Almost no one knows about this until now: the world “behind the scenes” has already decided to abolish cash on a planet-wide scale. This means that it will no longer be possible to “neither buy nor sell” without certain conditions - accepting the “mark of the Antichrist”!!! (Video)

The mysterious disappearance of Rudolf Diesel in September 1913 is still considered one of the most intriguing mysteries of the twentieth century. It is known that the inventor boarded the Dresden ferry heading to England, and... no one saw him again. What really happened on a stormy night in the last peaceful year before the First World War?

Among people, without whose discoveries and developments scientific and technical progress would have been impossible in the last century, a special place is occupied by the German engineer and inventor Rudolf Christian Karl Diesel, the author of an efficient and economical internal combustion engine. Now it is difficult to imagine what the modern world would be like if this talented inventor had not presented a model of his engine back in 1894.

And what’s especially offensive is that people living in modern world, cannot personally express their gratitude to one of its creators, even posthumously. The fact is that no one knows how Rudolf Diesel ended his days and where his ashes rest. What is known is that on September 29, 1913, the inventor boarded the Dresden ferry, traveling from Antwerp to London, after which he disappeared without a trace.

It was like this: shortly before this incident, Diesel received an invitation to come to England in order to inaugurate a new plant of one of the British companies that produced his engines. Those who saw him before leaving claimed that the engineer was in high spirits - the great inventor, although he had many patents, was not a good businessman, and by 1913 he was on the verge of ruin (which, by the way, was facilitated by the beginning economic crisis). The opening of a new plant in England could improve his financial affairs.

Moreover, some of Diesel’s acquaintances later recalled that he allegedly told them that the invitation was sent to him personally by Winston Churchill, who at that time was already heading the Admiralty. The energetic Duke of Marlborough was going to rebuild the entire English fleet, and he supposedly needed the inventor as a technical consultant. Whether this is true or not is difficult to say, since Churchill never told anyone about his desire to meet with Diesel.

Another strange thing is that... there is still no reliable evidence that it was Rudolf Diesel, and not a person similar to him, who climbed the ladder of the Dresden ferry that day. Strange as it may seem, the name of the inventor was not on the list of his passengers. Therefore, the version that it was him after all is based only on the testimony of engineers Georg Grace and Alfred Luckman, who were heading to England with Diesel, as well as the ship's steward.

Grace and Lukeman said that after sailing, Diesel invited them to take a walk on the deck, and then all three went down to the wardroom to have dinner. During the meal, the inventor was very animated, constantly talking about new proposed modifications to his engine, as well as the bright prospects for cooperation with the British.

At about 10 o'clock in the evening, Rudolf Diesel finally said goodbye to his colleagues, after which he went down to his cabin. Before opening the door, he stopped the steward and asked him to wake him up at exactly 6.15 in the morning. No one saw the inventor again. In the morning, when they grabbed him and broke open the cabin door, it turned out that Diesel took his pajamas out of his suitcase and laid them out on the bed, and also took his watch out of his pocket, wound it up and hung it on the wall next to the bed.

Further inquiries showed that no one saw the inventor leave his cabin that night. The porthole was also closed. This circumstance made the initial version of the police about suicide very vulnerable - the servants of the law suggested that the psyche of Diesel, who was a suspicious person, could not withstand the heavy premonitions of imminent bankruptcy, and he simply drowned himself. However, how did the suicide, crawling out of the porthole, manage to close it behind him, and from the inside?

It also seemed very strange to the investigators that a man who was about to take his own life prudently wound his watch and also asked the steward to wake him up exactly at the specified time. Suicide note By the way, they weren’t found in the cabin either. Moreover, the testimony of Grace and Lukeman indicated that the inventor was in a great mood all evening. And after dinner, as it was established, Diesel did not communicate with anyone except the steward.

Another version put forward by the investigation said that perhaps Diesel went out for a walk at night, stood by the side, and then suddenly had a heart attack. The unfortunate man found himself overboard and could not even call for help. This version was supported by the fact that the inventor’s cloak and hat were found on the deck in the morning. However, the arguments against were much more weighty: the height of the sides of the Dresden was more than one and a half meters, and even a healthy person could hardly climb over them. In addition, Diesel’s family, friends and personal doctor unanimously stated that the inventor never had heart problems.

It was also suggested that the inventor could have been killed - for example, on the instructions of competing companies that produced gasoline carburetor engines (Diesel's invention, which ran on cheap fuel oil and diesel fuel and was safer, took away a significant market segment from them). Or the intelligence services of the Kaiser’s Germany had a hand in the murder, who did not at all want the British, their potential opponents, to modernize the fleet on the eve of a possible war. However, who was the killer in this case?

Let us remember that Diesel communicated that evening with only three people - Grace and Lukeman and the steward. They all had a 100% alibi, confirmed by many other people. And as it turned out later, none of the passengers or crew members knew that the great inventor was traveling on the ferry - his name was not on the list! In addition, it was necessary to find the body and examine it for the possibility of a violent death, since the study of the cabin, corridor and deck did not provide any evidence that could lead to the suspicion of murder.

Looking ahead, let's say that the body was never found. True, a little later, several Belgian fishermen told the police that in the early morning of September 30, 1913, they went fishing and caught the body of a well-dressed gentleman at the mouth of the Scheldt River. After consulting, the fishermen decided to take him to Ghent, but they were prevented by a sudden storm. Deciding that the spirits of the sea were angry because they had robbed the elements of its rightful prey, the fishermen threw the body back into the waves.

However, before this, two rings were removed from the drowned man’s finger, which the skipper handed over to the police. These rings were presented to the inventor's son, who admitted that they were very similar to those worn by his father. However, there were no engravings on them that could accurately identify the owner (one was an engagement ring, the other was a ring with a stone, but without the owner’s name). The jeweler from whom Diesel bought this ring acknowledged his work, but noticed that many people ordered similar rings from him.

So, as you can see, it is impossible to say for sure that the drowned man caught by Belgian fishermen during his lifetime was the inventor of the diesel engine. Therefore, no one still knows where the remains of Rudolf Diesel are buried. And the circumstances of his disappearance over the past nearly hundred years have not become clearer. The inventor is still listed as missing by the German police.

As for the version of Diesel’s murder by competitors or intelligence agencies, it, like all hypotheses related to the so-called “conspiracy theory,” has one typical drawback. It is completely incomprehensible why it was necessary to kill the inventor, whose “brainchild” had long been produced in all factories in the world, including British ones. The design of the engine was known to thousands of engineers and technicians who could assemble it themselves and, if necessary, improve it (by the way, it was with their help that Churchill was still able to carry out the modernization English fleet). It only made sense to kill Diesel before the engine went into mass production.

In addition, it is difficult to suspect hired killers or intelligence officers of such blatant unprofessionalism - after all, it turns out that the person was eliminated in such a way that the next day the whole world knew about it. Why was it necessary to put on this whole ridiculous performance? It would have been much easier to kill Diesel before boarding the Dresden and have his body found in the port slums with signs of robbery. Then no one would doubt that the inventor became a victim of his own carelessness - after all, the robbers of the Antwerp port were notorious.

In general, if you carefully study some of the details of this story, you will find out that Diesel’s disappearance was primarily beneficial... to Diesel himself. His financial affairs at that moment were really in a deplorable state, everything was heading towards court and debtor's prison. Maybe the brilliant inventor simply decided to hide from creditors in such an interesting way? That is, in fact, he did not board any ferry (which is why his name was not on the list), did not have dinner with friends and did not ask the steward to wake him up. He discussed the testimony with friends in advance, and the steward could well have been bribed.

This explains the fact that besides these three, no one remembered that Diesel was present on the ferry (the same steward served at dinner) - and another incomprehensible thing. The fact is that in the inventor’s cabin they did not find a single item about which it could be said with certainty that it belonged to Rudolf Diesel - no documents, no wallet, no notebook, no drawings. The found watch was without the owner's name, as were the cloak and hat. The fact that these are Diesel’s things is known only from the testimony of Grace and Lukeman - but their price, if you follow this version, is very low.

There is another interesting point - after the disappearance of the inventor, his family was able to cope with financial difficulties and pay off debts. Afterwards, his family said that they sold some of the inventor's patents. However, if we remember that at that time there was a fierce legal war over them, it is unlikely that anyone would have bought them at a high price. So where did the funds come from for a family that had lost its breadwinner?

So, if we put all the facts together, it turns out that the great inventor could well have staged his own disappearance. He spread rumors that he was going to England, instructed two of his acquaintances who were actually going there on how to behave, and they, in turn, bribed the steward. The latter brought several things into an empty cabin, left a hat and cloak on the deck, and then reported the disappearance of the passenger.

And although many later said that in the evening they saw a third passenger in the company of Grace and Lukeman, no one (except, again, the steward) knew who it was. That is, perhaps there was some third acquaintance of the inventor on the ship, who “played” the role of Diesel, and then simply went to the bottom and did not give evidence to the police. As for the discovery of the Belgian fishermen, the rings were identified by Diesel’s son - and he was clearly privy to his father’s plans. In fact, they could have belonged to anyone - and it is not at all a fact that their owner was fished out of the sea on September 30, and not earlier.

It is also possible that later Diesel, under a false name, left for some country and got a job as an engineer at one of his factories. Perhaps he settled in Russia - the inventor had long-standing business relations with our country. And when he helped his family pay off their debts, he most likely continued to work on improving his engine - but under a different name.

10 years ago, on August 3, 2008, the famous slanderer of Soviet civilization, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, passed away. What’s interesting is that this writer is loved both in the West and by the Russian authorities and pro-government media. The fact is that Solzhenitsyn portrayed the USSR as an “evil empire,” which was beneficial both to the masters of the West, waging a thousand-year war against the Russian people, and to the liberal Westernizers who led Russia in the 1990s and who needed to be denigrated and covered with mud in every possible way Union. Therefore, a rather mediocre writer was promoted, his name was raised as a banner of the fight against Soviet totalitarianism, and everything he wrote was declared the pure truth.
Alexander Isaevich Solzhenitsyn was born on December 11, 1918 in Kislovodsk, into a peasant family. In 1924, Solzhenitsyn’s family moved to Rostov-on-Don, where the boy went to school. He began to get interested in literature in high school and tried his hand at essays and poetry. However, after school I entered the Russian State University, Faculty of Physics and Mathematics. But, as a student, he did not abandon his passion for writing and wrote the first chapters of “August the Fourteenth.”
At the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, he and his wife went on assignment to Morozovsk, where he worked as a teacher (he was declared unfit for military service for health reasons). But private Solzhenitsyn, unfit for military service, in some mysterious way, about which history is silent, ended up in an artillery school. Lieutenant Solzhenitsyn went to the front in the spring of 1943. He did not take direct part in battles and battles, as he commanded a sound reconnaissance battery. At the front, apparently, Alexander Isaevich felt well: he read and wrote a lot, ate well. One fine day, Alexander Isaevich’s orderly, using false documents, brought his wife from evacuation in Kazakhstan to Captain Solzhenitsyn. Natalya Reshetovskaya fondly remembers the time spent with her husband at the front: they walked a lot, read, took photographs, he taught her to shoot. Received awards: Order of the Patriotic War and the Red Star.
Shortly before the victory in 1945, Solzhenitsyn was arrested for correspondence - the captain was busy sending letters to his acquaintances criticizing the commander-in-chief and the Soviet system and proposing the creation of secret “fives”. Captain Solzhenitsyn could not have been unaware of the existence of military censorship and counterintelligence. In addition, Alexander Isaevich’s childhood and youth friends Kirill Simonyan and Lydia Ezherets spoke about their friend’s epistolary activity in the following way: “These letters did not correspond either to the eternal cowardice of our friend - and Solzhenitsyn is the most cowardly person anyone has ever known - nor to his caution , not even his worldview...” Professor K. S. Simonyan made a simple conclusion: “He clearly saw, as did each of us, that in conditions when victory was already a foregone conclusion, there was still a lot to go through, and it is not excluded the possibility of death at the target itself. The only possibility was to get to the rear. But how? ...Becoming a moral crossbow was in this case for Solzhenitsyn the best way out of the situation. And hence this stream of letters, stupid political chatter.”
From the end of 1945 until 1953 he was imprisoned. The “bloody Stalinist dungeons” were quite bearable for Solzhenitsyn. Here Alexander Isaevich himself describes his stay in the central political prison: “Oh, what a sweet life! Chess, books, spring beds, feather pillows, solid mattresses, shiny linoleum, clean linen. Yes, I had long forgotten that I also slept like this before the war...” Enjoying the sweet life, Alexander Isaevich willingly testified against his friends and even against his wife. However, only N.D. Vitkevich was seriously injured. Later, the rehabilitated Vitkevich was able to familiarize himself with his case and then learned that his childhood friend Alexander Solzhenitsyn had imprisoned him, who wrote that Vitkevich “was planning to create an underground subversive group, preparing violent changes in the policies of the party and government, viciously incriminating Stalin...”
After Lubyanka there was New Jerusalem, then construction in Moscow, then Rybinsk, Zagorsk and, finally, Marfino, that is, Moscow again. And in Marfin - half a kilo of white bread a day, in Marfin - butter, any books, volleyball, music on the radio and work in the acoustic laboratory. In conclusion, the writer, according to a number of researchers, became an informant and provocateur nicknamed Vetrov. From Marfin he ended up in the Ekibastuz camp, where he was a foreman, worked as a mason, then as a librarian. All this time he composed and kept poems in his memory so that he could later put them on paper. He described camp life in the novel “In the First Circle” and the story “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.”
After his release, the writer was sent to live in southern Kazakhstan without the right to leave the village of Berlik. There Solzhenitsyn worked as a teacher of mathematics and physics. In 1956, the writer was rehabilitated and was allowed to return from exile. He settled in the Vladimir region, then in Ryazan. Solzhenitsyn's works were first published in 1962 in the magazine " New world" - this was the story "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich." It is important to remember that just a few years ago the famous 20th Congress of the CPSU took place, where N.S. Khrushchev debunked Stalin’s cult of personality. The debunking was accompanied big lie: Khrushchev, knowing that at the time of his predecessor’s death there were about two million prisoners remaining in the camps, publicly spoke about ten million. Since then, the topic of repression, great and bloody, has become an official weapon in the hands of all anti-Soviet activists, and the West has received an excellent information weapon against Soviet civilization. And as soon as one spoke about the advantages of the Soviet system, about how much the USSR gave to its citizens, the crying immediately began about “one hundred million executed.” Khrushchev started with ten million prisoners, and Solzhenitsyn went further and proposed one hundred million, and not just prisoners, but exterminated (although in the USSR there were simply not enough people to calmly destroy 70-100 million, and the population continued to grow). Thus, Khrushchev and Solzhenitsyn repeated the propaganda materials that were composed by Hitler’s ideologists.
The theme of repression, which inspired many Soviet people with disgust for their own state and a guilt complex, began to be actively used in the Cold War. Both those who considered Khrushchev a renegade and a traitor (in China, Albania), and those leftists in the West who still supported the Soviet system and the communist idea began to turn away from the USSR. In the USSR itself, rejection of the Soviet system also gradually became fashionable, especially taking into account Khrushchev’s “excesses” in the field of national security, National economy, culture, etc. Alexander Isaevich got into this “wave”, and he was noticed by the enemies of Soviet civilization within the Union itself and in the West. After this, Solzhenitsyn set to work on The Gulag Archipelago. Solzhenitsyn, both in the USSR and in the West, becomes the most fashionable, most famous writer.
However, the writer soon loses favor with the authorities (under Brezhnev, criticism of the Stalinist period was generally curtailed), and he is prohibited from publishing. But the job has already been done, the author has been promoted, and he is supported in the West. So, in 1970, a large group of French writers, scientists and artists nominated Alexander Isaevich for Nobel Prize. Soon the prize was awarded. The novels “In the First Circle”, “Cancer Ward”, “The Gulag Archipelago” were published abroad. For this, in 1974, Solzhenitsyn was deprived of Soviet citizenship and deported abroad. The author settled comfortably first in Switzerland, then in Canada, and then in the USA, on an estate behind a high fence. And the Americans were so able to promote the image of the Gulag that many ordinary people around the world still strongly associate Russia with some kind of bloody horrors, mass arrests and general executions of millions of people. “Archipelago...” became one of the most prominent images of the USSR.
Russian schoolchildren are forced to study “The Gulag Archipelago” in order to fool them (although the book has neither literary merits nor historical truth). In this book, terrible atrocities are attributed to Stalin, surpassing all the atrocities of the German Nazis. Solzhenitsyn launched the myth of tens of millions of people repressed under Stalin (as many as 70 or even 100 million people!). The Americans who sheltered Solzhenitsyn did not challenge this lie, as they cold war(informational, ideological) against the USSR. The United States needed to present the USSR as an “evil empire,” which Solzhenitsyn helped.
Although one of the “think tanks” of the American empire, the CIA think tank Rand Corporation, based on demographic data and archival documents, counted the number of people repressed during the Stalin era. It turned out that during the entire time when Stalin was at the head of the country, 700 thousand people were shot. The same data is presented in other studies of the Stalin era, the authors of which are not interested in denigrating Stalin personally and the USSR. At the same time, no more than a quarter of the cases were sentenced under the political article 58. The same proportion was observed among labor camp prisoners. Thus, the number of those repressed in Stalin period a hundred times less than what was attributed to him. This is confirmed by demographic statistics, according to which, with the exception of failure during the war, the population of the USSR steadily increased throughout Stalin's reign. For comparison: during the reign of liberal democratic rulers (Yeltsin, Putin and Medvedev), the population of Russia has been steadily declining, if not dying out (so-called depopulation). The situation with demographics is even worse in another “independent” fragment of the USSR ( Great Russia) – Ukraine-Little Russia, which is dying out rapidly.
The second important conclusion from real statistics: only a quarter of those repressed and imprisoned can be considered victims political repression, and the remaining three-quarters received what they deserved for criminal offenses (it is worth remembering that even today most of the people are in favor of death penalty against murderers, rapists, drug dealers and other degenerates). And fans of Solzhenitsyn and others like him en masse portray everyone as innocent victims.
Not everything is so simple with “political” ones. Among them were real “enemies of the people” who worked for Western intelligence services; Trotskyist saboteurs who dream of destroying the Soviet project; former executioners, employees of the Cheka-NKVD, whose hands themselves were up to their elbows in blood and who were “cleansed” of their organs; various kinds of Vlasovites, Banderaites, Basmachi, “forest brothers”, that is, people who consciously fought against Soviet power. At the same time, we must not forget about that era, which was radically different from, say, the peaceful and stable time of Brezhnev’s rule. A terrible geopolitical catastrophe has just ended - the death of Russian Empire, turmoil and Civil War. The Soviet project had many enemies both in Russia and abroad. Our external enemies tried to prepare the “fifth column” so that at the decisive moment it would commit a new “February”. Thus, one of the main reasons for the defeat of Hitler’s Third Reich was a fatal miscalculation: in Berlin, the USSR was considered a colossus with feet of clay, modeled on the Russian Empire of 1914–1917. or Soviet Russia 1920s. The war was supposed to lead to the collapse of the USSR - a military rebellion, palace coup and numerous uprisings in Ukraine, the Baltic states, the Caucasus and Central Asia. However, our enemies miscalculated; they managed to withdraw most of the heterogeneous “fifth column” from the USSR. During the years of “perestroika” and reforms, all those repressed en masse (both innocent and real enemies of the people) were recorded as “innocent victims” of Stalinism.
In 1991-1993 in Russia the counter-revolution won, power was seized by opponents of the Soviet project, supporters of the Western “matrix” - predatory capitalism, caste neo-feudalism, liberal social Darwinism with the division of people into “successful and chosen” and “losers”, into “two-legged tools”. The Soviet project, which sought to build an ideal society of the future - a society of knowledge, service and creation with the dominance of ethics of conscience, was destroyed. The Western society of the “golden calf”, a society of consumption and self-destruction, gained complete dominance.
It is not surprising that such changelings as Solzhenitsyn received in the new Russian society"green light". Streets are named after Solzhenitsyn, contrary to the wishes of the majority of the people, and monuments or memorial plaques to him are erected on the streets; his works are included in the required school curriculum, and the press speaks of him with aspiration as a brilliant writer, a thinker of all times and peoples, a prophet and a brave truth-teller.
The great provocateur also took part in the collapse of the USSR. On September 18, 1990, Solzhenitsyn’s article “How can we develop Russia” was published simultaneously in Literaturnaya Gazeta and Komsomolskaya Pravda. It contains “Russia, which we have lost”, and false Russophilia (false “return to origins”, false Great Russian nationalism), and getting rid of “ballast” in the form of the republics of the USSR, and breaking ties with the former socialist camp, and the aggravation of national relations, etc. In the same year, Solzhenitsyn was restored to Soviet citizenship with the subsequent termination of the criminal case, and in December he was awarded the State Prize of the RSFSR for “The Gulag Archipelago.”

Guys, we put our soul into the site. Thank you for that
that you are discovering this beauty. Thanks for the inspiration and goosebumps.
Join us on Facebook And In contact with

There are so many amazing places in our world that almost no one knows about, where there are no tourists and where it is not easy to get to. Islands with azure waters, flower fields and waterfalls. Well, doesn't this look like a fairy tale?

website will literally tell you in secret about 15 places on our planet that few people know about.

Blagaj, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Blagaj is a small village where small white houses stand among small waterfalls and azure waters under a steep cliff, and a monastery rises in the middle. This is a holy place for dervishes and Sufis, who built a village in this paradise.

Huacachina, Peru

Huacachina is an oasis city in the middle of a vast desert, the road to which takes about 5 hours south from the capital of Peru, Lima. The population there is only about 200 people, so when you get there, you can fully feel cut off from the whole world. You can also go sandboarding on the sandy Peruvian hills.

Lake Hillier, Australia

Just imagine white sand surrounded by eucalyptus forest by the pinkest lake in the world. Lake Hillier is located in southwest Australia, on Middle Island, and was discovered back in 1802. It is notable for the fact that it is pink and does not change color. whole year. It was assumed that special algae and microorganisms gave it its pink color, but subsequent studies did not confirm this. Therefore, no one still knows why the reservoir has such an unusual color. The only real way to get to Hillier is by air.

Marieta Island, "Hidden Beach", Mexico

“Hidden Beach” (Playa de Amor) is a secret beach with crystal clear waters and an abundance of a wide variety of birds. This secluded paradise can only be reached by boat. After a few minutes of swimming through the labyrinths of underwater caves, you will discover a wonderful view of a beach lost in the depths of the island.

Silfra Cleft, Iceland

The Silfra fault is located in Iceland in national park Thingvellir. This amazing place is a favorite among divers and adventure lovers. Swimming here, it is easy to lose your sense of depth, as the pure cold drinking water so transparent that visibility in it is up to 300 meters.

Isola Bella, Italy

There is no doubt that the Italian island of Isola Bella on Lake Lago Maggiore is one of the most beautiful in the world. Almost the entirety of this tiny piece of land is occupied by the luxurious Borromeo Palace and a multi-level flowering garden with grottoes, terraces and fountains. A harmonious addition to all this splendor are the royal birds - white peacocks - slowly wandering around the garden.

Popeye Village, Malta

Popeye village is a collection of wooden cabins originally built for the filming of the Popeye musical in the 1980s. Now it is a resort area with an amusement park, bay cruises and stunning views. In some houses, the furnishings have been preserved from the time of filming and are related to the film.

Red Lands of Dongchuan, China

Dongchuan Red Soil is a mountain valley southwest of Kunming, the capital of Yunnan Province. Due to its remoteness from infrastructure, this place is not on the tourist map of China. It was opened in the mid-1990s. The undulating landscapes, like a patchwork quilt, have brownish-red hues due to the high content minerals and fossils.

Flores Island, Portugal

Flores island is not in vain on the UNESCO list, because it is located here national park with unique flora and fauna. It is located at the westernmost point of the Azores off the coast of Portugal. Translated from Portuguese, this is “Cape of Flowers”, because almost its entire territory is dotted with flowers of various colors and types. There are also natural hot springs and lagoons, rice fields, unique villages, lakes, as well as volcanoes and world-famous caves.

Darvaza “Door to the Underworld”, Turkmenistan

Darvaza is a giant burning crater about 60 meters in diameter and 20 meters deep. Locals They call this place “the gates of hell.” Once upon a time, geologists accidentally found a cave here that had huge reserves natural gas. The gas was set on fire to avoid harmful effects on people and livestock. But the fire, which was supposed to go out in a few days, has been burning for 45 years. This is a unique and fascinating spectacle that people from all over the world come to see.

Lencois Maranhenses, Brazil

Lençóis Maranhenses National Park is located off the coast Atlantic Ocean in northeast Brazil. During the rainy season it is simply an unforgettable sight. Every year at this time, thousands of lagoons with turquoise water and living creatures form among the sand dunes. It remains a mystery how fish and crabs get here after a drought, but the scale of such a spectacle simply cannot help but amaze. Best time to visit Lencois Maranhenses - the period from July to September, when the pools reach full capacity.

The genius of war Kutuzov [“To save Russia, it is necessary to burn Moscow”] Nersesov Yakov Nikolaevich

Chapter 26 The fateful “evening in Fili”: still no one really knows how it happened...

The fateful “evening in Fili”: still no one really knows how it happened...

After Borodin's terrible sacrifices, everything seemed to require the defense of the ancient capital. The soldiers, and the Muscovites themselves, were ready to die rather than let the enemy into the city. The loss of Moscow could undermine the spirit of the Russian army, negatively affect discipline, and give rise to defeatist sentiments. But from a military point of view, the defense of Moscow was impossible. There was no position convenient for defense near Moscow. Moreover, firstly, the actual losses turned out to be worse than the worst fears; secondly, of the approximately 90 thousand soldiers and officers who retreated from the Borodino field, only 60–65 thousand were not only experienced, but also more or less combat-ready, and this was, of course, not enough for a repeat battle with Napoleon. And he, having received reinforcements, with a force of up to 95 thousand people, which means, having almost one and a half superiority in forces, was already moving from Ruza to Zvenigorod, bypassing Moscow from the south with Poniatovsky’s corps along the Borovskaya road. And finally, the Russian army did not receive fresh reinforcements after the Battle of Borodino (in particular, from the governor of Moscow Rostopchin) and it needed time to bring up its reserves. It was possible to get this time only by surrendering Moscow, contrary to the wishes of the Tsar, the mood of the army and the people.

Kutuzov had to make a very difficult, extremely unpopular decision.

At first, it was planned to defend Moscow with the forces of Dokhturov - from the Sparrow Hills and Prince Eugene of Württemberg - from the Dragomilovskaya outpost. Taking into account Barclay’s analytical mindset, Kutuzov ordered him to evaluate all the pros and cons of the position proposed for consideration by the commander-in-chief on the banks of the Moscow River between Fili and Sparrow Hills for the last, decisive battle under the walls of Moscow. The methodical Mikhail Bogdanovich made a detailed analysis of the location of the Russian army, then showed Mikhail Illarionovich a drawing of the position, which made a strong impression on the “old fox of the north.”

The new 6-kilometer position on the banks of the Moscow River between Fili and Sparrow Hills, chosen by Kutuzov’s favorite K.F. Tol, was really not suitable for battle. The right flank abutted the forest, and the situation with a detour to the rear on the right depended on who took possession of it. The left wing was located on the top of the Sparrow Hills, but in front of it there was flat terrain on which the enemy could concentrate about 30 thousand people for an attack. And although the rear of the Russian position, which was only two kilometers, was covered by the Moscow River, it, as well as Big city in the rear would make retreat much more difficult. Moreover, the descents to the eight floating bridges built were very steep and it would have been necessary to abandon all the artillery, the convoy, and the cavalry would have had a hard time. In case of failure, the entire army would not have been able to be transported to the other side, and the part that had crossed would have been lost while passing through Moscow. In addition, the area was “cut up by ravines” and two winding rivers, Setunya and Karpovka, flowing through the deployment of troops from west to east. This made it difficult for troops to maneuver and infantry to operate in columns and squares. In general, the terrain did not allow one to take a dominant position over the enemy, it could be clearly visible to him, and the troops and artillery positions located here could be subject to destructive artillery fire. It was also believed that the front of the battle formation would be too stretched for the very weakened Russian army.

“He was horrified after listening to me,” Barclay later wrote. All the staff officers - Michaud, Krossar, Ermolov, and his son-in-law Kudashev, his special confidant - everyone with whom the “wise crucian carp” “Larivonych” consulted were of approximately the same opinion.

On September 1 (13), at 5 pm, he convened a military council in Fili, in the hut of the peasant Andrei Frolov, where the Russian army had retreated. It is generally accepted that generals L. L. Bennigsen, M. B. Barclay de Tolly, D. S. Dokhturov, F. P. Uvarov, A. I. Osterman-Tolstoy, P. P. Konovnitsyn, N. N. gathered there . Raevsky, A.P. Ermolov, (quartermaster general), V.S. Lanskoy and two colonels - K.F. Tol and P.S. Kaisarov, who served as duty general of the commander-in-chief's staff.

…However, there are discrepancies in the composition of the council members, since no minutes of the meeting were kept and information about the debates came to us indirectly - from the participants in the fateful “evening in Fili”. In memoirs, as is known, participants or eyewitnesses of events sometimes “forget” some details, and “add” something of their own; it happens: human memory is selective...

Miloradovich's rank (infantry general) could have been present at the council, but he was absent for a good reason: Kutuzov entrusted him with command of the rearguard, holding back Murat's constantly pressing vanguard. But the presence or absence of the Don ataman-“whirlwind” M.I. Platov remains in question.

…By the way, really in historical literature There is still no unity - “was the Don Ataman Platov at that fateful council or was he “treated” with the help of pepper, mustard or kizlyarka that he so adored?!” Some researchers, mainly relying on the data of memoirists, believe that Platov was there and, with his characteristic determination and uncompromisingness, opposed the abandonment of Moscow and for a new battle. However, not everyone agrees that Matvey Ivanovich was actually there: no minutes of the meeting were kept, and the entry in the “Journal of Military Actions” is so meager that neither Raevsky nor Uvarov were there...

According to one of the most common versions, it went something like this! On rights and. O. Chief of Army Staff Leonty Leontyevich Bennigsen put up a rhetorical question for discussion: “Is it beneficial to fight under the walls of Moscow or to leave it to the enemy without a fight?!” Taking advantage of the right of the commander-in-chief, Mikhail Illarionovich Kutuzov, a great master of “shifting the arrows to a time favorable to him”, deftly transferred the subject of discussion to a different plane: “Should we expect an attack in a disadvantageous position or should we cede Moscow to the enemy?!”

...By the way, testimonies of the generals surrounding Kutuzov or, as they were called by A.P. Ermolov, a well-known among them, “collaborators” who, under certain circumstances, were eager to take his place if the old man suddenly “stumbled”, about how the fateful meeting of that memorable military man took place Council in Fili are very diverse. It is possible that this very fact allows us to assume that the commander-in-chief trusted his “collaborators” very little, preferring in face-to-face conversations with them not to say a word of truth about his true intentions. It is quite possible that after the fateful incident many years ago with the “mocking” of Field Marshal P. A. Rumyantsev, Mikhail Illarionovich strictly followed the axiom - “even a pillow should not know the thoughts of the commander”: what “two” know, everyone knows...

The first to take the floor contrary to subordination (according to the tradition of military councils, the commanders who were junior in rank, position and age were supposed to speak first), Barclay spoke categorically and to the point! He criticized the position chosen for the battle by Tolem to smithereens. According to the authoritative opinion of Mikhail Bogdanovich, it was very similar to the position under... Friedland! He firmly spoke out in favor of leaving the Mother See in order to save the army and proposed retreating to the Vladimir (Nizhny Novgorod) road in order to maintain communications with St. Petersburg.

And yet, generals Bennigsen, Dokhturov, Konovnitsyn and Ermolov spoke out in favor of giving battle to Napoleon! But generals Raevsky and Osterman-Tolstoy supported Barclay, proposing to retreat. Uvarov - according to some sources, voted for retreat, according to others - against it.

Then Bennigsen began to appeal to... the patriotism of the Russian soul! Some historians do not rule out that he voted for another battle largely because of his confrontation with Kutuzov, whom for some time he was ready to “put a spoke in his wheels”: if only there was chance. Osterman-Tolstoy, who had long despised Bennigsen, asked him a rhetorical question: “Who will guarantee the success of the battle?” The trickster Leonty Leontyevich retorted in his characteristic manner: “If this had been doubted, the military council would not have taken place and you would not have been invited here.”

…By the way, who at that time, by virtue of his position (chief of army staff), was aware of many events, Alexey Petrovich Ermolov later expressed a very interesting assumption. He did not rule out that Kutuzov, firmly repeating to everyone about the need for a new battle with the Napoleonic army under the walls of Moscow, in fact was not at all going to risk his reputation again in a decisive battle with Bonaparte, much less tempt fate again! The fact is that for the second time a categorical order from the army “Stand and die!” (largely due to this battle of Borodino and it was “made a draw” by them!) could not pass: “you cannot step into the same river twice”! For himself personally, the “old fox of the north” had long ago decided everything: to surrender Moscow in order to save the army and Russia. But first he talks about this out loud for a number of good reasons I couldn't say! Moreover, quite recently, in all his letters to the Moscow Governor-General Fyodor Vasilyevich Rostopchin, Mikhail Illarionovich wrote that he would never surrender Moscow, swore by his gray hair, promised to die with his bones, wrote that “the loss of Moscow is connected with the loss of Russia,” that he would never give up ancient capital. And he himself did exactly the opposite: he retreated and decided to surrender Moscow. This happens to... people who know that it is... impossible to tell the truth!!! Kutuzov was then “saved” by Barclay at the council in Fili! He, as a former minister of war, categorically stated that the bloodless Russian army would definitely not be able to withstand another battle like the Battle of Borodino: “I speak as a soldier: the salvation of Russia does not depend on Moscow; most of all it must save troops; we must leave Moscow without a battle... If we do not lose courage and are active, then the capture of Moscow will prepare the death of Napoleon.” According to the same Ermolov, when Barclay first spoke about the need to retreat, Kutuzov “could not hide his admiration that it was not he who would be given the idea of ​​retreat.” "Larivonych" (that was his name among the generals) cleverly took advantage of the confusion that came after such a sharp statement by Barclay de Tolly and Bennigsen’s unsuccessful argument with him. In the oppressive silence that followed, “Larivonych” uttered the historical phrase at the right time: “...I order to retreat!” Having agreed with Barclay on the need to retreat from Moscow, he nevertheless chose a different direction, which, as it turned out, was strategically the most correct...

With a feeling of deepest grief, Russian soldiers left Moscow.

Moscow! - how much there is in this sound

For the Russian heart merged,

How much echoed in him...

The Russians abandoned their ancient capital, which for the first time in 200 years was in the hands of foreigners. In addition, proper measures to evacuate material and other assets from the city were not taken in advance.

Kutuzov's decision to leave Moscow caused irritation and fear in Emperor Alexander I. The Tsar was afraid that, having taken Moscow, Napoleon would go to the northern capital of the Russian Empire - St. Petersburg.

...By the way, the king was very dissatisfied not only with the loss of his ancient capital, but also with the fact that it later burned down! Today, by the way, it is no secret that the Russians themselves set it on fire! He wrote an irritated letter to the newly appointed Field Marshal Mikhail Illarionovich Golenishchev-Kutuzov: “You... owe a response to the offended fatherland for the loss of Moscow...” Letters to him from the emperor, filled with reproaches and reprimands during this period, give every reason to believe that Alexander I in the current critical situation was not only dissatisfied with Kutuzov, but was also preparing to remove him from command if compelling reasons appeared ( according to some reports, the candidacy of P. A. Zubov has already been discussed for this post). Kutuzov was able to cleverly hide behind Barclay’s harsh conclusions at the council in Fili, but he should have been responsible for the decision. Not only the entire arsenal remained in Moscow (156 guns, 74,974 rifles, 39,846 sabers and 27,119 artillery shells), but also thousands of wounded. According to various sources, from 2 to 15 thousand wounded remained in Moscow. (True, some historians raise the number of abandoned people to 20–22 thousand.) The Moscow Governor-General Fyodor Vasilyevich Rostopchin did not have any carts to evacuate them, which he used to transport fire brigades and “fire extinguishing equipment” so that the French would have nothing with which to extinguish the fires. The king was annoyed that the crafty old man (before that he swore that Moscow would not be abandoned under any circumstances!), Having made such a decision, he did not hasten to notify the sovereign about it. Mikhail Illarionovich understood that he would have to answer, and, in the end, sent a report in which there was not a word of truth: “All the treasures, the arsenal and almost all property, both state and private, were taken out of Moscow, and not a single nobleman didn’t stay in it.” The resourceful Mikhail Illarionovich covered himself with a note to the chief of staff Napoleonic army Marshal Berthier, in which he wrote that “the wounded remaining in Moscow are entrusted to the philanthropy of the French troops.” Wherein he knew for sure from the talkative Fedka Rostopchin that Moscow would be burned and many of his wounded soldiers - Borodin's heroes - would die in the fire of a gigantic fire that soon engulfed the capital. (The death toll remains a matter of intense debate among historians!) True, most of the wounded Russian officers were rescued by the French. Meticulous Alexander I sent a special messenger, his especially trusted interrogator, Adjutant General of Prince P.M. Volkonsky, to find out all the ins and outs of... Alexei Petrovich Ermolov, “how did it happen that Moscow was surrendered... without a single shot?!” Ermolov somehow managed to find out the true purpose of the “investigator’s” visit and skillfully disappeared for some time, “finding himself out of reach.” Alexey Petrovich knew when it was better to “quit the game.” At the same time, the sovereign was vindictive and over the years he would remember the “wise minnow” Ermolov for his disappearance maneuver. But this will not happen very soon...

From the book I take my words back author Suvorov Viktor

Chapter 6 Nobody wrote about the war like that! It is necessary to specifically prove that Zhukov was an outstanding strategist. But no one has ever substantiated this, so we can take it for now as a fact that the “Marshal of Victory” understood this area insofar as (and he himself is incredibly boring

From the book Where Should We Go? Russia after Peter the Great author Anisimov Evgeniy Viktorovich

Chapter 5 No one abolished the Empire Reviewing the legacy of the giant The legacy inherited by Peter’s successors in international sphere, was truly huge. A powerful empire stretching from Kola to Kola Peninsula to Astrabad in Persia, from Kyiv to Okhotsk,

From the book Why Was Stalin Killed? Crime of the century author Kremlev Sergey

Chapter Sixteen “THE LAST SUPPER” AND THE KISS OF JUDAS Then one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went to the high priests and said: What will you give me if I betray Him? They offered him thirty pieces of silver; And from that time on he began to look for an opportunity to betray

From the book History of Russia in small polka dots author Eliseeva Olga Igorevna

I DON'T KNOW - NO ONE KNOWS! (“SECRETS BEHIND SEVEN SEALS”) The vast majority of amateurish discoveries are discoveries of purely personal significance, that is, they are discoveries for oneself, one’s wife and family, and, at most, for friends or colleagues. The historian is also an amateur, say, in

From the book On the Path to Victory author Martirosyan Arsen Benikovich

Myth No. 41. No one really counted those killed during the war, and therefore it is still impossible to understand how many actually died on the battlefields, and the figures that have now been published are just another propaganda

From the book The Third Project. Volume III. Special Forces of the Almighty author Kalashnikov Maxim

From the book Unknown Junkers author Antseliovich Leonid Lipmanovich

Plant in Fili The real deal began in January 1922, when a representative of the German government came to Junkers in Dessau. – Our preliminary negotiations with the Russians revealed their interest in building metal aircraft as part of the war effort.

From the book Kingdom of the Sons of the Sun author

From the book The Krupp Steel Empire. The history of the legendary weapons dynasty author Manchester William

Chapter 22 Need knows no law At the end of the spring of 1884, one impoverished Norwegian woman knocked on the door of the Hugel villa, but the servants of the old “cannon king” ordered her to leave. That same evening she wrote a letter to Alfred himself. Apparently, the plight of the foreigner touched him, and

From the book The Jewish World [The most important knowledge about the Jewish people, their history and religion (litres)] author Telushkin Joseph

From the book Crimea. Military history[From Ivan the Terrible to Putin] author Verkhoturov Dmitry Nikolaevich

Chapter Four. The fateful battle The decisive battle was still ahead, but Devlet Giray believed that he would achieve victory. Setting out on a campaign in May 1572, he announced that he would crush the Moscow state and unite the former Kazan and Astrakhan khanates under his rule and

From the book Kingdom of the Sons of the Sun (illustration with alpha channel) author Kuzmishchev Vladimir Alexandrovich

Chapter IX. When no one could resist the Royal Council. Drawing from the chronicle of Guaman Poma As we have already said, by the end of the reign of Huayna Capac, the Incas had every reason to believe that there was no force in the world capable of resisting them. But it was during this period that they

From the book Two Stories about the Secrets of History author Bershadsky Rudolf Yulievich

What Ruzmat knows and what he doesn’t know Side by side with the expedition’s scientific staff, auxiliary workers are working - mainly collective farmers from the nearby collective farms “Algabas” and “Kzyl-Kazakh”. Perhaps, reasoning abstractly, for conclusions that are drawn on the basis

From the book The Roswell Mystery author Shurinov Boris

Chapter 21. From “it was - it wasn’t” to the search for the site of the disaster And if we assume that the seller of the film document does not confuse anything by calling Socorro-Magdalene, are we trying to deceive ourselves and link the film to an incident that is now relatively well known to us? For

From the book Mysteries of History. Patriotic War 1812 author Kolyada Igor Anatolievich

“One hour decides the fate of the Fatherland”: military council in Fili after the Battle of Borodino Russian army retreated to Moscow along the Mozhaisk road. When approaching the city, the acting chief of the General Staff, cavalry general L. Bennigsen received

From the book Routes: Russian schoolchildren about migrations, evacuations and deportations of the twentieth century author Shcherbakova Irina Viktorovna

“All this was, was, was...” The fate of a family of special settlers from the Lower Volga region Anna Molchanova, Anna Noskova P. Pervomaisky, Sysolsky district of the Komi Republic, scientific adviser T.A. Popkova About the concept of the work and the authors of the memoirsFor several years in a row, we, two

, many do not find a partner even by the age of thirty. Russian virgins told Snob why they still haven’t given up their virginity, how hard it is to take care of yourself, and how to cope with loneliness

Vladimir, 27 years old, Sergiev Posad:

I learned about sex at the age of 8 from my mother’s romance novels. My parents never talked to me about this.

From the very beginning I was unlucky in my personal life. The first girl I fell in love with didn't pay attention to me at all. I was unrequitedly in love for four years, and then she died of cancer. The second girl mocked me: in the presence of her friend, she began to disgrace me that I was still a boy, she pranked me on the phone, that she was tumbling with someone else. I suffered enough from her!

Relatives tried to help by hiring a girl of easy virtue. But my heart was busy then, and I was faithful to the person I love.

Until I was 25, I had no libido. I thought about having sex without sexual desire, in the hope that it would somehow shake me up. But the idea failed miserably: I met a virgin, offered her sex, and she didn’t want to fornicate before the wedding. And I am by nature a powerful person, a leader who does not tolerate failure.

One fine day I wondered why I didn’t have sex, what was stopping me from having sex and having fun? Neither shyness, nor timidity, nor religiosity suited me; all that remained was the lack of libido. I came across an article about asexuality, then found a website where these people gather, and found myself thinking that I was reading about myself. I think I'm asexual due to lack of testosterone. I have no hair on my back and chest, my stubble grows very slowly. When I took up yoga, the attraction appeared, the growth of my mustache and beard also accelerated, now I have to shave every four days.

My friends don't know that I'm a virgin. I successfully hide this: I have a lot of theoretical knowledge, I’m not shy, you can’t tell from me that there wasn’t a girl, you’d think that I’ve been having sex since I was 12 years old. Only my current girlfriend knows about my peculiarity. We met on the Internet and haven’t seen each other yet, she lives far away. We plan to have sex at the first opportunity. She reacted normally to my innocence, she was pleased to be the first.

At first I was glad that she was not a virgin; I like that the girl is more experienced. But then I became jealous.

I asked for advice on this matter from various religious groups. I believe there is hell, heaven and God - that's where my faith ends. I don’t even know what prompted me to join these groups, I just thought that knowledgeable people they will give useful advice. And they only said that I should find a virgin and marry her. This is not my option. Then I found a good psychologist, and he helped me cope with jealousy and become a man who does not obsess over the virginity of his chosen one.

Imagine the situation: a wife goes to church on Sunday to praise God, and her husband goes to drink with friends. And what kind of family this will be!

Svetlana, 32 years old, Samara:

I believe in God, in Jesus Christ, I go to Protestant Church. For me, as for all true Christians, sex before marriage is a sin. God originally designed sex for husband and wife to enjoy in the marital bed. It is so wonderful when you know that your spouse belongs only to you. It's called fidelity! This is how God intended it, and this is the beauty of the relationship between a man and a woman. But there is also Satan, who distorts what God created. He convinces people that premarital sex and cheating on your spouse are pleasures, when in fact it always brings pain and suffering.

I haven’t encountered any misunderstanding or ridicule: it’s not written on my forehead that I’m a virgin, I don’t talk about it too much. In addition, my social circle consists of friends from church with the same beliefs. Why do you need a relationship that does not lead to a family? Just to have it? Swim and quit? I do not get the point of it. You need to date someone you are going to marry and who has the same values ​​as you. Otherwise how to live? Imagine the situation: a wife goes to church on Sunday to praise God, and her husband goes to drink with friends. And what kind of family this will be!

If you constantly think about sex and work yourself up, then, of course, your body will become heated, but if you think about values, everything will be calm. It's like fire: if you add wood, it will flare up, if not, it will just burn slowly.

How many of us can be sure that we will live to old age? And how long will we be weak for water-bearing children to run to us with glasses?

Alexey, 28 years old, Moscow:

My parents never interfered in my personal life. They worked, I studied. They didn’t talk to me about sex, and I didn’t ask them.

I never met a girl I loved, and I didn’t really look for her. The girls didn't pay attention to me, and I didn't follow them. I am a technician by life, a circuit engineer: at the university there were no girls at all in the stream, at work there was an exclusively male team.

Some friends know that I am a virgin, some guess, but no one judges. And one day there were problems at work. One of my family man colleagues, a fat man who liked to rummage through other people’s underwear, tried to become my friend, and when he received a refusal, he began to hang signs on the doors “virgin’s office,” “onanist’s closet.” I approached the boss and said: “He or I.” And this fat guy is a fellow countryman and friend of the boss, and he chose him. At my current job, my colleagues are not very interested in my personal life, for which I thank them.

Being a virgin is not difficult - masturbation has not been canceled! In general, the further you go, the easier it is: with age, girls are needed less and less. I don't feel lonely. I have parents who need help, friends with whom I communicate. We need to get busy!

Raising a child and educating it takes at least 25 years. This is a feat that not everyone is capable of. We come into this world alone, and we will leave alone. How many of us can be sure that we will live to old age? And how long will we be weak for water-bearing children to run to us with glasses? Five years maximum, then death. And why does a child have to carry water for you in old age? Or to a nursing home, or to Ibiza, as for me.

Only my parents and my aunt know about my chastity, and they approve of it. Although they constantly pester me with questions about when I will give birth to their grandchildren

Maria, 29 years old, Orenburg:

I learned about sex from magazines that I read secretly from my parents when I was a teenager. My parents didn’t talk to me about sex because they thought I was still young. When I became an adult, my mother said that sex was only permissible after marriage. And I still adhere to this principle.

I remained celibate because I had not yet met my soulmate, my prince charming. And I’m also very afraid of the first time and generally think sex is dirty and vulgar.

I can easily do without sex, but I really want affection, hugs and kisses. Unfortunately, I have never kissed anyone yet: guys don’t pay any attention to me, probably because I dress too simply and don’t wear makeup. No one ever tried to seduce me, there was no one, I never dated anyone.

I'm very lonely. I used to work as a seamstress in a factory, but I was laid off. The only thing that saves me from loneliness is communication with my virtual friends and my favorite pen pal. I’ve been corresponding with him for two years now, and he loves me too. But he lives very far away - in another country, and he and I will never be able to be together. I only hope for our meeting, but he can’t come to visit me yet, and maybe he doesn’t really want to come. He is not asexual and sooner or later he would want an intimate relationship with me, but I am not ready for this and I only want hugs, caresses and kisses with him, without sex. If he started pestering me with intimacy, then I would probably be disappointed in him and we would break up.

Only my parents and my aunt know about my chastity, and they approve of it. Although they constantly pester me with questions about when I will get married and give birth to grandchildren. But it’s very difficult for me to find a good, understanding guy for whom sex will not be important, but true, pure love will be important. My ideal relationship is a legal marriage with an asexual or anti-sexual guy with whom we will only have hugs, caresses and kisses, without sexual relations. I want children, but only adopted ones.

Sometimes the present is really missing, real communication and a real loved one!

Most people like sex, but that’s the majority - what can you take from it!

Kirill, 24 years old, Ekaterinburg:

My parents never talked to me about sex. When I was in first grade, my peers told me everything. And I didn't like it. Years have passed, but I have not changed my opinion. I am anti-sexual and intend to stick to my principles. I believe that sex is overrated and not created for pleasure: it’s disgusting to put something in a person that you use to go to the toilet! This is illogical, therefore, there is a catch in this. It’s not just that sex causes a lot of diseases and problems. And in general, 5 minutes is not pleasure! Most people like sex, but that’s the majority - what can you take from it!

I didn't have a girlfriend. If she wanted intimacy and posed the question bluntly, I would have parted without regrets right there.

I get lonely, but not because of sex, but because I don’t have a friend nearby. But if you don’t take it to heart, think about pressing matters, after 10 minutes everything comes back to normal.

Relatives don't know. Some of my friends know that I am a virgin and antisexual, but they treat me calmly - not to say that they directly understand, but it’s normal. I faced ridicule, but it’s not scary if anti-sexuality is your choice and principle.

I planned to have children through, but now I changed my mind: children are a waste of time and energy.

Now I’m thinking of saving money and buying a wife from Asia through an agency. It will cost much less than our show off

Artem, 27 years old, Krasnodar:

I didn’t have a father, and I hardly saw my mother; she worked all day. I'm used to loneliness - always alone. Since childhood I had to survive alone. I educated myself: I read books, watched films. I learned about sex in kindergarten.

I believe that one should marry as a virgin. The exception is widowers and widows. A used girl is like a used condom, everyone has come in it and now I have to put it on! Plus these are viral infections, abortions, complaints about penis size and memories of past relationships.

Friends and colleagues know that I am a virgin and sometimes make fun of me. But I’m not weak, I can wash the floors with each of them, so this happens very rarely. They tell me that this is impossible, that I need to fuck someone and look for a used one, but no. I tried to build relationships, but all the girls only want money, and before I didn’t have it. Now I work a lot physically to pay off my mortgage. It takes all my energy.

There is only one sad thing: when I move to my own house, I will have to cook myself, and this will take time. The older I get, the less I want a girl. Now I’m thinking of saving money and buying a wife from Asia through an agency. It will cost much less than our show-off stuff.

My mother stopped telling me anything a long time ago. Sometimes we quarrel when she watches TV series, and there are only betrayals. I answer everything: if you want a daughter-in-law, look for a normal one, but I don’t know anyone like that.

No one died from abstinence. Unrealized energy can be successfully sublimated into creativity

Ivan, 23 years old, Moscow:

My parents taught me kindness, accuracy, politeness, and tact. They didn't talk about sex openly. When I was 14, my dad asked if I was aware of all this? I answered that yes, although I only imagined everything roughly. I received more detailed information after I turned 18, mainly from the Internet.

I'm an introvert. I've always liked being alone. I preferred the computer, cinema, TV, books to parties. From 8 to 18 years old I studied chess and went to music school, so there was essentially no time left for communication. I was not good at communicating, I frankly avoided beautiful girls, I had no idea how to talk to them, and even if they themselves offered friendship, I closed myself off or turned them away.

As a result, by the age of 23, I have a clear problem with informal communication and the absence of any relationships. I don't know how to communicate with the opposite sex. Now, sensibly assessing the situation, I am rather pleased that I am a virgin. I don’t consider it necessary to get rid of this on purpose or spontaneously, because I still have the opportunity to find my one and only and make her happy with this fact.

My parents, I think, guess, but don’t bother asking: either they are afraid of hurting my feelings, or they consider me independent and an adult. I don't have many friends. They know - they know, but they rarely joke. Once they gave me a framed condom for my birthday. I see no reason to be offended by the truth, I’m ready to laugh with them.

No one died from abstinence. Unrealized energy can be successfully sublimated into creativity. True, in such a situation loneliness is inevitable, there is no escape from it. But for me it is not something negative, I have already gotten used to it. At times the blues come over me and I fall into apathy, but this happens to everyone. Life.