Speaker A
KMTV is on the air with the program Ukraine. I am your host, Dianis Koptar.
Professor Savelyev discusses brain evolution and social instincts in the context of the Ukraine conflict, highlighting biological selection and societal impacts.
Key Takeaways
- Human brain evolution is ongoing and influences social and political events.
- Social instincts are environmentally shaped and critical for community living.
- Humans uniquely self-select traits, often harshly, impacting societal outcomes.
- The Ukraine conflict exemplifies the clash of differing social instincts and evolutionary processes.
- Understanding brain science provides valuable insights into complex social phenomena.
What the video covers
- The Ukraine conflict is analyzed through the lens of ongoing human brain evolution and biological selection.
- Social instincts, formed in childhood and embedded in specific brain areas, play a critical role in societal behavior and conflicts.
- Humans uniquely practice self-selection, choosing traits based on social and environmental factors rather than natural selection alone.
- The development of large frontal brain regions enabled humans to share resources and live socially, a key evolutionary step.
- Women’s role in offspring care influenced the evolution of social instincts and brain development.
- Men’s use of evolved brain regions diverged, often leading to inventions and behaviors unrelated to social care.
- The conflict in Ukraine reflects clashes of social instincts shaped by different environments and historical contexts.
- Biological and social instincts balance is crucial for societal stability; disruption leads to conflict and destruction.
- Historical and regional factors in Ukraine contribute to the current social and political tensions.
- The discussion highlights the importance of understanding brain science to interpret social phenomena and conflicts.
Chapters
- 00:00Introduction and Context of Ukraine Conflict
- 02:24Historical Examples of Biological Selection
- 05:04Innate vs Social Instincts
- 07:48Evolution of Social Brain Regions
- 10:41Role of Women and Men in Brain Evolution
- 14:01Social Instincts and Their Impact on Society
- 18:11Historical and Regional Influences in Ukraine
- 25:12Brain Development and Political Leadership
- 30:25Negative Selection and Brain Function in Conflict
- 37:25Concluding Thoughts on Brain Science and Society
Full Transcript — Download SRT & Markdown
Speaker A
Today in our studio is Doctor of Biological Sciences Sergey Vyacheslavovich Savelyev, one of our most renowned brain specialists. Since human actions and social phenomena are largely determined by the brain, I would like to hear our respected expert's scientific perspective on the
Speaker A
events occurring in Ukraine and the social phenomena we are all witnessing. Hello, Mr. Savelyev.
Speaker A
Hello. Everyone has an opinion about what is happening on the Maidan. That is wonderful.
Speaker A
And everyone has an opinion about what is currently happening in Donetsk and Luhansk. As we know, everyone knows how to coach a football club. Everyone knows how to run a country. But I would like to hear a scientist's opinion on
Speaker A
this matter. What are your impressions from a scientific point of view regarding these events?
Speaker A
Well, these events are a very, uh, classic example, a very vivid one, of the fact that brain evolution is still ongoing today. So, we are seeing a living example; it is almost living evolution. You know how there are
Speaker A
picture books called living history or living dinosaurs. Well, truthfully, by turning on the TV, one can take great pleasure in observing the living evolution of the human brain. What is the matter? I mean, what is happening?
Speaker A
Of course, it is very bad when people kill each other. No matter the reason, whether in the Middle East, in Ukraine, or in Latin America, it is still very bad and, generally speaking, it really won't do. It goes to show that
Speaker A
biological selection is taking place. Biological selection always occurs through destruction. The most effective methods, as we know, were the ones invented in France by the kind doctor, the guillotine, or the three-tier gallows for mass executions. That was a
Speaker A
French invention, by the way, which the French are proud of and consider a sign of their civilization, because those famous guidebooks for travelers, published by such houses in the 19th century, featured pamphlets about the French. Claiming that the French
Speaker A
invented everything: the torpedo, the steam engine, and everything else in the world. Well, their major achievements also include the guillotine and the three-tier gallows.
Speaker A
It's remarkable. So, we are talking about—and they truly demonstrated—that this is a matter of mass selection of people based on specific traits.
Speaker A
Which ones? We need to understand what is happening. In reality, all of human history is not a change in economic systems or a change in social relations. It is a mere statement of facts. The patient sweated before dying. Yes, he did sweat.
Speaker A
That is good. Within the framework of that joke, history examines the issues of socio-economic systems, changes in social relations, and other such nonsense. Because in reality, biological evolution, having begun in a purely human sense about 4.5 million
Speaker A
years ago, continues to this day. And it consists of two very important components that must be understood. And in order to transition to Ukraine, one simple thing needs to be understood.
Speaker A
Over 4.5 million years, humanity has tripled the size of its brain. No other creature on this planet has evolved at such a speed regarding nervous tissue.
Speaker A
Hence the question: how did this happen? Did someone stand over us and calmly select those who were inferior, whose brains were small, with a flyswatter, leaving those who were, well, big-headed? No, of course, that didn't happen. The horror is that we are the
Speaker A
only species on the planet that engages in self-selection. That is, we have artificial selection. We select ourselves based on the traits needed in a given situation. And we select very cruelly, worse than any breeder who wrings the necks of their pets if they
Speaker A
don't match up in tail length or coat color. We don't. Well, we talked about this in previous broadcasts, yes. Well, this brings us back to the question of what happens during every such shift in formation. How does this
Speaker A
change, which we are currently observing in Ukraine, among other places, happen at all? Yes, very simply. When a sufficient number of people with certain social, rather than innate, instincts are gathered, they simply change the situation in their favor.
Speaker A
Where are these social instincts stored and where do they come from? Herein lies the root cause of the Ukrainian conflict. These social instincts are instilled in a person during childhood, that is, in that very childhood, in the environment in which they grow up. We
Speaker A
have innate instincts, which are well known to everyone. We don't need to be taught to breathe, swallow, mate, and so on. We manage to do that well enough on our own. But social instincts are environmental. And we have special
Speaker A
areas of the brain where these instincts are loaded, just as the genome is stored inside cells. These social instincts form the basis of human existence. If a person does not receive these instincts in early childhood, they can no longer return to
Speaker A
society. There are many numerous examples of such pseudo-Mowglis. So it is necessary, just like innate instincts. Social instincts are formed by the environment and are embedded in the human brain in those areas that are characteristic almost exclusively of
Speaker A
humans and, to a small extent, higher primates. These are mainly human areas: the lower temporal lobe and the lower part of the frontal lobe. These centers evolved as human. They were subject to selection. It was precisely by the
Speaker A
presence of these areas that people were selected. That is precisely why the brain grew. Why? Because these regions allow for a social life. If you live in a community, you must share food. If you don't share food, you
Speaker A
cannot live in a community. And animals don't know how to do that. Yes. Well, for those who don't believe it, let them try taking a favorite bone away from their dog.
Speaker A
But how did animals survive then? And why did humans need it? Because they have an instinctive care for their offspring. And when females are nursing their young, and males too, it is, so to speak, inhibited. While there are small pups, they certainly
Speaker A
have a specific scent. There is an inhibition process; they bring food and share it to pass the genome to the next generation. Humans had a different situation, and that is a unique feature of human evolution, which continues right before our eyes. We will come
Speaker A
back to this now. The fact is that humans began to evolve as humans when large, inhibitory frontal regions appeared. What for? So that upon seeing food, one would not immediately snatch it from a neighbor, but share it with
Speaker A
an unrelated individual, with an unrelated person. The source of this, by the way—which is interesting and paradoxical—is women, because women care for their offspring. Whichever women cared for their descendants longer and passed the genome to the next generation had a better chance of
Speaker A
leaving a genetic trace. It is clear that in this case, rigid selection was at work, and females who looked after and fed their young well had a better chance of surviving in history as a genome carried by their descendants.
Speaker A
And men, as is well known, love to fertilize females in unlimited quantities. They don't have to get pregnant, you know, or nurse them for a long time afterward. A certain degree of polygamy is present. Therefore, men—but the genome is shared, we
Speaker A
exchange genes—men got this very frontal region as a free gift. And we used it without a conscience. While women use it specifically for what it evolved for—sharing food and caring for offspring—men, out of idleness and boredom, had to use it to invent
Speaker A
all sorts of nonsense, like television and the like. We're getting carried away into a completely different topic. We are not getting carried away at all, because what is the question actually about?
Speaker A
All further evolution is built on two things: a balance of social instincts and innate instincts. The environment in which a person grows up determines their social instincts. They are immutable, and you cannot rem...
Speaker A
You can only kill that person in 99 out of 100 cases. They will never abandon the inner convictions they absorbed with their mother's milk. What happened in Ukraine? That is the direct topic of our conversation. Over 23 years, they
Speaker A
created a system, starting even before Kuchma. I was there in Ukraine in the eighties. I remember perfectly well the completely rabid, yet swept-under-the-rug nationalism, especially among the intelligentsia, who are saying something now; where are the Ukrainian academicians, where are
Speaker A
the major scientists with world-renowned names? I arrived there at the time and saw two things. The eighties, there wasn't even a scent of perestroika yet. I attended a few conferences. I was horrified by the combination of rabid nationalism and,
Speaker A
let’s say, the not-very-high scientific value of the presentations. And since that time, I never went back until last year, when in the month of August of last year, I traveled across all of Ukraine and saw that a war would
Speaker A
start there any day now, which, in fact , happened a few months later. It was obvious. The discrepancy between what was happening in the fields, factories, homes, stores, and restaurants, and what was going on in people's heads was
Speaker A
very obvious. And what was the discrepancy? The discrepancy was precisely that people behaved as if they were Europeans, everything was quite normal, like in Moscow, yet, strictly speaking, they professed and acted upon completely different ideas that had been instilled in them over these 20-
Speaker A
plus years. That is, the instincts that were instilled in these people, that is the instinct of nationalism, which now cannot be beaten out of them. And hence the conflict, because these people, having done their job, appeared unnecessary, including to the
Speaker A
leadership of Ukraine. Nothing can be done with them anymore; they can only be gotten rid of somehow. And so they are being sent—since this instinct cannot be beaten out—they are sent where they find their own death. That is, I think this is a fairly conscious
Speaker A
activity, or intuitive, but nonetheless , it is a reckoning and a demonstration of the fact that humans evolved due to these social instincts. What are the advantages? They allow for very rapid change. Take, for example, Nazi Germany . There, in practically one generation
Speaker A
less than that even less, they manufactured people who had a set of instincts instilled in them, who were then throwing fifteen-year-old boys under tanks.
Speaker A
There you go. That is, if you skillfully use a combination of social instincts, you can make anything you want out of people, because these instincts cannot be beaten out.
Speaker A
Therefore, those who lead Ukraine will, one way or another, have to send all these guys, well, essentially, into the line of fire. Because nothing can be done with them anymore. If they want to go to Europe with this, it might look
Speaker A
very indecent. Well then, the question arises: what does the leadership itself represent from the perspective of your science?
Speaker A
Well, the leadership is biological; I’ll say it again, what we are discussing, including in Ukraine, is a biological process. And biological processes will unfold according to their own laws, quite naturally, which is also certain. Those who have come to
Speaker A
power there now. Well, first of all, there is another layer beneath all of this, besides the method of fooling people and using them. There is another very important layer: the ethnic problem. Let's abstract from who is bad and who is good, and let's imagine that
Speaker A
everything truly happens, there will be two more years of war, and in the end, Ukraine becomes a single, indivisible, independent state, as today's authorities want. What will it cost the poor Ukrainians? What?
Speaker A
Gigantic population losses, first and foremost. Some will migrate to us. Understood. A great many, especially the Westerners, those who, well, Galicians, will come to the east and perish there. They will be buried in mass graves there, just as they are
Speaker A
doing now. Well, without a trace or any investigation. These are people who have died. The question arises: who benefits from this?
Speaker A
Who? Tell me. Let's look. And whom did these guys, from Western Ukraine and Galicia, harm most during the 20th century? Who were they exterminating, whom were they destroying in heinous ways, mocking, cutting, and hanging throughout almost the entire 20th century? And at the
Speaker A
same time, the Soviet government covered it up perfectly. Whom? Whom? Let's look at the Poles, who are now supporting them very actively. And the Jewish population, which again, from America and within Ukraine itself, also actively supports Poroshenko and
Speaker A
Tymoshenko. To put it mildly, not exactly Ukrainians. Well, the question arises: "Guys, if these people, including the Poles, who were exterminated by Westerners in massive numbers, are supporting and pushing Western Ukrainians to fight the Easterners or our volunteers—it
Speaker A
doesn't matter who—And are thus getting rid of them. Is this not a settling of scores for the 20th century ? Who will end up the winner? The winner will be a completely bled-dry Western Ukraine.
Speaker A
Well, what is the win? The win belongs to those who are participating in all of this. Poland has interests, and American capital, which, frankly speaking, is financing everything, has interests. Yes, it does . So it turns out that, on one hand,
Speaker A
there are economic interests—but that is understandable. Dividing sausages among monkeys was a favorite pastime.
Speaker A
And ethnic, historical grievances are being settled. And so, I can only congratulate the CIA, the Mossad, and the Polish intelligence services for a brilliantly executed operation. They are destroying their sworn enemies with someone else's hands. I just want to
Speaker A
shout:" Ukrainians in the West, what are you doing? You are engaging in self-destruction by listening to your leadership, which sends you to your death and, frankly speaking, has no interest in your lives? None at all. " So, in this regard, although this is,
Speaker A
of course, a conspiratorial model, it still has a right to exist. If we remove all the froth and look at what remains, it looks very bad.
Speaker A
Well, wait, if that happens, it means that millions of people would have to die. There is no talk of that right now . Well, currently it's not in the hundreds.
Speaker A
I know, the talk has long been in the thousands, first of all. Well, thousands—that includes the wounded. Wait, the number of killed is not in the thousands yet. You know, if all the coffins were arriving in Western Ukraine, it would have ended
Speaker A
long ago, because no nation could withstand such losses. Exactly. But even if it’s not profitable for anyone to say so, it is being carefully hidden.
Speaker A
Well, okay, let’s assume it's thousands, that is still far from millions. Well, these are young people.
Speaker A
You see, these are what are always called the flower of the nation at a given time; wiping out such a gene pool for any ethnic group, especially one as small as Galicia—look at its real size and subtract from there.
Speaker A
Yes, about three million. Above that. For them, every ten thousand is a colossal loss.
Speaker A
It’s not only people from Galicia fighting there. No, well, the fact that there are mercantile interests, or what you call soldiers of fortune from all over the world, that is clear. They have already found many there, including Africans and others. That is
Speaker A
not what we are talking about. We are talking about mechanisms. And if evolutionary mechanisms are forming, related to the selection of the brain, who is being selected now? Now they are selecting physically. This means that those who received the wrong instincts
Speaker A
will be replaced by those who received the right ones. That's one thing. And in this way, they increase the speed of selection. You see, evolution does not care if a person is bad or good. The question is, do they have these
Speaker A
properties or not? Look, the people who are committing atrocities don't participate in the fighting there, that is, it's a certain...well, it's the French Revolution number two, in terms of selection. And people are being selected with certain lowered moral
Speaker A
values, let's put it mildly, a tendency toward various atrocities, absolutely controllable, shameless, and other such people. This is the selection process.
Speaker A
They will get preferences in reproduction. What will we get in 20 or 40 years from their descendants?
Speaker A
Yes, if they survive, wait. They, they are not, they are not participating in military operations, as a rule. The ones participating in military operations are the simpletons caught all over Western Ukraine.
Speaker A
They are standing behind their backs, move out. They are standing as, essentially, classic barrier troops of Soviet times.
Speaker A
Of course, they exaggerate them a bit, as is always the case with everything in our history. Yes. But these are the very barrier troops that will drive Western Ukrainians into gunfire, naturally, and they will receive preferences. And that is when a very
Speaker A
bad thing will happen. Then the population will shift, and people will be selected. An order, I say again, with lowered moral and ethical standards, they will always have huge advantages over simple-minded Europe, where tolerance and empathy are cultivated. And when this horde breaks
Speaker A
out into the plains of Poland, Hungary, and Germany, we will watch with pleasure to see how it ends. It will end in truly serious matters, because people with altered consciousness and altered innate instincts pose a colossal danger. And they themselves
Speaker A
are not to blame for this either. They have nothing to do with it. These are experiments funded by the USA, by oligarchs, and by nationalists who have , so to speak, overread pre-revolutionary literature. Including the intelligentsia, who remain silent
Speaker A
and continue to stubbornly support this very position. The price will be its complete destruction, because by the eighties, Ukraine, and Kiev as an intelligent cultural city, had essentially already disappeared. Well, now this is just a certain finale, because after 20 years of Maidans, the
Speaker A
migration from Western Ukraine of far from the most educated or intellectual people, who arrive and settle in Kiev, has certainly borne its fruit.
Speaker A
Therefore, it is a sad picture. But the biological process, multiplied by the economic interests of a small number of baboons, unfortunately yields exactly the results we are observing. There is nothing human in these atrocities. And this must be evaluated exclusively from
Speaker A
a biological point of view, not a humanitarian one. It is already savagery when people start killing each other. Sergey Vyacheslavovich, tell me, please, based on what you are saying, can we conclude that the so-called Maidan is not a revolution of the
Speaker A
people or those who fulfilled the will of the people, but rather a revolution of, let's say, some super-dominants, a small group that imposes its will on the rest? Do I understand correctly from what you said?
Speaker A
Well, technically, yes. But the fact is that this whole story has been brewing for a very long time. This story has a giant tail. Everyone who knows the history of Ukraine, even as superficially as I do, knows perfectly
Speaker A
well that even before Shushkevich and all that lot who were feeding... Before Kravchuk. Before Kravchuk. No, I'm saying that long before World War II this whole story began, when they artificially started to stir things up even before the 1917 revolution, when this
Speaker A
Ukrainian nationalism was being artificially formed. It was raised and cultivated on the basis of three, strictly speaking, pillars: Austria, Poland, and Germany. That is, these three countries nurtured this nationalism in order to, strictly speaking, destroy Russia back then,
Speaker A
just as later under socialism and now under capitalism. It was still a bone in their throat. It is one of their tools, their project. A single project.
Speaker A
The Germans, as we know, implemented it successfully. I'm talking about the export of Lenin with money for the revolution. Well, as a result, the Germans, as you know, struggled for almost 100 years, because of the division of Germany; that is, the
Speaker A
Germans paid a colossal price for their own German stupidity by exporting Lenin here and orchestrating the revolution, they got what they deserved. They want to do the exact same thing with Ukraine . This is also a long-standing story,
Speaker A
because in all the intellectual families that suddenly, unexpectedly, became Ukrainian during the time of Petliura, when he would ride into a village and line up the people, saying: " Who can say 'palyanytsia' correctly?
Speaker A
"" Those who said 'palyanytsia' were spared, and those who said it incorrectly were shot. So, first of all , forgive me, they are tearing down Lenin there now. They should be putting up monuments to him and kissing the
Speaker A
back of his neck, sucking up to him. Why? Who invented the first Ukrainian alphabet? It never existed in the first place. The Communists invented it. Why?
Speaker A
Because it was more prestigious to rule states—not just peoples of an empire, but to rule separate, artificially invented states like Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and so on, and Ukraine is the same thing. And here it’s as if these are whole countries, and not
Speaker A
individual peoples. They invented the alphabet, the writing system, and so on and so forth. You see, it's an artificial project created with the goal of collapsing Russia. A successful project, because 100 years have passed, and we see that it is happening. A
Speaker A
project into which the Communists foolishly laid their own foundation, creating an illusion of artificiality, when words were taken from Polish and simply inserted into Ukrainian as borrowings, just so it wouldn't look like Russian and so on. This is all
Speaker A
well known, after all. Fine. Linguists know all this very well. This is not my specialty, but it is an artificial model. And this artificial model, which they have tried to implement over these 20-plus years, has materialized into a
Speaker A
set of instincts uploaded into the brains of the people born during this time. You can't knock this out of them anymore. You can't explain anything.
Speaker A
You can only distance yourself or, as the Kiev authorities are doing to my horror, simply destroy these people so they don't get in the way. They did their job, now they are not needed; I feel for them. So that’s the system,
Speaker A
a triple artificial model that led to a biological conflict, because this situation is absolutely unnatural and it will end in bloodshed, whether large or small; God willing, it will be bloodless at all. But I am afraid that this will not stop immediately. Could
Speaker A
you speak more specifically about Ukraine's political leaders? Again, from the position that you are a professor, a doctor of biological sciences, and an expert on the brain.
Speaker A
Well, probably, just visually, without a scan, it's hard to tell what's in their heads. Well, perhaps something can be determined.
Speaker A
No, these people are all just solving purely biological problems. Uh, the ones who were recently replaced were solving biological problems, and so are the ones currently in power. It’s pure zoology, maybe not even biology, because, well, the guys are just
Speaker A
occupied with dividing up the means of subsistence for one goal: to gain dominance. And to use that dominance for their own benefit. Well, it’s a purely biological process. And it doesn't matter how.
Speaker A
Well, what isn't a biological process, you know? If they had, for example, taken power and, well, for instance, suddenly those 3 billion given by our country in the past, at the end of the last, yes, they hadn't vanished.
Speaker A
Like now, they've already been given 4 billion, and it has vanished somewhere again. So it’s clear that people reach power, take the money, and it disappears. It’s all so trivial and obvious that it seems pointless to even discuss it. And the selection process
Speaker A
is, in fact, negative. Look, everyone currently in power consists of people for whom rational values hold absolutely no interest.
Speaker A
Is that somehow visible from the structure of the skull, for example? No, that cannot be seen from the structure of the skull.
Speaker A
Well, it's understood that phrenology is pseudoscience. No, it cannot be determined, because sometimes people with all the signs of degeneracy on their faces turn out to be great humanists, pacifists, and decent people . And conversely, people with noble
Speaker A
appearances turn out to be, well, those who fancy young boys, and so on, and perverts, and thieves. There’s plenty of that. There is no direct correlation here. Therefore, you cannot judge them by external features. But if we look at
Speaker A
the track record of Yatsenyuk, for instance, forgive me, he has betrayed and sold out everyone he possibly could . Which means he is a sincere, honest, and consistent fighter for his own bread and butter. Well, that’s wonderful. And on the flag, it
Speaker A
shouldn't be blue and yellow, which is quite strange, I would say. There. Instead, they should just draw a large piece of lard on a fork; that would be appropriate. So, regarding Ukraine. The point is, those currently in power care
Speaker A
the least about the people of Ukraine, and it doesn't matter if they're from the west or the east. To them, it's just a biological tool to solve their own, again, biological objectives. Well , they've just cashed in a tranche.
Speaker A
They barely caught him at the airport when he was trying to fly out. And then they sent him back to work it off. I mean, it's almost laughable to discuss.
Speaker A
These are mere puppets fulfilling clearly assigned functions. They have their own interests, and they are allowed to steal what they want. But of course, they aren't the ones calling the shots; the shots are called from America. Well, that's no surprise.
Speaker A
That's what they all dreamed of and strove for—to find someone to surrender to. That's actually part of the Ukrainian tradition. I don't know what will happen to our roads if they close the border now. Drivers will be incredibly nervous, you understand? The
Speaker A
roads will become dangerous, much more dangerous than before. That's unpleasant, because right now all the drivers are calm, driving safely and following the rules. Why? Because they are all consoled by an entire army of prostitutes from Ukraine on Russia's
Speaker A
roads. And if that gets banned, if they demand this indecency be stopped, drivers will start getting nervous.
Speaker A
That will lead to a large number of accidents. I'm worried. Me too. Sergey Vyacheslavovich, if we move from jokes to more serious matters. On the last broadcast, you made a rather unexpected statement. On the one before last, actually, you said: "Yatsenyuk and
Speaker A
Obama don't have very large brains." God himself commands that I ask you about other political leaders, and for the others, well, brain size doesn't necessarily dictate intellectual ability, of course . But if we look at what I've said many
Speaker A
times before—the brain mass of talented and brilliant people— talented and brilliant people have, on average, heavier brains than the ordinary person. A person with a larger brain has four times the chance of becoming a genius or a talent compared
Speaker A
to an average person. The threshold is around 1,320 grams. The larger it is, the higher the chances. The bigger it is, the greater the chances, compared to those with less. But that doesn't mean a person with a small brain, like
Speaker A
Yatsenyuk himself, couldn't be talented . Though Yatsenyuk is unlikely. Well, there you go. But a person with a small brain, like Anatole France, for example , or our famous legal scholar Koni, who wrote the first Leninist, the first Leninist laws, especially the
Speaker A
criminal ones. Those were people with small brains, but with hyper-specialization, yes. Well, Yatsenyuk specialized in securing his livelihood, which is generally characteristic of all primates and is not a human quality. Well, what he says is certainly fine.
Speaker A
But he is not the one in charge there. We have much more powerful political figures there, after all. And what about Poroshenko? And what about Klitschko? They are the ones calling the shots now.
Speaker A
No, they aren't calling any shots. Well, I mean in the context I'm talking about. You understand, neither Poroshenko nor that American brawler, what's-his-name, Klitschko, they can't decide anything on their own . Well, excuse me. It's clear that there are people behind them, but there
Speaker A
are people behind Yatsenyuk too, yes, behind everyone. And none of them are independent people, so they are just earning their keep. And I don't see what there is to discuss here.
Speaker A
Well, you are discussing Yatsenyuk. Why ? I'm talking about Yatsenyuk simply because I was struck by the fact that when Yatsenyuk and Obama sat together, the two of them had less brains than Cromwell. I mean, Cromwell had over two
Speaker A
kilograms, and these two had maybe a kilogram each. That's it. And subsequent events, I draw your attention to it, proved that I was right. Their wits are not very sharp.
Speaker A
Obama launching that brain research project—I'm not surprised he decided to study the brain in America. It was enough for him to look around and at himself in the mirror to realize that the brain needs to be studied and
Speaker A
developed somehow. That much is clear. Well yes, and Psaki is also a phenomenon. But I think, in reality, these are just political tricks. Obama, Psaki, and their Secretary of State, who would also benefit from a check-up by a neurologist. To me, he seems quite
Speaker A
unwell. That's it. They are, of course, performing the functions of people on their way out. They will commit a mass of deeds useful to economists and the military lobby, and then they will be written off, and people will say, "Look
Speaker A
, see, we had this democracy, we took an African-American and made him president, we hired such weirdos, to put it mildly, like Psaki and others." And they drove America to this state.
Speaker A
We curse them, let them go away, we will choose a nice white man with blue eyes. And he will do exactly the same thing, just under a different guise.
Speaker A
That's all there is to it. Well, that's America. And you can apply the same line of reasoning to Ukraine, or at least a similar one.
Speaker A
Ukraine? I wouldn't be surprised if Obama doesn't really remember who Yatsenyuk or Poroshenko are. I think when he meets them, he’s reminded not of their names, but of who they actually are. Exactly. Because taking all of this seriously...Well, it won't
Speaker A
happen; they’ll just buy Kolomoisky cheap. Or maybe they won't even buy him . They’ll just say, "Take this." He’ll go, take it, and serve himself like a stray dog. But they will work and perform a specific function, because everything depends on them.
Speaker A
Therefore, the individuals in Ukraine don't matter at all. If Poroshenko fails, they’ll bring in the brawler Klitschko; they’re keeping him in the shadows for now so he doesn't stand out . If that doesn't work, then they'll need someone even more radical and
Speaker A
obedient. Perhaps Tymoshenko. Or if not her, they'll pull someone else out. But regarding her psychological, or psycho-cerebral type, if I may put it that way. Tymoshenko. What can you say about her?
Speaker A
She’s quite a lady, who paved her way in politics and the economy by any means possible, essentially selling herself however she could. Whoever was interested, she would go along with them. She did what she could, using her feminine charms and all those other
Speaker A
methods well known to many. By the way, we have plenty of those people too. We shouldn't blame Ukrainians as if they’re the only ones like that. Not at all, we have plenty of people who get into academies and parliaments
Speaker A
using the exact same methods. So there’s nothing new here; it’s a common practice among primates.
Speaker A
Nothing new, of course. I would still like you to comment on why not. What is there to comment on?
Speaker A
She is a person who is absolutely What’s her intelligence like? She has a biological brain. She does whatever is profitable. How can you comment on the brain of a predator that runs around grabbing anything that smells like food, eating, leaving a
Speaker A
mess wherever it can, and then running off? That's how I’d describe it. Savage. Savage. Yes, such savagery. They are absolutely biological, the whole leadership.
Speaker A
Of course, otherwise they would have a sense of what tomorrow holds. How does a human differ from an animal? By striving to create something new, but we see they are all creating something new, right? No, they steal the old
Speaker A
stuff. No, everything old has already been stolen. Well, they use old equipment there, Grads, there.
Speaker A
Anti-aircraft guns, howitzers there. That's it, they use old ones. Have they created anything? No. Have they created some kind of no. Meaning, no creators come from them; what did they invent to lift Ukraine up? Oh, please, they only
Speaker A
invented ways to scam the West and us for money and did that for a long time.
Speaker A
Nothing more. So, that is ruled out. So , what then? What other difference from a human? The main thing is missing. Now , about sharing food, that is, the frontal lobes. We started with this, we emerged in evolution to share food.
Speaker A
And no, they were given ours, they were given 3 billion dollars, the West gave 4 billion dollars. Did they share them?
Speaker A
No, they have nothing to support their army with. They immediately put them all into their own pockets. So, the frontal lobes, meaning, reconstructing, they are not working right for them. So , apparently, this is some kind of negative selection.
Speaker A
Well, since they don't have inhibitions and can't feed their own soldiers, it means they don't work at all. There.
Speaker A
Although those soldiers could turn around and shoot in the other direction , toward Kyiv. With those copper-plated roofs the Ukrainian elite are proud of, it's easy to aim there. So, what does this mean? That the human qualities we
Speaker A
attribute to humans, we cannot extrapolate to them. They don't create anything, don't share anything, only take and divide among themselves.
Speaker A
Yes, among themselves. Moreover, they even increase their dominance by destroying their own population, and in a cynical way, driving them into a hopeless situation. Thus, they destroy both their own opponents and potentially dangerous armed and trained people, whom they loaded with a set of
Speaker A
biological instincts that are completely wild. So, it turns out that they use absolutely biological approaches, having no relation to human values. And, accordingly, everyone who is paid, that is, for a sausage, the whole mass of people, including here,
Speaker A
supports them. So, well, this is normal , this is a biological process. They just need to perceive themselves not as part of enlightened Europe, but as part of a biological process, the evolution of the primate brain, and nothing else.
Speaker A
What century BC is this roughly, what era? Well, judging by how it's all being done, well, I think it is at best , the era of microlithic technology, still before the invention of iron.
Speaker A
And what kind of people or, how to say, semi-humans, what are they called? No, these were humans. These are Homo sapiens sapiens. Everything is normal.
Speaker A
It's just that our brain has evolved. Why did we become, uh, masters of such equipment, technology, and everything?
Speaker A
As a result of this self-selection, when we were picking those needed, engineers were required during the technical revolution of the 19th century. They were grown like yeast.
Speaker A
So, what is the level of their brain development, how many thousands of years ago? 50.
Speaker A
Well, it’s somewhere around 30,000 years ago, approximately. Because the approaches they use do not carry any modern mentality or modern values—not European, not American, not even Russian, none at all.
Speaker A
So, these are ancient, primitive values . These are ancient, primitive, of course , biological values, biological selection, and methods—it's horrific.
Speaker A
Why? Why is unhappy Ukraine being torn apart from within? It's a biological approach. Meaning, if you aren't like us, you must be destroyed. That's normal. But that, excuse me, isn't even the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages, they at least caught a witch, somehow
Speaker A
dealt with how she— and even put them on trial. And even put them on trial. But here, there's none of that. This is a biological approach. I mean, from the perspective of evolutionary biology, today's Ukraine represents some kind of
Speaker A
henhouse where drunken men have burst in, trying to pick out roosters suitable for fighting. They set them against each other, and those who lose get eaten immediately. It’s total savagery. What humanity has carefully masked throughout its history—that it's improper to kill one another,
Speaker A
trying to hold trials, using laws, and making collective decisions. All of that has been discarded. So, there is a set of instinctive desires held by a small number of people. Meaning, these instinctive desires, including those on the other side of the ocean, are very
Speaker A
shortsighted. Well, actually, they try to present them as far-sighted, but it's just masked by rhetoric, by outright lies. But otherwise, it is a rabid biological process. It is very difficult to resist; you see, when you come up and start intelligently
Speaker A
lecturing a wolf, right? And he is starving, he’ll think and think, and then he’ll just start eating you anyway. Well, that’s roughly the level of this conversation. The difference between our brains, which have gone through different stages of
Speaker A
sorting in different countries, loaded with different indestructible social instincts, is so great that we sit here reasoning, but when facing reality, many suddenly say: "You know, they don't even have those concepts." It’s like back in the day when Pol Pot and
Speaker A
Ieng Sary, in a certain place called Cambodia, when they were busy—well, just to save bullets—smashing the skulls of their citizens with pickaxes.
Speaker A
With hoes, yes, they killed with hoes, en masse, hundreds of thousands. And when they tried to talk, they'd say: "You know, they just don't have such concepts." Meaning it was useless to appeal to Pol Pot's officers who were doing this,
Speaker A
trying to tell them it wasn't good. They simply why, yes, they didn't understand, they they don't understand at all.
Speaker A
Therefore, the criteria for biological processes must be biological. That is, one cannot evaluate biological processes from the standpoints of humanism, human history, civilizational values, or some kind of pacifism, or anything else. By the way, it's not entirely clear to me where all the
Speaker A
Helsinki groups have gone. That's also not very clear. It seems to me that this is a sign of their inherent biological nature, since they disappeared in a situation where human rights are being violated everywhere and on every front.
Speaker A
Well, the Soviet Union is gone, nothing left to fight for. So it turns out it wasn't a Helsinki group, but a sausage group. Then it turns out that their interests, that is , it's again the selling of social
Speaker A
projects in exchange for sausage ones. Well, strictly speaking, that's what our country's leadership has regularly told us. We see with our own eyes right now how many people are suffering, innocent children, endless numbers of people being killed. Where are all
Speaker A
these pacifists? I don't seem to see them anywhere. Well then, Sergey Vyacheslavovich, our program is coming to an end. Thank you for the time you have given to our portal. In the studio was Doctor of Biological Sciences Sergey
Speaker A
Vyacheslavovich Savelyev. Goodbye. Yes.
Topics:brain evolutionsocial instinctsUkraine conflictbiological selectionhuman behaviorSergey Savelyevfrontal lobeself-selectionsocial neurosciencepolitical psychology
