Liberalism in Russia: Origins

- Your Majesty!
- What?
- It's indecent to pick your nose!
- Everything is decent for the king!
Dialogue from the movie "The Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors", 1963

And when there is freedom around,
Everyone is his own king!
Alexander Khazin. Song from the movie "Cain XVIII" (1963)

History Russian liberalism. On the pages of "VO" there are often discussions in the comments, the authors of which, with great pleasure, but clearly with a stupid mind, mold on each other a variety of labels of an impartial nature, apparently believing that in this way they are causing trouble to the opponent or the author of this or that article. In fact, this is not the case. As for hurtful words, it is worth referring to the opinion of the Chinese Yi Pun, the hero of Jack London's story "Hearts of Three." Besides, the opinion of anonymous critics is not worth much. As for the labels, one of the most popular today is "liberal". The word comes from the Latin liberalis, which means "free". Obviously, there is every reason to talk in detail about what liberalism is and what its history is in our country. Therefore, a series of articles is planned in which liberalism in Russia will be discussed. And this is the first article in this series. Well, it will be illustrated with shots from popular children's movie stories. As they say, the tale is a lie, but there is a hint in it!

However, before we talk about liberalism itself and its history, let us turn to our very recent past, since there are very instructive moments there. Let's start by remembering this: “I cannot resist the pleasure of citing the most ancient“ Code of Tyrants ”that Aristotle supposedly described” (I found it in Bertrand Russell's “History of Western Philosophy”).

1. Do not let the worthy advance. You can even execute them.
2. To prohibit joint meals (speaking in a modern way, to abolish the freedom of assembly).
3. Contain spies.
4. Promise a better life for the future.
5. Build public facilities to keep people busy all the time.
6. To wage a war (or prepare for it), as in this case the people need an autocratic leader. In addition, it is always very profitable to prepare for war, to wage a small war, or to frighten the people with the threat of a big war. Then all the miscalculations and shortcomings of the authorities can be easily attributed to the threat of war.
(From the article by Academician of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR N. Amosov "Realities, ideals and models", the journal "Science and Life" No. 5, 1989.)

"Agent 214 reports to the chief of the secret police of King Cain XVIII on how the question of the dowry of Princess Milada was resolved by Queen Vlasta and the royal prime minister:" To our beloved king forty thousand, respected prime minister is also forty and ... twenty thousand for the needs of the chief of the secret police! " (Still from the film "Cain XVIII" (1963)

Now let's fast forward to the 90s and recall the then popular "label": "red-brown". Well, who are "red", no need to explain, but who are "brown"? Do you think our "fascists"? H-e-e-t! That was the name of the supporters of Zhirinovsky, who denounced the communists, but nevertheless united with them into one common "bogey". Who invented this and how did you manage to launch this stupid label into the public consciousness? But I succeeded ... Although it did not take root, it looked very strange. A kind of hybrid of a snake and a hedgehog ...

And the government also needs to rely on ideology. It cannot live without it even when it is officially canceled. And she also needs social institutions to serve as props. And in the 90s, our society began to actively promote the idea of ​​... collegiality! That the Russian people are conciliar, that everything in our country went through the cathedral and drove by the cathedral. But something with collegiality did not work out, and all talk about it was quickly curtailed.

Oil prices are discussed today in much the same way, in an atmosphere of serenity and common interests, both personally and at a distance. Still from the film "Cain XVIII" (1963)

However, they found a new, so to speak, retaining stone of the young Russian democracy: the zemstvo. In its revival they saw the primordially popular forms of the rule of the people, and this despite the fact that the same Lenin very aptly called the zemstvos "the fifth wheel in the cart of the Russian autocracy." And then it would be just right to recall these words, replacing "autocracy" with "statehood", but our journalists, who were clearly entrusted with glorifying the zemstvo, preferred not to remember this.

The head of the secret police from the movie "Cain XVIII" turned out to be just a "charming": a music lover, in no hurry and knows absolutely everything about everyone ... Since childhood, I liked this character!

It just so happened that the "zemstvo period" in the history of our democracy is especially familiar to me. The fact is that the zemstvo was immediately given the green light to defend candidate dissertations, and people, naturally, immediately took advantage of this. Just look at how many candidate dissertations were defended in the late 90s - early 2000s on the zemstvo only in my Penza! And the themes are one more beautiful than the other: "Socio-economic activity of the zemstvo institutions of the Penza region in 1865-1917: based on the materials of the Penza province" (1998, candidate of historical sciences Polosin SN); "Organization and main directions of activity of the zemstvo institutions of the Penza province, 1865-1890." (2000, candidate of historical sciences Sineva N. Yu.); "Penza provincial press on the activities of the zemstvo in the period from 1864 to 1917: on the example of" Penza provincial vedomosti "and" Bulletin of the Penza zemstvo "(2005, candidate of historical sciences Peterova A. Yu.). And if the first two works are very weak (and this is putting it mildly), then the last one is very much even nothing. It was done by my graduate student, whose scientific advisor I was. However, it is not at all difficult to verify my statement: it is enough to download these works from the Internet and compare. Even a layman will see a definite difference. However, soon it all died out somehow, but as for the labels "cathedral" and "zemstchik", they never appeared, although they could, why not?

Another "guardian of the throne" is the most important minister Nushrok from the movie "The Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors". And this is how he spoke to his monarch: “To become queen, your great-grandmother executed her sister, but your grandfather took the crown from her and imprisoned the deposed queen in a monastery! ... Your father executed your grandfather to sit on the throne for 77 days. Only 77 days! And you seem to be the seventy-seventh. What a coincidence! You remember: he was found dead in bed one morning. And your mother has become a queen dowager. Then your elder brother became king. But he listened too little to the instructions of his ministers, and you, of course, remember well what happened to him. He went to the mountains and fell into the abyss! Then you received the crown ... But putting the crown on you, we hoped, Your Majesty, that you will never forget about the sad fate of your ancestors! And you ... Remember, you must fulfill our will, the will of the richest people in the kingdom! " Quite a charming character, isn't it? This character's hat was my favorite. And I made it myself: from my grandmother's boa and ink-painted cardboard

However, most likely, our government just finally realized that it is much more profitable to have support in hearts based on fear than on love. And this is how the next “enemies of the people” were born - “liberals”, living “on Soros grants” and dreaming of “destroying” everything around, and becoming masters on the destroyed… what? However, this question is from a number of rather indecent ones, and we will not analyze it for now. The main thing is that there have already been conciliarism, zemstvo, and now for several years now we have another object of public attention: "liberalism." But its vector, in contrast to conciliarism and zemstvo, is rotated 180 degrees!

Well, now, after this introduction, let's turn directly to the topic of our material. To begin with, the Middle Ages witnessed the first sprout of liberalism, when the sovereign lords sought to protect their lands from the tyranny of the monarchs. And above all in England, they achieved their goal: in 1215, the British barons managed to obtain from King John Lackland a signature on the famous document: “Magna Carta”, where the following remarkable words were written: “No free will be imprisoned or deprived of possessions, or outlawed, or expelled, or otherwise destroyed, except by the lawful court equal to him and by the laws of the country ... "And this was a huge achievement, because before that" everything was decent for the king! "

Two ministers "discuss state affairs" ... This is how it was in the old days: two ministers will talk, they will talk, and then it turns out that their sovereign died of hemorrhoidal colic! Still from the movie "The Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors"

The educated people of Europe, already in the Renaissance, became acquainted with the works of such ancient authors as Plato, Aristotle, Tacitus, who reflected on the merits and demerits of monarchical and republican forms of government, tyranny and the rule of law. Well, European lawyers inherited from Rome Roman law, where the concepts of property, owner and all his rights were developed in great detail. And this heritage of antiquity also had a very strong impact on the formation of new liberal ideas.

The significance of the “Magna Carta” was also in the fact that it created a precedent that later extended to most European states. And although at first only the nobility received the right of personal freedom, as a result of bloody feuds and revolutions in Holland, England and France, both townspeople and peasants obtained similar rights for themselves. The famous Russian historian, philosopher, religious thinker and publicist G.P. Fedotov (called by one of the critics "the smartest and most subtle Russian thinker of the XNUMXth century") wrote on this occasion that in Europe "noble privileges were not so much eliminated as they were extended to the entire people".

However, homo sapiens society still developed so slowly that only by the end of the XNUMXth century. states began to appear in Europe, built precisely on the principles of liberalism, understood as follows:

Complete freedom of conscience and freedom of speech; the state structure is based on constitutional orders that reject absolutism, local government is given preference over centralization, freedom of the individual against police custody, the equality of women is guaranteed, all class privileges are abolished, the people participate in the administration of justice, the burden of taxation is distributed in proportion to income, that is, who earns more, he pays more. Accordingly, economic liberalism is opposed to restrictions on freedom of trade and freedom of labor.

This is how he mows, mows a kind of Abazh like a "broad Cossack", or even like a fool, amuses the king / leader, and then comes to power and will plant rice in the Arctic Circle ... Or corn ... Still from the movie "Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors"

Medieval Russia developed in a way similar to European, although not without peculiarities associated with its natural geographical position. She was baptized almost 500 years later than France (the official date of the baptism of France is 496), and rivers were the main transport routes in the forest regions of Russia. However, in the XI-XIII centuries. the number of cities that had self-government in the form of veche meetings of the townspeople grew rapidly, which did not allow the princes, who claimed full power over the cities, to become too strong. That is, in Russia at that time there were all the conditions for the emergence of its own "Magna Carta". But then the Mongol-Tatar invasion began, which dealt a heavy blow to the Russian cities. But the peasantry, up to 1293, was somehow "interrupted". However, this year was perhaps the most terrible year of the second half of the XNUMXth century. Dudenev's army was in no hurry, unlike Batu's army, and the chronicler boldly compares them and writes that the enemies "villages and volosts and monasteries" and "made the whole earth empty", and people not only from cities, but even from the forests of ". That is, before that it was still possible to hide in the forests, but now the “cursed Tatar” found a way to “harass” people from there.

We have always had few women in the Soviet government. Is that Ekaterina Furtseva? Of course, according to her external data, she is far from Anidag, but in character they are very similar ...

However, any medal has an obverse, and there is also a reverse - a reverse side. The flip side of all these horrors was the strengthening of the princely power in Russia, which often relied on both the strength and the authority of the Horde! And when the Moscow princes, and then the Moscow tsars, threw off the Horde burden, no one could resist their power in Russia. There was no such force, although, yes, there were always “boyars-conspirators” who dreamed of limiting the autocracy of our rulers in their favor. And they reserved their own "charter" for every convenient occasion!

On the one hand, the secret police, on the other, the army. So today they report there "above" on the most important and urgent ... Still from the film "Cain XVIII" (1963)

Was the Polish prince Vladislav invited? He was invited, but at the same time they drew up a kind of "constitution" that limited his power in favor of the ancient families. Was Anna Ioannovna invited in 1730? Invited! But were the "conditions" drawn up? There were! Even if she broke them later. Well, the reason for all these failures is obvious: the Russian tsars had all the power over the land. A nobleman could receive an estate from the king for faithful service, but he could also take it away. And the serfs, enslaved, by the way, by the Cathedral Code of 1649, saw in the tsar-father their only intercessor before their masters, and they did not want the political rights of the nobility to expand even more. It is clear that no one asked their “willingness” or “unwillingness”, but here such a factor as “popular opinion” was important, and the tsarist government understood this perfectly. The same Fedotov wrote about it this way: “People brought up in the Eastern tradition, who breathed the age-old air of slavery, would never agree with such freedom - for a few - at least for a while. They want it for everyone or for no one. And that is why they receive it “for no one”.

[/ Center]

The law for soldiers: even if you are the most important minister, but without a key - a symbol of state power, we do not carry out orders! Still from the movie "The Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors"

And since the Russian monarchs did not want to voluntarily share power with the nobles, they had only one way out - to fight objectionable monarchs by conspiracies. That is why the XVIII century. here it became the era of palace coups, and even a joke was born that the autocracy in Russia is still limited, although not by the constitution, but by “different circumstances”: for example, the rifle belt with which the Emperor Peter III was allegedly strangled, while his son Pavel I would have been beaten at first, received a blow to the temple with a heavy gold snuff-box, and was eventually strangled by an officer's scarf. So our Russian sovereigns involuntarily had to pay great attention to their own security, and they were also hostages of the lack of freedom that existed in the country!

Huge power, almost divine, and then a mosquito sits on your nose like this, and you die all alone! And this happened not only in the cinema ... Still from the film "Cain XVIII" (1963)

However, life was restless for the nobles themselves. Forty impostors named Peter III - it was not without reason. The uprisings of both serfs and Cossacks took place in the country one after another. It got to the point that, realizing the danger of the situation with slavery in the country, the favorite of Tsarevna Sophia, Prince V.V. Golitsyn at the end of the XNUMXth century. first spoke about the abolition of serfdom. No one suggested to the Empress Anna Ioannovna that it should be canceled, but the Chief Prosecutor of the Senate A.P. Maslov himself. But what did she say to him? "It's not time yet." And why, in fact, is not the time? Yes, simply because the autocracy in this case would have to agree to a compromise with that part of the nobility, which already then demanded its "share" in the management of the empire, and it was simply not ready for this. To part with the absolute power ... oh, how hard it is!

To be continued ...

Comments

[Pessimist22]

Point 4 is always a priority for the Russian authorities, to promise the people to be patient and to live in a different reality themselves. "The burden of taxation is distributed in proportion to income, that is, who earns more, pays more. Accordingly, economic liberalism is opposed to restricting freedom of trade and freedom of labor. " Putin himself said that he is a liberal, but the actions of him and his friends from the Russian economy look like a banal robbery, and not like a liberal economy.

[Ragnar Lodbrok]

Quote: Pessimist22

, to promise the people to be patient, and to live in a different reality.

Yes, people have already gorged their fill of empty promises. So beautifully and brazenly lying to the whole society, the people, and then canceling all their promises could only be in Russia. I'm talking about the "May decrees", the election promises of the president and his team, United Russia. They promised to fight poverty, poverty, increase labor productivity, accelerate the growth rate of the Russian economy, the most important thing is to solve the problems of a protracted decline in the standard of living of the people, to raise pensions, benefits, scholarships, wages, real incomes of the population, and in fact they came again to power and at an accelerated pace, they carried out a whole wave of anti-social reforms.

[Pessimist22]

In addition to the promises beautifully veiled under the truth, I did not hear anything from the authorities, they seeing how society resignedly "hawala" their "blah blah blah" behave confidently, therefore I think that there should be opposition, but not the puppet hamsters paid for by the West, but really people with class consciousness that can unite at least 30 percent of society and seriously strain these snickering bourgeois on actions to ensure a normal life for the people, social support for the population, basic income, a progressive tax scale, etc.

[mihail_mihail0620]

Quote: Ragnar Lothbrok

They promised

They did not say that it would happen today, you have to wait and believe.

[nickname7]

banal robbery, and not on the liberal economy.

In general, liberalism just allows robbery, because freedom of choice means that you can become a policeman, or a criminal.
Secondly, Shpakovsky focuses on freedom, but in the Russian version of liberalism, the coloring is anti-Soviet and anti-Russian. This is the reason for the negative perception of liberals in the Russian Federation. Liberals grew out of dissenters, and the latter are the descendants of collaborationists and anti-owl fighters. authorities.
In Western countries, liberals are for freedom, but not against their own country, in the Russian Federation, liberals, in addition to freedom, are against the country, this is the difference.
For example, who are K. Borovoy or Novodvorskaya, Akhedzhakova? Are they liberals, or who?

[viktor_ui]

Vyacheslav hooked on the topic ... it would be nice to put this point of view on the agenda in our state fool - it would be interesting% at the exit who and what would understand from these, like him, servants of the people like
I walked into a bright and happy childhood, watching both films ... I especially adored watching "The Kingdom of Crooked Mirrors" - with jam! To the author of RESPECT and we look forward to continuing

[kalibr]

The second part has already been written and the third is being worked on. But the topic is very large, complex and multifaceted.

[The leader of the Redskins]

Thank you, Vyacheslav Olegovich. How many times have I at first tried to argue with certain experts here on VO that liberal is not a dirty word, but with what gusto they continue to poke him where necessary and not necessary, thinking that this will lead to the "clean water" of the opponent. Well, or at least accused / insulted.
Like grandfather Shchukar from Virgin Soil Upturned. Remember how he read the dictionary without glasses?
"WATERCOLOR means a good girl, and BORDYUR - on the contrary, a walking woman ..."

[kalibr]

Words, Nazarius, empty words. For some reason, these people, who consider themselves smart, do not understand that this is "air" that has no meaning. None! "Grandfather, you gave your word! I gave it and I took it back!" (Marya the Artisan). The meaning is completely different ...

[viktor_ui]

I have no doubts about the complexity of the topic you raised ... which has a hefty train from the 90s. The only question is whether the message will reach the addressee: Abazhov, Nushrokov, Aigupopov, Anidagov and other decanters ...
P.S. at Pashinyan and the fruits of his handicap with his country for an hour without tears and sadness you will not look ... although, "this is not us, but the time is such" -BOOMER.

[kalibr]

You know, Victor, I have a textbook (three) on internet journalism and public opinion management. Written on a heap of studies, including VO, and here's a short conclusion: 80% of readers do not care what the material is about, the main thing is the novelty and accessibility of presentation. That is, "simple", "interesting". There is a high degree of bias towards texts that do not coincide with the point of view of the reader. So if it comes to some Abazh, then ... after 90 + 1 (this is the formula for forgetting) day he will forget ... 90% of what was written. And after a year it can be repeated word for word! So what matters? Just the density of the information flow and its vector orientation. In this case, it is the ability to think, analyze, "think". It develops. Slowly but surely. Developed people are more difficult to manage than undeveloped people. Like this! And on people like Pashinyan and others like him, this will not work at all, even if he reads it.

[viktor_ui]

Looking in one direction ... colleague Although I am an IT pepper and a big splinter for leaders in my local sector for more than a dozen years (I will definitely not die of modesty ) Success in development - it is difficult for those who think to sell something.

[mihail_mihail0620]

Quote: kalibr

The second part has already been written and the third is being worked on. But the topic is very large, complex and multifaceted.

"The prison is crying for you."

[Mytholog]

Another thing is interesting: how many warning films were made for children ... (more "The Magic Voice of Jelsomino" would add). Did not work. More precisely, it worked the other way around: instead of a warning, some took it as a guide to action when they grew up.

[Pessimist22]

And I like "Buratino" in this regard, everything is clearly shown there

[Ragnar Lodbrok]

And me "Dunno on the Moon"
"And the rich are the real robbers. Only they rob us, hiding behind the laws that they themselves come up with. And what, tell me, the difference whether they rob me according to the law or not according to the law? Yes, I don't care!"

[Ragnar Lodbrok]

And also a cartoon

[sibiryouk]

I wanted to give you THREE pluses for this fragment, but it's impossible!

[Daniil Konovalenko]

And, mind you, all this was filmed and written under a "totalitarian" regime. Nasty and not good. And now this is not filmed and not written.

[Trilobite Master]

How not to recall the classics of Marxism-Lininism:

Law is the will of the ruling class elevated to law

[Van 16]

"Everyone, you know, wants to show that he is better than others, and since intelligence, kindness, honesty are not valued for anything in our country, they boast to each other only in wealth."
Also "Dunno on the Moon"

[tacet]

In ANY state, you will be robbed if you are not at the top of the power pyramid.

[Korsar4]

So many pictures of the film - "Cain". Intrigued. Didn't come across before. And disputes between, for example, "Slavophiles" and "nihilists" can go on forever.

Probably, it is possible to predict fierce disputes under this article. But in two days it will pass.

[kalibr]

Although these two films, Sergei, were shot in the same year, "Cain" was not very well shown ... somehow they "did not like" him at the top. It seems to be the denunciation of imperialism, but ... somehow it hurts us too ... So many did not watch it. Look, an interesting movie. And G. Vitsin in the role of the executioner is simply magnificent!

[Korsar4]

I've already started. The first 6 minutes looked. I watch movies in small portions. They require immersion.

[Daniil Konovalenko]

Cain, for some reason, was often shown on Leningrad-Petersburg TV, both in Soviet times and then. As in fact, Leningrad-Petersburg TV was gone, with his programs, programs, and the film was no longer shown.

[kalibr]

There was a wonderful Leningrad program “Operation Sirius-2.” Well done were the Leningrad TV people.

[Catfish]

Hi, Vyacheslav. Great topic, thanks.
There was another similar film "The Deer King" (1969) with a whole constellation of actors. After him, the phrase went for a walk - "I eat an apple and look out the window", no matter what happens outside the window.
Luxurious "aria" of Tartaglia performed by Jurassic:

"Who is Tartaglia in this tale?
He is a villain, a villain and a canal.
How did someone like that get born in Italy?
Not a fool, but a scoundrel and so on,
And so on, and so on, and so on ...

I am sorry that the name Tartaglia
Became a household name in Italy
Since kanalya, it means Tartaglia,
Cry, Tartaglia, cry,
And so on and so forth…

But not me, but the mask - Tartaglia,
I'm good, and the mask is a canal,
This mask is my anomaly
Human feelings and so on,
And so on, and so on, and so on ... "

[Trilobite Master]

Or like this:

I am round (Dostoevsky's novel). I am Prince Tartaglia.
Crazy eyes goggle into the distance.
There was a skew in my head:
I eat mice, frogs and dragonflies.
Free from morality and law
I publicly write from the balcony
And at the same time I die like an owl
And spewing swear words.
Doctors say this is paranoia.
Well, maybe! .. But I know only one thing:
Whatever disease I am obsessed with -
Today's regime is guilty of it! ..

This is "The Love for Three Oranges" by Filatov.

[Catfish]

Today's regime is guilty of it! ...

"Turn this book over, wind it on a mustache,
All modes are good - pick your taste. "

[Korsar4]

I like that. Like most of our fabulous musical films.

[Catfish]

"Slavophiles and nihilists are walking, both have their nails not clean." (C))))

In "Cain", from the entourage, the red soles of the boots of the chief of the secret police were touched most of all, and Bruno Freundlich is simply very good in the role of this character.

[3x3zsave]

"On" Louboutins, ah!
And "feldipersovy" pants! "

[Catfish]

"In the country of the Soviet midday
among the steppes and feather grass
Semyon Mikhailovich Budyonny
rode on a ginger mare.

He was in a leather jacket,
he was in plush trousers,
he sang the folk song "Murka"
sang with a tear on his mustache. "

[3x3zsave]

"And in that folk song of Murka,
Oh, she was killed!
The jacket was wet through and through,
The mare sobbed sobbingly "(C)

[Catfish]

"... For us this fact is the Epoch Times
She ordered to sing in songs and verses,
Even though that horse died a long time ago,
And the marshal rotted away in Solovki! " (from)

True, this is about another marshal ...

[3x3zsave]

"Reading an old notebook,
Executed General "(C)
Ugh, damn it, remember this by night ...

[Catfish]

I sent you a letter there, just be curious.

[3x3zsave]

Do not be so angry, sir! Coachmen are lazy, if they are not poured on the stands

[Catfish]

Have you even looked at what has come?

[3x3zsave]

Not yet, but I already regret what I have done!

[Korsar4]

Yeah. Prutkov was caught early enough. And I remember.

[Kot_Kuzya]

Liberalism was invented by bankers to gain power. Kings, dukes and earls were noble and did not consider commoners as their equal, and bankers were just commoners, and they could not have any power, any nobleman could pierce any commoner with a sword with impunity.

[kalibr]

I will surprise you: the first liberals in Russia (and not only in Russia) were just the nobles! But more on that in the following materials. But I really liked your comment!

[Kot_Kuzya]

Well, it’s not the peasants to be the first liberals, they for the most part didn’t even know how to read, let alone write scientific works. And they did not have time for philosophy, since they worked every day from dawn to sunset. So the first liberals in Russia were nobles who had plenty of free time. Someone spent this time hunting, someone on women, and someone was itching graphomania and philosophizing.

[kalibr]

Exactly! But many more, besides the itch, were obsessed with the thoughts that ... people are people, that a slavery state does not suit them, that everyone is equal before God and all sorts of other nonsense ... Know they where this will lead and that their wives descendants will have to wash the floors in the apartment themselves ... would be the most faithful dogs of tsarism!

[Kot_Kuzya]

Because they become liberals from the poverty of mind. To me, the liberals of the time remind me of modern pots and pans, galloping for European integration and eventually skipping their country. In the same way, the liberals rode in August 1991 for Yeltsin and as a result got the collapse of the USSR, depreciation of deposits, wild hyperinflation, rampant crime and poverty.

[kalibr]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Liberals are made of poverty of mind.

Then you and Pushkin will have to write down as fools and many more who made the glory of Russia. A pretty cocky statement for ... you, don't you think? What did you do to glorify our country, in addition to regular payments for communal services and other acts of a law-abiding citizen?

[Kot_Kuzya]

Do not confuse liberals and liberals. The liberal is ready to die for the freedom of others, and the liberal is ready to sell for the cookies. Well, or for the sake of chewing gum, jeans and a hundred varieties of sausages, like those who galloped for Yeltsin

Well, everyone knows very well about the liberals who rode in 2014 for lace panties and visa-free travel

[kalibr]

There is such a novel by the Strugatsikhs "The Inhabited Island". You are citing the opinion of one zombie Guardsman Guy Gaal from there word for word ... Amazing!

[Trilobite Master]

Quote: kalibr

The Strugatsikhs have such a novel "Inhabited Island"

- Well, let it be, - said Mack, turning around. - We're not talking about him now. We're talking about geeks. Here you are, for example ... You will die for your cause, won't you?
“I'm going to die,” Guy said. - And you will die.
- Right! Let's die. But we will die for the cause - not for legionary rations and not for money. Give me at least a thousand million of your pieces of paper, I won't agree to go to death for this! .. Will you really agree?
“Of course not,” Guy said. "This Mac is freaky, he will always invent something ..."
- Well?
- What - well?
- Well, of course! - said Mack impatiently. “You don’t agree to die for money. I don’t agree to die for money. And the geeks, then, agree! What nonsense!
- So then geeks! - said Guy soulfully. - That's why they are geeks! They value money more than anything, they have nothing sacred. It doesn't cost them anything to strangle a child - there have been such cases ... You must understand: if a person is trying to destroy the PBZ system, what kind of person could it be? This is a cold-blooded killer!
...
“Listen,” Guy said. - I'll explain it to you again. First, they are geeks. They generally hate all normal people. They are naturally vicious like rats. And then, we interfere with them! They would like to do their job, get money and live happily ever after. And we tell them: stop! Hands behind head! Well, should they love us for this?

Great book.

[kalibr]

It was this moment that I had in mind. Thanks! A paraphrase of another well-known phrase, already from the beginning of Tolstoy's novel "Anna Karenina", is straightforward, but I won't do it ...

[Silhouette]

A liberal is either an ignoramus or just a narrow-minded person of a pro-Western orientation. And a liberal is an anressive liberal

[Senior seaman]

Quote: kalibr

Then you and Pushkin will have to write in

Liberals? !!

[kalibr]

Sure! Indeed, to the question of Nicholas I where he would be, he answered - on the Senate Square.

[Senior seaman]

I knew that remember this :))) Even if this episode took place in reality, I'm afraid you are confusing the landowner's fronderism with a political position.

Most Merciful Emperor!
In 1824, having the misfortune of earning the wrath of the late Emperor, I was turned off from service and exiled to the village, where I am under the supervision of the provincial authorities.
Now, with hope for the generosity of Your Imperial Majesty, with true repentance and with a firm intention not to contradict my opinions with the generally accepted order (in which I am ready to pledge by subscription and on my word of honor), I decided to resort to Your Imperial Majesty with a gracious request ...
My health, upset in my first youth, and a kind of aneurysm have long been in need of constant treatment, of which I present the testimony of doctors. I dare to ask for permission to go either to Moscow, or to Petersburg, or to foreign lands.

I, the undersigned, undertake henceforth not to belong to any secret societies, under whatever name they exist; I testify with this that I did not belong to any such secret society and do not belong and never knew about them

And then, the liberalism of the Decembrists is also so ... with a savor. Although the whole question is what is considered liberalism. During these times, a liberal was considered to be the one who replaced corvee with quitrent and did not lay in the hayloft not all peasant girls in a row, but only the servants :)))
As for me, Alexander Sergeevich is a loyalist, undoubtedly a patriot, of course a citizen, although much more an aristocrat. Well, talent. Unimaginably huge talent.

[kalibr]

Quote: Senior Sailor

although much more aristocrat.

But he himself wrote - have mercy on God, I am a philistine ... This is when he was just accused of excessive aristocracy. And talent - yes, but moral qualities are below any plinth!

[Senior seaman]

Quote: kalibr

moral qualities below any plinth!

So that's why you wrote him to the Liberals ...

[3x3zsave]

The marriage to Anna Olenina was thwarted ...

[Kwas]

Quote: kalibr

Liberals are made of poverty of mind.

Then you and Pushkin will have to write down as fools and many more who made the glory of Russia.

Pushkin was a great writer, but this does not mean at all that he was a great thinker. Although the "paucity of mind" is certainly too harsh. Better "lack of awareness".

[kalibr]

Quote: Kwas

Better "lack of awareness".

This is a really appropriate term. I didn’t know much and ... I firmly believed and did not doubt. And I worked in the archives, and such a g ... there it was revealed to me that if this were revealed to "ordinary people", then I do not even know how they would react even. Adequate awareness for weak minds is scary!

[BAI]

A pretty cocky statement for ... you, don't you think?

Don't you find that these words can be addressed to you too? If you can, why can't others?

Adequate awareness for weak minds is scary!

Do you have a paper with a signature and a seal on the presence of a strong mind? Where is the guarantee that the archives did not have a negative impact on you?

[kalibr]

Quote: BAI

Do you have a paper with a signature and a seal on the presence of a strong mind?

Imagine there is and not one. I would even say that there are 40 of them. Book publishing contracts. Because it is not so easy to write 40 books published by the most famous publishing houses of the USSR, the Russian Federation and England. Enlightenment, Eksmo, AST, Polygon, Osprey ... Yes? And these are not Fomenkov's fantasies, if you open and look. A whole generation of Soviet schoolchildren grew up on my books. And how it all requires a mind is easy to see - try it yourself - see!

[kalibr]

Quote: BAI

If you can, why can't others?

I can do more than others. When you wrote and published 40 books in the USSR, Russia, England and Germany and more than 2000 articles, scientific (see E-lab) and popular science ... it is obvious that I understand something more than others.

[Not with you]

Pronounced
graphomania ??? ))

[kalibr]

That is, all the stupid, who printed it, and you, without reading, all at once saw through? Would you try to publish the book of the USSR in the publishing house ENLIGHTENING. You should have been told about graphomania ... However, ignorance is power. Keep up the good work and further.

[BAI]

The most titled user on the site is Yu.G. Shatrakov (Warrant Officer). In terms of the number of monographs, prepared candidates and doctors (and this is already a school), government awards and positions, you are no match for him. But he behaves incomparably more modestly, although he is presented on the ruspersons website. AND

more than 2000 articles

There are 2 options:
1. Graphomania.
2. A lioness gives birth to one lion cub a year. But a lion. Mouse 12 per month. But mice. Kurchatov had much less published works than you. But everyone knows him. Who knows you?

When you die, and grateful descendants will say: "Here he is - the father of the Fatherland, without whose labors we cannot live," then we can talk about your superiority over others.
M. b. the plumber considers you subhuman, because you cannot fix the toilet? You don't have to judge everything solely from your sitting point.

[kalibr]

And the opinion of the plumbers does not interest me. Yours too, by the way. But since you are writing, then it is decent to answer. The way Shatrakov behaves is not an example for me, everyone has their own ... manners. And what about they know ... Shatrakov is also not known to everyone, but only experts, and me ... a lot of children who read my books. They are in libraries and SUT and schools, and they are read now. Many chose a specialty in life after reading them, wrote to me about it, and many readers, even here, thanked both for the magazine and for these books. That's enough for me. But in this regard, you will never reach either Shatrakov or me. You understand NEVER, not even stand close to us. So envy in silence!

[Kwas]

Quote: kalibr

I can do more than others.

A wonderful statement for a supporter of liberalism, just lovely! How did you say this, probably from the heart!
Orwell's "animal farm" is involuntarily recalled: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal."
However, I quite understand that a person who has merits can sometimes intolerably endure that they are not widely recognized on the Internet. Such is the shameless thing this Internet is that does not give privileges to anyone. Neither the lords, nor the settled ones.

[kalibr]

Konstantin! And this happens because there is such a "Pareto law". Its essence is, among other things, that 80% of people, let's say, are not fully socialized, educated, informed ... and 20%, on the contrary ... And there is a certain confrontation between them. And 20, yes, it is often difficult to get through to ... 80. Lack of information affects. And when you point to it, people get offended. Like, he himself did not wash for three days. Is it clear what the problem is?

[Kwas]

I heard about such a law (they call and formulate it in different ways), but I strongly disagree with it. In fact, we have not an opposition (elite-), but a continuous distribution, moreover, constantly changing. Therefore, even the proportions of this law indicate different - it's a matter of criteria.
In simple terms, the world is not divided into clever people and fools, but only more and less smart ones.
Those who consider themselves elite usually don't like it, but there's nothing to be done. There is a saying like "Keep it simple, and people reach out to you."

[Han Tengri]

Quote: Kwas

but a continuous distribution, moreover, constantly changing.

Kostya, the humanities don't know. what is "continuous distribution". Therefore, if the sergeant told them: "luminium" "80/20" means - luminium 80/20! And no jerboas!

[Silhouette]

Apparently, Shpakovsky has never heard of such a phenomenon as negative selection of elites. This applies fully to writers and silk-workers. For me - so he is a very superficial author, but for primary and secondary school age it will do.

[Astra wild]

The correct question has been asked. Perhaps Vyacheslav Olegovich also cannot be allowed into the archive

[kalibr]

I, Astra, were not allowed to enter the archive in 1985 !!! You look, and today I would praise the alliance of the Party and the Soviet people ...

[Andrey VOV]

Vyacheslav, it's not worth talking about what everyone has done or what glorified, because you will be asked this question too ... and I think that being law-abiding is not so little, especially in modern realities

[kalibr]

Quote: Andrey VOV

and I think that being law-abiding is not so little, especially in modern realities

The truth has spoken by your mouth!

[sibiryouk]

It's unlikely, the lessons of history are that ..... you know.

[Plantagenet]

“Union of Welfare? They think my Tishka needs a Turkish or English constitution! He needs vodka, that's right, he also needs a woman - as I do, by the way - and then who knows? It is not for nothing that Kapnist claims that liberal Russian noblemen, for their own misfortune, are preparing liberal clean revolutions, for any clean revolution will inevitably be followed by a popular revolt and a new Time of Troubles. Maybe Kapnist is right ... "

Mark Aleksandrovich Aldanov “HOLY ELENA, LITTLE ISLAND”

[Han Tengri]

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Liberalism was invented by bankers to gain power. Kings, dukes and earls were noble and did not consider commoners as their equal, and bankers were just commoners, and they could not have any power, any nobleman could pierce any commoner with a sword with impunity.

And why the bankers? If we are to get into the historical jungle, then why not the townspeople, in general? All these masters, apprentices, merchants, usurers (where can we go without them) and other ingredients of proto-capitalist tar, "suddenly" wound up in the God-given feudal honey?
They would be grateful to lick the señor's heels, but no, all these boors wanted freedom, communal rights and even equality with democracy a little.
They imagined that: "the air of the city makes it free," they declared the City a collective feudal lord, they invented the Magdeburg right, quite liberal for their time ...
And from such "liberties" and to the idea of ​​equality of the vile class, with the gentlemen is already close, and capitalism can happen. ))

[Kwas]

Quote: HanTengri

And why the bankers? If we are going to get into the historical jungle, then why not the townspeople, in general?

Because ideology can only be invented by a very narrow group of people (or one person). The most educated, the richest, who have free time - who is this?

[Han Tengri]

Quote: Kwas

Because ideology can only be invented by a very narrow group of people (or one person). The most educated, the richest, who have free time - who is this?

You are talking about modernity. AND Kot_Kuzya about the times when else:

Quote: Kot_Kuzya

Kings, dukes and earls were noble and did not consider commoners to be their equal

I, in general, about the XII-XIII centuries, about the beginning of the "process", when the future capitalists, suddenly, out of some kind of fright, decided to fight for the fact that they are also a little people.)))

[Kwas]

Quote: HanTengri

I, in general, about the XII-XIII centuries, about the beginning of the "process", when the future capitalists, suddenly, out of some kind of fright, decided to fight for the fact that they are also a little people.)))

If we talk about those times, then the bankers in most European countries were foreigners - Jews and northern Italians. And they began to fight not for some RIGHTS, but for POWER. Not out of nowhere did the first world conspiracy theories appear.

[kalibr]

Quote: Kwas

Not out of nowhere did the first world conspiracy theories appear.

It is on empty. If there was something, the conspirators would have rolled all the talkers into the asphalt long ago!

[Kwas]

Quote: kalibr

If there was something, the conspirators would have rolled all the talkers into the asphalt long ago!

There is a conspiracy, as without it, but the fact is that the possibilities of the conspirators, by human rumor, are completely inadequately exaggerated.

[kalibr]

Quote: Kwas

human rumor is completely inadequately exaggerated.

Well, at least so for a start ...

[Kwas]

For some reason, it is believed that talking about a "conspiracy theory" is something indecent. Meanwhile, if two people privately agree on something, this is already a conspiracy. And when several hundred representatives of the richest families gather and talk about something behind closed doors, how else can it be called otherwise?

[Han Tengri]

Quote: Kwas

If we talk about those times, then the bankers in most European countries were foreigners - Jews and northern Italians. And they began to fight not for some RIGHTS, but for POWER.

Of course they could fight ... But they got them, they only "with one additional condition" (c) ... According to the provisions of Magdeburg Law, "foreigners", ie non-citizens of the City did not have any rights in it, and, even more so, authorities. The Magdeburg Law did not provide for rights for Jews at all, because of their Jewishness and because they are not "small" (c) .

[Kwas]

Something you read me inattentively. They needed not so much rights as power. And yet they succeeded in this. And "the struggle for rights, for the sake of all the good, against all the bad" is one of the instruments for achieving this very power.

[Han Tengri]

Quote: Kwas

Something you read me inattentively. They needed not so much rights as power. And yet they succeeded in this. And "the struggle for rights, for the sake of all the good, against all the bad" is one of the instruments for achieving this very power.

What kind of power ?! Black, on the screen, says that they (Lombards and Jews), in the XIII century, and no one was right, no one was going to give (Lombards outside Lombardy, and Jews, in general, everywhere)! And what power is there without rights? Financial? So the problem is not to lend, but to be able to claim this debt back.

[Kwas]

Interestingly, they quickly learned this!

[3x3zsave]

Well-read alcoholics.

[3x3zsave]

Bravo, Igor!

[nickname7]

Regarding liberties in England, the king was a tyrant, at any moment he could arbitrarily punish anyone and take away property, the barons did not want to live on a powder keg, tyranny should be limited, written on paper by cases, this is the meaning of the charter of liberties.
But the broader freedom movement was in France, liberalism descended from the French. In the 18th century, there was a strong regulation of life associated with the dominance of religion, but the aristocrats began to spit on the law and decency, they even had a fashion almost for anarchy. They had a movement to abandon the dominance of morality, rules and laws. For example, the Marquis de Sade, a philosopher and propagandist of liberalism, writes about this perfectly. Actually, the birthplace of liberalism is France.

[Far B]

Now let's fast forward to the 90s and recall the then popular "label": "red-brown". Well, who are "red", no need to explain, but who are "brown"? Do you think our "fascists"? H-e-e-t! This was the name of the supporters of Zhirinovsky, who denounced the communists, but nevertheless united with them into one common "bogey"

The whole road was called red-brown Limonovites, and Barkashovites were also called. These were radical comrades. The Zhirinovites were never called that, they looked too frivolous, even in the 90s, when in reality they had a majority in the Duma for some time. Here they were called "Zhirinovsky's falcons" (with a sneer, ess-no).

[Korsar4]

Uh-huh. Prokhanov's book "Red-brown".

[Mavrikiy]

Quote: Dalny V

... Here they were called "Zhirinovsky's falcons" (with a sneer, ess-no).

Why not? Young people and 20 no, in spectacular form. Quite a form of the Luftwaffe (caps, short jackets, with all the bells and whistles)
Conducted a photo search "Zhirinovsky's falcons". These are "Zhirinovsky's wineskins". All videos and photos were destroyed, but people remember Zhirik's mockery of a beggar on the Arbat and how the falcon looked.

[bober1982]

Liberalism is not philosophy and ideology, it is a religion that is intolerant of any other opinion.
Now there are liberal-Orthodox groups in the Church itself, this infection has penetrated into the Church.
I liked the illustrations (photos), I vaguely remember the film itself, it will be necessary to revise it.

[3x3zsave]

Thank you, Vyacheslav Olegovich! Intrigued. However, I think it is somewhat rash to address the origins of liberalism to Magna Carta.

[kalibr]

Quote: 3x3zsave

to address the origins of liberalism to the Magna Carta is somewhat rash

This is not my idea. This is the point of view of many specialists, who know the subject much better, but it is very difficult to present it ...

[Kwas]

A great many Greeks and Romans thought and wrote on this topic above all.

[Daniil Konovalenko]

Indeed, it all started with her.

[Trilobite Master]

Quote: 3x3zsave

to address the origins of liberalism to Magna Carta is somewhat rash.

Well, thus, the origins of liberalism can be attributed to Antiquity, starting with the Greek city-states.
But all the same, Greek and Roman laws, like the Charter of Liberties, have nothing to do with liberalism as such, in my opinion. The main essence of liberalism, it seems to me, is not in the various rights and freedoms, the list of which may vary, but in the fact that these rights and freedoms are equally extended to everyone. It was when this was first pronounced "at all" - that is when the first "liberalism" came.

[Han Tengri]

Quote: Trilobite Master

The main essence of liberalism, it seems to me, is not in various rights and freedoms, the list of which may vary, but in the fact that these rights and freedoms are equally extended to all equally.

Based on this definition, communism, in its essence, is a kind of liberalism.))

[Trilobite Master]

Cannot be a warm variety of green.
Communist, socialist, capitalist regimes can be both liberal and totalitarian with equal success. The Soviet system, on the whole, it seems to me, was quite liberal.

[Han Tengri]

Totalitarianism is the opposite of democracy. Based on the fact that:

Quote: Trilobite Master

Liberalism and democracy are different concepts, they cannot be compared. The first is ideology, the second is the form of government.

Regimes under the communist and capitalist CEF can be both totalitarian and democratic with equal success. The only question is which of them, in reality, will be able to more fully ensure that

Quote: Trilobite Master

rights and freedoms apply equally to everyone

[Liam]

Quote: Trilobite Master

Cannot be a warm variety of green.
Communist, socialist, capitalist regimes can be both liberal and totalitarian with equal success. The Soviet system, on the whole, it seems to me, was quite liberal.

You have strange ideas about liberalism .. from the series I am an artist, as I see it

[Trilobite Master]

State yours, consider.

[Kwas]

If we proceed from this definition, then communism is not just a kind of liberalism, but the FIRST liberalism!

[Han Tengri]

First by what criterion?

[Kwas]

It was when this was first pronounced "at all" - that is when the first "liberalism" came.
In my opinion, it was the communists who did it for the first time.

[nickname7]

First by what criterion?

With regard to the Russian Empire, under the feudal lords there was discrimination by class, the lower classes had fewer rights, and the mob had no rights at all, but the women of the peasant were closer to animals than to humans. It was imperative to bow to the master, to name the title, incorrect pronunciation of the title was punished with rods. The communists abolished, birth rights, noble privileges and discrimination, henceforth all the rights became the same (except for the army) and the title was the same for all - comrade. In France, after the revolution, the estates were also abolished, everyone became citizens and Robespierre was the head of the country, a citizen and a coachman, a citizen. By the way, we have copied the French experience. Now our estates are forgotten and it is not clear what it is, this is the merit of the Bolsheviks.
In modern Britain, there are only vestiges of feudalism, for example, the whole Prime Minister Theresa May makes a knixen in front of the wife of Prince Gary, since the latter is in a higher caste. And the princes make knyxens in front of Elizabeth.

[Liam]

Quote: Trilobite Master

Quote: 3x3zsave

to address the origins of liberalism to Magna Carta is somewhat rash.

Well, thus, the origins of liberalism can be attributed to Antiquity, starting with the Greek city-states.
But all the same, Greek and Roman laws, like the Charter of Liberties, have nothing to do with liberalism as such, in my opinion. The main essence of liberalism, it seems to me, is not in the various rights and freedoms, the list of which may vary, but in the fact that these rights and freedoms are equally extended to everyone. It was when this was first pronounced "at all" - that is when the first "liberalism" came.

At the moment, the laws of the Universe are most fully reflected - Einstein's theory of relativity. According to your logic, there was no physics and astronomy before Einstein, and Copernicus or Newton were engaged in alchemy

[Trilobite Master]

Quote: Liam

According to your logic

So far, only yours.
Try to decipher your analogy, in such a form it is incomprehensible to me.

[Kwas]

Quote: Liam

At the moment, the laws of the Universe are most fully reflected - Einstein's theory of relativity.

Of the physicists, only theorists adhere to this opinion. They differ from other physicists in that, in principle, they cannot work with their hands, and in particular, they cannot organize an experiment.

[Liam]

Practical physicists are mainly busy with experimentally confirming the hypotheses of theorists, and without the hypotheses of theorists they would have nothing to do

[Kwas]

As a practicing physicist, we have a lot to do besides testing delusional theories.

[Liam]

If it's not a secret ... When was the last time and by what experiment you refuted Einstein

[Han Tengri]

Quote: Liam

If it's not a secret ... When was the last time and by what experiment you refuted Einstein

Do you consider Comrade Odnokameshkov to be the only theoretical physicist who has ever existed on planet Earth? If not, then why is this idiotic question?
Any theorist, not tied to a specific practical task, can, in a year, belch out so many "brilliant" ideas that if all of them are experimentally tested, then technical progress in the world will stand up seriously and for a long time.

[Liam]

Learn to read and comprehend what is written and you will no longer have to ask idiotic questions ... maybe

[Kwas]

As I said, we have a lot to do. Personally, I work in the field of low energy plasma physics, and they pay for it. There will be nothing but problems from Einstein's refutation. The most interesting thing is that there is no evidence for this theory either. This is precisely a speculative theory, not confirmed by experiment, that is why it is called that. "Consequences from it" can be explained in another way, in particular, the Lorentz transformations were derived for the ether, the effect of "mass increase" in accelerators is explained by the radiation of accelerated particles. In addition, there are many holes, the most famous is the "paradox of twins", which no one clearly explained. Nobody observed the effect of shortening the distances, because it is difficult. It is unrealistic to measure the speed of neutrinos or gravitational interactions. For the last time I puked off the book of the theorist Deutsch "The Structure of Reality", I decided to read it on the recommendation of Wasserman, but on the first 20 pages I found gross errors, for example, the wave nature of light was not taken into account, and photons were considered as point particles, and it was deduced from this ... Theorists love "thought experiments" that practitioners laugh at because they see holes in them.
I'd rather check my thoughts.

[Liam]

Quote: Kwas

The most interesting thing is that there is no evidence for this theory either.

Are you a physicist?

[Kwas]

I see that I have not convinced. Okay. Google what Einstein received the Nobel Prize for. Everyone usually thinks what is the theory of relativity. Fig - for the second law of the photoelectric effect. Apparently the command came, and when they began to look for what to give, they found out that there was nothing else for it. This is, of course, a discovery, but the scale is about the same as Solzhenitsin's writing talent. Or as if Michael Jackson, for his songs, was named the greatest composer of all time.

[Liam]

For what Einstein received the Nobel Prize, I am aware of how and for what he was awarded in 2017 for example

[Han Tengri]

Kostya, joke - the site is military, the section is historical, and we are discussing physics!

[Kwas]

So this is good!

[Undecim]

As a practicing physicist, we have a lot to do besides testing delusional theories.
That is, you want to say that theoretical physics and experimental physics are not intersecting planes that exist on their own, but all sorts of Einsteins, Planck, Landau, Zeldovich, Raisers are handless paper scribblers, and, for example, Essen created the atomic time frequency standard exclusively on an experimental basis and without any theories?

[Kwas]

Quote: Undecim

That is, you want to say that theoretical physics and experimental physics are non-intersecting planes that exist by themselves,

Of course no. Every decent physicist-practitioner sooner or later comes up with this or that theory. I'm talking about something else, the scientific approach is that a theory is built on the basis of experiments, and tested by them. But when it is built on the basis of arbitrary postulates, which are then declared sacred, and real experiments are replaced by "mental" ones, this is already ... not quite a science. And now a whole tribe of "scientists" has grown up who have never held anything in their hands, heavier than a pencil.

[Undecim]

As I understand you, a "thought experiment" is a pseudo-scientific occupation of "scientists" in quotation marks, that is, not quite scientists either.
Okay, let's take a few physicists, for example (alphabetically) - Albrecht, Vin, Galileo, Huygens, Carnot, Maxwell, Schrödinger, Ehrenfest.
Based on your conclusion, these are all "scientists" in quotation marks. How to be in this case? Or do you really insist that these are representatives of the tribe who, apart from writing with a pencil, gave nothing to physics?

[Kwas]

Again, no. Any experiment is first constructed in the brain of the scientist. But then it must be put in real life. If this is not the case, it is not science. Because only by setting up an experiment you can learn the intricacies of understanding how something works or doesn't work. Without this, gross mistakes are inevitable, and most importantly, irreparable.

[Undecim]

It seems to me that you put the creative imagination in general and the thought experiment on the same level.
But what if staging "in real life" is impossible for technical reasons? Take, for example, a thought experiment with a Bell paradox result. How do you see such a practical experiment being carried out today?
How do you feel about thought experiments that do not create a theory, but reveal the shortcomings of an existing one? Also into the slag?

[Kwas]

Quote: Undecim

It seems to me that you put the creative imagination in general and the thought experiment on the same level.

Maybe we are here with you and got confused. My point is that imagination is part of science, but not science itself. The exception is perhaps mathematics, where theoretical abstraction is valuable in itself. Physics is the science of understanding nature. The criterion of truth is practice, without it there is no physics. Logic can refute a logical construction, but it is impossible to refute an experiment, you can only interpret it differently. A thought experiment is not a substitute for a real one, being only part of the logical apparatus that interprets the results of a real experiment. If there is no real experiment, then it, just like logic, can reveal the theory's glitches, like those very paradoxes. In an amicable way, after which it is necessary to say "theory - into the slag", but theorists say: "are there paradoxes? - so much the worse for paradoxes!"
Worst of all, this theory has become a sacred cow, and this greatly impedes progress.
However, maybe it should be so, otherwise we'll discover something too powerful for our stupid civilization.

[Undecim]

The criterion of truth is practice
Nobody argues with this. However, I already asked above what to do if practice is not available at some stage? Otherwise, proceeding from your maxim, the very same cosmology is an obvious pseudoscience.

[Kwas]

Quote: Undecim

what if at some stage practice is not available? Otherwise, proceeding from your maxim, the very same cosmology is an obvious pseudoscience.

If practice is not available, one should be modest and honestly admit "we do not know this, but we have such and such hypotheses, suggest your own." This is not done; on the contrary, dubious assumptions are categorically approved.
Yes, I believe that the modern version of cosmogony is a clear pseudoscience, the reliability of which is "the exact location of a black cat in a dark room, especially if it is not there." But ask Igor (HanTengri) for more details. He studied astrophysics, shares this view, and I think he will be happy to answer you.

[Undecim]

Astrophysics is also practically pseudoscience.
If practice is not available, one should be modest and honestly admit "we do not know this, but we have such and such hypotheses, suggest your own." This is not done
You came across some arrogant and self-confident swindlers from science instead of theoretical physicists. Just like on our site, some authors and commentators.
Normal theoretical physicists honestly admit a huge number of fundamental problems and theories that are "raw" and require experimental confirmation.

[Kwas]

Quote: Undecim

You came across some arrogant and self-confident swindlers from science instead of theoretical physicists.

Not only me, alas, but in general it is a consequence of the system. If you are not arrogant and self-confident, you will not get money. And the first of them is dear Einstein, isn't it? He didn’t suffer from a lack of self-confidence, on the contrary he was promoting himself! And I, yes, too emotionally angry with him because of the negative consequences for science of universal acceptance of his fantasies. Actually, post-Einstein's cosmology is bad because it relies on its postulates (in my opinion, clearly erroneous) and conclusions from them. Calling it as a whole a pseudoscience, I probably got excited, in the end, astronomy also grew out of astrology. But all the same, it would be better if all these smart people (some of whom I certainly respect), did something practically useful, it is possible that they would do much more for fundamental science, as is often the case.
And in science everything is not easy, and often it is not connected at all with science as such, ordinary financial-human relations. Connections, favors, reputation, and the temptation is great to write a "general theory of everything" becoming "the greatest scientist of all times and peoples." And then there is a system of grants, write-offs of money and mat of values, etc.

[Undecim]

But in science, everything is not easy, and often it is not at all connected with science as such
I am well acquainted with this aspect of the functioning of scientific institutions; there was a time when the development of certain budgets by some research institutes depended on me.
But this is not science.

[Kwas]

Whoa! I wonder how. What research institutes, please tell? If it's not a secret, of course. Sometimes you come to the conclusion that the Earth is very small ...

[Undecim]

What research institutes, do not tell
UkrNIISpetsstal, Titanium Institute, Gipronickel, NIIOGAZ.

[Han Tengri]

Quote: Kwas

Yes, I believe that the modern version of cosmogony is a clear pseudoscience, the reliability of which is "the exact location of a black cat in a dark room, especially if it is not there." But ask Igor (HanTengri) for more details. He studied astrophysics, shares this view, and I think he will be happy to answer you.

Just don’t fit me into this whore. I just expressed my personal opinion about the disputes around the origin of some elements of the large-scale structure of the Universe and the impossibility, at this level of knowledge, to test all this beautiful mathematics in practice. Neither cosmogony nor comsmology, in general, I called pseudosciences.
By the way, you are a little confused:

Quote: Undecim

Otherwise, based on your maxim, the same cosmology - sheer pseudoscience.

Quote: Kwas

Yes, I believe that the modern version cosmogonies

[Kwas]

Oh damn, really confused, eyes let down. Read
what I wanted to say.

[Kwas]

Complementing. An analogy with our favorite story. There are real historians who rummage in museum depositories and unearth ancient settlements. And there are "Internet historians" who get all their knowledge on the Internet, but this knowledge is sometimes erroneous, and unverifiable, therefore, these "historians" very often also make erroneous conclusions.

[3x3zsave]

From this point of view, the "Book of the Last Judgment" is a more liberal document than the "Charter".

[Trilobite Master]

The only difference is that the Charter talks mainly about rights, and the Book - about responsibilities.

[3x3zsave]

The only difference is that villans participated in the second, and only landlords participated in the second.

[Trilobite Master]

Yes, when we shared responsibilities, the villans were never forgotten. Rights are another matter.
But in fact, one can argue about the origins of liberalism until the second coming. In Greece - suffrage, in Rome - a detailed institution of property, and after that each gopher, going out into the field, could add something of his own to this list. Look, the Mongols established and protected freedom of religion - also quite a liberal right. The list of rights and freedoms could be anything, however broad, but so far these freedoms did not apply to all without exception, but only to certain categories of the population, I think you can forget about liberalism, because this is its main essence.
And yes, the Yasa of Genghis Khan in the part concerning religious issues was more liberal than all the provisions of the Charter in any part of them.

[3x3zsave]

It's hard to disagree. Signing under pressure.

[Silhouette]

Never and nowhere, in any society, rights and freedoms have not and cannot be applied to everyone in the same way. This is the main delusion and deception of liberalism. In the Greek city-states, only an adult man with property in the form of land or a business that would ensure his relative freedom could be a free person with the right to vote, but by no means all residents of the city. The same goes for the Charter of Liberties. She was well, very much for a narrow circle of people and did not cancel their duties.

[Trilobite Master]

Quote: Silhouette

Never and nowhere, in any society, rights and freedoms have not and cannot be applied to everyone in the same way.

Do not confuse legal capacity and legal capacity. To have the right (legal capacity) and to be able to realize this right (legal capacity) are two different things. A young child has the same rights as an adult, but does not have the opportunity to exercise them, for example, to marry. In liberal societies, everyone has the same initial set of rights. Who will be able to exercise these rights how - is another question, and this is the essence of liberalism - everyone is his own boss, everyone is for himself.

[Boris55]

Quote: V. Shpakovsky

"liberal". The word comes from the Latin liberalis, which means "free".

In a society of people, the freedom of some can only be due to the lack of freedom of others, i.e. a liberal is: an oppressor, an enslaver, a bourgeois, a slave owner, always ready to betray the Motherland. he simply does not have it - he is free. As for the practice, as a criterion of truth, the revolt of the liberals in 2012 on Bolotnaya Street under the name "The Rise of Mink Coats" speaks for itself.

ps
Vyacheslav Olegovich, do you respect Peter I?

[kalibr]

Quote: Boris55

Vyacheslav Olegovich, do you respect Peter I?

A very simple question that is not easy to answer. Let me do this - I will reveal the "secret" - there will be another cycle "The Great". About great rulers. And there will be about Peter. And on Karamzin, and Klyuchevsky, and Solovyov ... so far I have to read a lot. But there will be a cycle. That's where I'll answer you ...

[Boris55]

Quote: kalibr

That's where I'll answer you ...

Thank you.
I have one more question. Maybe remember (without delving into the archives) who wrote or verbally canceled in high life writing double dates?

[kalibr]

I cannot answer you. I do not know...

[Astra wild]

Vyacheslav Olegovich, I'm already waiting, but I'm afraid that the moderators will put you and Valery again

[Paragraph Epitafievich Y.]

Quote: Boris55

those. a liberal is: an oppressor, an enslaver, a bourgeois, a slave owner, always ready to betray the Motherland. he just doesn't have it

Well, yes, it is quite in the spirit and mainstream of vulgar patriots - to collect in a heap all the ulcers and vices and declare them the consequence and essence of liberalism. And the forces of light, as I understand it, are light-faced Russophiles with the Communist Party Manifesto under their arm and inescapable nostalgia for the USSR on their worried brow?

[Boris55]

Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.

Well, yes, quite in the spirit ...

A distinctive feature of a liberal is not only that they have no homeland (their homeland is where the refrigerator is bigger), but also that they are ready to physically destroy all those who disagree with them for the sake of their freedom.

Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.

Communist manifesto under my arm

You do not know who wrote this Manifesto and what happened to the USSR?

Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.

and inescapable nostalgia for the USSR

The USSR was different:
- Lenin-Trotsky - "Russians are brushwood in the World Revolution";
- Stalin - "We were born to make a fairy tale come true";
- Khrushchev - "Let's catch up and overtake America";
- Brezhnev - "I steal myself and give to others";
- Humpback - well, you yourself know that ...

Personally, I am for Stalin's USSR - I did not steal myself and did not give to others.

[Paragraph Epitafievich Y.]

Quote: Boris55

but also in the fact that for the sake of their freedom they are ready to destroy all those who disagree with them.

even how. Cannibals in one word.

Quote: Boris55

Personally, I am for Stalin's USSR

well it is clear. It cannot be otherwise in your black-and-white paradigm.

[Boris55]

Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.

Cannibals in one word.

Exactly. "Liberalism is the enemy of freedom": http://konzeptual.by/media/downloadable/product/2/0/20031103_Liberalizm.pdf

Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.

It cannot be otherwise in your black-and-white paradigm.

Ultimately, there is only black and white always and everywhere. “Rainbow colors are needed only to manipulate immature minds to pull them over to our side.

[kalibr]

Quote: Boris55

Personally, I am for Stalin's USSR - I myself did not steal and did not give to others

But I ended up very badly ...

[Boris55]

Quote: kalibr

But I ended up very badly ...

For what country he built!

He lived a wonderful life and showed the whole world that not only a cook, but also the son of a shoemaker can rule a country that is able to resist all "progressive humanity". WWII confirmation of this. At the end of his life, he understood who would come after him and that is why he turned to the delegates of other countries to raise the banner ... (video in the topic).

[Paragraph Epitafievich Y.]

any excuse to kiss your idol use?)

[kalibr]

"My idol, my idol, I saw in a dream ..."

[kalibr]

Quote: Boris55

For what country he built!

Which one? "Some are sitting, others are standing, everyone is angry and everyone is silent." And where is this country?

[Kwas]

Which one? The one in which we were born, and in my opinion, it is far from the worst.

Quote: kalibr

Some are sitting, others are standing, everyone is angry and everyone is silent. "

This is not an hour about the United States of McCarthyism? Or maybe about Italy under the rule of the mafia? Or about the current West, with its "harassment", "political correctness" and "tolerance", with terrible inequality? Is it better?

[kalibr]

Quote: Kwas

This is not an hour about the United States of McCarthyism?

Has it ever occurred to you that it is completely unwise to justify one meanness with another? It turns out that if somewhere people are sawed in half with saws, then we can - so what?

[Kwas]

It seemed to me that you fell ill with a common disease of our intelligentsia - hatred of your native country. It is usually combined with an aspirated admiration for geopolitical and ideological adversaries. If not, so much the better, and my "sorry".

[kalibr]

Konstantin! I asked a question: Did it ever occur to you that it is completely unwise to justify one meanness to another? Usually, well, it’s accepted that at first it is considered decent to answer, then in turn ask questions. And hatred - yes, but not to the native country, but to its individual shortcomings. Do you see the difference? And in the same way I don't like a lot of "there". And I like a lot both "there" and "with us". Explained easily?
You see, you don't need A-one-sided glances, and B - black-and-white vision. In one of the materials we will consider Dostoevsky's statements about the same ...

[Kwas]

I don’t know where in my words you saw “the justification of one meanness of the other”? I was only extremely surprised and indignant with the words "Some are sitting, others are standing, all are angry and all are silent" that seem to refer to our Motherland, but it is not clear what you mean by this. It is somehow very inadequate, but if you see so, tell me, what are you talking about, about any such shortcomings?
I don’t understand at all what “justifying one meanness to another” means, but I understand that there is no ideal society on Earth, which means we have to compare with others, real ones.
And I gave such examples.

[kalibr]

Quote: Kwas

I do not understand at all what it means to "justify one meanness to another",

Really? Well, I wrote about the USSR. And you immediately wrote that it was so in the United States in the era of Macartism. Yes it was! But what does this have to do with us? "Some are sitting, others are standing, everyone is angry and everyone is silent," seemingly related to our Motherland ... This is a phrase from an anecdote that gave birth to the people of our Motherland. Very faithful. The full text is: How did we live under Lenin? Like matches in a box. Everyone is cramped and just light up. How did we live under Stalin? Like a tram: some are sitting, others are standing, everyone is angry and everyone is silent. How did we live under Khrushchev? As in the Tu-104. The speed and altitude are great, and it's scary to look down. How did we live under Brezhnev? As in a taxi - the further the bazaar gets more expensive! "This is an anecdote from about 1982, when the famous Food Program was adopted. There was also an anecdote about thick eyebrows ... There were many jokes.

[Kwas]

I did not hear this anecdote, apparently he walked in some narrow circle. And no wonder, in my opinion some kind of unsuccessful, not smart and not funny.

[icelord]

and you personally lived in the west, yes, it is much better there than in the Soviet Union and the post-Soviet space. Better for common people

[bober1982]

Quote: Boris55

for the sake of their freedom, they are ready to physically destroy all those who disagree with them.

Yes, that's right.
It is liberal citizens who are distinguished by their bloodthirstiness, there are many examples of this. What and, we witnessed, ......... crush the reptile, shoot the former members of the State Emergency Committee ......., thus the whole audience screamed and raged.

[ee2100]

Would you like to serve on a submarine with liberal rules? This is a rhetorical question.

[Paragraph Epitafievich Y.]

the submarine allusion is not entirely clear. Explain.

[ee2100]

The point is in the fight for survivability. This, like many other things, runs counter to liberal values.

[Trilobite Master]

Quote: Boris55

freedom of some can only be due to the lack of freedom of others

The essence of liberalism as an idea is precisely the same, albeit not absolute, freedom for all.
What you are writing about is when someone is trying to get a little more freedom than others. but this is not liberalism.

[ee2100]

In fact, it is so. Liberalism is the advantage of the minority at the expense of the rights of the majority.
I hope you go to the bathhouse. Let's say 5 people are sitting in the steam room and one of them asks: "Throw up?" and one out of five says "No" and the rest are patiently waiting for this individual to leave the steam room. This is liberalism in its purest form.
Democracy is when the answer is "no" the individual is advised to visit the steam room later or stay and steam with everyone.

[Trilobite Master]

Liberalism and democracy are different concepts, they cannot be compared. The first is ideology, the second is the form of government. Both the democratically elected ruler and the hereditary monarch can be both conductors of both liberal and totalitarian regimes of government.
The essence of liberalism is a set of certain rights and freedoms that are the same for every person, which he possesses from the moment of birth and which he can be deprived of only by a court decision.
The situation you described is the process of making a certain decision. I know of only one example of what you called "liberalism" in real life - the veto right of the permanent members of the UN Security Council. But this has nothing to do with liberalism.

[ee2100]

Liberalism is incl. freedom of opinion and pluralism. If someone on this site expresses their opinion different from the official history and members of the circle on this sub-site of similar views, they forget about their adherence to liberal values ​​mercilessly "drown" the disobedient by hanging various labels on him.
That's the whole true essence of any liberal.

[Trilobite Master]

Liberalism presupposes the right of everyone to express and defend their own opinion. If my opinion disagrees with the opinion of my opponent, I express it and defend it, this is my right. The opponent has the same right. Do you want to deprive me or someone else of the right to express and defend my opinion solely on the basis that the majority of people in a particular community hold the same opinion?
Everyone has the right to "drown" and "hang labels", you are no less than me or anyone else from, as you put it "members of the circle", although there is no "circle", which I have repeatedly told you about ... It's just that some opinions enjoy more support and others less. Write, fight, persuade and your point of view, perhaps, after a while will become dominant. Although I seriously doubt this, and not even because you are such a bad popularizer of ideas (not at all), but because your ideas themselves are too vulnerable to criticism.
And to shout "Hey you, there, shut up your criticism. See, the person has a different opinion, do not touch him, there are many of you, he is alone" or something like that - judge for yourself whether this is correct ...

Quote: ee2100

That's the whole true essence of any liberal.

What to do, liberalism is a purely bourgeois ideology that reflects bourgeois values. And his second main principle after the initial equality is the principle "every man for himself", the most logical development of which will be the maxim "who is stronger (smarter, smarter, more energetic) is right."

[ee2100]

What you wrote "Liberalism presupposes the right of everyone to express and defend their own opinion. If my opinion disagrees with the opinion of the opponent, I express it and defend it, this is my right" this is precisely the democratic principles. Free and open discussion.
Liberalism does not want free discussion. The liberal immediately hangs the label. The liberal uses universal human values ​​as a means to achieve his narrowly selfish goals. Liberal values ​​do not contradict democratic values ​​in any way.
Aggressive liberalism imposes double standards, double standards, etc. on society. Liberals are a very close-knit minority that has managed to seize power in the media and in some countries. The ultimate goal of the liberals is the complete collapse of modern society, I'm not sure they realize this.
Regarding the "showdown" on this sub-site. I do not like your intolerance of the opinions of other members of this community. You don't have to be so angry.

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

Liberalism does not want free discussion. The liberal immediately hangs the label.

Who told you that? But a free discussion is impossible between the knowledgeable and the ignorant, the clever and ... not so much. Let's discuss on an equal footing and no one will glue you labels. Well, for example, before you write ... read a little about it ... Not difficult, right? And not to hope for your brilliant mind, but to see what smart people wrote about it before you ...

[ee2100]

Vladislav! I'm not talking about here. I'm talking about in general

[Trilobite Master]

We understand the concepts of "liberal" and "liberalism" in completely different ways. Those whom you have described are listed in my vocabulary under the term "politics". And it makes no difference to me under what slogans they do what they are doing - "liberal", "patriotic" or "in defense of the environment."
As for the showdown on this site ... I have already said many times before, but I can repeat: I am a supporter of a purely scientific approach to the study of history. I love history as it is, and I just hate to see how they try to compromise it, destroy its reputation as a science by way of heinous, often dirty manipulations. You can consider that I stand up for the honor of the lady.

[ee2100]

This means we do not understand each other. I would not compare the story with a lady whose honor is worth fighting for. Beliefs, yes.

[Trilobite Master]

Consider that for me pseudo-historical fictions on the topic of history are akin to dirty gossip about an attractive and modest woman who is being poured with slop simply because she "did not give it." Hence the reaction.
In addition, the majority of adherents of pseudo-historical theories are also unpleasant to me personally, since, as a rule, they actively demonstrate stupidity and ignorance - traits that I also hardly bear in people.

[ee2100]

As always, we are talking about different things. I wish you success in defending the honor of a modest woman named History!

[Trilobite Master]

Modest, beautiful and inaccessible.

[ee2100]

I would add mysterious. Beautiful and mysterious.

[3x3zsave]

Oh, Clio! My unrequited love!

[3x3zsave]

Regarding the "showdown" on this sub-site. I do not like your intolerance of the opinions of other members of this community. You don't have to be so angry.
I wanted to ask who exactly?

[Trilobite Master]

I decided that in this particular case - me.
But, in principle, it seems to me, you can address some more comrades.

[3x3zsave]

I wanted to find out from a comrade, to whom you, Mikhail, in his opinion, are intolerant? Purely sporting interest and a little excitement: what if my descriptive list turns out to be more extensive than it?

[Trilobite Master]

Indeed, it is interesting. For me, it will be a look at myself from the outside, which is always useful. I thought about it, the list turned out to be somehow short, short, it even became somehow offensive.
But on the other hand, I realized that there are much more pleasant people here than unpleasant ones, and this makes me happy. It's a pity only some of them began to appear here less often. I will not name names, so as not to offend anyone by accident.

[3x3zsave]

I will not name names, so as not to offend anyone by accident.
Some names are dumb to call, so as not to accidentally banned.

[Korsar4]

So you won't get any property from the repressed. Even virtual.

[3x3zsave]

"Eh, Carlson! Happiness is not in pies!" (C)

[Korsar4]

So you have a dog.

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

then they forget about their adherence to liberal values ​​mercilessly "drown"

They drown him for ignorance. There are so many fools that it is not a sin to submerge a couple or three.

[ee2100]

Here you are too. All those who are not pleasant to you at once into fools, yes come across here and such, but extremely rarely.

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

yes, there are some here, but very rarely.

Quite so - yes! Rarely, literally 1-2 ... And this, by the way, makes me very happy. But there are many of those who would not hurt to add a little wit.

[ee2100]

A hint at me?

[kalibr]

Well, why is it necessarily a hint and necessarily at you? Look: not even all authors begin their materials with the historiography of the issue, and commentators ... with the fact that they also do not always look at what is on the Web on their issue. No one reads dissertations written on topics of interest to people, although I often call them. Because the price of the issue is 400-500 rubles. Do people need it? No, don't. They need to satisfy their interest and that's it. But this leads to the fact that ... often the comments are very superficial and frankly ridiculous, and the statements are not based on anything. And the same Mikhail, by the way, is absolutely right. And he is right because he read a lot, knows a lot in the area in which he writes, and he does not like "lies".

[ee2100]

I will be responsible for myself. I allow comments in the event that I read about it and I have developed my own idea, often different from the author of the publication. I will not additionally read someone's desserts. I understand that they are written under a specific patronage and a step to the side will be regarded as freethinking. Now there are quite a few sites devoted to history, as well as a lot of literature on the Internet, I mainly read before revolutionary.
Naturally, I cannot cover all periods of world history, and I am not striving. Enough of the Russian Middle Ages.
I respond to some comments, mostly those that I don't like. As I have already noted many times - comments and additions are more interesting than the article itself.
Mikhail, you mentioned, is too intolerant of the opinions of others. He had a series of articles (good) about Yaroslav Vsevolodovich, I tried to point out to him that the path (road) to which he refers now exists, it is unlikely that it was in the XIII century, but today practically no one uses it, but use it Google maps services are not correct in relation to history. He was immediately accused of all sins.
The advantage of the site is communication, not gagging.
We see the processes generated by liberalism everywhere and I am not happy about it.
I will wait to continue.

[kalibr]

Reflection without knowledge, opinion without knowledge, opinion based on superficial knowledge ... we have already gone through all this in the history of the USSR. And where is it, founded by just such people?

[ee2100]

Knowledge is from the word "know", if we speak in relation to history, then people receive information, or rather they "receive" the knowledge of others, those people who have processed the original source, as it seemed to them "right", and of course they thought something up.
It is difficult to call people who have read history textbooks or some monographs knowledgeable; rather, they received some information about what others know.
You yourself said that on some issues that do not have an unambiguous interpretation, historians simply agree. And what is this "knowledge" after that? Maybe on the contrary, a person who has not read history textbooks, but who is interested in history, having mastered the primary sources, will look at many points with a non-"blurry" look and draw other conclusions.
I understand that it's easier to deal with people singing unctuous praises about and without it, but I'm not one of them.
Regarding the USSR, how did it not suit you? You yourself wrote how you lived beautifully at the time. What happened, something happened. And that's already history. We live in a very interesting time, but not everyone understands this even on this site, and information from history textbooks is unlikely to help. Here you have to think and analyze. Bishkek, Karabakh, Minsk. I hope you don’t think this is by accident?

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

Maybe, on the contrary, a person who has not read history textbooks, but who is interested in history, having mastered the primary sources, will look at many points with a non-"blurry" look and draw other conclusions.

This happens, yes, but rarely. And it requires a lot of work. And you can only be reproached for one thing, you want without difficulty, so ... a little here, a little there. It takes years to figure out something!

[ee2100]

Why did you decide that without difficulty? Yes, the system is not visible, but I do not pretend to be a professional historian

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

Regarding the USSR, how did it not suit you? You yourself wrote how you lived beautifully at the time.

Cheating!

[ee2100]

By deceiving yourself? or society?

[kalibr]

I do not like when someone is lying to me. And that society was built on deception and giving the population inaccurate information. That's all.

[ee2100]

And how old did you receive your sight?

[kalibr]

It's late, Alexander. Somewhere towards the end of graduate school, that is, by 1988. I had several articles about this here, you can find it through the profile and read it in detail.

[ee2100]

And I am somewhere like that. As far as I understand, it was not from the "great" mind that I saw the light, just a certain situation began to develop in the country and it was not difficult to draw conclusions.

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

information from history textbooks is unlikely to help

You read my textbook on technologies of public opinion management ... Then there will be less "hardly".

[ee2100]

It seems like they talked about history, and you mean your textbook on "management ...."
It turns out that I was registered on this site 5 years ago, and if we assume that I read 2 articles on history a day, then this can be equated with a university education.

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

that I read 2 articles on history a day, it can be equated with university education

Wonderful! But these articles are not systematized by content, that is the problem. That is, it's all about everything - and that's good. But this is not enough! And "management" and history are really very close things ...

[ee2100]

Let's call this not a systemic education!

[kalibr]

A good name + you should add that it was also a good development of intelligence for you, since knowledge is diverse, diverse and often our materials contained elements of creativity. So for the general development this is the very "that". But here is something concrete to study in more depth already independently.

[ee2100]

We have applied education, this is when a person with one higher wants to get another one. Within six months, he receives tasks on the Internet and naturally answers them. Then he writes a paper on any topic in the chosen specialty and it remains to receive a positive review from 2-3 people working in this specialty and the new specialist is ready.

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

the new specialist is ready.

Wonderful! And now, what do you say, if a person has been dealing with some topic for 20, 17, 15, 10 years, writes articles and monographs based on the results of these classes, for which, according to their quality, he is given grants from the Russian State Science Foundation? Is he a specialist or not?

[ee2100]

He must be an expert on his topic. Grants are not always received by specialists and you know this very well. Kirill Serebrennikov has no specialized education; works as a director; receives grants and terms

[Korsar4]

Unfortunately, you can't. Two articles (conditionally) are selective, pieces of interesting.

Imagine if a year you wrote two thorough articles on related topics. This would be a forward movement. And also a lot of related issues would be raised.

Nevertheless, it is difficult to do without a system.

[kalibr]

Quote from Korsar4

if a year you wrote two solid articles on related topics

Well, when I worked at the university it was. If two articles in QUESTIONS OF HISTORY came out in a year - it's already a holiday!

[Korsar4]

So I perceive it. The only thing is that there is time to collect material, and time to put it on paper, when the head is digested.

[Andrey VOV]

And who decides Vyacheslav who is a fool and how to define a fool or not, what are the criteria?

[kalibr]

The criteria, Andrey, are very simple. When in a person's opinion there is only a black and white vision of a problem, when he does not know what he is writing about (and does not want to admit it), when he refuses to use the sources of information indicated to him, when instead of a problem he discusses personalities.

[Paragraph Epitafievich Y.]

So a bathhouse or a submarine?

[ee2100]

The topic "liberalism in Russia", at least in this part of the cycle, is not covered. A lot of things have been written, but it's all a fog for the entourage.
To believe that the "charter of liberty" is the Bible of a liberal is fundamentally wrong.
Liberalism is a democracy driven to the point of absurdity. And the name of Zhirinovsky's party is full confirmation of this.
One cannot deny the courage to the author who wrote an almost anti-government article.
Although there is practically no "military" in it, a fresh breeze has already blown.

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

To believe that the "charter of liberty" is the Bible of a liberal is fundamentally wrong

Where is it written? From this it began ... Each phenomenon passes through 5 stages in its development. It was the beginning ...

[ee2100]

The charter of liberty - concerned all the inhabitants of England, and liberalism proclaims the rights and freedom of EVERY person as its head value.
You refer to the opinion of people who know the "charter" better than we do and write that this is the primary source of liberalism in Europe. I dare to assume that all these specialists are liberals.
Do you yourself adhere to liberal views?

[kalibr]

I, Alexander, refer to scientific research, both in our country and abroad. And you read the text of the charter again, and only then ... about all the inhabitants of England. Don't rush to write, Alexander! ... Naturally! You read the epigraph - the words of the song from the movie "Cain 18".

[ee2100]

So this is not your opinion! Then the Bible, with the same success can be called the primary source of liberalism.

[Paragraph Epitafievich Y.]

Quote: ee2100

The topic "liberalism in Russia", at least in this part of the cycle, is not covered.

but the message is clear - Russian liberalism is caricatured and provincial in its epigone essence. With this I completely agree.

[Liam]

Quote: ee2100

Liberalism is a democracy driven to the point of absurdity. And the name of Zhirinovsky's party is full confirmation of this

It's ingenious to judge liberalism by the name of the clown party

[ee2100]

Clowns-clowns, but they have their own piece of the all-Russian pie!

[Liam]

This is Zhirinovsky's personal business project, which is no sideways to liberalism. And to give this example in a discussion of liberalism means that you yourself do not understand what it is about.

[ee2100]

The Liberal Democratic Party is like hot and green or "oil and water" that do not mix.
And I mean it. A beautiful sign, nothing more.

[Daniil Konovalenko]

In Latin America, with the acquisition of independence, there was a constant logging between liberals and conservatives. Numerous civil wars in different countries. And the political struggle between these groups continues to this day.

[Paragraph Epitafievich Y.]

It just so happened that the "zemstvo period" in the history of our democracy is especially familiar to me.

Well Duc Zemstvo constitutionalists and were pioneers organized Russian liberalism, no? The Cadets were the first liberals in the Duma.

[kalibr]

Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.

Well, Duc Zemstvo constitutionalists were the pioneers of organized Russian liberalism, no? The Cadets were the first liberals in the Duma.

But you can't stuff all this IMMEDIATELY into one material. Can you imagine how it would look? There is such a fable "The elephant-painter" ...

[Paragraph Epitafievich Y.]

Quote: kalibr

But you can't stuff it all IMMEDIATELY into one material.

but the thought is also not a trace. Closer to the body, as Comrade. G. de M. The history of systemic Russian liberalism is not as rich and vivid as the Western one.

Quote: kalibr

There is such a fable "The elephant-painter" ...

well, if it’s a fable topic, then I’ll remember the great mocker Saltykov, who in his fairy tales for "children of fair age" through the mouth of a Donkey gave an interpretation of the principle laissez passer, laissez faire)

[Kwas]

You continue the main thing! The topic is very rich, it is necessary to discuss and argue. Perhaps we will give birth to something, for example, suddenly we will understand each other better.

[Operator]

The paradox is that the author, who has set himself the task of fighting tyranny, cites images from films released under tyranny as illustrations (since nothing comparable in quality was created under a democracy).

Absolutely, you know, the libertorians are doing badly, at every corner promoting the freedom of sodomy, pedophilia and other philias, refusal to vaccinate, curtailment of health care and public education - under the slogan of fighting tyranny, obviously

PS Recently I read a review of a Russian student who lived for a year on an exchange in a German family with an above-average income, where she found a complete denial of freedom of morals, teaching children in a private school without sex education (which actually contradicts German laws), etc. .P. In other words, liberal ideology in our time: this is just a commercial product for the shirnarmass - ordinary members of the society of universal consumption of all kinds of food, cultural and other ersatz (to ensure the growth of sales, obviously).

[icelord]

Your student is lying, I lived in Germany for a year, there are very strict laws, and they are for everyone. A private school is a private school, it is just for those parents whose state. education does not suit. But there are very few of them

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

Liberty Charter - applied to all residents of England

She recorded the rights and privileges of certain groups of the population - the clergy, chivalry and townspeople. Not peasants. So don't talk about everyone ...

[ee2100]

What kind of a liberal's Bible is it if the peasantry is not understood in it?

[kalibr]

And who told you that this is the Bible of a liberal? Is it written like that?

[ee2100]

True, not written. The Charter is presented as the primary source of liberalism, so I allowed myself to call it that

[kalibr]

Well, this is your business, not mine ...

[ee2100]

Vyacheslav!
Please note that once again it is not your article that is being discussed, but as in this case the problem of liberalism in modern society in general.

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

Please note that once again it is not your article that is being discussed, but as in this case the problem of liberalism in modern society in general.

It only says that ... our society lacks both knowledge and ability to discuss. VO gives both the first and gradually teaches the second.

[ee2100]

You shouldn't be talking about the members of this community. Many have enough knowledge and we conduct discussions in a civil manner. The fact that people have different views is also good. These views were not taken from scratch.
е

[Daniil Konovalenko]

The peasants, at that time in England, were not yet considered people, they were the speaking means of production. This was then, when plague, plus wars swept across England. The above clergy, chivalry, nobles, rich townspeople began to understand that they could do without them, but they are without peasants and townspeople, no matter how .. If I'm not mistaken, serfdom in England began to be abolished in the 13th or 14th century .... By the way, the Charter of Liberties in Great Britain is still in effect.

[kalibr]

Quote: Daniil Konovalenko

By the way, the Charter of Liberties in Great Britain is still valid

4 points from it ...

[Daniil Konovalenko]

That's right, the rest are not relevant at the present time, but nevertheless, even 4 points are valid, and there seem to be 61 or 64 points.

[Undecim]

Obviously, there is every reason to tell in detail about what liberalism is and what its history is exactly in our country, in our country.
After reading this phrase, for some reason I remembered the first paragraph of the translation into Russian of David Bergland's book "Liberianism in One Lesson". The paragraph read: “The ideas in this book are accessible to few. But I hope you are the kind of person who can understand them. Understanding them requires the ability to think independently, boldly, and just have common sense. "
If someone is suddenly really interested in the question, I recommend Ludwig von Mises, "Liberalism in the classical tradition."

[Operator]

Democracy, oligarchy and tyranny are long-established forms of social organization, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.

Tyranny is historically based on patriarchy with a single head of the clan, oligarchy - on the military democracy of the tribe (leader and squad), democracy - on the state polis of the ancient world.

The forms of social organization have been and are being applied creatively. For example, tyranny was popular in the agricultural-river states (Egypt, Mesopatamia, China), based on collective work on the cultivation of land in conditions of constant floods. Oligarchy developed in trading states (Phenicia, Carthage, Genoa, Venice) with numerous merchant houses. Democracy was formed in the city-state of Athens for a prosaic reason - near the city there were rich silver mines in public ownership, the proceeds of which covered all the costs of democracy.

Democracy has an inherent property to pass into a latent form of oligarchy - for example, the power of the emperors of the Roman Empire while maintaining the Senate in the first centuries of our era, the power of "fat cats" in the United States at the end of the 19th century, Soviet power with the "Order of the Swordsmen" for most of the 20 century.

The current political crisis in the United States has highlighted the power of the local oligarchy - most of the seats in Congress are occupied by hereditary representatives of the top of society (the so-called Washington Marsh), the country's presidents are people from the same stratum of society, and public opinion is successfully manipulated by the largest families - the owners of "factories. , newspapers, ships "(up to paralysis of the legal executive power at all levels). The response of the majority of society in the form of support for a man with the manners of a tyrant (Donald Trump) is quite natural for a democracy that is fighting an oligarchy.

As for the horrors of tyranny, why are the horrors of the oligarchy better (the fight against landless peasants in Britain in the 17th century, the economic crisis in the United States in the 1930s, the massive importation of wild immigrants to Europe for permanent residence in the 2010s, support for African American extremists in the United States in 2020)?

Or, for example, the horrors of democracy - the rampant anarchy (refusal of the police), the destruction of the structure of society (family), the elimination of the biological basis of the human race (heterosexual relations), the denial of vaccination (since there are side effects - and the fact that without it, the rampant of epidemics will begin with mortality at the level of the Middle Ages, none of the adepts cares)? Moreover, democrats successfully master totalitarian means - persecuting opponents, adopting laws that contradict logic (for example, in Sweden, a woman's oral statement to the court about her alleged rape a year or more after the allegedly indicated action is enough and voila - the guilty person is sentenced to imprisonment without any witness testimonies, examinations and other objective facts - exactly like the procedure for confessing witches in the Middle Ages).

The last trick of the liberals: let's lower the voting age to the level of 16 years - we must give freedom to teenagers who (due to their little life experience, incomplete education and parasitic economic condition) are so easy to manipulate.

It is time for anti-liberals to move on to retaliatory actions - for example: to raise the electoral qualification to 25 years (anyway, in civilized states, the training cycle now lasts up to 22-25 years), to introduce criminal penalties for the propaganda of sexual perversions (including mentioning them in Internet, on television, in fiction books and films), to restrict the rights of people who refuse vaccination (ban on professions, teaching children at a distance), etc.

PS The overwhelming majority of people, due to natural reasons, have reduced mental abilities, therefore the most effective form of government is an oligarchy of smart people, hidden behind a screen of democracy, with a transition to tyranny in case of military conflicts

[kalibr]

In Stanislav Lemma's novel Eden, it was an anonymous dictatorship. It was said: there is no power, but it was!

[Operator]

All utopias are de facto dystopias, since they assume the existence of a population entirely composed of smart people (which is achievable only by vivisection)

PS The term "dictatorship" is vague, since there is a dictatorship of the oligarchy (for example, the Order of the Swordsmen), the dictatorship of the tyrant (autocracy) and the dictatorship of democracy (olhocracy).

[kalibr]

In "Eden" it is not specified. It is only emphasized that she is anonymous ...

[Astra wild]

Agree with you. The dictatorships were correctly listed, and there are also dictatorships of stupidity

[Kwas]

Why not put two pluses?

[icelord]

There is no such law in Sweden

[icelord]

Yes, and by the way, I don't understand that everyone is so annoyed by LGBT people, because that's their business, right?

[Bersaglieri]

Do not confuse "liberalism" and "liberalism" (as described above)

[Senior seaman]

Hmm ... a strong central government was one of the most important conditions for the preservation of our state, and, perhaps, the people as such.
As for the "rights" of the upper class, the state was very close where exactly these rights were placed at the forefront. And this state ended very badly. I am talking, as you understand, about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - a noble republic. Interestingly, neither the townspeople nor the peasants received similar rights with the gentry, and the potentially strong and rich country was torn to pieces by its neighbors, brought to the handle by the ruling class.
However, let's see what happens next, but in my opinion, the main problem of liberalism in Russia is that its representatives are liberals only in name.
Here the liberal nobles were commemorated ...
Every sissy,
Everyone robbed
Fashionable nonsense
Writhes a liberal.

Despotism adversary,
Equality orator, -
Sulled, blind and bearded
Proud receptionist.

Tom Thiers and Rabo
He knows from memory
And like an ardent Mirabeau,
Liberty glorifies.

And you look: our Mirabeau
Old gavrilo
For the crumpled frill
It splashes in the mustache and in the snout.

And you look: our Lafayet [1]
Brutus or Factories
Guys puts under the press
Together with beetroot.

[Astra wild]

The senior sailor, I think, is Ivan? You +: picked up a good argument - comparison + poem in the topic. So far 1 +, and another then

[Senior seaman]

Quote: Astra wild

I think Ivan?

Absolutely.

[arturpraetor]

Quote: Senior Sailor

but in my opinion, the main problem of liberalism in Russia is that its representatives are liberals in name only.

In general, this is a huge problem in Eastern Europe - in our country, liberalism is often understood as completely different from what is meant by it in the rest of the world. Because our liberals, hiding behind slogans about liberalism, in fact turn out to be anyone, but not liberals. Accordingly, seeing them, the Shirnarmasses and liberalism understand them especially, in their own way. Because of this, the perception of the topic in society is greatly shifted to one side. I remember that on a website I know of, a little hack came out because I called one Serbian prince a liberal. Which he really was, because he advocated social-political transformations and social progress in the country, for rights and freedoms - and in the terminology of the XNUMXth century, such a person was definitely a liberal - but some colleagues who were accustomed to domestic liberals considered it to be him insult and humiliation. Fortunately, I managed to explain my position, and what I mean by liberalism, rather quickly.

The comments to this article are a clear illustration of the fact that forgery of terms in the names of various political movements continues to work in our time. Which sometimes causes extremely unpleasant situations

[Senior seaman]

Greetings, dear colleague.
In essence komenta - PPKS!

[arturpraetor]

Quote: Senior Sailor

Greetings, dear colleague.

And I greet you, dear colleague! It's still nice to write off with you at least sometimes.

[Astra wild]

Vyacheslav Olegovich, YOU are cunning: "whose scientific supervisor I was" critics right off the bat: since I am a leader and prch, and you suggest boiling on the Internet. Critic and keep silent

[kalibr]

I have always believed, Astra, that man is his own best seeker of information. He needs to name the places where to take it, but then let him take it or not take it himself. What you find yourself is more valuable than what you get from someone else's hands.

[Astra wild]

Quote: ee2100

The charter of liberty - concerned all the inhabitants of England, and liberalism proclaims the rights and freedom of EVERY person as its head value.
You refer to the opinion of people who know the "charter" better than we do and write that this is the primary source of liberalism in Europe. I dare to assume that all these specialists are liberals.
Do you yourself adhere to liberal views?

I think that Vyacheslav Olegovich librated, but now he does not want to admit it and strengthens

[Andrey VOV]

Shpakovsky is definitely not a liberal ...

[TriA]

History of Russian liberalism

The main thing is to understand that in Russian liberalism there are no patriots of Russia, but there are patriots and agents of Western influence. All. And there is not much to discuss here.

[kalibr]

Quote: TriA

The main thing is to understand that there are no Russian patriots in Russian liberalism

Do you know that for sure? And if exactly, then where did the information come from? From our media, this is not the source.

[Senior seaman]

Quote: kalibr

And if exactly, then where did the information come from? From our media, this is not the source.

At least some of them themselves sometimes carry such things that at least take out the saints.
And this is without any participation of the regular propagandists of our TV.

[Pavel57]

The author lucidly explained that the liberal was just a scarecrow.

[tatarin1972]

Quote: kalibr

I will surprise you: the first liberals in Russia (and not only in Russia) were just the nobles! But more on that in the following materials. But I really liked your comment!

, yes, the nobles, I agree, in those days they were educated, the people were not. True, then the word liberal becomes a household name, which can still be traced.
“The Russian liberal has gone so far as to deny Russia itself, that is, he hates and beats his mother. Every unfortunate and unfortunate Russian fact excites laughter and almost delight in him. He hates folk customs, Russian history, everything. If there is an excuse for him, it is perhaps that he does not understand what he is doing and takes his hatred of Russia for the most fruitful liberalism. ”- Dostoevsky F.M.
“One of the characteristic features of Russian liberalism is its terrible contempt for the people. The Russian people will never be forgiven for wanting to be themselves. All traits of the people are ridiculed and put to shame: faith, meekness, submission to the will of God. For liberals, the Russian people are "an inert mass, dumb and deaf, arranged to pay taxes and to support the intelligentsia." - Dostoevsky F.M.

[kalibr]

Extreme judgments sometimes look very ... biting, but they are not always 100% correct, even 50%, and even then not always.

[icelord]

The one I don't understand is Dostoevsky. Probably this is not his, but my fault, but in my opinion, both he and Tolstoy write rare nonsense, it's just very boring to read Tolstoy, but Dostoevsky is disgusting

[tatarin1972]

I do not want to upset you, to the works of these authors, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, you need to "grow", that is, read them with some everyday experience, then the essence becomes clear.

[icelord]

yes no, the essence is clear, but I do not agree with her, for example, the main idea of ​​"War and Peace". It turns out that in a war, nothing depends on the commander, he simply brings the soldiers to battle, and then the point is not in guns, not in skill, not in experience, but in some kind of mythical inner popular power

[kalibr]

Quote: ee2100

Many have enough knowledge and we conduct discussions in a civil manner.

Professional, in their field - yes. But with regard to the same story, Gumilyov's books are already a gift of fate. Although there are enough of those who read many interesting books. But pay attention (if you are careful!) - here no one refers to articles from the magazines Rodina and Voprosy istorii. Although they write "I'm interested" ...

[icelord]

Vyacheslav Olegovich, IMHO, Gumilyov is not a historian but a historical writer romantic

[depressant]

Liberalism, which has not been able to take on a decent appearance in modern Russia, pretends to be dead. But we are still saddled with his supposedly decomposing corpse. In fact, the pseudo corpse does not decompose. It is being reborn into a completely living neoliberalism of totalitarian nature within the framework of the transition

[depressant]

I will not continue to comment. I don't like it. Without finishing writing, accidentally touched the send button, went. I decided to add through the fix. Added, pressed, Administrator forbids, returned - stub passed.
After an illness, since March 12, my hands are trembling, my eyes hurt, it is difficult for me to comment, but they send me away. Against the background of benevolent discourses about such a kind, useful and fair liberalism.

[kalibr]

Quote: depressant

After an illness, since March 12, my hands are trembling, my eyes hurt, it is difficult for me to comment, but they send me away. Against the background of benevolent discourses about such a kind, useful and fair liberalism.

It's sad to hear. I am sincerely sorry for you. But personally, I usually do not offend women. My motto: what a woman wants is God wants!

[depressant]

Oh, come on, Vyacheslav Olegovich, that's me ...)))

[Liam]

In fact, the pseudo corpse does not decompose. It is being reborn into a completely living neoliberalism of totalitarian nature within the framework of the transition

Quote: depressant

I will not continue to comment. I don't like it. Without finishing writing, accidentally touched the send button, went. I decided to add through the fix. Added, pressed, Administrator forbids, returned - stub passed.

Take as a sign of fate

[depressant]

Colleague, I began to see badly signs of fate, decipher! )))

[BAI]

And if the first two works are very weak (and this is putting it mildly), then the last one is very much even nothing. It was done by my graduate student, whose scientific advisor I was.

Yes, the author clearly does not suffer from a lack of modesty. You can't praise yourself - others won't guess.

[kalibr]

This is an objective reality: the number of votes "for" and "against" submitted for the defense of these works ... And if you cope with the "toad", and you still have the strength and time to read all three works, you will see that it is quite Objective assessment. True, one can only dream of this. "Toad" is strong, there is a lot of work, there is no time to deal with any "nonsense". So ... we'd better write a comment like this!

[kalibr]

You know my credo: Modesty is like underwear. A must have, but not worth showing everyone!

[BAI]

1.

And if the first two works are very weak (and this is putting it mildly), then the last one is very much even nothing. It was done by my graduate student, whose scientific advisor I was.

Yes, the author clearly does not suffer from a lack of modesty. You can't praise yourself - others won't guess.
2. Starting the series of articles on liberalism, the author omitted or did not specifically present the definition of liberalism. Many comments on the article are caused precisely by the debate about what liberalism is. If we assume that the main goal of the article is to collect as many comments as possible, then this structure of the presentation of the material is understandable. But if the definition appears at the end of the cycle, then the author must provide a justification for why this definition, in his opinion, is correct. If this does not happen, then the absence of a definition is a methodological error, which is unacceptable for a person who positions himself as the owner of a remarkable mind, which, a priori, is superior to his opponents.
3. Any research begins by highlighting the question "What is already known on this issue"? And if the author is spreading his thoughts from Eve to Geneva, it would be interesting to see what definitions of liberalism existed at that time, for example, in Russia, if the author remembered it:

However, in the XI-XIII centuries. the number of cities that had self-government in the form of veche meetings of the townspeople rapidly increased, which did not allow the princes, who claimed complete power over the cities, to become too strong. That is, in Russia at that time there were all the conditions for the emergence of its own "Magna Carta".

This would be especially interesting when you consider that liberalism originated in the 17-18 century, and the term itself originated in 1810 [BDT, Authors: B. G. Kapustin (Liberalism in social and political practice), S. V. Prikhodko (Liberalism in the economy), K. A. Soloviev (Liberalism in Russia)].

PS. The site behaves absolutely not clearly. Comments spontaneously disappear and appear

[kalibr]

The topic is too specific to start with historiography ... This is a popular essay, not a scientific study. Did you find this two jobs? Now you would also read them. And then everything would be great!

[Iskazi]

the author writes very informatively ..., but trite, perhaps for many readers this is news, but in reality the author is a popularizer ... and this is not an easy, but important matter, even the comments are very good, very to the point, which is very rare on this site, thumbs up, keep it up !!!!

[kalibr]

Quote: Iskazi

but in reality, the author is a popularizer ... and this is not an easy, but important matter

You are absolutely right! Bravo!

[depressant]

I will slightly continue what I started yesterday)))
Liberalism is not a soft approach to personality and life in general, as it seems to us. Liberalism, like any ideological sect, is totalitarian. Here we are laughing: there are some secret Anglo-Saxon aristocratic societies with their rituals - remember the movie "Eyes Wide Shut"? I cite this as an illustration. For us, laughter, and for them, liberals, secret societies are centers of development and decision-making. The global financial system is their tool for taking control of the entire population of the Earth. Hollywood is an example of such a tool. Actually, it is necessary. As an important part of a sect and an instrument in one bottle, which is well illustrated in David Lynch's film Mulholland Drive ...

At the end of the 20th century, there was a terrible advance from the liberals, suggesting the erasure of borders, as a result of which the USSR fell. But total control over the population of the Earth did not work out. Because thanks to the conditional erasure of borders, surprisingly cunningly and technically, monstrous China got out and unexpectedly for everyone, and now it is trying to take control of the Earth itself. As a result, a new concept of the white billion hastily arose and is hastily implemented - neoliberalism, which presupposes the reverse process, since it did not work out, namely: the division by the boundaries of everything that can be shared with the subsequent establishment of any form of government on each piece - from slave system to totalitarianism in the most vile form. Everything will be acceptable! If only the IMF was present in every piece and the World Bank for Development, therefore, subordination to a single decision-making center. For example, Trump is against it, he does not want the collapse of the United States, which is being actively swayed by the neoliberals, but so far he is able to take up arms only against such an instrument of old liberalism as the WHO. Putin, too, fussed, hence the amendment and the corresponding law on non-division. Hence the attempts of some states wishing to remain within their former borders, in defiance of the IMF, to introduce their own cryptocurrency. A pioneer in bringing the concept of neoliberalism to life was the UK, which left the EU. Old alliances are breaking and will continue to break. Countries will be fragmented. The IMF rules us. Putin believes that this will allow the country to avoid dismemberment. For loyalty. Well, let's see.

[kalibr]

You should write articles in the magazine "Secrets and riddles", Lyudmidla Yakovlevna. We would go with a bang!

[depressant]

You're kidding, Vyacheslav Olegovich! But I have sketched the most general scheme. For the details, which in the case of each specific country differ from the details of all neighboring ones, the diagram is not visible, but it is))
For some reason, the liberals decided that the subordination of everyone specifically to them is the only way of survival not so much for the human race as for themselves. They may be right.

[kalibr]

We will consider it somehow, dear Lyudmila Yakovlevna!

[ee2100]

Somehow you started digging too deep. It smacks of conspiracy, Shpakovsky has already walked. There is no guarantee that the IMF and the Bank for Reconstruction and Development will not perish in this chaos, albeit initially controlled.
My personal opinion is that the liberals themselves do not know what they want. If only knew long ago would have said.

[depressant]

Come on, "don't know"!
Ever since Magellan proved that the Earth is round, any ideological sect wants power over a round world. And any sect offers a set of tempting benefits for adherents, while not specifying that all real benefits will go to the organizers of the sect, and adherents - only faith in the idea and following it with impunity to the extent of their depravity. There are exclusionary sects, but liberalism is not one of them.

[icelord]

Here you have a mistake with Great Britain, the elites there are very much for the EEC, and the result of the referendum surprised and upset them

[Silhouette]

Quote: Trilobite Master

A young child has the same rights as an adult, but does not have the opportunity to exercise them, for example, to marry.

Are you serious? ..... A young child has the right to marry? .... Is your head okay?

[Silhouette]

Quote: arturpraetor

our liberals, hiding behind slogans about liberalism, in fact turn out to be anyone, only not liberals.

We in Russia do not have and cannot have liberals? ... Here they are! .... How so? ..... Is it just here in Russia or elsewhere is there a similar attack? In Africa or somewhere in the Marquesas Islands? I'm very interested.

[icelord]

Quote: TriA

History of Russian liberalism

The main thing is to understand that in Russian liberalism there are no patriots of Russia, but there are patriots and agents of Western influence. All. And there is not much to discuss here.

Bravo, Stalin is not on us)))

[Vladimir Volk]

Fu, what a stupid demagogy with emphasis on verbal diarrhea ...
Let's start with the fact that all the nasty liberals in Russia were exterminated, even by Ivan the Terrible.