Military Review

Prerequisites for the current Russian political system’s stalemate in the face of the exhaustion of modernity

91
The meaning of modernity in the liberation from tradition, from collective identity, from social connections and obligations, to the limit - from morality and ethics. This is "freedom from .." as formulated by John Mill - Liberty - the basis of liberalism. Such an exemption from premodern is the essence of modernization.




Russia, following the West, went through all the same stages of this “liberation” by implementing all the stages of modernity: the Romanov Desacralization, which gave rise to liberal experiments of the beginning of the 20th century, which led to liberal bourgeois and Marxist revolutions, and again into, now free, unlimited liberalism.

Realizing the perniciousness of the 1990's liberal experiment for Russian statehood itself, the new political elite, which replaced the Yeltsinite liberals, began the process of liberating liberalism from fatally disastrous for Russia, which is contraindicated in any doses. The aspiration is absolutely true, dictated by a sense of self-preservation. But what did we end up with?

Having broken the backbone of fascism - the first political theory of modernity, freed from communism - the second political theory, and on the whole painfully getting rid of liberalism that almost killed us - the first political theory, we eliminated all three modern political theories. We can say that today we completely got rid of the Political - as defined by Karl Schmitt - in general.

But it was precisely the complete emancipation of a person from identity and connections that brought modernity itself to a conceptual dead end. After clearing a person of everything, modern discovered nothing — for it turned out that man was a set of identities, attitudes, values, faith, and social connections. Having cleansed ourselves of the three political theories of modernity, we discovered a state — nothing. How did Western philosophical thought react to the discovered exhaustion of modernity? Creating the postmodern paradigm. How did we respond to the exhaustion of meanings of modernity, as always, out of breath, catching up with the West and in this?

Freed from all the ideologies of modernity, from meanings, from motivations, having discovered “the state is nothing” in the place of Russia, we refused to believe what happened and started, and what was left… the modernization process, i.e. that which has just led us to the present impasse, the process of continuing to tear off the still remaining organic bonds, hammering the same, long ago hammered nail with a frenzy worthy of a better use. Modernization is nothing more than a continuation of a completed modernity, its main mission.

Having announced this, the elites, no matter how strange it may seem to them, did not find a new, general enthusiasm for this, but they found a disappointed state - apathy, indifference, despondency, refusal to cooperate on the part of society. Declarative modernization in the absence of meaning, which, in historical ideology gives optics, it discovered the absence of a goal, which revealed the insignificance of the very statehood, on the assertion of the value of which - which is absolutely true - and Putin came.

So, a disappointed state: there is no goal, there is no hope, the insignificance of the subject is the result of the exhaustion of modernity, which, yes, as in the West, has reached the limit. The insignificance within the subject is nothing — the absence of the subject. Russia, while maintaining the external statist shell, has lost the essence of the state - the subject, in fact, ceased to be a state. It sounds pretty hopeless, so here you can reassure yourself with the thought that things are not much better in the West. Inside - nothing, without - nothing, the subject is neither here nor there. So we meet the postmodern.

Of course, here there is a natural desire to pretend subjectivity, as it is inherent in the current elites, to solve the problem with the help of PR and political technologies. A convulsive simulation of meanings begins, an attempt to grasp at what is rapidly escaping, to reanimate the former subjectivity, to seize upon its residual manifestations. Here appears the image of Stalin, the Soviet cinema and variety art are spinning endlessly, the image of the Great Victory, the reanimation of Soviet virtual reality is being exploited again and again with an attempt to reconcile it with the pre-Soviet era, so that we can draw on images of the former subjectness from there. But all this is the inevitable withdrawal into virtuality and dispersion of the state, which inexorably sucks us into the funnel of the postmodern, but not as a subject of the postmodern, but as nothing.

The worst thing is that ideology in the space of the paradigm of modernity is no longer possible. For it has three political theories of modernity — liberalism, Marxism, and fascism. You can, of course, turn to the Fourth Political Theory, but this is already beyond the bounds of modernity, and for this you need to constructively and constructively comprehend the postmodern. Understand the postmodern. The task, as it seems, is absolutely incompatible for the current elites, which means ... we take the hammer, and continue with a frenzy to hammer a long-hammered nail over the hat. This is all that the current system has to offer. This is her exhaustion. And this is the end of the system. We are alive until the hammer knocks ...
Author:
Originator:
https://korovin-mgu.livejournal.com/73049.html
91 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Uncle lee
    Uncle lee 11 January 2018 04: 01
    +9
    Inside - nothing, outside - nothing, the subject is neither here nor there.

    In short, they all died ..... crying
    1. siberalt
      siberalt 11 January 2018 05: 45
      +1
      Well yes. With the "modern" morality, morality, for some wise men, become not the same thing. lol
      1. maxim947
        maxim947 11 January 2018 08: 57
        11
        Very sensible article. We have been consistently turned inside out three times in 90 years with complete rejection of previous morality. So they became sterile, without ideology, without purpose, with a momentary feeling of innate distrust of power ...
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. maxim947
            maxim947 11 January 2018 09: 53
            +2
            You are about the soul, and you are all about lust .. here the author says that the subject is lost ... And yet -
            I still want ...
            want and be able to different things)))
            1. FID
              FID 11 January 2018 09: 55
              +5
              So I want the soul, not lust ...
              1. maxim947
                maxim947 11 January 2018 09: 58
                +1
                Now it’s become clear))) So you don’t belong to that faceless sterile mass with multiple inflated self-esteem, which has only one consumption in its head,
                1. FID
                  FID 11 January 2018 09: 59
                  +1
                  Well, sometimes lust sticks out, and I can still ...
                  1. maxim947
                    maxim947 11 January 2018 10: 01
                    +1
                    Congratulations))
                    1. FID
                      FID 11 January 2018 10: 02
                      +1
                      thank! Same to you!
              2. Julio Jurenito
                Julio Jurenito 11 January 2018 11: 51
                +3
                That's great. It’s time for all of us to return to the roots. The author is wrong in claiming that
                ideology in the space of the modern paradigm is no longer possible. For it is the three political theories of modernity - liberalism, Marxism and fascism.

                Faith is the meaning, and ideology, and the bond.
                1. dSK
                  dSK 11 January 2018 15: 23
                  0
                  Quote: Julio Jurenito
                  Faith - that’s the meaning, and ideology, and the bond
                  The ephemeral soul is the foundation, it immortal, unlike material, but mortal body. What the most widespread "ideology" in the world proved by its 2000 years of existence - Christianity!hi
                  1. dSK
                    dSK 11 January 2018 15: 47
                    +1
                    Quote: Korovin
                    Russia, while maintaining the external statist shell, lost the essence of the state - the subject, in fact, ceasing to be a state.
                    Down with the state, all power self-organized (on the handouts of Comrade Soros) "free historians". Old song in a new way.
                2. V. Salama
                  V. Salama 11 January 2018 17: 25
                  +1
                  Quote: Julio Jurenito
                  That's great. It’s time for all of us to return to the roots. The author is wrong in claiming that
                  ideology in the space of the modern paradigm is no longer possible. For it is the three political theories of modernity - liberalism, Marxism and fascism.

                  Faith is the meaning, and ideology, and the bond.


                  How strange everything is. Faith in the Bible is the belief in the existence of the invisible. Faith in Marxism is a belief in the possibility of achieving the goal. Ideology is a system of political, economic, legal, ethical, etc. etc. views of a particular social group (class). A clamp is generally a wiring for suckers.
                3. GradusHuK
                  GradusHuK 11 January 2018 23: 51
                  +1
                  Julio Jurenito Today, 11:51 AM Nature. Genus. Homeland. People. yes
                  1. Svist
                    Svist 14 January 2018 13: 56
                    +1
                    Quote: GradusHuK
                    Julio Jurenito

                    I ask you not to express yourself! stop
                4. Anyone
                  Anyone 15 January 2018 14: 08
                  +1
                  Belief in what?
        2. Petr1968
          Petr1968 11 January 2018 13: 35
          +3
          Quote: maxim947
          We have been consistently turned inside out three times in 90 years with complete rejection of previous morality.

          Who turned you around? And you do not turn out, or your opinion is not? What they want is what they do with you?
          1. maxim947
            maxim947 11 January 2018 14: 08
            +4
            ??? Have you read the article? or just troll? After the 17th year, for 70 years, the whole country, starting from kindergarten, was hammered that tsarism is bad, and the process of following communism is good (and it was done very qualitatively) and what is your opinion?! When in a couple of years all turned upside down. After the collapse of the Union, they all mixed up in a heap, and nothing concrete has been offered to society so far, only disputes. So try to have your adequate opinion of 20-25 years, the majority of young people do not have it and this, taking into account what has happened and is happening, is natural.
            1. Sergey Cojocari
              Sergey Cojocari 12 January 2018 13: 05
              +8
              Apparently nothing was hammered into you. For example, I was taught that man is friend to friend, comrade and brother. That young people are dear to us everywhere, it’s an honor for old people, How the Motherland begins, from the picture in your Primer, I was taught much more, thanks to which my Motherland flew up into Space, learned how to control the nuclear reaction, and became the second most powerful world power. About tsarism, I remembered the rout in the REV and the death of two Fleets, About the First World War, where tens of thousands of Russian soldiers were killed for the sake of the French bourgeois, that if autocracy were at least a fraction of a percent as attractive as modern monarchists describe it, then good father tsar. would not have been shot in the basement with his family. Now about modern realities. The current Ochlocracy, there is nothing to offer the society, and it will fall, I’m not sure that the Ipatiev basement will be repeated, but the wall of the soldier's toilet under which Ceausescu was shot is easy.
              1. maxim947
                maxim947 12 January 2018 15: 41
                +1
                I look at you very well, even if I’m not able to objectively look at things, I do not agree with the opinion that during the Russian Empire everything was so bad. It was different and good was also not enough.
                By the way, with a large number of pluses, there were also enough black spots under the USSR, and the not-so-successful Finnish company, and help to all the rogue proletarians, and repressions were all the same, etc. so you don’t have to pretend to be an idealistic boy.
                1. Sergey Cojocari
                  Sergey Cojocari 12 January 2018 20: 58
                  +2
                  And there are spots on the Sun, and Christ, upon careful examination, that monster, even a stone lying wherever in the middle of the desert, once will prevent anyone from being ...
            2. RUSS
              RUSS 14 January 2018 08: 17
              0
              Quote: maxim947
              After the collapse of the Union, they all mixed up in a heap, and so far nothing has been offered to concrete society, only disputes

              Because the authorities now have a great desire to guess everyone, therefore, such a mishmash.
  2. Moore
    Moore 11 January 2018 04: 12
    30
    Of course, here there is a natural desire to simulate subjectivity, as it is in principle characteristic of today's elites, to solve the problem with the help of PR and political technologies ... This is where the image of Stalin appears, the Soviet cinema and pop art endlessly spinning, the image of the Great Victory, the reanimation of the Soviet virtual reality with an simultaneous attempt to reconcile it with the pre-Soviet era, in order to draw images of past subjectivity from there.

    The image of Stalin and everything else in the preference of the people appeared not as political technologies, but as a reaction of a healthy body to the effects of a degrading environment.
    What kind of environment? Wednesday is an alcoholic, not an astringent bast, at the head of state, this is a war on the outskirts, a thieves ’elite.
    That's why Ernst's "Old Songs about" main", therefore, are the highest rated holidays in the past.
    The elite (the authorities), on the contrary, tried in every possible way to ban these Stalinobuses (which is on the collage), spending huge money on the Alcocenter, memorial sights and the Wailing Walls for those who are strongly associated with ghouls in the brains of the bulk of the population. Those. trying to combine incompatible.
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 11 January 2018 04: 54
      31
      yes ... so that they don’t talk about “bonds” and “unity” - Russia is not the USSR, the gap between the people and the government is growing, as well as between the rich and the poor. like 100 years ago.
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 11 January 2018 05: 14
        26
        the gulf between the people and the government is growing, as between the rich and the poor. like 100 years ago.

        You are right ... unfortunately right ... and again the prerequisites for a new revolution are being created by the hands of the same authorities.

        Look at the list of laws passed by the Duma and the government ... look at how the government cheats with people's pensions ... look at the chaos of financial structures unlimited in RUSSIA there really is no prospect for ordinary citizens ... we will again step on the rake of a social explosion.
        I’m sure that after the election of GDP, a bacchanalia of tightening the nuts on all fronts will begin ... the preparations of the President’s ROSGUARD are an example ... the hope is still warming that the GDP does this to replace the current bloodsucking parasites on the body of our people with other less bloodsucking ... but the whole history of RUSSIA shows that the state cannot live without bloody riots and revolutions ... and the actions of the authorities have always been the source of these internal upheavals.
        1. Greenwood
          Greenwood 11 January 2018 06: 14
          34
          Quote: The same LYOKHA
          GDP does this to replace current bloodsucking parasites on the body of our people with other less bloodsucking
          Lord, again faith in a good king. Aren't you tired yet in 18 years? You yourself write above:
          there really is no prospect for ordinary citizens ... again we will step on the rake of a social explosion
          Why does our irreplaceable guarantor change anything. And then, he said more than once or twice that he was completely satisfied with the work of the government.
          1. Same lech
            Same lech 11 January 2018 06: 17
            +9
            Lord, again faith in a good king. Aren't you tired yet in 18 years?


            smile Hope dies last...
            I always want to believe in the integrity of people of the highest rank because in their hands are the fates of millions of people.
            1. Gardamir
              Gardamir 11 January 2018 08: 40
              12
              Hope dies last.
              The hopes of the youths nourish. But you are not a young man for a long time. Therefore, here is a reflection, maybe here that will change http://www.rline.tv/news/2018-01-10-pavel-grudini
              n-predstavil-predvybornuyu-programmu- /
            2. stas
              stas 12 January 2018 20: 05
              +6
              For 17 years, the Tsar proved that it is impossible to believe him. He was a member of the CPSU - now the leader of the bourgeoisie. By oath, as an employee of the KGB, he was supposed to defend the USSR - and he quickly attached himself to Sobchak. There was his strategy with EP 2003 of the year - did nothing. Of course, he did something.
              Who venerates Putin, answer the 3 question.
              1. What is Putin building in Russia, and who has read this plan.
              2. What is Putin’s goal.
              3. Where is the document which indicates how he will fulfill his plan.
              1. turbris
                turbris 13 January 2018 14: 45
                0
                stas - here Putin will register as a presidential candidate, then he will speak with his election program and you will all know, be patient and do not ask stupid questions.
                1. stas
                  stas 16 January 2018 13: 14
                  +1
                  Stupid are those who believe the King. He had not represented the program for 18 years and now he will not present it. His May decrees remained unfulfilled. His promises (memorandum) of the 2003 of the year are not fully fulfilled. Wait for the crab to hang on the mountain.
        2. free
          free 14 January 2018 09: 08
          0
          Quote: The same Lech
          the gulf between the people and the government is growing, as between the rich and the poor. like 100 years ago.

          You are right ... unfortunately right ... and again the prerequisites for a new revolution are being created by the hands of the same authorities.

          Look at the list of laws passed by the Duma and the government ... look at how the government cheats with people's pensions ... look at the chaos of financial structures unlimited in RUSSIA there really is no prospect for ordinary citizens ... we will again step on the rake of a social explosion.
          I’m sure that after the election of GDP, a bacchanalia of tightening the nuts on all fronts will begin ... the preparations of the President’s ROSGUARD are an example ... the hope is still warming that the GDP does this to replace the current bloodsucking parasites on the body of our people with other less bloodsucking ... but the whole history of RUSSIA shows that the state cannot live without bloody riots and revolutions ... and the actions of the authorities have always been the source of these internal upheavals.

          Blessed is he who believes!
          1. stas
            stas 16 January 2018 15: 52
            0
            If people did not believe in anything and did not strive forward, they would still live in primitive society. And stomping 24 of the year around the Tsar in a capitalist flea market is not the best option for Russia.
    2. flicker
      flicker 11 January 2018 10: 30
      +8
      The image of Stalin and everything else in the preference of the people appeared not as political technologies, but as a reaction of a healthy body to the effects of a degrading environment.

      all right said
  3. populist
    populist 11 January 2018 06: 52
    +4
    Modernism in the history of mankind is far from exhausted. An example is China. In Russia there is a monstrous simulacrum of traditionalism, liberalism, a social state and globalism. This simulacrum has come to its exhaustion.
    1. stas
      stas 11 January 2018 11: 35
      14
      Continuation of the reign of the Tsar is a thieves capitalist flea market where only thieves oligarchs, money-swindlers and officials who serve them can live with dignity. This is the way to a standstill.
      1. Petr1968
        Petr1968 11 January 2018 13: 33
        +2
        Quote: stas
        Continuation of the reign of the Tsar is a thieves capitalist flea market where only thieves oligarchs, money-swindlers and officials who serve them can live with dignity.

        I do not belong to any of these classes and live normally. Paradox.
        1. stas
          stas 11 January 2018 14: 34
          10
          Well settled, I live well and the Tsar will give the rest. Only according to the State Statistics Committee in Russia
          21 million lives in poverty and another 20 million lives near this poverty line.
          Live on, conscience and your power does not have. You probably live at someone else's expense.
    2. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 11 January 2018 16: 15
      +3
      China is not an example. The Chinese did not begin to kill his father, claiming that he was bad and unworthy of life, and his son refused his name. The Chinese said - we will develop. That is, they have maintained continuity.
      After all, the author explained that there is modernity. Re-read one more time. Modernists have always reminded me of vile thieves. Having taken all that is possible from their Tradition, they suddenly began to declare (and live like that) that they should not do anything of this Tradition! But those who do not pay honest debts always end badly.
      The problem is in stock. The problem is terrifying. Why all this? Where we are going? What will we die for? The answers changed at first, but now they simply do not exist. Earth is no longer ours. There is no brotherhood of nations. Unity is gone. What is left then?
  4. Per se.
    Per se. 11 January 2018 07: 10
    10
    In general, the concept of "modern" is more appropriate in architecture and art, but the author famously philosophized on this topic. If we say that "There are three political theories of modernism - liberalism, Marxism and fascism", it should be noted, but then what else is everything else, that is, not" modern ", maybe classicism? So you can dodge for a long time, complaining about the" end of the system ", and live," while the hammer knocks. " from curly illustrations, the exhaustion of the system, it is not “modern” or “empire”, this is the end and the beginning of the evolution of the development of civilization, death and the birth of new social systems. The positive of capitalism ended as soon as the monopolist leader formed in him who subjugated the whole world community as soon as the real transnational competition ended new monopolies, as soon as capitalism ended new colonies under its world economic pyramids.What is the crisis here, that we abandoned our more progressive social system, and picked up an outdated system, got into capitalism, under foreign rules.The fall of socialism allowed capitalism get a respite by creating new colonies, but the crisis and depression are inevitable, and, therefore, the need to "reboot" the system, that is, the war on which debts are written off and new superprofits are made. The faster civilization moves to a new social system, the better it will be. If evolution is called “modern”, then let it be modern, but from the “branches” voiced by the author, only Marxism has a worthy future in renewed socialism, with human morality and humanism.
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 11 January 2018 07: 43
      10
      Quote: Per se.
      What is the crisis in us, in the fact that we abandoned our more progressive social system and picked up the outdated system, falling into capitalism, under the rules of others.

      Socialism is simply too progressive a social system that could not be implemented at the technological level of the twentieth century. Hence its imperfection in comparison with already mature capitalism. Capitalism existed by the end of the twentieth century for several centuries, socialism - only 70 years. Hence the immediate desire to quit this venture with perfecting socialism, for the sake of an allegedly more full life in capitalism. Everything is right in the bible, a classic story with an apple and temptation.
      And now we can see that in a number of countries socialism itself begins to grow through capitalism in a natural way, i.e. everything goes to the point that after some time socialism will become the norm. The revolution of 1917 of the year took place too early, it was ahead of time, was complicated by a bunch of parasitic, dogmatic and radical phenomena, and therefore was not understood and appreciated neither here nor in the whole world. And now socialism is beginning to take shape on its own, but apparently until its full maturity it will take another 50-100 years.
      1. marline
        marline 11 January 2018 12: 46
        +1
        Quote: Alex_59
        Socialism is simply too progressive a social system that could not be implemented at the technological level of the twentieth century. Hence its imperfection in comparison with already mature capitalism. Capitalism existed by the end of the twentieth century for several centuries, socialism - only 70 years.

        Oh, oh ... As if the term "socialism" itself appeared in the 19th century. However, this does not mean at all that socialism did not exist before. So, socialism based on the complete control of the state of the economy, i.e. such beloved and dear to every Soviet person - a planned economy, command and administrative system, existed in ancient times, for example, in Ancient Egypt, Sumer, even in Ancient Rome at a certain period of its existence, as well as in China of the Jin and Tan eras. Something like this...
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 11 January 2018 14: 33
          +1
          Quote: merlin
          However, this does not mean at all that socialism did not exist before.

          Well, in modern history it was meant. Ancient Egypt is already something epic. Semi-mythical. The experience of Egypt will not help us in any way. And in modern times only the USSR in practice tried to implement the ideas of socialism. But as I believe it was done under conditions when there was no real basis for the transition to socialism. (there were no technologies that provide this - robotics, automation, the Internet, etc.) Plus, being a pioneer, he made many mistakes, feeling for the right path and turned out to be a “black sheep” came under external pressure. The result is a fail.
          And what is characteristic, everyone happily began to jump and mock the socialist model as an unviable one, and literally some 10-15 years after the collapse of socialism in the USSR, this same socialism began to take shape in Western Europe ... with the simultaneous onset of the crisis of capitalism.
          1. marline
            marline 11 January 2018 15: 29
            +1
            Quote: Alex_59
            But as I believe it was done under conditions when there was no real basis for the transition to socialism. (there were no technologies that provide this - robotics, automation, the Internet, etc.)

            Comrade Lenin would not agree with you, because he believed that there is a real basis for the transition not only to socialism, but to communism, remember: "Communism is Soviet power plus the electrification of the whole country." You think that he was mistaken, what is possible. But can it be that you are currently mistaken?
            1. Alex_59
              Alex_59 12 January 2018 07: 35
              +2
              Quote: merlin
              But can it be that you are currently mistaken?

              Not only possible, but also likely. A person seeking a new path is often forced to taxi in the wrong direction, make mistakes.
            2. ImPerts
              13 January 2018 12: 42
              0
              Lenin threw the correct slogan into the masses. The construction of generations and transport networks accelerated sharply. And this slogan is much more correct than "Let's catch up and overtake America."
              Further, Lenin talked about what was a miracle and a rarity at the beginning of the 20 century. Now we have every mobile. And in 1987, mobile was a rarity everywhere. Both in the USSR and in the USA. But everyone transfers the realities of the modern world to that period and begins to judge from modern positions.
              My parents did not have air conditioning and I do not have it now. And the relatives who lived in Central Asia were. And I still do not suffer much from absence, I opened the window and it’s good)))
      2. Per se.
        Per se. 11 January 2018 12: 49
        +8
        Quote: Alex_59
        The 1917 revolution of the year happened too soon, it was ahead of its time.
        If we talk about Russia, then it was socialism that saved her from destruction, without a difference, the king remained on the throne, or, all the more, the pro-western Provisional Government came. The First World War had already determined the leader in capitalism, and the royal dream-nap in this did not even imply a struggle for the world throne. With the tsar or the liberals, no one would allow Russia not only to become a superpower, to create nuclear weapons and go into space, but to generally survive as an empire. After the February Revolution, which in itself is a litmus of our tsarist government, coupled with the disgrace of Tsushima and the 1905 revolution of the year, Yeltsin, Gaidar and Chubais would start for us not after 1991 of the year, but after 1917, not with the legacy of a nuclear superpower, but in a semi-literate country, dependent on the West, with debts on loans. The death of the USSR can probably be explained by internal mistakes, but it is impossible not to recognize external causes, primarily sophisticated Western propaganda, even ideological sabotage. According to hypocrisy, hypocrisy, duplicity and immense meanness, the West turned out to be stronger, cynically as it may sound. Now Russia, which has already tasted selected capitalism, as in 1917, has one salvation, the return of renewed socialism, into which we are pushed by sanctions and general discrimination in world capitalism. No blessing, no good, it was necessary to go through it, even just for the sake of one that the West threw off its sheep skins, showed its true face, and the "graft" of capitalism would benefit Russia. About the rest. China, rather, there is something that can be called "national communism." The country that attacked the socialist countries, which has frank territorial claims, is far from being alien to nationalism, is already a potential aggressor, does not fit into classical internationalism and the humanism of socialism. The irony is that it was thanks to the help of a socialist country, the USSR, that these "brothers" were raised out of poverty and filth. And, the irony is that in "gratitude" there were events on the Damansky, and the West allowed the "Chinese miracle" to take place, making the PRC Eastern anti-Russia, as, at one time, from the German National Socialists. To fight with someone else's hands, to bleed, destroying opponents among themselves, is also a great achievement-meanness of the West. Otherwise, it is possible that by creating its “Fourth Reich”, moving away from occupation and dependence on the Anglo-Saxons, it is Germany that will come to socialism, especially since it already has a part of the former socialist GDR. In any case, the change of the social system is already overdue, capitalism is in agony, becoming a planetary virus, devouring the resources of the planet and human morality, becoming an absolute evil.
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 11 January 2018 14: 24
          +2
          Almost everything agrees with you!
          Quote: Per se.
          China, rather, there is something that can be called "National Communism." A country attacking socialist countries, having frank territorial claims, far from alien to nationalism, is already a potential aggressor that does not fit into the classical internationalism and humanism of socialism.

          Then I would say, everything is trickier. China is on its mind. He raped us and the west. Gratitude in the form of "damask", I think, was the period through which China had to go, on the path of growth, as we did through our 37 year. Now China is a much more mature player, without hell and devilry. After Mao’s death, they reluctantly acknowledged that period as a mistake. And the pragmatist Deng Xiaoping won. I think internationalism and humanism in China will develop further, after some time. Although of course they have a national trait in the form of narcissism. Specificity. East is a delicate matter.
          Quote: Per se.
          capitalism agonizes, turning into a planetary virus, devouring the resources of the planet and human morality, becoming an absolute evil.

          Here I would be careful too. Capitalism in its current form - yes. But market relations alone with the transition to postmodernism or socialism will not disappear. After all, they were in the USSR, and in communist China - in general, fire, what capitalism! Capitalism simply should not be as uncontrolled by society as it is today, when the tail wags the dog. I think that postmodern thinking, when questions of profit are inferior to questions of creative self-expression, will adjust capitalism to the desired form. A creative person will not succeed in breathing in whistles and fakes - a consumer society will stretch, capitalism will be forced to change after him.
          1. Per se.
            Per se. 11 January 2018 20: 17
            +2
            Quote: Alex_59
            But by themselves, market relations with the transition to postmodern or socialism will not disappear. After all, they were in the USSR as well, and in communist China - fire in general, what a capitalism!
            Dear Alexey! There are general laws of mathematics and physics, the geographic environment in which development takes place, and they are not the merit of capitalism. Here, rather, capitalism simply has more experience, an accumulated historical base. How it all began in Russia after 1917, backwardness and devastation. What was a necessary measure before industrialization, - NEP. Finally, that which can be effective and useful from the capitalist model can well be used in socialist development. About China, it already now has a boosted economy that needs expansion, new markets, gigantic resources, including fresh water and new soils not poisoned by chemicals. China without the isolation and sanctions of the West, not looking at the "commi" and their "socialism", just because it is a potential aggressor that matures on our empty border. China is actively arming itself, and it is unlikely that its soldiers will traverse along the bottom to the shores of the United States or distant Europe, just as the overpopulated and poor south can solve its problems. The only thing that can keep him from direct or indirect aggression against Russia is its increased power, but as long as we arm the Chinese ourselves, giving us the opportunity to study and copy our state-of-the-art technology, flirting with them, as "friends" in our time with the Third Reich. At the same time, we have capitalism with oligarchs dependent on the West and their world system. It's funny that even in this form, Russia, with its capitalism, is surrounded on all sides, strangled by sanctions, and the "red" China is not touched ...
          2. ImPerts
            13 January 2018 12: 48
            0
            Quote: Alex_59
            After Mao’s death, they reluctantly acknowledged that period as a mistake.

            They did not recognize that period as a mistake. They admitted that mistakes were made during that period. The Chinese agreed that Mao had mistakes, but immediately made a reservation that for the most part the great helmsman was right. 70 to 30. And the point. And no one rebooted Mao. His huge portrait hangs on the gates of the forbidden city. Something like that Stalin had mistakes, but in general, overwhelmingly, he led the country from the agrarian appendage of Europe and the world to industrial leaders. Moreover, against the backdrop of a terrible devastation and world massacre, which contributed to the world powers.
            In theory, if Khrushchev acted in Chinese, he would have said that.
            At the 20 congress.
  5. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 11 January 2018 07: 38
    18
    Modern, postmodern. But it couldn’t be shorter - the “liberal” elite of Russia, nurtured by the 90s, can lead Russia to collapse if it is not stopped in time.
    1. Petr1968
      Petr1968 11 January 2018 13: 23
      0
      Quote: rotmistr60
      But it couldn’t be shorter - the “liberal” elite of Russia nurtured by the 90s can lead Russia to collapse

      Well, it doesn’t lead, on the contrary, Russia is gaining momentum. Something I do not see a decline in Russia.
      1. vadsonen
        vadsonen 11 January 2018 15: 31
        +4
        Something I do not see a decline in Russia.

        And you look at those 23 million citizens who, according to the Federal State Statistics Service, live below the poverty line.
  6. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 11 January 2018 07: 49
    12
    The capitalists of the 21st century are not the same as they were in the 20th. They wiser and ... united in the global financial and political octopus. Now they don’t “pull the blanket” over themselves, as they did in the 20th century, but act as a united front, crushing the policies and ideologies of all countries. It was precisely to prevent political and social movements and associations that were “reactionary” for them, they also conducted a “tolerance” revolution, placing the world human community in artificially created conditions where the interests of the “individual” prevail over the interests of the “community” and "minorities" over the interests of the "majority", thereby depriving society of benchmarks of public justice and dividing society into competing with each other for privileges, groups and groups .... thereby protecting themselves from "spontaneous" revolutions ....
  7. Alex_59
    Alex_59 11 January 2018 08: 19
    +6
    The worst thing is that ideology in the space of the paradigm of modernity is no longer possible.
    It is quite possible. For example, social democracy, as the goal of modernity. Social democracy is essentially postmodern.
    We have a tangle of problems famously twisted. We need modernity because we are really cast off by the collapse of the USSR almost in the pre-industrial era, and for the formation of postmodernity we again need industrialization, but at a new technological level. A misunderstanding of the authorities of this need is superimposed on this need and, from above, a layer of inability to do anything sensibly. Therefore, we see a wild fusion of references to the Soviet past, Stalin, the tsarist past with a simultaneous demand to leap into the future (Skolkovo, etc.), create a powerful army and maintain the libertarian course of the economy with the simultaneous tax and administrative press on small business. Complete chaos. And another clash with the West and an attempt to regain its former influence in the post-Soviet space. We are trying to sit on 10 chairs with one booty.
    If Putin and his team did not understand this in 18 years, then they need to leave. I see the future in the parish of the same Social Democracy, which can link these contradictions and streamline them. This is a compromise for going into postmodern.
    1. Antianglosax
      Antianglosax 11 January 2018 09: 20
      12
      The article emphasizes the obvious things - the quality of power in Russia is lower than the plinth. They know how to steal sophisticatedly, but they absolutely do not know how and do not want to build a prosperous state. In the existing system, this is simply not possible. For a long time we had to change the shameful articles of the colonial Ebnov Constitution, then the legislation, and only then there would be a chance, which we still had to be able to use. Now the train is heading for a cliff into the abyss, and the Russian population partly understands, partly feels hopelessness and misfortune, while clearly realizing that the roots of this misfortune are in the Kremlin!
      1. Petr1968
        Petr1968 11 January 2018 13: 32
        0
        Quote: Antianglosaks
        The article emphasizes the obvious things - the quality of power in Russia is lower than the plinth.

        The authorities, as you put it, are all from the people. Such a quality of the people.
  8. Begemot
    Begemot 11 January 2018 08: 38
    +7
    There is a development potential in any system, the problem is that in post-Soviet Russia small political figures such as Kasyanov, Chubais, Medvedev, etc., etc., rule the country. and there is not a single figure of scale, say, Konrad Adenauer, who revived the FRG from ruins or Thatcher. All some kind of mumbles and blanks with raking handles. And yes, what is the strength, brother? - A key issue for Russia. The society’s request for justice in the modern world cannot be satisfied, because the system itself is built on injustice, and in Russia there have always been enough perversions in this sense: merchants, especially their offspring, are demonstratively furious, officials who cannot take their hands out of budget pockets, swagger, lawlessness and arbitrariness of the elite and, above all, its henchmen. All this is covered by the fog of democracy in the form of elections. A separate topic is the elections to the State Duma. I did not vote for any of these people. Can someone say otherwise? I doubt that there will be more such than members of parliamentary parties and families of deputies themselves. However, they decide for me how to live, what is possible, what is not. I did not delegate to them my one hundred and forty millionth share of power.
    1. Antianglosax
      Antianglosax 11 January 2018 09: 23
      +4
      Quote: Begemot
      All this is covered by the fog of democracy in the form of elections. A separate topic is the elections to the State Duma. I did not vote for any of these people. Can someone say otherwise? I doubt that there will be more such than members of parliamentary parties and families of deputies themselves. However, they decide for me how to live, what is possible, what is not. I did not delegate to them my one hundred and forty millionth share of power.

      Great comment! Well said! +100500
    2. Petr1968
      Petr1968 11 January 2018 13: 31
      +2
      Quote: Begemot
      the problem is that in post-Soviet Russia small politicians such as Kasyanov, Chubais, Medvedev are leading the country

      You are lost in time. They have not led for a long time. Everything is headed by Putin Vladimir Vladimirovich.
      You still remember Chernomyrdin.
      1. Begemot
        Begemot 11 January 2018 15: 12
        0
        I look at things soberly, only God can lead everything, and Putin is a man, he cannot lead everything.
  9. Gardamir
    Gardamir 11 January 2018 08: 43
    +9
    And we are doing well. Only time is coming you all hold on there
    The Ministry of Finance spent the last trillion rubles from the Reserve Fund, according to the department. Funds in foreign currency in the amount of one trillion 420 million rubles went to cover the budget deficit
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 11 January 2018 08: 48
      0
      Quote: Gardamir
      The Ministry of Finance spent the last trillion rubles from the Reserve Fund

      Fakes should be able to write. There is no "Reserve Fund" in the Russian Federation. There is no such thing. At all.
      1. Stirbjorn
        Stirbjorn 11 January 2018 09: 10
        +6
        Quote: Alex_59
        Fakes should be able to write. There is no "Reserve Fund" in the Russian Federation. There is no such thing. At all.

        Yes - what is it?
        https://ru.wikipedia.org›Резервный фонд Российской Федерации
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 11 January 2018 09: 20
          0
          Quote: Stirbjorn
          Yes - what is it?

          And this must be read. ))) The second line at the top is Starting January 1 2018, the Reserve Fund has been liquidated and merged with the National Welfare Fund
          1. Stirbjorn
            Stirbjorn 11 January 2018 09: 40
            +8
            Quote: Alex_59
            And this must be read. ))) Second line from the top - Since January 1, 2018, the Reserve Fund has been liquidated and merged with the National Welfare Fund

            Well, they’ve used it up and added that you are raising a kindergarten here ... two weeks ago it still existed, Gardamir said everything correctly
        2. thinker
          thinker 11 January 2018 09: 21
          0
          Understood holidays, not up to reading
          The Reserve Fund of Russia ceased to exist.
          The Reserve Fund of Russia joins the National Welfare Fund (NWF) from January 1.

          https://ria.ru/economy/20180101/1512050205.html
  10. CONTROL
    CONTROL 11 January 2018 09: 19
    +1
    It looks like a self-disclosure competition: whoever takes off his pants faster! ...
    -------------------------------
    ... shy to ask: and who judges? And by what criteria is the "winner" determined? where is the "judge" looking in? ...
    --------------------------------
    ... and for what purpose - pants, that is ... - to remove something? For what purpose?
    If, for example, it would be easier for - again, not publicly, well ... But for what else ... - again: it’s a purely intimate affair!
  11. The Siberian barber
    The Siberian barber 11 January 2018 10: 02
    +9
    I do not understand the concepts of "modern, postmodern", etc. but I see signs of feudalism (When posts are "handed out for feeding" at all levels, for loyalty, kinship, services, money. Starting from the director of the kindergarten, school, municipal enterprise, ending with large posts of the federal level and large state corporations. this, the responsibility is purely declarative. Individual "demonstrative" flogging certainly does happen, but it’s rather a clash of clans, under the guise of a "fight for justice" In a "little inheritance has its own king", in a certain framework, omnipotent. With all this, the bureaucratic apparatus continues swell like dough on yeast
    The absence (or reduction) of social elevators, for the rest of the population, does not contribute to the "healing of the blood."
    Sad ..
  12. Altona
    Altona 11 January 2018 10: 43
    +8
    Of course, I am not as strong in philosophy as the author of the article. I will simply point out to him three factual errors that he made by smearing his pseudo-meanings. Communism, or rather socialism, was simply dismantled from above in our society; society did not refuse it. Fascism is one of the points of the same liberalism, for as liberalism offers death, either from disagreement with the main opinion or from a banal lack of money. In addition, fascism is quite tenacious, albeit in viral forms, the same communism broke the form of a pandemic. Here. If, according to liberalism, we abandon traditions, ties and former meanings, then this means abandoning civilization and moving forward to primitivism, which we are now observing. Again the flourishing of ignorance, religion, occultism and other obscurantism, coupled with the expectation of the end of the world in the form of a nuclear Apocalypse. Now transnational and global groups are trying to control the world, whose financial capabilities already exceed the capabilities of more than half of the states on the planet. These global groups have their own lobbies within the governments of many leading states. These groups decide that morality, what is ethics, what is law, and what is simply thrown into the trash. That is, we are dealing with liberal fascism in various forms. Ethnocultural — tolerance and multiculturalism, economic and financial fascism — in the form of the EU and the US Federal Reserve, military fascism — in the form of NATO.
    Now about Stalin. The figure of Stalin is important not only in the fact that he defeated fascism and put the thief against the wall. Stalin laid the post-Yalta peace and socialist system, which Gorbachev simply sold to the Germans and Americans. Stalin was generally the founder of CMEA-international fair trade and cooperation between socialist states. And not only this, but also cultural, sports and tourist exchange. This is important and valuable. But our management decided that it wants to hang out beautifully in a gay club.
    1. Petr1968
      Petr1968 11 January 2018 13: 27
      +2
      Quote: Altona
      Fascism is one of the points of the same liberalism, for as liberalism offers death, either from disagreement with the main opinion or from a banal lack of money.

      Seriously?))) Are you trolling or is your porridge really wild in your head? ))) I think that the first ... but they had some fun .. now it turns out that you can already troll ... just like there is a herd of sheep))))
  13. flicker
    flicker 11 January 2018 11: 45
    +5
    Hmm, it's hard to look for a black cat in a dark room. Especially if she is not there.
    The meaning of modernity in the liberation from tradition, from collective identity, from social connections and obligations, to the limit - from morality and ethics. This is "freedom from .." as formulated by John Mill - Liberty - the basis of liberalism. Such an exemption from premodern is the essence of modernization.

    From the very beginning, a misunderstanding of modernity is set, like "liberation from ... from ... from .. and so on." It turns out that the essence of modernity (and hence its content) is a denial of the previous request
    On the negatives of what kind of content you can’t dig, depending on what to deny.
    Mankind somehow lived for centuries completely not thinking about premodern and modern - BUT it was forced to to solve some pressing issues for themselves and for their lives : how to feed yourself, how to protect yourself from the enemy, how not to freeze, and so on. All this required and forced to create new associations. Inside associations there were new norms, rules of conduct, etc., etc..
    And so throughout the history of mankind, and this extent can be divided into certain stages (according to tasks which were decided and rules, regulations, laws . So modern is one of such stages (the stage of development of industry within the framework of capitalist legal norms - they also form an ideology), i.e. a certain socio-economic structure.
    Postmodernism means the end of the modern era, that is, the era of industrial development (it required the involvement of the peasantry as a labor force in the city - hence the breakdown of traditions, the usual way of life, etc.) plus the ideology that serves it.
    Question: what next? What is the task and with what means should it be solved? Like, we're generally in the tail.
    things are not much better in the West

    In the West, things are MUCH worse on this issue - on the one hand, the LGBT triumph, on the other - the fear of losing a dominant position in the world, hence the attempts to unleash the war with the wrong hands - ISIS and other Ukrainians.
    The West (it is the subject of the author) flies into the abyss. For some reason, we are not subjects (according to the author), we are trying with all our might to pass the abyss, and even trying to save the West, returning it to the path of modernity, which, as the author correctly noted, he has already passed or is close to exhaustion.
    So our position (we are a little further from the abyss) is better than that of the collective west.
    But the question is: what to do and where to go? Yes, more relevant than ever.
    Sorry so long. request
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 11 January 2018 12: 52
      +3
      Quote: flicker
      Postmodernism means the end of the modern era, that is, the era of industrial development (it required the involvement of the peasantry as a labor force in the city - hence the breakdown of traditions, the usual way of life, etc.) plus the ideology that serves it.
      Question: what next? What is the task and with what means should it be solved? Like, we're generally in the tail.

      Everything is simple. Now, the basic basic needs of a large part of the population of developed countries are satisfied. (I'm not talking about Africa or part of Asia - there are other eras). Those. everyone, in principle, has food, shelter, family, at least some kind of equipment. The goal towards which modernism led was largely achieved. And what needs of a person remain after he is full, dressed, healthy and well-off?
      Cultural needs! And this is just socialism and postmodern. For the first time in the history of mankind, a simple person can open a cafe, photo studio, bakery, flower shop not in order to survive and not die of hunger and cold, but because he likes this business. Because he wants to express himself that way. This is of course "theirs" basically. We are still struggling with this, but the process is also underway. People begin to exchange products of their creativity not for the solution of physiological, but cultural needs. In France or Sweden, you can live on the social allowance and be a free artist, exhibiting in galleries and have extra. income - but even if you do not do it on social benefits, you will still be fed, dressed and have a roof over your head. All this became possible thanks to the passing era of Art Nouveau. Technology, robotics, automation, internet. Those. the question of survival is no longer relevant. For the first time in history in Western Europe, unemployment takes the form of "I don’t know what to do," instead of "I can’t get a job to feed myself." To each according to his needs, from each according to his abilities. And this is just the beginning.
      1. flicker
        flicker 11 January 2018 15: 01
        +3
        Thanks for the additions and clarifications. I agree in many ways. But here:
        Cultural needs! And this is just socialism and postmodern

        Cultural needs are not socialism, it is possible that postmodernism, and here it is necessary to disclose what cultural needs are in question (Gelman, Serebrennikov, Pavlensky - this is perhaps postmodernism)
        And this is just the top ten postmodernism:
        in history in Western Europe, unemployment takes the form "I don’t know what to do," instead of "I can’t get a job to feed myself."

        Modern like a stage like an era in the history of mankind (does not exist outside ideology) should not be confused with modernization (exists outside ideology), as improvement process anything.
        Although it is precisely for this function that modernism ("Technology, Robotics, Automation, the Internet"), in fact, modernization, absolutely all and appreciate. Although Art Nouveau simultaneously solved another problem, he formed a knowledgeable person with knowledge, because without this person there would have been no industrialization. That is, there is a direct connection между industrialization and human development (in terms of not so much morality as in technical knowledge).
        It turns out that losing modernity a person begins to lose and development - Hence the above listed arts, plus any LGBT.
        Art Nouveau did not create a highly moral humane person, but he created a bunch of weapons that can easily and quickly destroy it and created postmodern, in the form of the above artists and various LGBT people who no longer need anything.
        This Western society is like that, but in Asia, the flourishing of modernity is taking place - there the people are determined to dare ... they will dare to address the postmodern west ... and will devour it ... and then it may turn into it if it doesn’t create PROJECT (i.e. something planned, in contrast to the current largely spontaneous postmodern), which will save him.
        Like it not, the new PROJECT is likely to be human human project.
        It can be said, a communist project, the only ones that intend to create a new humane person.
        Can or not, another question.
        1. flicker
          flicker 11 January 2018 15: 16
          +2
          I did not have time to fix it: “and created postmodern” - he did not leave the ground for the above mentioned postmodern.
        2. Alex_59
          Alex_59 11 January 2018 15: 48
          +1
          Quote: flicker
          It turns out that losing a modernist person begins to lose development too - hence the above listed arts, plus any LGBT people.

          I understand this a little differently. Modernism carried out industrial modernization, taking the people of the village as a resource and sending them to the cities and factories. And he gave equipment to the village, which replaced the peasant hands - combines, tractors.
          Postmodernism does the same, but at a higher level. Robotization and automation frees people in factories and sends them ... where? Robots replaced the locksmiths - what should the dismissed locksmiths do? There are two directions - to retrain as programmers who control robots, but there are not so many programmers who need to be freed. And the second is to find self-employment. It seems - well, how to do it? But it turns out - easy! Because the level of progress which we have achieved makes this easy. It is only necessary to change thinking. As once the peasants had to change the rural thinking to urban. You take it, and you start knitting socks and selling them through instagram ... and damn it, with the right approach, it is a success! Sea of ​​options. Go grow flowers, open a cafe, become a photographer, embroider a cross. Open the channel on YouTube - you will gain a million subscribers, consider yourself provided for old age.
          Thus, moving away from modernity, we do not lose knowledge and development, but move to a different level of this knowledge. The peasant knew how to plow. Having become a worker, he forgot how to plow, but learned how to locksmith. The worker became a robot programmer. Having become him, he forgot how to locksmith, but learned how to create programs. Well, is it bad for us today from the fact that for the most part we have forgotten how to plow? Nope. Lost and figs with him. So it will be with technical knowledge - machines and robots will do this routine, and a person will do more creative things.
          1. flicker
            flicker 11 January 2018 20: 08
            +3
            I would like to live in such a postmodern.
            What is modernity easier to understand, it took place, and we could and can see it, in the same Asia.
            But as regards postmodernism (and this is an era that has not been exhausted for 10 or 20 years), it is much more difficult to judge it; it has not yet taken place.
            Worker has become a robot programmer

            For me, this is more a continuation of modernity than postmodernity, but here again I repeat, it is still difficult to give exact characteristics to postmodernity. It seems to me that the era begins with a new, extremely important challenge. What challenge and how modern answered clearly. But what challenge and how should postmodern respond? Maybe the one that modern could not answer?
            Well, for example, in the modern period, humanity unleashed and survived two world wars. War was and is a way to solve various problems arising within humanity. The problem is, mankind may no longer survive the third world war. It turns out that nuclear wars are the main challenge of the coming era. Those. the new era should solve this particular problem, and its solution lies in the field of education of a new Man, more humane. Until now, only the idea of ​​communism has tried to solve this issue, unfortunately, without success. But there seems to be no other way.
            But again, I would like to
            a person will do more creative things.

            so that postmodern is just that.
            1. Alex_59
              Alex_59 12 January 2018 07: 34
              +1
              Quote: flicker
              It turns out that nuclear wars are the main challenge of the coming era. Those. the new era should solve this particular problem, and its solution lies in the field of education of a new Man, more humane. Until now, only the idea of ​​communism has tried to solve this issue, unfortunately, without success.

              Yes, interesting thoughts. Thanks for the productive dialogue, there is something to think about)))
    2. flicker
      flicker 11 January 2018 15: 27
      +3
      Complement
      And so throughout the history of mankind, and this extent can be divided into certain stages

      Man began to break his story into stages, into eras (modern, postmodern) purely for cognitive purposes.
      It may be in order to try to plan your life in the future according to your desire and not as it turns out.
  14. viktorch
    viktorch 11 January 2018 13: 03
    +4
    article - ardent nonsense of the next pseudo-patriot,
    for Russia there is only one way - the socialist,
    there are no other options, and there cannot be,
    simply because the socialist project was already launched and then dismantled - that there is a giant step backwards, outside socialism we can only degrade, it’s like jumping from tribalism to tribalism and trying to develop within it by inventing third and fourth ways, where we won’t go nothing but regression and the construction of chimeric non-viable structures will be obtained.
    1. Petr1968
      Petr1968 11 January 2018 13: 28
      0
      Quote: viktorch
      for Russia there is only one way - the socialist,

      And I like the current one, but there’s no desire to return to the scoop.
  15. Petr1968
    Petr1968 11 January 2018 13: 43
    +1
    If a person is mediocre and wants to live for free somehow he is for socialism. If he wants to achieve something, to realize himself, then this is a market economy. With her, I live an order of magnitude better and allow myself more than with the USSR. People are different and everyone has different approaches to life. But at the moment, the richest countries with a high standard of living are not socialist.
    1. Greenwood
      Greenwood 11 January 2018 16: 05
      +6
      Not everyone wants and most importantly can work for themselves. Someone must work for the state. Someone should work as a teacher, doctor, researcher. These people also have the right to a decent life. And even much more than another huckster businessman reselling imported goods at a premium.
    2. free
      free 14 January 2018 09: 15
      0
      Quote: Petr1968
      If a person is mediocre and wants to live for free somehow he is for socialism. If he wants to achieve something, to realize himself, then this is a market economy. With her, I live an order of magnitude better and allow myself more than with the USSR. People are different and everyone has different approaches to life. But at the moment, the richest countries with a high standard of living are not socialist.

      Are you a fool or a rascal?
  16. turbris
    turbris 11 January 2018 13: 46
    0
    “The worst thing is that ideology in the space of the paradigm of modernity is no longer possible. For there are three political theories of modernity - liberalism, Marxism and fascism. You can, of course, turn to the Fourth Political Theory, but this is already beyond the scope of modernity, and this requires constructive and constructively comprehend postmodernity, understand postmodernity, the task, it seems, is absolutely incompatible for the current elites, which means ... we take a hammer and continue to hammer with a fury on the hat of a long-hammered nail. This is all that the current system has to offer. This is its exhaustion. And this is the end of the system. We are alive while the hammer is knocking ... "Of course I apologize, but do not you think that this nonsense was written by a person who has already begun to celebrate the New Year? It makes no sense to discuss anything, especially these same paradigms .... We lived and will live, I even hope that it is better every year, and whoever has their nails hammered in their heads, so this should be treated. I understand "Modern" in painting and architecture, but so that in politics and social order we live to "modern", it already depends on the degree of perception, as they say - you need to know the norm.
  17. Don Analyst
    Don Analyst 11 January 2018 15: 39
    +2
    A very good article! Timely!
    After all, we are just a human resource for those in power. We are their cash cow, we are their protection, etc.
    And concern for social benefits, demographics there - this is their same concern as concern for the pipeline!
    Without us, in a competitive world, they will be crushed in an instant.
    Where is the ideology of modernity here?
    We, ordinary people, must form an ideology for ourselves! To meet our reasonable needs. We must not be indifferent, take care of each other!
  18. Altona
    Altona 11 January 2018 17: 42
    +2
    Quote: Petr1968
    If a person is mediocre and wants to live for free somehow he is for socialism. If he wants to achieve something, to realize himself, then this is a market economy. With her, I live an order of magnitude better and allow myself more than with the USSR. People are different and everyone has different approaches to life. But at the moment, the richest countries with a high standard of living are not socialist.

    ---------------------
    Now I look that you have wild porridge in your head and you are considering socialism in terms of consumption. Socialism assumes that there are social consumption funds, free education and medicine, and a completely different type of relationship in society. The role of money is substantial of course, but not a priority. With regard to countries with a "higher standard of living", then this level is again achieved for a reason. In addition, this level will gradually decrease and dismantle, there is no need for him to be now, there is no one to compete with. I, too, can afford much more than under the Soviet Union, I can “change the way I think,” but if I rewind time and introduce myself as a young man, it is unlikely that I could just go to Moscow just now, pass the entrance exams and graduate. As for you, you are a typical representative of postmodernism, and I congratulate you on this. You are prone to a consumer attitude to life and imposing your own way of thinking on others.
  19. Altona
    Altona 11 January 2018 17: 48
    0
    Quote: Don Analyst
    Where is the ideology of modernity here?

    ------------------------------
    I understand the ideology of modernity as the need for the technicalization of life and the growth of productive forces. In public relations, the growth of humanism and democratization, the elimination of all kinds of discrimination.
  20. 82т11
    82т11 11 January 2018 20: 29
    +1
    Modern is like the favorite word of the author of the article) Almost in every sentence).
    Interestingly, this author wanted to stand out so much?)
    And if you stand out, maybe he would write about a new ideology which he sees it. And then any student can tell a story about the frustration of Russians with tsarism, communism and capitalism.

    And not even using modern))
  21. andrej-shironov
    andrej-shironov 11 January 2018 21: 14
    +2
    Dear author! I'm afraid that we no longer live. The whole world is rolling in tartarara. Liberal capitalism is a dead end for humanity, degradation and extinction. Alas!
  22. The comment was deleted.
  23. free
    free 14 January 2018 09: 13
    0
    Thieves' kagal will fall, thieves and traitors will be judged by the people, a matter of time. The voice of the people cannot be strangled!