masculinity, loyalty to tradition, positive archaism. Exaggerating, we can say that Russians need to increase masculinity, and Caucasians, on the contrary, need to reduce it, giving it a constructive direction. This is what was done in the Russian Empire and the USSR. Both states participated in wars either with the enemy, or with economic backwardness, or were preparing for a real confrontation, and there were a lot of points of application for masculinity (participation of Caucasians in wars on the side of Russia, when service in the Armed Forces was prestigious, participation in construction projects of the century, etc.). under a unifying, supranational idea).

Nowadays, the normalization of relations between Caucasians and Slavs, in addition to the well-known reasons of clanism, social vulnerability of the population, unemployment, etc., is hampered by ideological turmoil, the absence of a complete supranational idea capable of consolidating the peoples of Russia without taking into account ethno-religious differences.

The lofty theses preached about unity, and even more so their information support in the mass media, smack of excessive secularism and democracy, destroying traditional values. This is not at all what Russians and Caucasians need. Russians need to once again become carriers of their own high culture, and not the ideological leftovers of Western liberalism. In the 19th century Russians attracted other peoples to themselves through Dostoevsky, Griboyedov, Chekhov, Tolstoy. At the beginning of the twentieth century. - Yesenin, Blok, Berdyaev, Mendeleev. Science and culture were held in high esteem, and the ability of a people to control space was proportional to the degree of development of its culture.

Liberalism, the unreasonable emancipation of women, consumerism are fundamentally opposed to Caucasian traditions, and if Russians, as the engines of modernization, understood in a Western manner, today en masse pick up consumer ideology and become its bearers, a split will arise between the ugly “modernized” Russian society and the “archaic” Caucasians go deeper. Caucasian culture will view secular liberalism as a threat to its masculine foundations, and Russians as the bearers of this threat, as those who have abandoned their roots and preach the same to other peoples.

The integration of the Caucasian peoples into Russian society should take place within the framework of cultural mutual enrichment, by introducing the Caucasian peoples to the fruits of Russian culture and introducing Russians to the culture of the Caucasus. However, this is a complex process, the success of which depends on many factors, including the degree of demand for a cultural product in the state. In the meantime, high culture, and not mass culture, as its primitive surrogate, is bracketed and hung with the labels “unprofitable,” “unprofitable,” and “does not pay off.” If this continues, the Caucasus will move away from Russia at the cultural and psychological level, and Russia’s departure from there can be considered largely voluntary.

1) Pavel Shlykov “Turkish nationalism in the twentieth century: the search for national identity” (“Issues of Nationalism”, No. 5 2011).

To the question Why does everyone think that Caucasians are all strong men and stronger than Russians? given by the author Growth the best answer is Why did you have to invent all this when you could say “I hate the Caucasus”? The Caucasus is INDIFFERENT towards you. I don't even want to put 1

Answer from Lobster[guru]
seminarians or parishioners of Orthodox/Catholic countries (England, Russia) killed and persecuted blacks or Chinese.
but in Muslim countries this is the case.
answer:
Christians have lived in Muslim countries for centuries and have not been touched.
But they touch the conquerors (and the Russians are conquerors in Tajikistan).
And the Russians for centuries touched the conquerors who came to them.

Answer from Le Chateau Margaux[guru]
I do not think so. Caucasians have a rather rigid mental structure, determined by traditions. And traditions, in turn, arose in order to reliably restrain natural instincts. That's why they engage in fighting sports. They are explosive and that suits them. For me, a strong person is a person who fights by himself - a marathon runner or a weightlifter. A strong person is a person who works for a team. Here Caucasians are traditionally outsiders.

Answer from European[guru]
Among the Dagestanis I met good wrestlers...

Answer from Adapted[guru]
To be honest, Caucasians are not at all interesting. Not only are there a dime a dozen of them on the streets of Russian cities, their faces are constantly shining from crime chronicles on TV. I wouldn’t like to talk about them on the Internet.
Glory to Russia!!!

Answer from Mikhail Repnikov[guru]
Maybe they just don't take steroids?

Answer from Putindroty putidrants putitutki[guru]
the crowd is stronger

Answer from slyuopri[guru]
I saw how a Russian and a Caucasian were sorting things out. The Caucasian was so aggressive with his words, he drove so hard, so terribly authoritatively, but when he got to the Russian, the Russian began to wave his arms and legs and hit the Caucasian, but the Caucasian did not raise his arm or leg, fell silent and disappeared somewhere;-) )

Answer from Dmitriy[active]
what does power have to do with it???? They're all training. boxing. judo. kickboxing and more. Most Russians are sitting in padikas. Here.

Answer from Papa Smurf[guru]
they have more arrogance than strength and confidence that a dagger and a barrel will help

Answer from Macosta[guru]
Nobody considers them strongmen. This is funny!

Answer from Islam Jalilov[newbie]
Author: Site Administrator | 03/14/2015
After reading this publication, you will become acquainted with an independent opinion that claims that Caucasians are much stronger than Russian people. Is it really?
Once again I remind you that on this page there is no place for inciting ethnic hatred.
A dissenting opinion should not lead you to any kind of aggression and humiliation of each of the parties under discussion.
If you are not satisfied with the overly strict rules, I ask you to “close the door on the other side.”
Vadim Savelievich from the city of Ufa trained Caucasian athletes for many years.
His anonymous participation in our issue is completely right.
During grueling training, Caucasians demonstrated more successful strength training than their Russian counterparts.
I believe that this is caused by the following objective reasons.
* Climatic mountain conditions, which become a strong foundation from the point of view of the birth of new life.
The strength of the Caucasian is the mountains.
And hardly anyone will argue with this.
* Most of the Caucasians I have had the pleasure of training are fanatics who draw strength from their religious beliefs.
They work in the name of Allah. In the name of Allah they fight and come to victory.
* Caucasians are stronger than Russian people - not only in body, but also in disciplinary norms.
Endurance and absolute internal protest against an unsuccessful loss can force a Caucasian to take revenge in the very next few days.
* I do not presume to say that Caucasians are quite cold-blooded people. Their strength is often neutralized by “southern emotions”, which irascibly miss the “retaliatory blow”.
* The strength of a Caucasian lies in community, when it is impossible to let down a person close in spirit.
In any case, my coaching belief is, in a sense, “the average temperature in the room.”
Russian people are very strong, and not a single Caucasian can stop them.
But this is only in the “critical days” of iron patience bursting to the point of despair.
Expressed his independent point of view: Vadim Savelyevich from the city of Ufa.
The material was prepared by me, Edwin Vostryakovsky.

Answer from Madina Borlakova[newbie]
Caucasian is stronger than Russian Russian weaklings

Answer from Arbuzov[newbie]
Let's not quarrel, and the Russian and the Caucasian are good in themselves, these two nations are very strong and those who say, calm down, I met both the Russian and the Caucasian, they are good and hospitable and, interestingly, they are strong, it’s just that the Caucasian character is too talkative , but the strong ones, the main thing is don’t quarrel, it was a long time ago, it’s over, God grant everyone health and peace!!!

Answer from Biriskin[guru]
Why does everyone think that Caucasians are all strong men and stronger than Russians?
Because that's how it is!
Urban dystrophies have only been able to sit at the computer since childhood, but rural ones drink so much that by the age of 15 they are already yellow.
In general, the Russian people have degraded to a pitiful semblance.
Russians are generally the weakest if you take it on average. Alcohol, smoking, poor climate, lack of attention to sports, poor nutrition, low social level - all this, of course, has an unfavorable effect.
Drinking and smoking mothers - what can they teach a child?? But a love for sports must be instilled from childhood.
Russian means weakling, dry, drunk, weak-willed, weak-willed, beggar, wretched.
This is all in general, of course. There are, of course, normal people, but there are fewer and fewer of them every year.

Speaking about the national psychology of Caucasians, about the peculiarities of their psyche, only the lazy, perhaps, do not mention their supposedly extraordinary “militancy,” rage, courage, despair, “animal instinct,” etc. They themselves actively strive to maintain a similar image in our society, so that the Russians would not have any thoughts about the possibility of resisting the invaders - the image of these berserkers, infinitely warlike and cruel, not feeling pain, not knowing fear and not knowing pity. Unlike, of course, from us, cowardly and intimidated in life. Here, for example, is the most typical reasoning on this matter: “What do you think is the main reason for Russia’s defeat in the Chechen War? Of course, many of them can be named, these reasons are political, economic, social, and some others. But I will name one single reason, which is quite enough. In Russia, they begin to instill in a person almost from the cradle: you are no one, you are nothing, at best you are just a cog in the machine, and at worst you are just an empty place. And what are our proverbs worth, like “Don’t sit in your own sleigh”, “Every cricket knows its own nest”, etc. and so on.! I am convinced that the Chechen people do not and cannot have such proverbs. In the Caucasus, almost from the cradle, a boy is taught: you are a man, you are a warrior, you cannot be afraid, you should not cry, let girls cry, you are fearless, you are invincible... From the age of two or three, they are constantly introduced into the child’s consciousness similar installations. Therefore, it is almost impossible to defeat such a people. You can only exterminate him to the last warrior. But as long as this warrior is alive, he will fight.” (Vadim Shlakhter)

It would be good if only representatives of the “progressive” nationality had such an opinion, one would not expect anything else from them, since a significant part of Russians perceive a similar attitude! And Russian proverbs are always selected accordingly in order to “prove” our supposed natural laziness, cowardice, passivity, meanness and the like, and thereby program our social consciousness for further self-destruction. After all, Mr. Schlachter did not remember such proverbs as “Die from your land - and do not leave”, “Die yourself - but help your comrade”, and many others similar. And then, if we are such a lousy people, then how can we explain all our military victories - from the campaigns of Svyatoslav Igorevich to the defeat of Nazi Germany? How can we explain that a nation of cowards and nonentities created and defended for a millennium the largest state in the world? The Jews, of course, have no answers to this question and cannot have them. By the way, to the question that, as Mr. Schlachter put it, “at best you are just a cog in the machine, and at worst you are just an empty place.” The only reason the Russian people have worked miracles in history is because Russian people are distinguished by their high ability to interact. Why did the Chechens - “a proud nation of warriors” - achieve nothing, why didn’t they create a state, didn’t create an empire, since they are such brave warriors, why can they only destroy? And they don’t fight that well, more simply instilling fear in the enemy with their savage cruelty. Because each of the proud, by and large, is always on his own. Each of the proud men does not recognize command, shuns menial work, “unworthy of a real man,” and strives to act alone in battle. When such an army of proud people meets a truly serious force, it crumbles to smithereens. Our army, welded together by the invisible bonds of duty, honor and camaraderie, defeated any enemy - subject to skillful command, of course. The Chechen bastard would have won, even in the first campaign, if not for the mediocre cowardly generals, the generous assistance to the Chechens from the anti-Russian “democratic” government, and from the entire world Judeo-community. And of course, if it weren’t for the severe spiritual crisis that crippled the entire society, and the army, as part of it.

The “bravery”, “rage” and “militancy” of the Caucasians is as much a myth as their “nobility”. It is known for what purpose this myth was created, but in practice we see either the “bravery” of idiots pumped up on drugs (it’s hard for Chechens to fight without drugs), or the “bravery” of scoundrels hiding behind hostages, or, most often, elementary intimidation and demoralization of the enemy through demonstrative cruel treatment with prisoners, and inhuman terror against “non-combatants”. Batu used this “know-how” against us, and the Chechens did not come up with anything new here. We survived Batu and his horde, and we will survive the Chechens too. You just need to know your enemy well. Therefore, let’s talk about something that was somehow not accepted to talk about until now: what is the psychological portrait of the “average” Caucasian, what type of psyche is more typical for Caucasians? Let's look at the problem from a “scientific” point of view, from the point of view of psychophysiology.

In search of an answer to these questions, one can, of course, study special literature: on medicine, psychology and psychiatry - the results of these studies and “natural” comparisons will be very interesting. Just imagine, I found an almost exhaustive psychological description of the “average” Caucasian in manuals and manuals for operational personnel of law enforcement agencies. Moreover, the psychology of the enemy interests us from the “practical” side, in the sense of determining his strengths and weaknesses, as well as developing techniques and methods to combat him. And what’s interesting: when speaking about the “psychophysiology of a potential enemy,” such literature does not at all mean the psychophysiology of a representative of a particular nation. For the security forces, as is known, “bandits and terrorists have neither nationality nor religion” (this, obviously, explains the failures of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB in the fight against these same terrorists). By “enemy” there is meant, first of all, a criminal, no matter what nationality he may be, or (in wartime) a representative of the enemy’s agents, recruited from the “locals”, in his moral qualities - the same criminal. However, it is simply amazing how similar the psychological portrait of a special service operative’s “client” is to that of a typical representative of absolutely any of the “small but proud nations”! And they are also offended when, for example, the Chechens are called a criminal nation, and the Caucasus in general is called a gangster nest. However, judge for yourself.

Actually, this is the answer to the reason for the disproportionately large participation of Caucasians in crime, and in general for their antisocial behavior, which at the everyday level has long been expressed in formulas like “all Caucasians are crooks”, “all Caucasians are psychos”, as well as in the expressions “chocks” ", "Caucasian beast", "criminal nation" and many others. “A person of Caucasian nationality” for us is a synonym for the word “criminal,” since we are already tired of hearing such a phrase in crime reports. This point of view, however, is highly condemned by the so-called “human rights activists” and “liberals”, and is for them a manifestation of “Russian fascism”. Which, however, is quite understandable: among “human rights activists”, “liberals” and other “democratic” evil spirits, the proportion of psychokinesthetics and epileptoid psychopaths also goes beyond the critical level. Especially if you consider that in terms of national composition, the majority of the “democratic” camp consists of representatives of a nation very similar to the Caucasians in their life principles and attitudes.

And one more important point. I have already spoken about the imaginary “nobility” of the Caucasians, the mention of which usually makes any Russian person laugh through tears. Caucasians themselves are very fond of speculating on the topic of supposedly characteristic courage, honesty, decency, fidelity, devotion and other qualities that only they themselves notice in themselves. Naturally, implying that “Russian pigs” do not have these qualities, never have had them and, in principle, cannot have them. Like, only we, Chechens (Dagestanians, Ingush and others) sacredly honor our national traditions, are forever devoted to the interests of our clan, our people, are ready to give our lives for them, fight the enemy to the last drop of blood, etc., etc. etc. In fact, everything is much more prosaic: “...Despite belonging to various political and social groups (one could add “and national” - A.K.), in the end, psychokinesthetics always stand only for themselves. Only fear can force them to work for someone. Such people do not like to obey.” (A. A. Potapov.). This is much closer to the truth. Fear of revenge from one’s own people makes a Caucasian “faithful” to the interests of his teip and his pseudo-people. Fear, and an elementary corporate, predatory calculation: if you stick to your flock, the flock will help you. The flock will snatch a piece - and you will get it. The same fear makes him “brave” in battle, and when the “field commander” is killed and this fear disappears, mass surrender begins. Fear of blood feud makes a Caucasian “noble” and “decent” when he is in his homeland. Of course, he would have tried, for example, to rape, or at least simply insult a woman - someone’s wife, someone’s sister. He would try to steal something there. I would try to sell drugs in my native village... Only fear, and not “decency” unknown to Caucasians! Fear of an efficient police force makes him "law-abiding" when he is abroad. When he is found somewhere in central Russia, then this fear is completely absent (we have disbanded them after all, we have taught them not to be afraid!), and any “noble” Caucasian immediately turns into a beast: he kills, and rapes, and steals, and sells drugs. Here is the solution to the notorious “Caucasian nobility”.

Accepting fear as the only control tool in their own environment, Caucasians sincerely believe that there are no other control tools for any society at all, or they are all ineffective and do not deserve attention. Therefore, wherever they are, they certainly transfer their own worldview to the society where they are. As they say, they judge others solely by themselves, moreover, believing that there simply cannot be a society with a better structure than their own “bandnation”, and better management methods than those accepted in their midst (i.e. based on animal fear) also cannot be. That is, it is all other societies, in the eyes of the “average” Caucasian, and not his own, that are in the “Stone Age”. It is other peoples in his eyes who are “savages”, “sheep” and “chumps”, and not his people. Caucasians didn’t care about “tolerance,” internationalist consciousness, “equality of all before the law,” respect for other people’s customs and other values ​​accepted in modern society. For them, only fear matters, and the force that causes this fear in them. At the everyday level, this feature of theirs has long been noticed by Russian people and is expressed in the formula “Caucasians respect only strength.”

Accordingly, the place where they do not experience this fear and pressure on themselves is considered suitable for their expansion. Due to known circumstances, they considered the central regions of Russia to be such a place. In accordance with their worldview and vision of “historical processes”, in winning for themselves a “place in the sun” from the Russians in Russia, Caucasians strive “to the fullest” to use exactly that instrument of influence that they consider the only effective one - fear. Hence the “black terror” against Russians, which, if you follow the logic of things, will intensify more and more as the number of Caucasian “diasporas” in Russia increases - according to the “Chechen” scenario. Hence the other Caucasian crime, which, according to the Caucasians themselves, also has a “useful” side effect - intimidating Russians and depriving them of the will to resist.

So, I think the “psychological portrait” of a typical Caucasian is described very clearly. We can also talk about the reasons for the predominance of psychokinesthetic and epileptoid-psychopathic personality types among the majority of the peoples of the Caucasus, although this is somewhat beyond the scope of this work. However, I will briefly dwell on them. In my opinion, these reasons are as follows.

1. The notorious “closeness to nature” of these ethnic groups, the extremely low level of their social, spiritual, moral and intellectual development, which follows from the “childhood”, from a historical point of view, age of these ethnic groups (their society is at the level of development of the tribal system ). Thus, the Chechens, according to some sources, formed as an ethnic group no earlier than the 14th century. This “childhood” is clearly manifested, in particular, in the infantile worldview of the Caucasian peoples (for example, in their desire for “freedom” at the expense of others, in the eternal search for those to blame for their troubles, in dislike for any order and any power), in the complete absence sense of responsibility. And children, as you know, must live in the “nursery” and must have severely limited rights, otherwise they will get into trouble... Which, in fact, is what is happening now.

2. The large role of violence in the life of these ethnic groups is a reason that logically follows from the first, as well as from the remoteness and isolation of the habitat of the Caucasian ethnic groups for thousands of years from more developed peoples.

3. A kind of “selection”: it is known that in the formation of these nations (for example, the Chechen one), a large role was played by the criminal element, the scum of other nations, outcasts rejected by more developed societies and who found shelter in the high mountain villages, from where, in fact, and most of the current Caucasian peoples left.

In any extreme conditions, in particular, in the conditions of modern Russian chaos and anarchy, or, for example, in conditions of war (and we essentially have a war), psychokinesthetics and epileptoid psychopaths - i.e. types that are dominant, due to historical reasons, among mountain peoples, they have a certain “tactical” advantage over “normal” people, whose psychophysics is based on an intellectual, rational principle, and whose “animal instincts”, as unnecessary, have long been “mothballed” and dormant. Actually, soldiers at all times knew a simple truth: in battle you need to think less with your head and trust more in your instincts, natural reflexes and instincts. If you tried to comprehend any dangerous phenomenon, instead of acting “on autopilot”, using reflexes, it means you hesitated, and if you hesitated, it means you died. The lower your intellectual level, the more developed your natural feelings and instincts are, and the greater your chances of surviving. In war, intellectuals generally do not live long, except in headquarters, away from the front line. Our Russian reality is a continuous battle, a continuous war, a struggle for existence, for a “place in the sun”, in which we are still losing, for the reasons stated above. And for now, THEY are winning. Who do you think in Russia has a better chance of surviving and leaving offspring - a university graduate specializing in quantum mechanics and working at a research institute, or a Caucasian trader with three years of education? We read from A. A. Potapov, a veteran of the special services, who is well acquainted with the “specific” contingent: “These people (psychokineesthetics - A. K.) are active and energetic, have increased observation, insight and instant intelligence. They have their own, secret, primitive, but accurate knowledge of the nature of things, based on an innate intuitive understanding of the enemy’s weak points. Psychokinesthetics themselves do not consider this knowledge; this is their vital essence to which they are accustomed. They know this and feel this way. Their unmistakable innate fighting instincts are not in a dormant state, like those of intellectuals, but in everyday life they are triggered as necessary on the “here and now” principle. ... They are excellent at processing close and short-term goals that immediately involve them in the life work process (in our case, for example, “making money” quickly, without any far-reaching business projects that require painstaking development and financial investments - A.K.) . For them, close goals are familiar, understandable and therefore achievable. ... For such individuals, intuition works very well for “the vital dirt of human relationships (who are our most unsurpassed masters in bribery and blackmail? - A.K.).”

Andrey Kochetov