Military Review

Cultural Russian words about democracy

77
Last week, an article by Roman Skomorokhov was published on "VO" “What is closer to Russian: totalitarianism or democracy?”. The publication forced me to reflect on the optimal form of power for Russia, and now, I hasten to share with my dear readers the fruits of my thoughts.




In order to decide on the best form of governing Russia, it would be nice to begin to understand what we want from those in power? What, in fact, we want to receive from the leadership of our country, region, settlement, in which we live? In essence, only one thing - effective management, aimed at meeting our needs. What are our needs?

We want to be protected and therefore we expect that our state will have capable armed forces, police and special services. We want the rule of law, before which everyone should be equal, because otherwise the "untouchables" will indiscriminately rob us and violate our rights. We want to be healthy and therefore we look forward to a network of efficient hospitals and pharmacies that can provide assistance and treatment at the level of the best world standards. We want to be educated and therefore we are waiting for high-quality education in schools, secondary and higher educational institutions, etc. - again, focusing on the best international results. This does not mean that we want to copy someone's techniques (although sometimes it is possible), but we want the child, after graduating from the national school, to be in no way inferior (or better) superior in terms of knowledge and ability to apply them. same baby from usa, china, korea etc.

We want to work and receive for it a fair fee, comparable to that in other countries, and a decent retirement when old age comes. But we do not want to become slaves of the machine tool or the desktop in the office - because we want fair labor laws governing our relationship with the employer. And we also want comfort in domestic, everyday conditions - quality consumer goods at an affordable price, good roads, apartments that do not have ceilings and pipes, clean water from taps and shops within walking distance, places in kindergartens for our children, efficient service and so on.

In other words, we want quite a lot and, of course, not all of what we need, we can demand from the state. But still, our expectations from the government are rather weighty. For example, in order to rely on high personal incomes, it is necessary to ensure the efficiency of industry and agriculture at the level of the countries on whose wage levels we are oriented. Strictly speaking, this is the task of business owners, but in order for them to solve it, it is necessary to put them in equal conditions with foreign manufacturers - that is, collect the same (as a percentage) taxes from them, provide them with equally affordable and cheap loans, protect them their interests, just as they are protected in other states, to ensure a comparable level of development of science, to ensure an effective system of personnel training, and so on — and this is already the task of the state.

We want a lot, but we are not parasites - we are ready to serve in the army, ensuring the security of the country, and we are ready to pay fair taxes from our honestly earned funds so that the state can provide us with what we want from it. After all, everything in our life is interconnected. Create conditions for industry and agriculture - business will start developing, business will develop - full-flowing rivers of taxes will pour into regional and federal budgets, funds will appear for many things that were previously inaccessible, etc. The efficiency of production will increase - wages will start to grow, wages will grow, people will have additional money, which they can spend not on basic necessities, but on something else - and then small business will start to develop, for it will be solvent demand.

In general, in the area of ​​state responsibilities, we are “for all good against all bad”.



It is clear that this is not the case in life, but it is still necessary to strive for it.

What determines the effectiveness of governing the country? Actually - from the same, why and efficiency of management of an ordinary enterprise. Of course, the scale and complexity are not comparable, but the management principles do not change. They are, in fact, simple and intuitive: you have to choose people, make them responsible, set tasks for them, provide them with the necessary resources and monitor their implementation. Everything!

If a little more, then at the enterprise it looks like this:

1) The company should be managed by the best, most qualified top managers you can find;

2) These top managers should be given correct, measurable and very specific tasks. This means that a measurable condition for accomplishing the task should be formulated (to increase sales of the plant’s products — say, autogredders, from 100 to 115 units per month), the deadlines for its execution (January 2019 g), responsible for its implementation (commercial director);

3) These tasks should be split (by top managers themselves) into a roadmap. In our case, this may be the case –– by June 2018, go to sales of 105 motor graders a month, by October 2018 - 110, and in January 2019 - sell 115 graders;

4) Then, it is necessary to determine the necessary measures and resources for the implementation of the road maps (participation in two additional exhibitions in May and September 2018 g, cost 300 thousand rubles each, increase in the sales department staff by one employee no later than May 2018 and etc.) are determined by their sources of funding, responsible. In this case, for example, the selection of another employee will fall into the “roadmap” of the personnel director, the search for funds to pay for participation in exhibitions - into the “roadmap” of the financial director;

5) The implementation of the “road map” should be strictly monitored; in the execution of its stages, the top manager should be encouraged, if not, punished, if systematically not executed — replaced by another;

That is, in fact, all the art of management, from the point of view of the president of any commercial company. Or the president of any country.

What is measurability and deadlines for the task? In order to be able to give a clear assessment of the results of human performance. What are the road maps of the plans for? Firstly, in order to provide the executor with the necessary resources to complete the task, and secondly, to identify problems in advance, because if the roadmap is not executed at some stage, then the final task will not be completed, least - in time. What is the encouragement and punishment of employees? Alas, but the overwhelming majority of the most well-known and talented managers quickly cease to be so in the absence of stimulating their activities. There are people who will plow in and achieve results, even if they are not encouraged for it, but there are very few of them. And finally, no top manager is worthless, and is important only as long as he is able to perform the tasks assigned to him - if he does not cope with them, he should be dismissed, giving the opportunity to work to someone who is able to cope.



The role of the country's president is also very similar to the head of the company. Let's pay attention - the president controls a gigantic country, the general director of the plant is an enterprise numbering several thousand, rarely tens of thousands of employees. But even the plant manager does not have sufficient competence to "steer" the plant alone. He cannot know sales, as his commercial director, equipment - as the chief engineer, the chief mechanic and the power engineer. He cannot know the technology, as the chief technologist, the economy, as the head of the planning and economic department, etc. Often, the general director of the plant is a person himself and some service (say, the former chief engineer) and then, of course, he knows this area of ​​responsibility perfectly well, but in all the others he is still not a professional. And so, not being a pro in sales, supplies, personnel management, recruiting, etc., he nevertheless must pick up professional and effective assistants — heads of relevant areas — and then motivate them, control their work.

The work of the president is a hundred times harder. Because the plant director, not being a professional, still has a certain understanding of the work of other services of his enterprise, but the president of the country has to manage, including what he has no idea about. In whatever area the future president “rotates” before taking up the highest post in the state, he cannot, in principle, know the peculiarities and “inner kitchen” of foreign policy, diplomacy, science, education, medicine, military affairs, economics, etc. etc., that is, the entire area of ​​its responsibility.

In other words, a key factor in the success of a president is his ability to understand people - he should be able to appoint the right people, set tasks for them and control their implementation even in areas of which the president himself has a very superficial idea. Therefore, in fact, the thesis “The president is good, but the boyars are bad” is absolutely absurd, because who, if not the president, is responsible for appointing the “boyars”? If someone (commercial director, chief engineer, etc.) works poorly at the plant and disrupts the fulfillment of goals, who will be to blame for the owner? It goes without saying that the past top manager, but along with him - the CEO, and even, first of all, the CEO, because he hired (or did not dismiss on time) an inefficient manager. And how personally the general would not be good, so to speak, personally, but if his tops are constantly disrupted by the tasks assigned to them, then the “general” will be fired or lowered as not corresponding to the position held. His work is not his personal work activity, but the correct selection and motivation of other leaders, and if he does not cope with it, then he is dismissed.

But there is another aspect. Take the same factory director, let's say he is not satisfied with the commercial director and he is looking for a replacement for him. Who will the director choose? Of course, you can see if it is not suitable for the role of the commercial director of his deputy. There are more resumes selected by the HR Director, perhaps the CEO himself knows some good commercial director working in another company and may try to lure him to him, but that’s basically all. At the same time, it cannot be ruled out that there is a person in the sales department who makes an excellent commercial director (but not a deputy), and the director doesn’t know that the recruiters missed or mistakenly sifted out a remarkable candidate, etc. - that is, the CEO will choose the new commercial one that is not the best of all those who can apply for this position, but the best one from those who came to his attention. And it's not a fact that this will be really the best, since the CEO does not have the necessary qualifications in commerce to understand which of them is better than the rest. The same is true for the president of the country - he chooses any manager not from all those who deserve this title, but only from those whom he knows about, who came to his attention.

From the foregoing, we can draw the following conclusions. State management will be as successful as possible if it is headed by a person who is extremely well versed in people, and in his entourage there will be many talented managers who are professionally versed in what they manage (ideally, having gone all the professional way in their field of work from its lowermost steps). After all, if the president is surrounded by professionals in his field, then even his wrong choice will not lead to fatal consequences.

And now we have to state the following:

1) The ability to understand people, alas, is not inherited and is not a discipline that can be learned from books. This is a talent that a person either possesses or does not. Of course, even the most inattentive, incapable of distinguishing truth from falsehood and not knowing how to understand people, can learn a lot, but still it can never be compared with someone who had a natural talent in this field and developed it. In stating this fact there is nothing offensive, because not all of us are destined to be born Einstein or Leonardo da Vinci.

2) The ability to manage and professionalism is also not inherited - just like the ability to understand people is a consequence of innate talent, perseverance, efficiency and healthy ambition. There is no doubt that the children of the ruling classes have, as a rule, the best education and great opportunities to learn how to manage science, but this does not mean that they will take advantage of them. As a result, it may well turn out (and often in practice it turns out) that the chief engineer, whose parents were ordinary employees and who began his labor activity as a foreman in the shop, and even ordinary workers, is capable of managing the factory to give 100 points to a graduate of a prestigious university. England, never went to the shop at all.

In other words, neither professionalism nor the ability to manage and understand people are the prerogative of the elite of the ruling class. Quite often it turns out that the best of the best have a completely non-elite origin. Recall that George Washington, the first president of the United States, was born into a family of a land surveyor and left without a father early. Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, as you know, was the son of a shoemaker, and Vissarion Dzhugashvili was stabbed to death in a drunken brawl when his son was only 11 years old. Many today consider Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin to be the biggest figure in the newest stories, but let us remind ourselves that his father fought as an ordinary fighter in the Great Patriotic War, and after the war he was a master at the plant. Yegorova. Without any doubt, Vladimir Spiridonovich Putin lived a life worthy of every respect, leaving a bright memory of himself, we note only that his son, Vladimir Vladimirovich, is not from the "power" class, to which party nomenclature could be attributed to the USSR .

All of the above, of course, does not mean that the children of the elite are always unworthy of their ancestors - such great statesmen as Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Spencer Churchill had the most elite origin. But all of the above boils down to the fact that power should not be inherited within the ruling class. Other things being equal, the state that can provide a “social elevator” will be more successful - conditions under which people from all classes of society will get into power due to their personal qualities, and not origin.

Without a doubt, no state structure can provide equal conditions, and in the race for power, the children of the elite will always have certain starting advantages - parental instincts are ineradicable, and it is clear that the elitist will try to provide their children with good conditions for life. However, children of other classes of the population should not care, even if it will be more difficult for them.

And now let's ask ourselves - what is democracy? In theory, it is a completely wonderful thing (as much as theoretical in general). The literal translation of democracy is the "power of the people." Today representative democracy is widespread: it is a form of government in which citizens are granted the right to make political decisions, and this right is exercised through elected representatives.



That is, people choose those whose convictions they share and trust them to decide for them. In theory, democracy is the power of the majority; this power is based on the equality of the rights of all citizens before the law, but is also limited to it. In a democratic society, election winners cannot begin to persecute those who have chosen the “wrong” candidate, to ban religions only on the grounds that they do not coincide with the majority religion, and so on. In other words, a democratic society follows the choice of the majority of its citizens, but, if possible, without compromising the rights of the minority. In general, as Voltaire said: "I hate your beliefs, but for your right to express them, I will give my life."

What is good democracy? By the fact that it (again, in theory) provides the best opportunities for the “social elevator” to the widest possible sections of the population. There is no doubt that “social elevators” are also present in other forms of government — with feudalism and autocracy, for example, it was possible to earn the nobility and thereby enter the elite of society. Under Napoleon, there was no democracy and no freedom of speech, even in principle, but the social elevators worked perfectly: "In the satchel of every soldier lies the marshal's baton." In general, with any form of totalitarianism, faithful service could be rewarded with high appointments, but here there is one important nuance: in all these cases there was a certain ruling class that established the rules for joining the elite. And since he also controlled the implementation of these rules, then, by a “strange” coincidence, it became extremely difficult, almost impossible, to become “worthy” without belonging to the ruling class. And even if there were individual geniuses (like the same Napoleon) capable of shaking up the elite and forcing it to “renew its blood” as it should, then after one or two generations everything returned to normal. In general, quoting Bonaparte:

“It is in the interests of the state that officials constantly change: if this principle is not respected, inevitably there will be specific tenure and seigniorial justice”


Democratic elections to a large extent limited the ability of the ruling class to “stew in their own juice” and therefore, in the end, the most developed European countries and the United States came to a democratic form of government.



What are the disadvantages of democracy? First of all, democracy itself is not a panacea, and it begins to work in some acceptable way only with a certain, existing structure of society. The fact is that how many do not say “democracy”, but the ruling class still exists both in the USA and in Europe (today it is the bourgeoisie, may those who do not respect Marx and F. forgive us forgive this Marxist-Leninist revolution Engels). Any ruling class seeks to expand its power and with great difficulty reconciles with its limitations - this is generally in the nature of power.

And it is very easy to profanish the election. You can offer “elections without a choice” when only one candidate is presented for whom it is worth voting, and the rest are no more than statisticians, which clearly do not correspond to the positions for which they are applying. Or offer a few "manual" candidates. Or ... in general, the possibilities of mass.

Of course, no one forbids self-promotion. But who, not being a capitalist, will be able to master the cost of even the most mediocre advertising campaign of a presidential candidate? Moreover, even if suddenly there is someone who can gather people and put forward his candidacy, he can always be removed from the elections on a formal basis (this is not an allusion to Navalny - his conviction is in no case a “formality”).

Therefore, democratic elections only begin to work effectively as a “social elevator” when there is a multi-party system of competing elite political groups in the country. And if their potentials are approximately equal, the situation is so stable that they cannot be seriously shaken even by the defeat in the elections, and the difference in interests is so deep that it only allows temporary, tactical alliances with the opposing party, but does not allow them to unite for a long time, then their influence to a certain extent neutralizes each other. Then they are forced to use the opinion of the people, like that straw, which is capable of breaking the back of an opponent camel.

Of course, this is completely unlike the “theoretical” democracy that we read about in textbooks, but in this state of affairs all these Whigs and Tories, democrats and conservatives, are forced to a certain extent to take into account the opinion of the people and take it into account, and the need to be effective and strong, not weaker, but better - stronger than the opponent, pushes the need for a team of effective managers. And then it doesn’t matter where they come from (again - to a certain extent), and this need creates the social elevators for power we are talking about.

If there are no such historically established, opposing each other parties, then democracy very quickly turns into the Chapito circus, and this is even better. At worst ... You should never forget that Adolf Hitler received absolute power in the country based on the results of the 19 August 1934 democratic referendum, during which the democratic German people democratically handed them the power of 84,6% of votes. By the way, this triumph of democracy took place already after it was adopted, given and occurred:

1) The decree “On the protection of the people and the state”, which repealed seven articles of the constitution, restricted freedom of speech, press, assembly and rallies; allowed viewing correspondence and tapping phones;

2) Banning the Communist Party and arresting 4 of its thousand members;

3) Permitting the government and the Reich Chancellor to make laws (which only the Reichstag could have done before), and these laws could contradict the constitution;

4) “The Night of the Long Knives” (more than a thousand SA attack aircraft were killed without trial).

At one time, there was a lot of talk about the need for democracy to “grow”, that only a “mature” society developed in its development, fully aware of the values ​​of freedom and universal equality, can be truly democratic. Maybe it is of course so, but we see that in the “developed and mature” countries, democracy today is not a guarantee of the equal rights of citizens before the law. If you are a white, heterosexual citizen, a good taxpayer, then of course you have your rights. But, having met with a black refugee homosexual in court, you suddenly become convinced that his rights are significantly more “right” of yours.

Sexual coercion is one of the most repulsive forms of violence, and, of course, no healthy society can and will not condone such. But if we start to record a “gaze” or a casual touch in the “sexy harassment”, then we will very quickly leave the struggle against real violence, turning it into a means of manipulating others. Didn't you look at me like that? Yes you are a maniac! Prosecutor, two life sentences and another 300 years from above, please.

The child, no doubt, is a person. But the personality, alas, is immature, and it depends on the adults how it, this personality, will be formed. Education is necessary, and education will always contain an element of coercion (rewards for good deeds, punishments for bad). The rejection of this model on the grounds that “this is violence against a person” is absurd, because, in essence, it implies a rejection of education in general, since the child does not receive the coordinates of “what is good and what is bad”. The whole human civilization was based on the fact that the rights and duties of a child are limited to his majority, and an attempt to equalize a child in rights with an adult is just as stupid as an attempt to equalize him with an adult in duties would be foolish. Of course, there is a line between upbringing and a cruel attitude towards the child, but it lies much further than the parent slap on the bottom. And today for some of this you can lose parental rights ...

However, it is necessary to clearly understand something else - all of the above, in fact, has nothing to do with democracy. The excesses we are talking about are not the result of democracy. After all, democracy existed in ancient Greece, but there was no similar to what we see in a number of western countries today. For example, the same refugees (immigrants) did not endow there with any special rights and privileges - they were not considered as citizens at all, and they did not participate in the political life of the Greek polis.

Democracy does not entail inequality in the face of the law or a defeat in the rights of certain groups of the population, but it does not protect against them. Democracy does not secure anyone’s rights at all.

Cultural Russian words about democracy


If we recall the history of the same United States, their working class fought for their rights with the help of anything (the formation of trade unions, strikes), but not by democratic elections.

And yet, with all of the above, until recently democracy (with all its flaws) provided the best conditions for a social elevator to power. Yes, only in a number of countries and subject to certain conditions (the presence of several equal and antagonistic political parties), but it provided.

So here. Russia (like any other country) has no need for democracy. In Russia (as in any other country) there is a need to ensure that people who are able to govern the country in the best way can come to power. If we can come up with a system that will cope with this task better than democratic elections, then the need for democracy will disappear by itself.

Today it is difficult to find a person who would be completely satisfied with the way our country is governed. A great many of those who voted for Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin are nevertheless dissatisfied with the situation in the economy, education or medicine, or even everywhere at once. It turns out that we seem to have democracy, but with effective management there are problems. Accordingly, if we want to get effective government, we have a choice: we have to change our civil society so that democracy becomes effective in it, or come up with a different, non-democratic model of governing the country, leaving democracy on the sidelines of history. For, as Napoleon said, who was “a little many” in this article, but who did sometimes say very clever things:

“In essence, the name and the form of government are of no importance: if only justice is granted to all citizens, if they are equal in rights, the state is governed well”


Продолжение следует ...
Author:
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. apro
    apro April 2 2018 05: 34
    +1
    People are different and everyone’s interests are different. And it’s not right to put everyone under one comb.
    By voting, economic problems cannot be solved. Here dictatorship is more suitable. Law dictatorship. Knowledge dictatorship. Public interest dictatorship.
    The power of the best. Meritocracy. Come out on real business. And not eloquence. Administrative resource. Financial means of various origins.
    A social contract implies a developed. Consolidated population of a certain territory. Russia has problems with this.
    1. Grandfather
      Grandfather April 2 2018 05: 53
      +6
      Cultural Russian words about democracy
      Is it possible ?
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 April 2 2018 06: 58
        +6
        Quote: Dead Day
        Is it possible ?

        I also thought that it wasn’t, but the author did it. request
      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        April 2 2018 11: 43
        +3
        Quote: Dead Day
        Cultural Russian words about democracy
        Is it possible ?

        Generally speaking, I called the article: "On Democracy. In Simple Russian Words."
        But the moderators decided to redo :)
        1. Mooh
          Mooh April 10 2018 00: 14
          0
          A rare case when the moderators did their job flawlessly. The censored name is more interesting, with humor and even makes you think.
  2. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 April 2 2018 07: 30
    +7
    We wish a lot, but we are not parasites - we are ready
    I agree. But there is a category of people who focus on something else - I have rights (they owe me, I must), but at the same time I try either not to think about or neglect my duties.
    1. Opera
      Opera April 2 2018 11: 36
      +2
      Here! Of course, there is unfortunately such a category of people who always and everyone owes! Such people, at the lowest cost or even the lack thereof, wish to receive the greatest benefits! For such, any power will be bad! They will not use the most convenient and comfortable social elevators - you need to learn, strive, work and work sometimes a lot, infringe and limit yourself in something ... This is from the series - there is never much money - work is not a wolf ... - I I’ve achieved more, and power is always bad, as my needs have no borders, and the power naturally didn’t appreciate me, and therefore I always miss everything! Here the question arises about which the author speaks - we are for all good versus all bad! But how to determine what is good and what is bad for our society ?! This is called morality! Everything else should naturally be formed from a public request for the observance of morality and justice of the living arrangement and laws and power! Power, both executive and legislative, and supreme! In the entire history of mankind, it has not been possible to build a single society, a state that fully meets the demands of social justice ... There will always be dissatisfied and there will always be injustice. The question is that this should be less, and the purpose of earthly life is probably on the very path to justice. So what kind of morality should we have? Will we invent?
  3. Basil50
    Basil50 April 2 2018 08: 38
    +1
    Today in Europeans, for some reason, they consider themselves to be the navel of the universe. Hence the teachings and attempts to the truth. Centuries of robbery and the slave trade made it possible to hire * thinkers * who found excuses in their opus for both robbery and the slave trade. As soon as the colonialists began to receive a rebuff, direct robbery began to be changed to the governments in the colonies democratically selected by the same colonialists. The justification of coups and seizure of power by help in democratic elections have become commonplace for Caucasians.
    Nazi ideology was prevailing in Europe, today Nazism continues to develop. Caucasians have arrogated to themselves the exclusive right to determine the level of democracy in a particular country and of course add democracy at their discretion, denying the peoples the right to self-determination and development.
  4. andrej-shironov
    andrej-shironov April 2 2018 08: 59
    +5
    Andrey, thank you for your hard work on writing the article. The first part is gorgeous and it’s stupid to challenge it. But then everything is not very. Firstly, it is too exaggerated, the enterprise is not a country and, accordingly, management management methods are not suitable. Secondly, according to the old American tradition, the functions of the state are reduced to the collection and distribution of taxes and a little protection. The modern understanding of the state and its tasks is much wider, if we take even Europe. There is a concept of a social state. This is not when the subsidies are paid to everyone, but when the state is focused on solving the important needs of the population in the context of strategic goals. For example, I will support any power and form of government if it is able to create economic conditions in the country so that the people have work and not for 12-15 thousand a month, but say for 35-40, I understand that the amount is ridiculous for cities with a population of over one million, but we don’t have that either. And if the authorities help solve my housing problem. I am writing specifically to understand the principle of "own shirt closer to the body." But the current government, by virtue of obstinacy in the liberal-capitalist paradigm, is not able to solve even these tasks!
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      April 2 2018 11: 41
      +4
      Quote: andrej-shironov
      Firstly, it is too exaggerated, the enterprise is not a country and, accordingly, management management methods are not suitable.

      Perfectly fit :)))) All management is reduced to setting the task, assigning a person responsible, allocating necessary resources to him and monitoring execution. At least in war, even in politics, even in economics, even where
      Quote: andrej-shironov
      Secondly, according to the old American tradition, the functions of the state are reduced to the collection and distribution of taxes and a little protection.

      Well, why? Quite the contrary - I painted many wishes for power. Another question is that in addition to tax revenues (gas-oil excises - the same tax), it does not have any other resources
      1. andrej-shironov
        andrej-shironov April 3 2018 18: 39
        +1
        smile Andrew, the thesis about Putin, a great top manager, we passed back in 2006. There are articles about this, including the foreign press. You can find them yourself in nete. I myself have a managerial education, and specifically a business school. I declare one thing responsibly to you, the country is not an enterprise, and the President is not a top manager. By citing such primitive analogies, you deliberately put it mildly, dibilizing some of those present here. By the way, how to correlate the election and I hope the succession, even through the revolution, the position of top manager?
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          April 3 2018 19: 17
          +1
          Quote: andrej-shironov
          Andrew, the thesis about Putin, a great top manager, we passed back in 2006.

          Sorry, I did not understand. What do I have to do with it?:)))
          Quote: andrej-shironov
          I’ll declare one to you responsibly, the country is not an enterprise, and the President is not a top manager

          Yes, and I even explained in the article why. But the principles of management from this do not change at all
          Quote: andrej-shironov
          By citing such primitive analogies, you deliberately put it mildly, dibilizing some of those present here

          Explain what you see as "dibilization" and "primitiveness of analogies." I am happy to discuss, but for this, you still need to move from sticking labels to the argumentation of your position.
          Quote: andrej-shironov
          By the way, how to correlate the election and I hope the succession, even through the revolution, the position of top manager?

          What does the election / turnover? I write about the process of governing the country and illustrate it with the example of an enterprise. Could illustrate with the example of the family budget, or the work of a kindergarten teacher.
          1. andrej-shironov
            andrej-shironov April 3 2018 19: 42
            0
            What does the election / turnover? I write about the process of governing the country and illustrate it with the example of an enterprise. Could illustrate with the example of the family budget, or the work of a kindergarten teacher
            .
            Andrey, in principle, I have no more questions.
            1. Mooh
              Mooh April 10 2018 00: 19
              0
              But in vain, say seemingly practical things, but messy and not thought out, due to which you can not clearly argue the position.
  5. free
    free April 2 2018 09: 31
    +2
    Interestingly, I look forward to continuing.
  6. luk
    luk April 2 2018 09: 41
    +1
    Simplified common truths in a chaotic form. In fact, everything is much more complicated
    1. Senior manager
      Senior manager April 2 2018 10: 05
      0
      Quote: luk
      In fact, everything is much more complicated

      The article does not have the influence of political aspects and external influences, and also - everyone is ready to work, but not sweating so much, and get more for a sweaty job. The article is not bad, but it is very long. But in general, thanks, I agree with many.
  7. Alex_59
    Alex_59 April 2 2018 09: 48
    +5
    The issue is so complex that it’s hard to discuss. On the one hand, I am opposed to considering our country as a kind of special civilization, living according to its individual laws of physics. Why do we suddenly need totalitarianism or monarchy, when the whole world lives without it? (oh, just don’t need about the super-developed monarchies of Europe in the 21 century, we understand that this is a sham). On the other hand, Russia objectively has features that need to be taken into account - the climate and spatial scope significantly affect how our government works (this is not compact Switzerland for you).
    I’m definitely against the monarchy, back in the 21 century, we didn’t have enough to beat our foreheads on the floor in front of the viceroy of God on earth - the scrapes are cracking from the primeval force of squeezing society in a single burst, chur, chur ... I am definitely against the Soviet model, which is the monarchy, only with blackjack, young ladies and other fashionable modifications. Both systems brought the country to a collapse, although the beginning in both cases was enchanting. The dependence on the person is too high. As soon as the person is so-so - everything collapses.
    But something valuable from the past must be borrowed. What scares me the most is that we have a change of power - a change in all ways and principles of development. “With them”, when the parties in power change, a certain base does not change, which is based on supra-party values. Yes, there such forces will not win. The party demanding to reformat the entire political system of the country into a monarchy or dictatorship of the proletariat will not win in the United States. And here ... How would we avoid this? Obviously, consensus is needed in society, a kind of supra-party, supra-political. To avoid these radical vacillations.
  8. BAI
    BAI April 2 2018 10: 01
    +1
    Quite often it turns out that the best of the best are of a completely non-elitist origin. Recall that George Washington, the first president of the United States, was born into the family of a surveyor and early left without a father. Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin, as you know, was the son of a shoemaker, and Vissarion Dzhugashvili was stabbed to death in a drunken brawl when his son was only 11 years old. Many today consider Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin to be the largest figure in recent history, but let us recall that his father fought as an ordinary soldier in the Great Patriotic War, and after the war he was a foreman at the plant named after Egorova. Without a doubt, Vladimir Spiridonovich Putin lived a life worthy of all respect, leaving a bright memory on his own, we only note that his son, Vladimir Vladimirovich, does not come from the “power-holding” class, to which the party nomenclature could be attributed .

    Actually, this paragraph illustrates the following fact:
    The ruler then becomes successful when, coming to power from the bottom in a short time, he does not have time to forget the interests of the common people and does what the people need. Then he bronzes, loses touch with the people, for which he gains faith in his infallibility.
    Putin gained popularity when he quickly and decisively stopped betraying the army and brought the Chechen war to a victorious end - he knew firsthand what was worrying society at that moment, and gained well-deserved authority and respect. And if the government comes from hereditary bureaucrats, or a person who has been in power for decades, then "the government lives on another planet."
  9. tasha
    tasha April 2 2018 10: 13
    0
    We must have the right to choose. But when choosing, we must be sure that the candidates meet the requirements for this position ...
    So it turns out - selection for candidates for elections by parameters, by citizen index. But each person should be able to increase his index.
    1. Mooh
      Mooh April 10 2018 00: 23
      0
      Only those who have served the suffrage? The idea is brilliant, but in practice it will degenerate into aristocracy and caste.
      1. tasha
        tasha April 10 2018 04: 29
        0
        But each person should be able to increase his index.
  10. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn April 2 2018 10: 19
    0
    Overall very decent. The second part of the article is a bit off to the side. We look forward to continuing.
  11. vlad007
    vlad007 April 2 2018 10: 34
    +2
    Money rules the world and “democracy” will always be what it is for those who have money. The USSR was the only attempt in history to build a democratic society based not on money, but on the interests of the WORKING WORK.
  12. Doliva63
    Doliva63 April 2 2018 12: 09
    +7
    Only Soviet power and public ownership of the means of production! Otherwise, the road to nowhere.
  13. wooja
    wooja April 2 2018 12: 19
    +1
    it’s not necessary to absolutize democracy, it’s nothing more than a brand, fashion, democracy, a local phenomenon, like ideal gas, but there is a reality, and a lot of correction factors, etc., ancient democracy was exclusively slave-owning, and now it is also qualified, everything is equal someone more equal, democracy in the modern world is a form of fetish, a cult, one of many. Do not make yourself an idol....
  14. arturpraetor
    arturpraetor April 2 2018 13: 04
    +2
    In your article, dear colleague, you can feel the spirit of Eastern Europe ...))
    I do not like speeches about the exceptional path of Russia in world history, but alas, ah - in this case it would be quite appropriate to say that we have our own atmosphere here. It is with us - I mean the whole of Eastern Europe, Russia here only as its most powerful state can be considered. Democracy, after all, is really good - at least by the fact that in one way or another all large cones and state go through natural selection. managers, they must show themselves to be elected, and effectively manage the state in order to be re-elected. But this is ideal.
    We need a political elite that is suitable for democracy - different de jure, but actually united by common ideas. The same Democrats and Republicans are two different parties, but they have common ideas and values, which does not lead to serious changes when the ruling party is changed. They are competitors, but they are not enemies. And it is right. It is also true that democracy has existed and has been developing for centuries - they are used to it, share it. The mechanism is debugged and working.
    What happens when democracy triumphs with us? Firstly, nat. the elite is simply not adapted to its realities, because it belongs to radically different political parties that are really enemies each other. Democracy in our country, as it happened, is a periodic, young phenomenon, and not so long. Nat the elite was brought up on other ideas that are distinguishable from democracy, it fights differently, and even now in a seemingly democratic society, education goes with a bias in totalitarian oligarchic rule, and not "you must win the hearts and minds of people, otherwise they will not vote for you" ( how they draw voices in the elections - a separate conversation, a friend from the election commission told). A change in the ruling party will lead to such a radical change in the state’s course that a crisis will inevitably happen, and instead of a path to success, you will have to shkandy along the way of scooping up the consequences of this abrupt change of course, maybe there will be enough time before the next election. Similar phenomena are observed not only in our country - in many countries with formal democracy of the nat society. the elite is completely undemocratic, and the struggle for power goes in completely different ways.
    Yes, democracy can really provide an effective exhaust - if we are talking about democracy with regard to determining the composition of power (about excesses with tolerance and other things, I’m not saying this is different). It has competition, natural selection, criticism, the need for improvement. The problem is that we are stupidly unprepared for such a democracy, we don’t know how to do it, and because the Yankees in joy is Russian death. Alas and ah, but we either experience a paradigm shift (which is unlikely), or continue to mess around with near-totalitarian regimes. We are not used to democracy. Give us a good king / general secretary, and do not care about the rest, they are on their own, we are on our own. But then we beat dishes and muzzles to each other during feasts, trying to prove something to each other on the themes of politota, while having practically no influence on it and not even wanting to get it, because responsibility will also be added to the appendage, who that he didn’t say - nobody loves.

    Well, or something like that. Miles sorry for the confusion.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      April 2 2018 18: 11
      +1
      Quote: arturpraetor
      I do not like speeches about the exceptional path of Russia in world history, but alas, ah - in this case it would be quite appropriate to say that we have our own atmosphere here.

      I totally agree. We are not that the elect and not the God-bearing people, but we have our own specifics that should be taken into account when building the system of government.
      Quote: arturpraetor
      Firstly, nat. the elite is simply not adapted to its realities, because it belongs to radically different political parties that are really enemies of each other.

      Here, I’m unlikely to agree - the fact is that just the same, our parties get along quite well with each other, and much more peacefully than the Democrats / Republicans in the USA could ever
      Quote: arturpraetor
      A change in the ruling party will lead to such a radical change in the course of the state

      Yes, it won’t lead :)))) We had a protest communist Zyuganov, who in case of victory would have died from a fright from the responsibility that had fallen on him (there is an opinion that he won the EBN election, but gave him the victory), and Zhirinovsky with his The Liberal Democratic Party did not block any any serious draft of EdRussia or GDP.
      1. arturpraetor
        arturpraetor April 2 2018 18: 20
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Here, I’m unlikely to agree - the fact is that just the same, our parties get along quite well with each other, and much more peacefully than the Democrats / Republicans in the USA could ever

        A colleague that you have, that we have parties that are opposed to the current government, are simply poisoned, including by administrative resources. I've never drowned for Navalny, but he was removed from the competition (despite the fact that he already had near-zero potential). We then rolled the barrel on orange, now on the former Party of Regions, and now before the elections the admin went into action. resource and the elimination of potentially dangerous competitors of the existing president. I won’t be surprised if soon people start to die, not to be in jail. And yes, Russia in this case is different in that its elites are still in better condition ... But this does not cancel the pronounced tendency to establish something like a hidden dictatorship of one leader and one party.
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Yes, it will not :))))

        A colleague, the example you have cited is from the category "this can be completely discarded, because this will not happen in our reality." No, well, seriously, who can win in your election, except for EdRussia and Putin?)) Even the Communists and the LDPR have essentially turned into appendages of the system, and these are not close competitors to the current government.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          April 2 2018 22: 13
          +3
          Quote: arturpraetor
          A colleague, that you, that we have parties that are opposed to the current government, are simply poisoned, including by administrative resources

          Long gone. Yes, and before they were not something that was poisoned - they acted finer.
          Well, for example, in the early 2000s we had 4 donor regions, the rest are dated. And now, for example, the governor-communist wins in the region. Everything is in order, no one will say a word - the region simply does not receive subsidies from the budget, and that’s all. As a result - a terrible shortage, the governor in the eyes of the people did not cope with his duties and - as a result - he will certainly not be re-elected.
          And then, so that the people would not suffer, the elections were simply canceled - they began to appoint governors, although elections have now been introduced back. But the guys learned to “conjure” their results so much that it doesn’t mean anything - the one whom the Kremlin will agree will be elected.
          On the other hand, if you start to make a serious career, then starting at some point you ... you can continue it only if you are a member of the United Russia party.
          And all - the party system in the Russian Federation ordered a long life.
  15. Antares
    Antares April 2 2018 13: 30
    +1
    An interesting article, you can argue at any time.
    Under Napoleon, there was no democracy and no freedom of speech even in principle, but the social elevators worked perfectly: "In the knapsack of every soldier lies a marshal’s baton." In general, with any form of totalitarianism, loyal service could be rewarded with high appointments, but there is one important nuance: in all these cases there was a certain ruling class, which established the rules for joining the elite.

    Carlo Buonaparte, Napoleon's father, served as a lay judge. Yes, and the Corsicans noble separatists (as they would say) they themselves transferred the rights for 40 million livres to the king of France and then in May 1769 at the battle of Ponte Nuovo they lost their formal independence. And Napoleon even admired the leader of the separatists in the fight against the French (the irony of fate ... became the most famous Frenchman in history, preferring the globalism of the small town "independence"). Even while studying in French schools, he was still a debater and professed the ideas of Corsica's independence. But long-term training (for example, in Brienne as an artilleryman) made him still a Frenchman. So I got distracted. The main thing here was the origin. That is, initially the son of the assessor.
    He became sovereign in control of power after Tilsit. Prior to this, he had to take part in democracy, revolution, freedom of speech (he covered a bunch of opposition newspapers and even revolutionaries) and he himself went through the social elevators of the same WFR many times he was lucky not to be on the guillotine.
    And the marshals surrounding him, brilliant military leaders, sometimes came from the very bottom, passing through social elevators. In the civilian sphere the same thing.
    There was an unusual form of revolutionary totalitarianism. Something similar was under Stalin. Only times and customs have changed. And to argue with the consul / emperor was always possible if the case. Another thing is that Napoleon himself always had his own opinion, even though when he himself was a subordinate, he did not always follow orders and decrees ...
    He became emperor simultaneously with the new constitution ..... based on the results of a plebiscite laughing
    Democracy is also different. The fact that in the Russian Federation is now also a special form of democracy. Maybe the term fits "Russian democracy."
    The monarchy in the Russian Federation will also lead to stagnation.
    Climatic conditions have formed a country where different forms bizarrely combine.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      April 2 2018 14: 10
      +4
      Quote: Antares
      He became sovereign in control of power after Tilsit

      This is true, but also false at the same time.
      In fact, Napoleon began to change the system of power in the country immediately after he became the first consul as a result of a coup. Its changes were adopted by the people on the plebiscite of December 1799- January 1800, by the way, there are suggestions that the results of the plebiscite are falsified. But be that as it may, after the adoption of these changes it’s no longer possible to talk about any kind of democracy in France. But the power of the first consul still had some formal limitations and he got rid of them already to Tilsit
      1. Antares
        Antares April 2 2018 20: 54
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Napoleon began to change the system of power in the country

        before that, he did not completely obey the orders and instructions of the Directory ...
        He was an interesting person, weakly obeying anyone.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          April 2 2018 22: 07
          +1
          Quote: Antares
          before that, he did not completely obey the orders and instructions of the Directory ...

          How you gracefully formulated it :)))) I appreciated :))))) Taking into account, for example, that as a general in Italy, he took a number of actions without informing the Directory at all, but only notifying him after the fact, despite the fact that a number provisions of the peace treaty, which he concluded, directly contrary to directives.
          1. Antares
            Antares April 3 2018 23: 25
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            How you gracefully formulated it:

            I very gracefully summed up your thesis about any democracy and freedom of speech under Napoleon. To a man who is a child of the elevators of the revolution he himself made the elevator a fire of guns and the mind (and luck) without obeying. He himself finished off the "French revolutionary freedom of speech" and "democratically" crowned himself.
            He had his own view on democracy and freedom of speech. But they were. I do not consider him a dictator.
  16. Rostislav
    Rostislav April 2 2018 13: 49
    +4
    the thoughts are correct and correctly organized.
    We look forward to continuing - what solutions will the author propose?
  17. Vlad Petrov
    Vlad Petrov April 2 2018 16: 20
    +1
    In our country, the multiparty system of parties competing with each other is poorly developed. There is a pseudo-left party of the Communist Party, pseudo-right LDPR, there is a center of United Russia, which is driving. Yes, there are free and fair elections, but the rule of law, separation of powers, protection of fundamental personal rights and freedoms, and most importantly, the system of checks and balances of the branches of power are very poorly developed. Which proves the high level of corruption in the country. For the “elite” to be needed, it needs its own elite school for the continuous reproduction of its systemic national elite, which simply does not exist, because it has forgotten the traditions of family, community, it’s good that the military has remained.
    1. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy April 3 2018 02: 17
      0
      You write nonsense.
      1. Do you need a multi-party system of competing parties, and will there be happiness? belay
      2.
      But the rule of law, the separation of powers, the protection of fundamental personal rights and freedoms, and most importantly, the system of checks and balances of the branches of government are very poorly developed.
      100 grams weight is not enough? repeat
      3.
      we need our own elite school for the continuous reproduction of our systemic national elite, which simply does not exist
      To build an elite school, and to spend money, send to London to study, like Peter smile
      4.
      Which proves the high level of corruption in the country.
      You all overslept. "Our Soviet scientists have proven": The more money in the country, the higher the corruption. So where are we for money?
      5.
      because they forgot the traditions of family, community, it’s good that the military remained.

      Well, family traditions are not only needed by the elite, but the people have forgotten them. The military is always good, the "allies of Russia", the only ones.
      1. Vlad Petrov
        Vlad Petrov April 3 2018 16: 31
        +1
        In the world now there are almost parliaments everywhere, a multi-party system, elections, as a way of governing the state. The monarchy, dictatorship, was ordered to die.
        The system of checks and balances is when, the Senate personnel rotation is updated by 1/3 every two years. . The Supreme Court and the governor’s corps are formed jointly by the President and the Senate. The Senate may reject any nomination by the president of a governor, supreme judge or law. In turn, the President has the right to veto any candidate proposed by the Senate, and yet, it can be adopted if the parliament with both chambers 2/3 of the votes again votes in favor. Etc.
        The elite school is the national cadet corps, lyceums, universities, universities and first-class teachers, i.e. national tradition of learning. So roughly.
        1. Mavrikiy
          Mavrikiy April 3 2018 17: 18
          0
          1. Will we build our life like the USA or is it nevertheless closer to the USSR? In the PRC, DPRK, USSR, a multi-party system?
          2. The renewal of the composition and rotation is everywhere and always (Senate, Council).
          3. Bleeding the president and senate for candidacy will contribute to fruitful work? The president should appoint governors and remove them. Accordingly, be responsible for their work.
          4. Elite school for the elite, but the "cattle" appropriate? This is the “triumph of the boor”. In the days of Stalin, education was all "elite," for everyone. And the social elevator started slightly higher.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            April 3 2018 18: 05
            0
            Quote: Mavrikiy
            In the PRC, DPRK, USSR, a multi-party system?

            Do you want to live like in DPRK? I do not advise :))) The USSR, alas, collapsed, apparently also not from an excess of political stability. But in China, strangely enough, the situation is really closer to the multi-party system
            1. Mavrikiy
              Mavrikiy April 4 2018 08: 57
              0
              NONSENSE.
              The standard of living in the DPRK is determined not by the political system but by resources.
              The country chose the course and received an almost global blockade, like Cuba or Vietnam.
              The USSR did not collapse due to the lack of a multiparty system!
              China - close to a multi-party system ?????? Ordinary clans and factional struggles.
          2. Vlad Petrov
            Vlad Petrov April 4 2018 08: 39
            0
            If there were always, such as Uncle Vova or better, Comrade Stalin would not be bad. But if Borka is even worse than Bear then extinguish the light. The problem with the poor is solved for free, with the payment of scholarships, with strict and equal education exams
  18. sib.ataman
    sib.ataman April 2 2018 16: 48
    +3
    Solid material and decent analysis. And it pleases that the people do not abandon attempts to realize the problems tormenting us, and try to offer a viable version of its solution!
  19. beer-youk
    beer-youk April 2 2018 17: 53
    0
    The author is a huge minus! Skomorokhov's magnificent article was perverted to: "Black is white." Some nonsense of a drunken schizophrenic, sniffing coke!
  20. Alf
    Alf April 2 2018 19: 14
    +2
    In other words, the key factor for the success of the president is his ability to understand people - he must be able to appoint suitable people, set tasks for them and monitor their performance even in those areas of which the president himself has a very superficial understanding.

    In fact, this is exactly what Stalin had in mind when he said, Cadres decide everything.
  21. ont65
    ont65 April 2 2018 19: 51
    0
    How many great thinkers worried about state and law? - Do not count! And finally, in 2018, in the topvar, their aspirations were finally realized in real life, all answers to insoluble questions were found. Hurray, comrades, the revolution has happened!)) Respect to the author.
  22. Radikal
    Radikal April 2 2018 22: 06
    0
    1) The company should be managed by the best, most qualified top managers you can find;
    Here I would like to ask the author a question hi - what qualifications do you mean? If, for example, a top manager of an aircraft building concern was a great financier and accountant in the past, he wasn’t close to aviation, but then suddenly he became an “aircraft builder” by someone’s willful decision - who should he be considered? winked
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      April 3 2018 09: 29
      0
      Quote: Radikal
      If, for example, a top manager of an aircraft building concern was a great financier and accountant in the past, he wasn’t close to aviation, but then suddenly he became an “aircraft builder” by someone’s willful decision - who should he be considered?

      It depends on which top. If we are talking about the position of chief accountant or financial director or chief economist, then of course it would be better to find someone who already had experience in the aviation industry or to consider the possibility of growing someone from the corresponding service.
      But sometimes it happens that there simply aren’t (or there are, but there is nothing to boast of other than work experience, and experience is not everything, knowledge of the profession is also needed and an active life position). Then it’s worth considering people from other industries.
      If a person is an experienced finder or chief accountant, then he will be able to do a lot even at an enterprise not in his industry. Although of course, he will be able to fully comply with the position only after he understands technology, economics, production features ... In general, this is not one year. But, if there is no other option, then this one is the best.
      But such a financial account manager should not go to the general director in a foreign industry in any case
    2. Alf
      Alf April 3 2018 21: 01
      +1
      Quote: Radikal
      who should it be considered?

      An effective manager. The whole history of modern Russia "proves" this.
    3. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy April 4 2018 08: 26
      0
      Quote: Radikal
      1) The company should be managed by the best, most qualified top managers you can find;
      Here I would like to ask the author a question hi - what qualifications do you mean? If, for example, a top manager of an aircraft building concern was a great financier and accountant in the past, he wasn’t close to aviation, but then suddenly he became an “aircraft builder” by someone’s willful decision - who should he be considered? winked

      If the top manager of the aircraft concern in the past was an excellent financier and accountant, consider you lucky.
      Andrey Konstantinovich Shmelev - General Director of the Pervouralsk Novotrubny Zavod (1998-2001)
      In 1981, he graduated from the Chelyabinsk Medical Institute (specialty "General Medicine"). After graduating from the medical institute, he was a surgeon in the medical unit at the Chelyabinsk Electrometallurgical Plant and an assistant in the Department of Urology at the Chelyabinsk Medical Institute. Then he worked at the Chelyabinsk City Hospital and the Ural Institute for Advanced Medical Studies. In 1994, he left medicine and took up managerial activities in business structures.
      1. Alf
        Alf April 4 2018 21: 02
        0
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        If in the past the top manager of an aircraft building concern was an excellent financier and accountant, consider yourself lucky.

        What is lucky? Typically, these gentlemen begin their career in a new enterprise with cost optimization. Optimization, according to their concepts, is to spend less. And under this business all expenses are cut, except for the salaries of those you love.
  23. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy April 3 2018 01: 58
    0
    we must change our civil society so that democracy becomes effective in it, or come up with a different, undemocratic model of governing the country, leaving democracy on the sidelines of history.

    Naturally, capitalism, tyranny, democracy are an instrument and concepts of the West. They are not related to Russia.
    Only we had autocratic power (all the same, they created and introduced their own term). Create your own version of the dictatorship of justice. We can.
  24. Radikal
    Radikal April 3 2018 10: 51
    +2
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: Radikal
    If, for example, a top manager of an aircraft building concern was a great financier and accountant in the past, he wasn’t close to aviation, but then suddenly he became an “aircraft builder” by someone’s willful decision - who should he be considered?

    It depends on which top. If we are talking about the position of chief accountant or financial director or chief economist, then of course it would be better to find someone who already had experience in the aviation industry or to consider the possibility of growing someone from the corresponding service.
    But sometimes it happens that there simply aren’t (or there are, but there is nothing to boast of other than work experience, and experience is not everything, knowledge of the profession is also needed and an active life position). Then it’s worth considering people from other industries.
    If a person is an experienced finder or chief accountant, then he will be able to do a lot even at an enterprise not in his industry. Although of course, he will be able to fully comply with the position only after he understands technology, economics, production features ... In general, this is not one year. But, if there is no other option, then this one is the best.
    But such a financial account manager should not go to the general director in a foreign industry in any case

    Wow, and I’m talking about the same thing, because in our industry often everything is exactly the opposite - they appoint such a “craftsman” to manage cash flows, but he didn’t stand next to any production and the destruction of the enterprise begins , and even the entire industry! sad
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack April 3 2018 11: 08
      +4
      Quote: Radikal
      Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
      Rђ RІRѕS, to CEO in a foreign industry in no case should such a finger account go

      Wow, and I’m talking about the same thing, because in our industry often everything is exactly the opposite - they appoint such a “craftsman” to manage cash flows, but he didn’t stand next to any production and the destruction of the enterprise begins , and even the entire industry

      Please provide a couple of destination examples CEO "craftsman to manage cash flows."
      Purely for a change, you know a lot of these, judging by your statement wink
      1. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 April 3 2018 16: 01
        +2
        Quote: Golovan Jack
        Please provide a couple of examples of the appointment of the general manager as “a skilled cash flow manager”.

        Artyakov at the VAZ, Komarov at the same VAZ, Bu Anderson, the same VAZ. Komarov incidentally moved to Roskosmos. The man is not bad, but NIFIGA is not a production man.
        Well, Kitty - four examples fit? wink
        1. Golovan Jack
          Golovan Jack April 3 2018 16: 17
          +4
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          four examples fit?

          Formally, yes. Be scared.
          In the case, if, then - about nothing. As, however, and usually.
          And in general - the question was asked Radikalwow. Or is it your "second self"? wink
          Or do you just love, for the sake of ... well, you understand, I hope wassat
          1. Ingvar 72
            Ingvar 72 April 3 2018 16: 20
            +2
            Quote: Golovan Jack
            In the case, if, then - about nothing. As, however, and usually.

            This is nonsense, not an answer. In fact, as usual - nothing?
            Quote: Golovan Jack
            And anyway - the question was asked by Radical. Or is it your "second self"?

            I can’t calmly pass by the boorish ignorance. .
            1. Golovan Jack
              Golovan Jack April 3 2018 16: 31
              +4
              Quote: Ingvar 72
              I can’t calmly pass by the boorish ignorance

              Put a sheet on the mirror. Forever.
              Quote: Ingvar 72
              In fact, as usual - nothing?

              Yes, that's just as usual - "what." You, as usual, mixed everything in a heap. I (as usual) point this out to you, um.
              I repeat the question - which of the above was Director General? Who currently works as the Director General of VAZ?
              Thank you yes
              1. Ingvar 72
                Ingvar 72 April 3 2018 17: 49
                +2
                Quote: Golovan Jack
                Put a sheet on the mirror. Forever.

                Even with all your tenacity, I do not wish you to have a mirror hanging in your house. No.Think what you write.
                Quote: Golovan Jack
                I repeat the question - which of the ones listed by you was the Director General?

                Pussycat, if only Pediviky would come -
                According to Russian law [4] [5] [6] [7] [8], the title of the person entitled to act on behalf of the legal entity without a power of attorney is determined by the Charter of the legal entity, while the founders are not limited in the choice of this name and can give any name , eg: CEO, Director, Manager, Administrator, Chief, Head, Chairman, President, Head, Chief, Chief Physician (in healthcare institutions), Rector (in universities), Chief Editor (in professional journalism organizations), etc.
                And you, as a child, cling to letters. fool For some people, the essence is not available in terms of intelligence. request
                1. Golovan Jack
                  Golovan Jack April 3 2018 17: 54
                  +4
                  Quote: Ingvar 72
                  Even with all your tenacity, I do not wish you to have a mirror hanging in your house

                  And even here you managed to rearrange the cause and effect sad
                  Quote: Ingvar 72
                  Ingvar 72

                  Listen ... stop wagging ... You climbed to teach, and taxed.
                  Fade and worry in silence.
                  Look for fools in ... damn it, you already hung it ... in short, wherever you want - look there yes
                  1. Ingvar 72
                    Ingvar 72 April 3 2018 17: 58
                    +2
                    Quote: Golovan Jack
                    And even here you managed to rearrange the cause and effect

                    Pussycat - mirror in Russia hang up for one reason. Once again - think before you write something.
                    Quote: Golovan Jack
                    stop wagging ... you climbed to teach, and taxed

                    What, pussycat? belay That you are not able to compare the facts?
                    Quote: Golovan Jack
                    You already curtained him.

                    Sometimes words are returned by a boomerang. request Especially when a person persists in his mistakes. hi
                    1. Golovan Jack
                      Golovan Jack April 3 2018 18: 07
                      +4
                      Quote: Ingvar 72
                      Once again - think before you write something

                      Engage in auto-training. Repeat repeatedly. Maybe it will help.
                      Although I personally - I doubt it.
                      Quote: Golovan Jack
                      Quote: Ingvar 72
                      I can’t calmly pass by the boorish ignorance

                      Put a sheet on the mirror. Forever

                      Everything seems to be clear? You are a shame, I answered you. Everything is within the rules, by the way, although there was (and is) a great desire to explain to you who you are and from whom you came from.
                      In general, if there are no more ideas about the General Director of AvtoVAZ - go ... by the forest yes
                      1. Ingvar 72
                        Ingvar 72 April 3 2018 18: 26
                        +2
                        Quote: Golovan Jack
                        go ... by the forest
                        Eh Kitty, communicating with you and convinced once again - when a person can not build a logical chain and answer the facts, he is rude. And what good are online forums for trolls? You can be rude and insult a person, and not get a wort. People like you use it with might and main.
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      April 3 2018 11: 27
      +3
      Quote: Radikal
      Wow, and I’m talking about the same thing, otherwise in our industry often everything is exactly the opposite - they appoint such a “craftsman” to manage cash flows, but he didn’t stand next to any production

      Alas ... You are absolutely right, that’s how I say, as an experienced enough finder :))))) Generally speaking, in my personal opinion, a financial director is a ceiling for an economist at an enterprise, he should never become a director. There are probably rare exceptions (these are some kind of geniuses), but on the whole and generally the baggage of knowledge and skills that is formed by an economist / financier (even if he really, really tries to get into everything) still does not allow him to manage the enterprise .
      The best general managers I know are all production workers.
  25. Radikal
    Radikal April 3 2018 11: 12
    +2
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    Quote: Radikal
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Rђ RІRѕS, to CEO in a foreign industry in no case should such a finger account go

    Wow, and I’m talking about the same thing, because in our industry often everything is exactly the opposite - they appoint such a “craftsman” to manage cash flows, but he didn’t stand next to any production and the destruction of the enterprise begins , and even the entire industry

    Please provide a couple of destination examples CEO "craftsman to manage cash flows."
    Purely for a change, you know a lot of these, judging by your statement wink

    The head of the UAC is Slyusar Yu.B. lol . Enough? wassat tongue
  26. Radikal
    Radikal April 3 2018 11: 16
    +2
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    Quote: Radikal
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Rђ RІRѕS, to CEO in a foreign industry in no case should such a finger account go

    Wow, and I’m talking about the same thing, because in our industry often everything is exactly the opposite - they appoint such a “craftsman” to manage cash flows, but he didn’t stand next to any production and the destruction of the enterprise begins , and even the entire industry

    Please provide a couple of destination examples CEO "craftsman to manage cash flows."
    Purely for a change, you know a lot of these, judging by your statement wink

    And yet, for a change - look on the net yourself, you kind of wrote that you constantly catch something in it! lol wassat tongue
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack April 3 2018 11: 23
      +5
      Quote: Radikal
      for a change - look for yourself on the net

      You just signed that you are irresponsible yap. Which is not responsible for their words.
      My congratulations yes
      Correct, if I am mistaken.
  27. Radikal
    Radikal April 3 2018 11: 26
    +2
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    Quote: Radikal
    for a change - look for yourself on the net

    You just signed that you are irresponsible yap. Which is not responsible for their words.
    My congratulations yes
    Correct, if I am mistaken.

    You seem to have read the last comment, the penultimate indicated a specific person! Put your glasses on and your dog at the same time - you can see the two together! fool wassat tongue
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack April 3 2018 12: 15
      +5
      Quote: Radikal
      You seem to have read the last comment, the penultimate indicated a specific person!

      So ... we collect the scattered by you in a heap, look ... accusative:
      Quote: Radikal
      The head of the UAC is Slyusar Yu.B. Enough?

      Not enough.
      It was about the production manager, not the chairman of the corporation.
      Although for you, perhaps this is one and the same thing. Not really.
      Quote: Radikal
      Put your glasses on yourself and your dog

      I will convey your wish to Jack, but I doubt that he will treat him with understanding laughing
  28. Radikal
    Radikal April 3 2018 12: 19
    +2
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    Quote: Radikal
    You seem to have read the last comment, the penultimate indicated a specific person!

    So ... we collect the scattered by you in a heap, look ... accusative:
    Quote: Radikal
    The head of the UAC is Slyusar Yu.B. Enough?

    Not enough.
    It was about the production manager, not the chairman of the corporation.
    Although for you, perhaps this is one and the same thing. Not really.
    Quote: Radikal
    Put your glasses on yourself and your dog

    I will convey your wish to Jack, but I doubt that he will treat him with understanding laughing

    Dress him with a pair of eyepieces, and read the article in a new way! bully tongue
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack April 3 2018 12: 25
      +5
      Quote: Radikal
      Dress him with a pair of eyepieces, and read the article in a new way.

      Buy five pasties, and collect a cat.
      I already told you that on your occasion I think:
      Quote: Golovan Jack
      Who is not responsible for his words

      You have not yet given a reason to change this opinion.
  29. Radikal
    Radikal April 3 2018 13: 42
    +2
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    Quote: Radikal
    Dress him with a pair of eyepieces, and read the article in a new way.

    Buy five pasties, and collect a cat.
    I already told you that on your occasion I think:
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    Who is not responsible for his words

    You have not yet given a reason to change this opinion.

    I can’t help you with anything, you probably have a “clinic”, and it’s progressing, you’re not here, you need to go there: http://pkb1.ru/ wassat And ... my condolences! lol hi
    1. Golovan Jack
      Golovan Jack April 3 2018 14: 21
      +4
      Quote: Radikal
      you apparently have a "clinic", and progressing, you’re not here, you need to go there

      To the doctor, heal yourself (s) laughing
  30. Radikal
    Radikal April 3 2018 22: 16
    +2
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    Quote: Radikal
    Wow, and I’m talking about the same thing, otherwise in our industry often everything is exactly the opposite - they appoint such a “craftsman” to manage cash flows, but he didn’t stand next to any production

    Alas ... You are absolutely right, that’s how I say, as an experienced enough finder :))))) Generally speaking, in my personal opinion, a financial director is a ceiling for an economist at an enterprise, he should never become a director. There are probably rare exceptions (these are some kind of geniuses), but on the whole and generally the baggage of knowledge and skills that is formed by an economist / financier (even if he really, really tries to get into everything) still does not allow him to manage the enterprise .
    The best general managers I know are all production workers.

    yes hi
  31. iouris
    iouris April 4 2018 12: 06
    0
    Democracy is a form of organization of a society of slaveholders in slavery. It’s more interesting for a Russian person to replace corvee with easy rent.
  32. Mooh
    Mooh April 10 2018 00: 55
    0
    Продолжение следует ...

    I have long expected something like this from you, finally I waited. For now, I will refrain from detailed comments, wait for the second part, I may have time to think about something at the same time. And Skomorokhov’s article would be nice to read. So far, everything is very sensible and on the shelves, but somehow too smooth or what? I can’t formulate, I have to think.