Military Review

Liberalism and Conservatism. From theory to practice

335

There is no fate! Still from the movie "Terminator 2: Judgment Day"


"There is no destiny but the one we choose ourselves."
Sarah Connor. Terminator 2: Judgment Day


History Russian liberalism. Today's part cycle about Russian liberalism it is necessary, I think, to begin by defining what the liberal idea is in general. This can be done in one word: it is ideology. One of many. Ideologies are different, like the people themselves. Although everyone wants the same thing: a reasonably arranged society, a just society, and, of course, all the best for everyone and for everyone.

It is interesting that for many centuries, but that there are centuries - millennia, mankind has not known any ideological disputes. People were born in a stable, absolutely unchanging world, life in which was determined by their family and social status, physical strength and occupation of their ancestors. It took a very long time (another proof that a person can be called a reasonable person with a big stretch) before people understood: a person can never be free from the society in which he lives, but he is free to make decisions. And if this is so, then neither the family, nor the clan or peasant community, nor those in power can decide the fate of a person instead of the person himself.

The basic principle of the ideology of liberalism is very simple: no one person in his rights can be higher than another, and society must not only declare this principle, but also fulfill it. If this principle is declared, but at the same time a certain part of people from this society dresses and eats in closed distributors and shops, and receives money, in addition to salaries, in envelopes, then this is a bad society, because there is a gap between word and deed. The options for the structure of such a society, of course, can be different, but there is a main condition: the freedom of each person can not be limited either by traditions, or by power, or by the opinion of the notorious majority, that is, by nothing but the freedom of some other person or people whom it does not. should hurt. In this case, the foundation of a person's personal freedom is the inviolability of his private property. But the political one should be guaranteed by fair elections and the presence of a rule of law, in which the laws of the country are higher than the elective power existing in it, and the court cannot depend on government officials. The result is obvious: in such a society the winner is the one who, with all other equal starting opportunities, turned out to be stronger, smarter and more energetic - this is the understanding of justice that exists in liberalism. It is clear that it distances itself from real life in a very noticeable way. Again, an unnecessary argument in favor of the fact that people only pretend to be rational beings, but in fact are not at all smart, or rather, unreasonable!

Moreover, people who turned to the ideology of liberalism were faced with the homespun truth of life: despite the rivers of spilled blood, the social structure of the same post-revolutionary France turned out to be very far from ideal. The ideas of equality turned into even greater inequality, the guaranteed stability of feudalism disappeared (and it was only violated by the plague, but after all, wages only increased after it!), And now everyone had to fight for existence on their own.

And people made the obvious conclusion: the freedom given to people only leads to chaos. It is clear that people are not equal from birth, but the strong, having power, should support the weak, and those should be responsible for this with their gratitude, obey the established order, believe in traditions, and put the public duty above their own personal talents and aspirations. Only then will prosperity and longed-for stability come. And this is how another ideology was formed - the ideology of conservatism (from the Latin conservativus, that is, "protective").

It is clear that this ideology was seized primarily by the ruling strata of society, since it justified the inviolability of their power. However, it also appealed to the weakest and most dependent layers of the population, that is, to all those who could not imagine their life without the tutelage of the "top". And just in Russia, the unlimited power of the authorities on the one hand and the absolute lack of rights of the majority of the population, on the other, made conservatism the most basic, understandable to everyone and, one might say, “natural” ideology.


"Ivan III tramples the khan's letter and orders to kill the khan's ambassadors." Painting by N. Shustov. The action was effectively presented by the artist, but in historical sources the murder of the Horde ambassadors in Moscow is not mentioned anywhere ... On the contrary, it is known about Ivan that he was a very cautious ruler and never acted in a rage

It is interesting that in Russia there were also attempts to get the Russian "Charter of Liberties" from the tsars, but they usually ended in failure. The first such attempt took place even under ... Ivan III, when a spiritual dispute broke out in the state over the right of the church to own land. The idea of ​​depriving her of land ownership was of a reformatory nature, since the basis of freedom is precisely property, and above all land. The seizure of property from the church meant its transfer to private ownership, the rapid growth of the nobility, its enrichment and the growth of independence with all the ensuing consequences. The supreme power also benefited from the deprivation of the church of its lands and the growth of small noble land tenure. But they managed to defend them at the cost of an important ideological "bribe": the church declared the royal power to be divine in nature. "He rebelled against the king, the vesi was furious with God!" The subsequent attempt of Patriarch Nikon to prove that “the priesthood is higher than the kingdom, for from it it will be anointed with oil” failed. And it all ended with “gratitude”: when under Peter I in 1721 the church was deprived not only of its lands, not only the institution of the patriarchate, but also fell into direct subordination to the state authorities, headed by the Synod, whose head was the state chief prosecutor.

Liberalism and Conservatism. From theory to practice

Vasily Shuisky. Portrait from the "Tsar's Titular" 1672

The second attempt to obtain the desired freedoms took place in 1606 when Vasily Shuisky was elected to the throne. Then the condition of his reign was a document in which the new tsar of All Russia swore an oath promise not to execute anyone without trial and the consent of the boyars, not to take property from the families of convicted criminals, not to accept verbal accusations without investigation, as well as not to torture during inquiry, and persecute for false denunciations. But he lasted only four years on the throne, after which the Polish prince Vladislav was invited to the throne. Moreover, the conditions for his accession to the Russian throne were 18 points, which the tsarevich signed. And this document just became for Russia the real "charter of freedom". The tsarevich pledged to convert to Orthodoxy, refrain from interfering in the affairs of the church, and not build Catholic churches, respect the status of the boyars and his land property, transfer the lands of childless owners to their closest relatives, and not take them in his favor, do not introduce new taxes without the boyars' approval, and the peasants between Poland and Russia and inside the country "do not walk". All these conditions saved Russia from autocratic arbitrariness, not to mention the fact that Vladislav (a foreigner) could not count on the support of his autocratic rule, that is, as in the case of the English barons, "freedom" would first come to the "top", and then gradually would descend to the common people. But this was the case in the West, but in our country this attempt failed, because Vladislav simply did not come to Russia!

Peter I read the works of many Western historians, in particular the same Pufendorf, whose book "On the position of man and citizen" he even ordered to be translated and published. In his manifestos, he began to explain his decisions (before him, all tsarist decrees bore the imprint of an absolute imperative) and said many times that the ruler and his subjects were mutually responsible for the good of the Fatherland, which was a real revelation for Russia at that time. That is, the ideas of liberalism began to seep into the spiritual life of Russia drop by drop precisely under Peter I, although he himself was more of an oriental despot than a modern European monarch.


Anna Ioannovna. Portrait by Louis Caravac (1684-1754)

The next attempt to limit autocratic rule in Russia took place in 1730. Then the famous conditions demanded that Anna Ioannovna rule only together with the Supreme Privy Council, declare war and conclude peace, again only with his consent, with a rank higher than a colonel without his consent, not to grant anyone, more than 500 thousand rubles from the treasury a year not to spend , do not introduce new taxes, do not distribute land for anyone's benefit, do not subject anyone to court without due consideration of the case, especially not to execute anyone from the nobility at their whim, and do not deprive of honor and property. She even had no right to marry without the permission of the "supreme leaders", and if any of these provisions were violated, she also abdicated the throne.


Prince Dmitry Mikhailovich Golitsyn (1665-1737). One of the leaders of the Supreme Privy Council and inspirer of the first attempt to establish a constitutional monarchy in Russia. Unknown artist. Museum-Reserve "Dmitrov Kremlin"

And again, the nobility did not succeed in preserving all these "liberties" obtained by a lucky chance. Feeling the support of the petty service nobility, whose demands were much easier to satisfy, Anna Ioannovna "tore" them. Moreover, even the possession of the very text of conditions has become a state crime in Russia! But she did relieve the nobility. Thus, special schools were opened for children of the upper class, whose graduates received an officer's rank. Peter I, humiliating for the nobles, to begin compulsory service with the rank of ordinary soldier was canceled. Noble families got the opportunity for one of the sons to leave the house to look after the estate. It was indicated to go into the service of the sovereign from the age of twenty and only ... for a quarter of a century, and not for life, as they served under Peter I. That is, the Russian nobility was finally able to get their first freedoms.


Prince Vasily Lukich Dolgorukov. For participation in the "conspiracy of the supreme leaders" he was exiled to the Solovetsky monastery (1730), "tortured firmly" and beheaded (1739). Unknown artist. State Museum of the History of St. Petersburg

But the most important holiday for the Russian nobility was February 18, 1762, when Emperor Peter III issued his manifesto "On the granting of liberty and freedom to the entire Russian nobility." Any arbitrariness of the imperial power in relation to a person who had the dignity of nobility was limited to them, while the nobleman himself had to independently choose his future: serve the monarch in military or civil service or, sitting on his estate, engage in agriculture. That is, service to the sovereign has ceased to be obligatory.


Peter III. Coronation portrait of 1761 by Pfandzelt Lucas Konrad (1716-1786). State Hermitage, St. Petersburg

Well, Catherine II, in her "Charter to the Russian nobility" (1785), even declared the land holdings of the nobles as private property. Thus, for the first time in the history of Russia, an estate with civil liberties and private property, protected by law, appeared in the country. Now it was necessary to gradually extend these civil liberties to more and more new groups of the population. The task is obvious, but, as the historical experience of the XNUMXth century has shown, it turned out to be extremely difficult for the Russian state power, so it could not fully fulfill its power.

To be continued ...
Author:
Articles from this series:
Liberalism in Russia: Origins
335 comments
Ad

The editorial board of Voenniy Obozreniye urgently needs a proofreader. Requirements: impeccable knowledge of the Russian language, diligence, discipline. Contact: [email protected]

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. for
    for 11 October 2020 02: 37 New
    +2
    What's the difference what ISM it all depends on which people are in power and whether they have strong vices and which ones. You can blacken socialism and whitewash capitalism.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. siberalt
      siberalt 11 October 2020 06: 08 New
      +3
      Cloudy article. Liberalism is not an ideology at all, but its complete absence. For ideology in an atomic state in the form of a single liberoid does not exist in society. Even if they gather in small groups, according to V.I. Lenin, it turns out an intelligent Mr. nation. Only anarchy is steeper than liberalism, as the last stage of libertarianism and a complete tryndets to "start over" from the digging stick and cave life. Since the liberals, except "la-la", do not know how to do anything useful. In a word - drones for a human man.
      1. kalibr
        11 October 2020 06: 31 New
        +2
        The deep meaning is not immediately understood and not by everyone ... Yuri Vasilyevich (see below) for some reason understood ... And others ... You, apparently, are simply out of luck.
        1. siberalt
          siberalt 11 October 2020 07: 03 New
          +8
          The "deep meaning" of the liberals exhausted itself with the appearance of the USSR. And in order to delve into this "depth", you must at least have a humanitarian university training from Socrates, French utopians, German philosophers and ending with Lenin. A hundred years ago, all these liberal quirks were formulated in the works "Imperialism as the highest stage ..." and "Childhood disease of leftism in communism." To chew what the greatest philosopher of the 20th century said about what the greatest philosopher of the XNUMXth century said, passing off as his own thoughts, looks somehow naive. hi
          1. kalibr
            11 October 2020 07: 32 New
            +3
            The "deep meaning" of the liberals exhausted itself with the appearance of the USSR. And with its end it became relevant again, didn't it?
            But you did not name the main work of V. Lenin on this topic: "Persecutors of the Zemstvo and Annibals of Liberalism." And in vain ... Reread for general development. And to chew ... here you were worried, but you still did not understand. So what is needed and how. This is called popularization.
            Since the liberals, except for "la-la", do not know how to do anything useful. And the zemstvos? So the work about "persecutors ..." is waiting for you! Just do not immediately write about the "5th wheel", because although they were "5th", they did a lot for Russia.
          2. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 11 October 2020 08: 43 New
            +1
            hi it was the liberals of the Republic of Ingushetia in the XNUMXth century who turned their gaze to the Great French Bourgeois Revolution and glorified the freedoms granted to it and spoke of it as a holiday revolution. lol wassat And they somehow did not pay attention to terror and inequality.
            1. Kronos
              Kronos 11 October 2020 11: 00 New
              0
              Before the revolution, inequality was greater - ordinary people, even by law, could not wear hairstyles and clothes of nobles.
            2. kalibr
              11 October 2020 15: 48 New
              0
              Quote: Reptiloid
              And they somehow did not pay attention to terror and inequality.

              They converted, Dmitry, as well as converted ... There was a moment right in front of the Senate Square. But this will be discussed in the next article.
              1. Reptiloid
                Reptiloid 11 October 2020 15: 53 New
                +2
                Here it would be necessary to designate time for me. When they talked about the Revolution - a holiday ..
                Quote: kalibr
                Quote: Reptiloid
                And they somehow did not pay attention to terror and inequality.

                They converted, Dmitry, as well as converted ... There was a moment right in front of the Senate Square. But this will be discussed in the next article.
            3. vladcub
              vladcub 11 October 2020 16: 25 New
              +1
              In principle, it was so: the French Revolution declared "freedom, equality". Just what the liberals dreamed of.
          3. Olgovich
            Olgovich 11 October 2020 08: 57 New
            +4
            Quote: siberalt
            Lenin. Chew what you said greatest philosopher 20th century,

            Lenin: "I'm not a philosopher, I am not well trained in this area "
            (letter to Gorky, February 7, 1908).


            As for liberalism and conservatism: what was considered liberal earlier turned out to be conservative later.
            1. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 11 October 2020 09: 34 New
              0
              Quote: Olgovich
              ..... With regard to liberalism and conservatism: what was considered liberal earlier turned out to be conservative later.
              well yes! The fact that modern liberals do not notice at all, as freedom, seemed like an unattainable liberal dream 40 years ago
              1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 11 October 2020 10: 38 New
                0
                You have indicated your level by using the term liberals... Why is this greediness? From a lack of expressive means?
                1. Reptiloid
                  Reptiloid 11 October 2020 12: 47 New
                  +1
                  I see you are offended nepadezzki !!! Namely it is !!!!!!!!!!! Under the USSR, the liberals were wept that they could not travel abroad, that they could not read Solzhenitsyn, Nabokov, that they should not feel sorry for the tsar and the White Army.
                  Now it's all up to a vegetable! And this is not enough!
                  1. kalibr
                    11 October 2020 16: 23 New
                    0
                    Quote: Reptiloid
                    Now it's all up to a vegetable! And this is not enough!

                    And this will also be about, Dmitry. With time.
                    1. Reptiloid
                      Reptiloid 11 October 2020 17: 32 New
                      +3
                      The first article I only today, I do not know how it will turn out next. Therefore, I am writing not only to this article, but in general on the topic, as I understand it ...
                      Quote: kalibr
                      Quote: Reptiloid
                      Now it's all up to a vegetable! And this is not enough!

                      And this will also be about, Dmitry. With time.
                    2. Reptiloid
                      Reptiloid 12 October 2020 09: 10 New
                      +4
                      Quote: kalibr
                      ...... And this will also be about, Dmitry ...........
                      You can travel abroad as much as you like, any books are published, they mourn the tsar and others, they walk in religious processions, even for children, naked asses in the museum and theater are shown live, the Second World War is criticized, denigrated, slandered, as well as the achievements of the USSR, LGBT are absolutely free, no bans why not rejoice in a modern liberal? But no! They oppose the prosecution of their loved ones for criminal activities, even theft, even worse ....... Or unauthorized rallies, processions ...... want freedom in this.
                      It says below that liberalism will lead (or end) anarchy. I didn’t think about it before, but all for this ... Yes, there are many of these examples ...
                  2. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                    Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 11 October 2020 17: 07 New
                    -4
                    ... I see you are offended nepadezzki !!!

                    Why do you think so? 'Nepadezzki', judging by the abundance of exclamations, rushing you)
                    You have a very primitive philistine understanding of liberalism. Apparently, this series of articles by Shpakovsky is not for you, alas.
                    1. Reptiloid
                      Reptiloid 12 October 2020 22: 56 New
                      +3
                      Quote: Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                      ... I see you are offended nepadezzki !!!

                      Why do you think so? 'Nepadezzki', judging by the abundance of exclamations, rushing you)
                      You have a very primitive philistine understanding of liberalism. Apparently, this series of articles by Shpakovsky is not for you, alas.

                      Yes, exactly for me. wassat It is easy to check by counting the comments winked author addressed to me.
                      1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
                        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 13 October 2020 06: 44 New
                        -1
                        ... Yes, exactly for me.

                        Yes, I see, they got carried away
          4. Icelord
            Icelord 11 October 2020 09: 52 New
            +2
            Bravo! Lenin lived, Lenin is alive, Lenin will live. Yeah, we swim know
            1. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 11 October 2020 12: 40 New
              +5
              Quote: Icelord
              Bravo! Lenin lived, Lenin is alive, Lenin will live.
              Great respect for Lenin and the Bolsheviks, for the fact that by mythologizing the Decembrists, the WFBR, they created a fundamentally different state.
              The state of workers and peasants! That is why the USSR defeated fascism!
              1. vladcub
                vladcub 11 October 2020 16: 31 New
                +2
                Dmitry, in general, mythologization is a good thing, but in moderation, otherwise ... it will be a complete ambit
              2. Icelord
                Icelord 11 October 2020 22: 42 New
                -2
                Not therefore, but in spite of
        2. for
          for 11 October 2020 09: 40 New
          0
          Quote: kalibr
          The deep meaning is not immediately understood and not by everyone.

          All your deep meaning is Malevich's black square.
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 11 October 2020 12: 43 New
            +3
            Malevich's black square.
            Have you seen him? Well, at least one of them?
            1. for
              for 11 October 2020 14: 24 New
              +3
              Quote: 3x3zsave
              Have you seen him?

              And what can you see in them?
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 11 October 2020 14: 42 New
                +2
                In my opinion, nothing. But the fact that you began to talk about Malevich's "black squares" in the plural means that my day was not in vain.
                1. Catfish
                  Catfish 11 October 2020 19: 44 New
                  +3
                  Hello Anton. hi
                  In fact, he mentioned the square in the singular:
                  All your deep meaning is Malevich's black square.

                  But this is not important, in the sense it is still true. As for Malevich, I remember an old anecdote about a monkey:
                  "- She's a fool, but I still have my three rubles a day." (from) wink
                  1. 3x3zsave
                    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 19: 51 New
                    +3
                    Uncle Kostya! hi
                    There are actually four of them. And the fact that a person was not too lazy, climbed into Wikipedia and began to say "squares", means that I have entered the thorny path of enlightenment. It makes me happy!
                    1. Catfish
                      Catfish 11 October 2020 20: 24 New
                      0
                      [quote] ... I entered the thorny path of enlightenment.
                      This is a thankless occupation.
                      1. 3x3zsave
                        3x3zsave 11 October 2020 20: 54 New
                        +1
                        Undoubtedly! I learned this 30 years ago.
                2. bubalik
                  bubalik 11 October 2020 19: 56 New
                  +2

                  3x3zsave
                  Today

                  ,,, and maybe what he wants to see? laughing
                  1. 3x3zsave
                    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 20: 05 New
                    +2
                    Not without it. Especially if the "museum fairy" angrily whispers in the back: "I just breathed a lot here !!!" I hate the Russian Museum! It is because of these individuals.
                  2. Catfish
                    Catfish 11 October 2020 20: 27 New
                    +4
                    Hello, Sergey! hi
                    Bad example is contagious (I'm not talking about beer). laughing
        3. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 14 October 2020 08: 51 New
          +5
          I read your comments from the profile. How many times did I want to get to the commentary of Mammoth about philosophy. Did not work out. Disadvantages of the mobile version? I don't get further comments from Lyudmila. With subtext --- did not match. It turns out that good liberalism will turn into good socialism. Confused. The error came out. As it seems, Mammoth wrote. Philosophy is not yours. And without emotionally it did not work
      2. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 11 October 2020 16: 55 New
        +2
        In general, in my opinion, there has always been a desire for liberal changes. Liberasts have existed since ancient times, although, of course, no one called them that.
        The first of them in the historical period was, as I think, the Pharaoh of Egypt Akhenaten. In order to take away the power and property from the priests of various Gods, primarily the priests of Amun-Ra, he ordered to close all the temples and declare the only God of Aton (personification of the Sun), and his only mediator, of course, himself, his beloved. In his "religious zeal", he went as far as destroying temples, statues of the Gods, and even ordered to knock down the name of his father, Amenhotep III, from monuments, just because it includes the word AMON. But, according to the Egyptians, the destruction of the name of the deceased in the tomb expels his soul from the Fields of Ialu!
        Despite this, after the death of this blasphemer on the throne, the Egyptians returned without problems to worship the great ancient Gods of Egypt. The name of Enaton, like himself, was cursed, and the XNUMXth dynasty ended after the death of his son Tutankhamun.
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 20: 46 New
          0
          Everything is very well told, but this revolution has nothing to do with liberalism.
          1. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 12 October 2020 09: 23 New
            +1
            Quote: kalibr
            Everything is very well told, but it has nothing to do with liberalism.

            It was Akhenaten's reforms that led to different freedoms, to indulgences ...
            Well done, ancient Egyptians, who did not continue this liberal negative direction repeat but returned bully to the former. laughing lol wassat
            1. kalibr
              12 October 2020 17: 45 New
              -3
              Quote: Reptiloid
              It was Akhenaten's reforms that led to different freedoms, to indulgences ...

              Who is it that deceived you? To whom were these indulgences under Akhenaten? Yes, and "different freedoms." What are these, I wonder? I understand you have not read serious research on the reform of Akhenaten, but here is a rather fascinating novel by Georgy Gulia "Pharaoh Akhenaten", historically accurate. There is a novel by Elizabeth Hering, The Sculptor of the Pharaohs, also written on the basis of documents. This is for a start. Both interesting and historically accurate.
            2. kalibr
              12 October 2020 17: 50 New
              -2
              Quote: Reptiloid
              Well done, the ancient Egyptians, who did not continue this liberal direction, but returned to the old one.

              I have the impression, Dima, that you are not all at home when you write this ...
              1. Reptiloid
                Reptiloid 12 October 2020 18: 38 New
                +3
                I have the same impression wink winked about you, how are you 50 years later, all suffer because of the treatment or pulling out teeth under the Soviet regime. Repeatedly.
                And I wrote earlier about a dentist in a film about a tall blonde. I can add the words of Paul Andersen, a science fiction writer, about dentists of the same time, but in England. This was the level of medicine at the time. Everywhere.,
                1. kalibr
                  12 October 2020 21: 21 New
                  -3
                  Dima, your impression and mine - they are somewhat different in meaning. You will refer to the opinion of the junior scooper from the sewage convoy. However, in my opinion, it was not about "pulling out teeth" (I never wrote anything about rakes!) But about Akhenaten's reforms? Is not it? Therefore, you do not need to jump from topic to topic, like a flea in trousers, but you should adhere to the rule: question-answer. This is decent in discussing any issue. Just for the future: if you are not sure of something, do not write about it. Either way, it's easier to look on the internet first.
                  1. Reptiloid
                    Reptiloid 12 October 2020 21: 51 New
                    +3
                    Quote: kalibr
                    Dima, your impressions ........... However, in my opinion it was not about "pulling out teeth" (I never wrote anything about a rake!) ........... .a you should adhere to the rule: question-answer. This is decent in discussing any issue. Just for the future: if you are not sure of something, do not write about it. Either way, it's easier to look on the internet first.
                    ..the impression, no matter whose it was --- unprovable, invisible neither with the eyes, not with devices ....... so whoever they were, it's about nothing, they have value only for the owner ..
                    I, too, did not write about the rake, but about your impressions and memories of the dentists who treated you or removed you. Where did you get this about the rake?
                    And the themes. What's the topic? I now have no time to look for your comment, where you wrote about the USSR ....... And this is wrong, you have to watch on the Internet, listen not only to libepastrv, slandering the country.
                    1. kalibr
                      13 October 2020 15: 24 New
                      -1
                      Dima, it was about the fact that you wrote everything wrong about Akhenaten, okay? When I write about teeth, not about teeth, I laughed like that, remembering the rake, because the teeth are in the rake, and there are teeth in the mouth, then I write about what happened. The difference between “wrong” and “was” is obvious. Explained easily, or is it even easier?
                  2. Alexander Greene
                    Alexander Greene 12 October 2020 21: 57 New
                    +2
                    Quote: kalibr
                    Dima, your impression and mine - they are somewhat different in meaning

                    Do you value your opinion higher? Yes, you simply do not have it, you teleported in Soviet times along with the party line, now you teleported along with the line of those in power.
                    1. Reptiloid
                      Reptiloid 12 October 2020 22: 32 New
                      +4
                      Glad to meet you, Alexander! Interestingly, new stories about the WFBR appear ..
                      Somehow it turns out that it is difficult to see the comments, there are a lot of them. I wrote there somewhere that by mythologizing the Decembrists and the WFBR, Lenin and the Bolsheviks built a completely new state of workers and peasants
                    2. kalibr
                      13 October 2020 15: 31 New
                      -3
                      Quote: Alexander Green
                      Do you value your opinion higher? Yes, you simply do not have it, you teleported in Soviet times along with the party line, now you teleported along with the line of those in power.

                      Naturally. We just have different levels. I am the author of 40 published printed works and 6 electronic and more than 2000 articles, both scientific and popular science, published both in the USSR and in the Russian Federation, as well as in England, Australia, Japan, Belgium, USA, Bulgaria ... and our "reptilian" with you, even without higher education? And my opinion ... I had my opinion even when I believed in the correct policy of the CPSU. Because I believed that even if it was covered with a copper basin, I personally would always get a good job and would not be a digger. And so it happened, although, yes, her downfall greatly ruined my life.
                      1. Alexander Greene
                        Alexander Greene 13 October 2020 20: 29 New
                        +2
                        Quote: kalibr
                        ... I had my own opinion even when I believed in the correct policy of the CPSU. Because I believed that even if it was covered with a copper basin, I personally would always get a good job and would not be a digger.

                        Alas, this is the "opinion" of the weather vane, which always keeps the nose downwind.
                      2. kalibr
                        13 October 2020 20: 50 New
                        -1
                        This is the opinion of a reasonable person, the only correct one in our difficult age.
                      3. Alexander Greene
                        Alexander Greene 14 October 2020 09: 41 New
                        +2
                        Quote: kalibr
                        This is the opinion of a reasonable person, the only correct one in our difficult age.

                        A weather vane is not a person, he has no name.
                      4. kalibr
                        14 October 2020 11: 08 New
                        -3
                        This is your opinion, the opinion of a person who has outlived his time, the opinion of a person of no country and is no longer suitable for anything worthwhile. Your only benefit to our site is your clicks. Thanks for them!
                      5. Alexander Greene
                        Alexander Greene 15 October 2020 00: 48 New
                        +1
                        Quote: kalibr
                        This is your opinion, the opinion of a person who has outlived his life,

                        But this does not diminish the objectivity of my assessment of you as a weather vane. He is a weather vane and a weather vane in Africa.
                    3. Icelord
                      Icelord 14 October 2020 15: 01 New
                      0
                      My main principle is that I can't afford the luxury of having principles.
          2. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 13 October 2020 13: 01 New
            +4
            .......... flea in trousers. .....
            You went through this, you can see right away.
            1. kalibr
              13 October 2020 15: 33 New
              -3
              Dima doesn't need to be funny. I, unlike you, always answer the questions asked and do not translate arrows in the discussion. A direct question is a direct answer. I think this is the only correct thing, and as I think, I do it.
              1. Reptiloid
                Reptiloid 13 October 2020 15: 41 New
                +4
                Oh, come on. It's not the first day we've been talking. I answered you directly in the last, previous conversation. You do as you do. However, you yourself have repeatedly written that you do not care. If only clicks. In this case, we are not talking about the form of the answer, repeat belay wink drinks
              2. kalibr
                13 October 2020 15: 46 New
                -2
                In this case, Dima, we are only talking about what you wrote nonsense about Akhenaten NOW. Not last time, but NOW. And I fundamentally dislike it when people give incorrect information, when they have the Internet at their fingertips. That's all. You didn't answer and started writing about the teeth. It is clear that this is your level, there is nothing you can do. But there is no need to fantasize about Akhenaten.
              3. Reptiloid
                Reptiloid 14 October 2020 00: 22 New
                +4
                Quote: kalibr
                In this case, Dima, we are only talking about what you wrote nonsense about Akhenaten NOW. Not last time, but NOW. And I fundamentally dislike it when people give incorrect information, when they have the Internet at their fingertips. That's all. You didn't answer and started writing about the teeth. It is clear that this is your level, there is nothing you can do. But there is no need to fantasize about Akhenaten.
                your level to laugh at the Soviet outhouse many times, and then it turned out, as they themselves said, this is a pre-revolutionary outhouse, did you want to celebrate a century for him? Not redone?
                THERE, after all, they gave distorted information, and they themselves burned
                .
              4. kalibr
                14 October 2020 06: 40 New
                -1
                Dima, it's very childish to justify your own mistakes to others, right? Others can do anything, but a person (or state) of high morality should not refer to it. That is, if somewhere blacks are hanged, it does not mean that we should. Is it available to you? By the way, about the toilet ... For me personally, it is Soviet, because I was born when he was standing. With me. It stood as such since 1917, although it was built earlier, yes. But as a boy, I did not delve into such subtleties. Everything that I have with me is Soviet! Clear?
              5. Reptiloid
                Reptiloid 14 October 2020 08: 34 New
                +5
                From distorting information about his bully actually the toilet I hear comments about distortion.
              6. kalibr
                14 October 2020 08: 42 New
                -1
                Dima, and you are even more stupid than I thought. But ... keep going! For you one more comment up to 300.
          3. kalibr
            14 October 2020 11: 17 New
            -2
            Quote: Reptiloid
            laugh repeatedly at the soviet toilet

            Dima, I can not only laugh at the toilet. I can say that there was a "scoop" - something like Mordor, in which it was good just like you, because unfortunately there are many of them. But he had no chance from the very beginning, and therefore he died. He died stupid and vulgar, practically without shots, in peacetime ... That is, you could not imagine more stupid. And laughing at this is both possible and necessary to discourage trying to repeat it. RI - though it ended as a result of a hard war. And here in peacetime ... with a party of 16 million Communists - faithful Leninists, with Komsomol members and pioneers ... with the police, the KGB, 92 nuclear submarines with missiles ... Isn't that funny?
          4. Mordvin 3
            Mordvin 3 14 October 2020 11: 23 New
            +1
            Quote: kalibr
            in which it was good just like you,

            Whoever felt so good was you, along with your mother.
            Quote: kalibr
            And here in peacetime ... with a party of 16 million Communists, faithful Leninists, with Komsomols and pioneers ... with the police, the KGB, 92 nuclear submarines with missiles ...

            So you have to ask. And put it against the wall. And you, citizen Shpakovsky, are in the first row!
          5. kalibr
            14 October 2020 11: 45 New
            0
            Quote: Mordvin 3
            So you have to ask. And put it against the wall. And you, citizen Shpakovsky, are in the first row!

            Are you very dumb or bad with your memory? Yes, I was among the most ardent defenders of that order. And I felt good because - ATTENTION - because I PROTECTED him WELL. As they say - according to merit and honor! It was only later, after 91, I went through the archives again, looked at what was happening and realized that ... the king was without panties! Explained to your understanding? And now, dear Vladimir, remember for the rest of your life we ​​ruled you then, we rule now, and it will continue to be so, because all those who are against the current situation are agents of American imperialism who want to destroy the Russian Federation from the inside, having arranged another revolution and bloodbath.
          6. Mordvin 3
            Mordvin 3 14 October 2020 11: 50 New
            +2
            Quote: kalibr
            that I PROTECTED him WELL.

            We have seen such defenders. When at the most inopportune moment "Montana" began to peep. And you, with your jeans, are certainly not rolling on the foremost defender of communism.
          7. kalibr
            14 October 2020 11: 53 New
            -1
            Quote: Mordvin 3
            And you, with your jeans, are certainly not rolling on the foremost defender of communism.

            So I didn't go to class in jeans. He wore a strict funeral-looking suit.
        2. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 14 October 2020 12: 35 New
          +5
          ..... we ruled you ,,,,,,,, we rule you ......
          wassat winked recourse request Are you healthy, Vyacheslav Olegovich? Whom did you rule? Living then with a wooden toilet? Almost 80s? Who do you rule now, having lived 5 generations in the Soviet Khrushchev? And continuing to live in it?
        3. kalibr
          14 October 2020 13: 10 New
          -2
          Dima, I already wrote to you: you don't have to be more stupid than you are, although I think there is nowhere to go further. You cannot even figure out that you are doing everything that I need here, that the price of your words is at the level of the price of a dog's bark. And by whom and when did we rule? Yes, all sorts of hard workers ... who were obliged to listen to us, and listened when we sent them to love the CPSU and personally Comrade Brezhnev. Place of residence, like an old worn-out tunic, is not an indicator, Dima.
        4. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 14 October 2020 13: 20 New
          +5
          Those who ruled, or govern, live differently. Don't you know? Or do you manage according to the book that comrades demonstrated here -----
          .... How to manage the universe without attracting the attention of the orderlies ??. ....
          Then you can wear pajamas, shorts and a T-shirt.
        5. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 15 October 2020 03: 59 New
          +3
          rudeness begins when there are no convincing arguments.
          What did Comrade Stalin say?
          ..... and I have no other writers ......
  2. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 14 October 2020 11: 55 New
    +5
    hi welcome Vladimir! Ancestors at Shpakovsky V.O. were, in my opinion, the correct communists. From the comments to another article, it is clear that they did not somehow raise him higher, although they could, as he himself wrote
  3. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 14 October 2020 11: 59 New
    +5
    Comments burst out, I continue. I also called them krasnopuzi and in other words and threw out my mother's dissertation. And she showed him the real signature of Stalin. So she was just the right communist, I think.
  4. kalibr
    14 October 2020 13: 26 New
    -1
    Quote: Reptiloid
    And she showed him the real signature of Stalin.

    Now I burst into tears with emotion. And my grandmother along the line of his wife had a flap from Alexander III's overcoat, which he picked up at the place of his explosion. And what of it? In one case, a rag in the other is a piece of paper ...
  5. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 15 October 2020 03: 41 New
    +4
    Quote: kalibr
    Quote: Reptiloid
    And she showed him the real signature of Stalin.

    Now I burst into tears with emotion. AND..........
    She showed it after 60 years? That is, when the anti-Stalin campaign has already passed and only bad about Stalin. And for her, the signature was important. So your mother thought correctly despite this campaign. And I wanted to raise you the same. Yes, it did not work out, as we see. As you yourself wrote, they did not begin to promote you further, although they could, as you wrote in other comments, you wrote that they could do more, but did not. This, in your opinion, cost them nothing. And then Anton wrote, like, why are you substituting your relatives? But you couldn't stop. That's what !! Relatives probably noticed something bad in you, for example, in the words of your stepfather, whose surname you yourself chose instead of the real one, as you yourself wrote.
  6. kalibr
    14 October 2020 13: 28 New
    -1
    Quote: Reptiloid
    So she was just the right communist, I think.

    Aha! From each lecture at the poultry factory, I brought in a bag of chickens, and did not get out of the special clinic. "Although they treat so-so there, but there is no rabble!"
  7. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 14 October 2020 13: 43 New
    +5
    Quote: kalibr
    Quote: Reptiloid
    So she was just the right communist, I think.

    Aha! From each lecture at the poultry factory, I brought in a bag of chickens, and did not get out of the special clinic. "Although they treat so-so there, but there is no rabble!"

    So you're making fun of your communist mom? But the answer is known. As you wrote, what they could do for you without any difficulty, more, but they did not. And rightly so. And that's enough.
  8. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 14 October 2020 12: 06 New
    +5
    Yes, laugh at your own toilet as much as you want, just add that this is your toilet, which you could not improve for some reason, until the 70s, everyone was waiting for an apartment from the Soviet regime.
  9. kalibr
    14 October 2020 13: 24 New
    -1
    So, Dima, why was there anything to improve when we were promised the building of the foundations of communism in 1980, and free housing with all amenities. So they were waiting for all this to come true. It is not a sin to be patient here.
  10. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 14 October 2020 13: 31 New
    +5
    Quote: kalibr
    So, Dima, why was there anything to improve when we were promised the building of the foundations of communism in 1980, and free housing with all amenities. So they were waiting for all this to come true. It is not a sin to be patient here.

    Ha ha ha! Did you endure yourself, looked through the holes of your toilet, did you manage from there? And now why so many times have they been stigmatized ..? Because others got an apartment 20 years earlier? Not given as manager
  11. kalibr
    14 October 2020 14: 19 New
    0
    Dima, I have already made more than 318 comments with your help. Now the material will hang for a long time among the most read and commented on. So thank you and don't try any more.
  12. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 15 October 2020 03: 53 New
    +5
    Quote: kalibr
    So, Dima, why was there anything to improve when we were promised the building of the foundations of communism in 1980, and free housing with all amenities. So they were waiting for all this to come true. It is not a sin to be patient here.

    This comment says it all. Because the USSR managed to destroy, that you were not the only one who thought --- why improve something? And they did not think to solve the problems of their pre-revolutionary toilet themselves, they expected that the Soviet government under communism would mess with your sewage.
  13. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 13 October 2020 15: 42 New
    +3
    I wanted other emoticons, this is how it works.
  14. kalibr
    13 October 2020 17: 49 New
    -3
    I understand everything well without emoticons, Dima!
  15. kalibr
    13 October 2020 20: 53 New
    -1
    It is stupid, Dima, to give me a minus for a completely reasonable and perfect answer that is not offensive to you. After all, I don't care what +, what -, the main thing is that you do the click. How many comments do we have there? 291. Let's overclock it to 300, I personally will only be in favor.
  16. Reptiloid
    Reptiloid 14 October 2020 00: 26 New
    +3
    Do you want clicks? I have them !!!!
    But the network is buggy laughing lol wassat .
  17. kalibr
    14 October 2020 06: 33 New
    0
    Come on, Dima, come on. The more the better!
  • kalibr
    11 October 2020 07: 39 New
    +2
    Quote: for
    what people are in power and whether their vices are strong and what.

    Certainly! But the system should be built in such a way that absolutely vicious people would not climb up ... Isn't it?
    1. The leader of the Redskins
      The leader of the Redskins 11 October 2020 07: 49 New
      +1
      Ideally, Vyacheslav Olegovich, but apparently liberals of different eras and geographies are very different from each other.
      And in the current era of our country, liberals are what they allow be from above.
      1. depressant
        depressant 11 October 2020 10: 40 New
        +1
        Well I do not know. I understand everything in my own way.
        In my understanding, conservatism is a prerequisite, without which no liberalism is possible. And I was funny and even embarrassed when Putin called himself a liberal in the orgy of non-observance of laws by the ruling class. Because conservatism is the equality of all before the law. Regardless of which stratum of society you belong to, or which clan. Regardless of connections, preferences, nepotism, etc. When this foundation has been built, at least within some notable limits, then one can say whether this or that law is bad, collect statistics on the infringement of individual freedom and say that this is liberalism. And then he is a liberal ... sorry, for whom is a liberal?
        1. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 11 October 2020 13: 07 New
          +5
          ......... he is a liberal ..... for whom is he a liberal .....
          good afternoon, Lyudmila hi hi Yes, as well as freedom, freedom is different. For example, the slogan of the WFBR was FREEDOM, EQUALITY, BROTHERHOOD of all Frenchmen.
          And in practice, even such a concept as electoral law did not imply equality! There were electorswho elected deputies, and there was a people who were divided into active и passive ... These were precisely their terms, I read at Kropotkin. Active are those who paid the property qualification and had the right to elect electors. And the passive ones are those who are poor as well all female persons !!!... They did not have the right to elect and be elected. Active means literally "acting", and passive means "suffering" ".
          1. depressant
            depressant 11 October 2020 13: 48 New
            +4
            Dima, I would prefer to be called "suffering" if the law was observed. But the laws heaped up by the Duma are such that they have two components: spirit and letter. At one time, I was faced with this. The President, addressing the lawyers, asks - exactly like this: asks! - keep the spirit of the law. They say, there is case law in America, and you should also. And they told him: and we will observe the letter and only the letter! For otherwise, our spirit in another law, to which your, President, request did not apply, will find our own punishing letter for ourselves.
            I naively believed that after zeroing the president would give the command to shovel all these ambiguous laws in order to exclude such a thing. And yes, Matvienko said: "Lopatim!" But it turned out that digitalization is included in the laws, without removing from them the property of the beneficial power of the tongue.
            1. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 11 October 2020 14: 05 New
              +5
              I'll try to joke a little, Lyudmila love In that terminology, after all, we are talking about all women, there were grounds, so to equate the opportunities of women with those of the poor? I treat your thoughts and comments with interest and respect good
            2. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 11 October 2020 14: 12 New
              +3
              The previous comment burst out earlier. I continue. When cable programs and American films first came out, many of their films showed where this case law rescues and rescues an unjustly accused at the last moment ....
              Drawbar turning more and more often ...
            3. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 11 October 2020 14: 23 New
              +5
              About the WFBR. For example, France was engaged in the slave trade. After the revolution, the position of slaves did not change. The word FREEDOM did not apply to them. And if anyone ran away, they first branded, and another time they mutilated. ....
              1. kalibr
                11 October 2020 20: 44 New
                -2
                Quote: Reptiloid
                After the revolution, the position of slaves did not change. The word FREEDOM did not apply to them. And if anyone ran away, they first branded, and another time they mutilated. ....

                Slavery in France and the colonies was abolished in 1794. Napoleon restored it in 1802.
                1. Reptiloid
                  Reptiloid 11 October 2020 20: 55 New
                  +4
                  Have you thought about it, or what? How can it be without slaves?
                  Quote: kalibr
                  Quote: Reptiloid
                  After the revolution, the position of slaves did not change. The word FREEDOM did not apply to them. And if anyone ran away, they first branded, and another time they mutilated. ....

                  Slavery in France and the colonies was abolished in 1794. Napoleon restored it in 1802.
                  1. Icelord
                    Icelord 14 October 2020 22: 46 New
                    0
                    Don't worry, the damned Bourbon monarchists have abolished slavery. You should fly back to your planet Nubiru. There communism looks like
            4. Korsar4
              Korsar4 11 October 2020 17: 50 New
              +2
              Do you yourself think there were even the slightest grounds for such assumptions?

              (The question is, of course, rhetorical).
      2. for
        for 11 October 2020 14: 46 New
        0
        Quote: Leader of the Redskins
        liberals are

        Such are the power.
        The United States has created an international bin Laden.
        Russia is local (goes to international) bulk.
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 15: 58 New
          0
          The most famous terrorist of the planet, serving two life sentences in France, Ilyich Ramirez studied at the USSR, Peoples' Friendship University. In May 2017, six Russian writers wrote an open letter to French President Emmanuel Macron asking him to pardon Carlos. Among the signatories are Alexander Prokhanov, Igor Molotov, German Sadulaev, Israel Shamir, Andrey Rudalev and Sergey Petrov. By August, the number of signatories was 20. The letter remained unresponsive from the French government and public figures. In March 2018, after the court upheld the verdict, Ilyich Ramirez Sanchez asked Vladimir Putin to influence his release. In particular, Carlos asked to be given Russian citizenship in order to exchange him for a spy. Why such "love" to Russia?
    2. bubalik
      bubalik 11 October 2020 09: 38 New
      +4
      kalibr
      Today, 08: 39
      so that very vicious

      ,,, depending on what is considered a vice. People are all different, for whom vice is not a vice. A vice is something that does not fit into the social norms of morality, which a hundred years ago was considered a vice, is now the norm.
    3. Hantengri
      Hantengri 11 October 2020 10: 16 New
      +7
      Quote: kalibr
      Certainly! But the system should be built in such a way that absolutely vicious people would not climb up ... Isn't it?

      This is what happens - it means that everyone can "climb up", but "crooks and thieves" are not allowed? But what about:
      the main condition: the freedom of each person can not be limited either by traditions, or by power, or by the opinion of the notorious majority,
      ??
      Some kind of double standards in your wonderful liberalism ...)))
      1. Kwas
        Kwas 11 October 2020 13: 21 New
        +2
        "In our free country, everyone has the right to be a villain"
        (Rhett Butler from Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell)
      2. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 11 October 2020 13: 45 New
        +5
        There is also such a topic, Igor laughing For example, --- quite vicious --- who is this? The concept of vice is different for everyone ..... So, completely vicious ---- is impossible? Isn't it completely vicious? Can? Or vicious but
        successfully hiding?
        1. Icelord
          Icelord 14 October 2020 15: 08 New
          0
          Of course, hiding is possible, not a thief is caught. Here is your idol Dzhugashvili hid and some stupid people still respect him
      3. kalibr
        11 October 2020 15: 59 New
        -1
        The freedom of one ends where the freedom of the other begins.
        1. Hagen
          Hagen 12 October 2020 09: 59 New
          0
          Quote: kalibr
          The freedom of one ends where the freedom of the other begins.

          Ideally, this is so. In life, it turns out that the boundaries between other people's freedoms are very flexible, and the presence of someone else's freedom must certainly be shown, and then defended. Thus, we again come to the conclusion that the one who is stronger is also more free. This is probably not entirely fair. Therefore, freedom should be limited by the state that has established a corresponding restriction on freedom.
          I would also like to note that I do not quite agree with your thesis about the "bribe"
          the church declared kingship to be divine in nature. "He rebelled against the king, the vesi was furious with God!"

          The sacralization of power has been present in the life of the Russian people for a long time. Another appearance of the Varangians in the Slavic lands. An illustration of this is the experience of imposing on the power of all the misfortunes that fall on the heads of the people, independent of the will of man. For example, prolonged rains served as expulsion, as I remember in 1229, from Veliky Novgorod and acting. patriarch (in our understanding wink ), and the princes Fyodor and Alexander Yaroslavich. There were plenty of similar examples. And this explains the complete acceptance by the urban elites of those times, the reign of the offspring of the grand ducal families at extremely young ages. Their presence alone was assigned the role of protecting cities from various elements that were not subject to the will of an ordinary person.
    4. for
      for 11 October 2020 14: 18 New
      +2
      Quote: kalibr
      Is not it?

      So it is, but for some reason only such people go there, no matter what ISMs and such a system is difficult to build.
      1. kalibr
        11 October 2020 16: 00 New
        0
        Quote: for
        such a system is difficult to build

        All any doubts!
  • ZEMCH
    ZEMCH 11 October 2020 03: 08 New
    +3
    We look forward to continuing with interest))
  • Cherry Nine
    Cherry Nine 11 October 2020 03: 17 New
    +3
    )))
    Unexpected text on an unexpected site.
  • Iskazi
    Iskazi 11 October 2020 03: 29 New
    +5
    the author started from afar ... but judging by the beginning, he will not reach conclusions. Another nonsense ... boring gentlemen, boring ...
    1. Catfish
      Catfish 11 October 2020 03: 51 New
      11
      ... the author started from afar ... but judging by the beginning, he will not reach conclusions.

      Wait and see. wink
      And if you are bored, do not read, after all, no one forces, now in the country liberalism, swaboda and zeroing. laughing
      Good morning everyone and have a nice day! drinks
      1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 11 October 2020 05: 05 New
        +2
        An unexpected midnight reading for breakfast!
        Vyacheslav Olegovich thank you !!!
        Now for the text. Liberalism, democracy, pluralism and other “isms” do not exclude other forms of government, as well as the structure of the latter.
        Another thing is interesting, our whole general political "aplomb" of knowledge is built on works more than two thousand years ago. People still only guessed about the molecules, assumed the sphericity of the earth, etc., but already systematized the structures of government and government. And how many people know that apart from democracy and autocracy, at least there is a theocratic, oligarchic form of government?
        In their organization, Spartan and Roman societies were superior to all modern ones. Moreover, the stability of the political institutions of ancient states is admirable !!!
        So there is a reason to think and thanks again!
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 08: 20 New
          13
          People still only guessed about the molecules, assumed the sphericity of the earth, etc., but already systematized the structures of government and government.
          Uh-huh.
          "Being very hungry, the primitive tribe began to look for a way out of the situation.
          - Let's go hunting a mammoth! - said one. This is how the first commander appeared.
          - We must dig a hole and drive a mammoth into it - said another. This is how the first chief of staff appeared.
          - All, as one, to hunt !!! - shouted the third and became the first political officer.
          We did everything as planned and the hunt was a success.
          ... And by morning the mammoth was gone ... So the first chief food officer declared himself. "
    2. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 11 October 2020 07: 25 New
      -5
      Quote: Iskazi
      the author started from afar ... but judging by the beginning, he will not reach conclusions. Another nonsense ... boring gentlemen, boring ...

      But the pictures are still there? repeat Another delirium from Shpakovsky:
      because the basis of freedom is precisely property, and above all land. The seizure of property from the church meant its transfer to private ownership, the rapid growth of the nobility, its enrichment and growing independence with all the ensuing consequences.
      Gentry liberty did not have land ownership under it. What kind of independence under autocracy? fool
      1. kalibr
        11 October 2020 07: 29 New
        +1
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        What kind of independence under autocracy?

        After the decree of Catherine II in 1785, complete! Live on your estate and you are the master of everything!
    3. kalibr
      11 October 2020 07: 26 New
      0
      Quote: Iskazi
      but judging by the beginning

      Do not judge rashly, says the Gospel ...
  • Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 11 October 2020 04: 54 New
    +8
    Liberalism and Conservatism. From theory to practice

    There is only one practice we need to recognize: the symbiosis of all these "isms."
    I liked that the author revealed the real essence of liberalism in:
    The basic principle of the ideology of liberalism is very simple: no one person in his rights can be higher than another, and society should not only declare this principle, but also implement it. If this principle is declared, but at the same time a certain part of people from this society dresses and eats in closed distributors and shops, and receives money, in addition to salaries, in envelopes, then this is a bad society, because there is a gap between word and deed.

    After that, it becomes clear where the derogatory "liberals" came from and why the ideas of liberalism are perceived with a creak by the Russian authorities.
    In the policy of "carrots and sticks" it becomes completely clear whose "stick" is here, and whose hole is stuck together from the carrots.
    1. depressant
      depressant 11 October 2020 11: 15 New
      +4
      A symbiosis of "isms" should be.
      That is why the royal power lasted so long? But because the laws were respected. They were cruel, but everyone understood - both peasants and landowners. Those and others were "flogged" for non-compliance with the laws. And only the excessive accumulation of cruelty raised the peasants to revolts. Why did the tsarist power not hold out? And due to the fact that she did not listen to the liberals: this law is too harsh, it would be urgent to soften it. Both this and that.
      In England, Sweden, somewhere else - a constitutional monarchy. There, this matter was quickly understood, they stand on the foundation of conservatism, occasionally changing the laws in the direction of softening them. It's like a clever mayor saw that the people had trodden a path convenient for them and ordered it to be asphalted. Therefore, for example, England, having withstood a series of cutting of royal heads, has created an unshakable foundation for its existence.
      In today's Russia, there is an orgy of laws, and each one contradicts the others with this or that article. Therefore, the people have given up on them and do not comply, en masse looking for loopholes. For it is more dear to observe. And if it observes at the household level in relation to each other, then for the authorities it looks like a dangerous consolidation of the population against it. It is necessary to atomize by digitalization, points based on the results of spying on neighbors. Believe it will.
      1. Ross xnumx
        Ross xnumx 11 October 2020 13: 21 New
        +3
        Quote: depressant
        a constitutional monarchy.

        Any power relies primarily on the power structures. A constitutional monarchy is not the worst option for governing a state. We remember that in the history of Russia there was an experience of choosing "God's anointed one". Here are some interesting features of the Russian autocracy - the presence of many tsarist coups, the ossification of reforms and the rejection of everything new, the absence of a well-thought-out social policy (as a result, constant riots, uprisings, wars).
        In what way, for example, cannot presidential rule be presented as a constitutional monarchy? In either case, the acuteness of the issue of changing the head of state is not dulled.
        You know (and claim) that in any state, power lasts for a long time only if the laws are equal for everyone. Ultimately, the state itself is created for this. As soon as "wormholes" of privileges, special status, unofficial powers, exceptions, privileges appear, the building of the state begins to collapse like a tree under the pressure of termites.
        I like that not just statements appear on the site, but clever thoughts and business remarks. And I do not disregard them.
        love
      2. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 11 October 2020 16: 07 New
        +4
        "They quickly understood this matter, they stand on the foundation of conservatism, occasionally changing the laws in the direction of softening them" ///
        ---
        Royalist conservatives in England changed laws quickly and radically when they "gut" felt that the people were "boiling." And thus they prevented revolutions.
        Queen Victoria, at the height of the power of the British Empire, carried out profound social reforms in favor of the workers.
        Russian emperors did not have such a flair. They first "pressed" the people and then belatedly provided a piece of reform. But people were already embittered and continued the underground struggle.
  • Dart2027
    Dart2027 11 October 2020 07: 19 New
    +1
    Moreover, people who turned to the ideology of liberalism were faced with the homespun truth of life: despite the rivers of spilled blood, the social structure of the same post-revolutionary France turned out to be very far from ideal.
    This is the whole essence of real liberalism - it simply does not exist and cannot be.
    But attempts to build it lead to anarchism, because the real embodiment of the liberal idea will lead to the destruction of the state as an institution of government.
    1. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 11 October 2020 13: 40 New
      +3
      Quote: Dart2027
      But attempts to build it lead to anarchism, because the real embodiment of the liberal idea will lead to the destruction of the state as an institution of government.

      These attempts cannot bring something real a priori, because the entire system of state power, as a rule and in most cases, is done according to Western patterns.
      It was Lenin who could walk. It was Olof Palme who could return with his wife from the cinema through the streets of Stockholm, it was Lee Kuan Yew who could put three "friends" on the bunk ...
      But our leaders and their "king's men" cannot exist in this world without being different from the "cattle" in clothes, shoes, accessories, transport, type of recreation, manner of speech, the size of the apartments and the scope of luxury ... Sometimes it seems that they even they don't use toilet paper, but ... they send their natural needs right away - in cellophane.
      And, as soon as they are hinted at their isolation from ordinary citizens - bearers and sources of power - they immediately begin to moan: “Do you want it like in ... (name of the country). You are missing the mess like ... (country name). We missed the anarchy like in ... (country name). Forgot how it was in (name of the country). "
      Meanwhile, they breathe the same air as mere mortals. And their blood is not blue at all, in contrast to orientation (physical and human). And they die from any careless "sneeze".
      hi
      1. depressant
        depressant 11 October 2020 14: 08 New
        +2
        And because liberalism in our country does not work as a tool for establishing a balance between power and society. As in tsarist Russia it did not work on time, assuming ugly terrorist forms, so now. Until our political power realizes that the basis of its power, longevity and prosperity is not a police type of government, but a real separation of powers in the presence of two powerful parties, one of which periodically replaces the other, it is doomed to a hostile attitude towards it people. Because he accumulates mistakes, not wanting to correct them. Like, and so it will come down, they endure. Not realizing that this cannot last forever.
        1. Ross xnumx
          Ross xnumx 11 October 2020 14: 16 New
          +2
          Quote: depressant
          As in tsarist Russia didn't fire on time, taking ugly terrorist forms, so now.

          Someone did not take the works of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin.
          Quote: depressant
          Because he accumulates mistakes, not wanting to correct them. Like, and so it will come down, they endure.

          I'll tell you this, some endure because they are not able to make independent decisions, others accumulate "these mistakes", hoping that they will blow away the bowl of detachment from everything "acquired by overwork." They hope that the budget will contain all this breakthrough only because some "ghouls" will be replaced by others - it is not for nothing that we have been led across the desert for 30 years.
          Because of this alone, many of them are afraid of a repeat of 1917. Only because of this they curse the Soviet government and lie to us about galoshes ...
      2. Dart2027
        Dart2027 11 October 2020 14: 19 New
        -1
        Quote: ROSS 42
        It was Lenin who could walk.

        Was Lenin a liberal?
        Quote: ROSS 42
        “Do you want it like in ... (name of the country). You are missing the mess like ... (country name). We missed the anarchy like in ... (country name). Forgot how it was in (name of the country). "

        As a rule, those who shout loudest about the fact that the government needs to be overthrown, because it stifles freedom and that is what they want.
        Quote: ROSS 42
        It was Olof Palme who could return with his wife from the cinema through the streets of Stockholm, it was Lee Kuan Yew who could put three "friends" on the bunk

        Lee Kuan Yew has a well-known statement about the difficult temptations of power: “I had two paths. The first is to steal and take friends and relatives into the Forbes lists, while leaving their people on the bare ground. Second: it is to serve your people and bring the country to the top ten of the best countries in the world. I chose the latter ... ”[28]. In folk processing, these words turned into a saying attributed [29] to Lee Kuan Yew, the meaning of which is that in order to defeat corruption you need to put three of your friends
        1. Ross xnumx
          Ross xnumx 11 October 2020 14: 28 New
          +4
          Quote: Dart2027
          Was Lenin a liberal?

          Perhaps Lenin did not consider himself a liberal, but he fought for equal rights and gave his gold medal to buy food for the hungry.
          Something I do not know that the liberal Putin gave one of his hours for the treatment of children, or even gave something "belonging to him personally" for good needs ...
          Second, citing the names of Lenin, Palme, Lee Kuan Yew, I contrasted their behavior with the behavior and manners of people, in the protection and maintenance of which thousands of people work and the costs are estimated in billions:
          MOSCOW, September 30. / TASS /. The draft federal budget of the Russian Federation for the next three years provides for an increase in labor costs for employees of the presidential administration in 2020 by almost 1,6 billion rubles. This is stated in the explanatory note to the draft budget for 2020-2022. The named indicator is compared with the amount provided for this purpose by the current federal budget for 2019-2021 ...
          A draft federal budget for three years was submitted to the State Duma
          According to the explanatory note, the budgetary allocations for the activities of the president and his administration in 2020 will amount to 13 billion 851,1 million rubles, in 2021 - 14 billion 191,1 million rubles and in 2022 - 14 billion 624,8 million rubles. These amounts in 2020 and 2021 are increased by 2 billion 373,4 million rubles and 2 billion 323,3 million rubles, respectively, compared to the same indicators prescribed in the current budget.
          1. Dart2027
            Dart2027 11 October 2020 14: 32 New
            -3
            Quote: ROSS 42
            Perhaps Lenin did not consider himself a liberal, but fought for equal rights

            At the same time, using weapons, eliminating dissent.
            Quote: ROSS 42
            citing the names of Lenin, Palme, Lee Kuan Yew, I contrasted their behavior with the behavior and manners of people

            What do you want to say that they did not have security (the fact that Palme refused to escort did not mean that there was no security service in his country) and everything else?
      3. Icelord
        Icelord 14 October 2020 15: 19 New
        0
        Mr. Ulyanov drove Rolls Royces, and remade one sales for a ski run, for a large currency, in the midst of devastation. Something like this
  • And why do you need
    And why do you need 11 October 2020 07: 19 New
    0
    Zhirinovsky's reaction will be interesting
    1. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 11 October 2020 13: 42 New
      +3
      Quote: Why do you need
      Zhirinovsky's reaction will be interesting

      I wonder how many months (weeks, days) the LDPR will exist without Zhirinovsky?
      belay
  • mark2
    mark2 11 October 2020 07: 40 New
    +3
    A good start to a series of articles. The history of the stillborn ideology must also be known. The author himself predetermined the fate of the next ism in its essence.
  • bober1982
    bober1982 11 October 2020 07: 57 New
    +1
    Liberalism had nothing to do with ideology and has nothing to do with it, here the author is mistaken.
    Liberalism is a kind of dirty spirit - the destruction of moral principles and traditions and, mockery of what is sacred to a person.
    Liberalism, justifies all the passions and lusts of man, this is freedom from shame - "Darwin's topsy-turvy", when a person goes from man to monkey.
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 11 October 2020 08: 49 New
      +3
      hi this time I agree with you, Vladimir. Which is rare. laughing
      1. bober1982
        bober1982 11 October 2020 09: 16 New
        +1
        You are growing up, Dima, you are gaining experience of everyday life, why should you be surprised here.
        1. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 11 October 2020 09: 29 New
          +3
          With age, you acquire a previously uncharacteristic intelligence. Life makes wassat
          1. bober1982
            bober1982 11 October 2020 11: 27 New
            0
            Quote: Reptiloid
            With age, you acquire a previously uncharacteristic intelligence. Life makes

            What to do, soon and, to go to the next world, age, involuntarily you will start to grow wiser.
            As you rightly noted, life compels.
            1. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 11 October 2020 11: 56 New
              +4
              Well why on that negative light, Vladimir? We still need you very much here. Somehow indecently early you started to think. Now many are trying to celebrate the 90th anniversary drinks What we wish you laughing
    2. Icelord
      Icelord 11 October 2020 09: 57 New
      +1
      Eeee. Are you seriously? I have not read it, but I condemn it? Live in the west for a year and compare
    3. kalibr
      11 October 2020 10: 38 New
      -6
      Quote: bober1982
      Liberalism had nothing to do with ideology and has nothing to do with it, here the author is mistaken.
      Liberalism is a kind of dirty spirit - the destruction of moral principles and traditions and, mockery of what is sacred to a person.

      Drunk or foolishly it is written ... Or completely from the dense ignorance!
      1. bober1982
        bober1982 11 October 2020 11: 24 New
        +1
        Quote: kalibr
        Drunk or foolishly it is written ... Or completely from the dense ignorance!

        By the way, one of the signs of rabid liberalism is accusations of fanaticism and, in this very deep ignorance of another group of people, let's call it that. And, what is most curious, these accusations are precisely fanatical and man-hating in nature. These are the real attacks of mad dogs.
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 11: 26 New
          -3
          And ignorance is the most terrible of human shortcomings ...
          1. bober1982
            bober1982 11 October 2020 11: 31 New
            +3
            Quote: kalibr
            And ignorance is the most terrible of human shortcomings ...

            Is it so, but then what about human pride? And off we go: vanity, thirst for fame and success, applause, intolerance of other opinions, etc.
            1. depressant
              depressant 11 October 2020 11: 59 New
              +5
              I agree with my colleague bober1982. Had to deal with liberals. Militant stance, arrogance, the main thing is arrogance. And all around - called by the liberals by the Polish word for pets, once the most beloved "Echo of Moscow" - are worthy only of contempt, and they are the beacons of reason. For whom do they shine? For your own kind "chosen ones"? The only correct point of view is theirs. The rest are a priori incorrect.
              This is how a multinational state is being destroyed - by instilling into a separate people that it is chosen, "you deserve it," the rest do not care. That's what they are aiming for.
              1. Dart2027
                Dart2027 11 October 2020 14: 25 New
                +1
                Quote: depressant
                Had to deal with liberals. Militant stance, arrogance, the main thing is arrogance

                They have always been like that.
                https://ruxpert.ru/%D0%A6%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8B_%D0%BE_%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B1%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%85
            2. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 11 October 2020 12: 07 New
              +2
              Quote: bober1982
              ..... vanity, thirst for fame and success, applause, intolerance of other opinions, etc.
              it's like that! And as a result ----- desire for the good of others, perjury
              1. kalibr
                11 October 2020 12: 17 New
                -4
                Quote: Reptiloid
                desire for the good of others, perjury

                What's the connection? It is in a liberal society that close relatives are exempt from the obligation to testify against each other. And all the rest are not "neighbors".
                1. Reptiloid
                  Reptiloid 11 October 2020 13: 14 New
                  +5
                  Ha ha ha! By using biblical terms, and making similar comments, you show a complete ignorance of the subject. If you have read something, which I doubt, then a very small part.
            3. kalibr
              11 October 2020 12: 15 New
              -4
              Quote: bober1982
              intolerance of other opinions

              To the ignorant - yes!
          2. BAI
            BAI 11 October 2020 14: 52 New
            +1
            And ignorance is the most terrible of human shortcomings ...

            Do you want to say that in the blessed RI (I’m not even talking about the current tribes of the Amazonian Indians), the overwhelming majority of the population suffered from this "most terrible drawback"? Ignorance = lack of education. This is treated with due government participation.
            1. kalibr
              11 October 2020 15: 44 New
              -3
              Quote: BAI
              This is treated with due government involvement.

              And it is not treated, in the absence of desire in the "patient" himself, and in his absence of such an important but not obvious thing as intellect.
              1. BAI
                BAI 11 October 2020 18: 42 New
                +5
                lack of such an important, but not obvious thing as intellect.

                Those. the Russian peasantry - the bulk of the population of Ingushetia did not have intelligence? To be honest, it’s strange to hear from a historian of the CPSU - about the people, about the driving force of history. And why now the state (since the times of the USSR) is pouring huge amounts of money into the education (schools) of children with mental retardation?
                1. Reptiloid
                  Reptiloid 12 October 2020 14: 41 New
                  +1
                  Quote: BAI
                  lack of such an important, but not obvious thing as intellect.

                  Those. the Russian peasantry - the bulk of the population of Ingushetia did not have intelligence? To be honest, it’s strange to hear from a historian of the CPSU - about the people, about the driving force of history. And why now the state (since the times of the USSR) is pouring huge amounts of money into the education (schools) of children with mental retardation?

                  [B]survival of the Russian pre-revolutionary peasant[/ b] demanded in the conditions of that climate, lack of agronomy, land reclamation, veterinary medicine, health care, education, demanded from the Russian peasant great intelligence, quick wit, ability to work, quick decision-making, ability to plan. These are the Russian peasants who for thousands of years lived without electricity, running water, gas pipelines, cars, the Internet, and who created a great country - the USSR!
                  1. kalibr
                    12 October 2020 17: 37 New
                    -1
                    Quote: Reptiloid
                    who created a great country --- the USSR!

                    And just as successfully profuked her!
                2. kalibr
                  12 October 2020 17: 35 New
                  -1
                  Quote: BAI
                  And why is the state now (since the times of the USSR) injecting huge amounts of money into the education (schools) of children with mental retardation?

                  And why in the United States freed black slaves, if it was proved that their labor was effective until 1952? Humanism - that's what it's called!
                3. kalibr
                  12 October 2020 17: 36 New
                  -1
                  Quote: BAI
                  Those. the Russian peasantry - the bulk of the population of Ingushetia did not have intelligence?

                  In a latent state, everyone has it. But in latent! And then some developed, some did not. 80% of the population had (and still!) Problems with this.
                4. kalibr
                  13 October 2020 09: 09 New
                  0
                  Quote: BAI
                  To be honest, it’s strange to hear from the historian of the CPSU - about the people, about the driving force of history.

                  Read the work of G.I. Plekhanov on a monistic view of history ...
      2. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 11 October 2020 13: 04 New
        +2
        Quote: kalibr
        Drunk or foolishly it is written ... Or completely from the dense ignorance!

        )))
        Why not? A colleague broadcasts a typical traditionalist (for the XNUMXth century) or fascist (for the XNUMXth century) narrative. Nothing new here.
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 11 October 2020 16: 27 New
          -1
          Quote: Cherry Nine
          Nothing new here

          You, too, nothing new, passed ... (see "The Bible for Believers and Unbelievers", Miney Gubelman, he is a red pop)
  • 7,62h54
    7,62h54 11 October 2020 08: 01 New
    +1
    The author would rather get in his fabrications to the main Russian liberal, our Respected Leader.
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 08: 03 New
      -1
      Speed ​​is only good when catching fleas!
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 11 October 2020 10: 21 New
        +1
        There are at least two more cases when haste will not hurt.
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 10: 39 New
          0
          Quote: Undecim
          There are at least two more cases when haste will not hurt.

          And we know them too !!!
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 11 October 2020 11: 11 New
            +3
            I think that at the expense of the third you are mistaken, since you did not serve in the army. Army humor, it is specific, especially in places where at least sometimes they shoot.
            1. kalibr
              11 October 2020 11: 27 New
              +1
              Yes, most likely I don’t know ... I finished this school of life by correspondence.
          2. depressant
            depressant 11 October 2020 12: 01 New
            +4
            Uh ... Colleagues, enlighten!)))
            A flea has been caught.
            1. kalibr
              11 October 2020 12: 10 New
              0
              I've already been enlightened. Not for women's ears ...
              1. depressant
                depressant 11 October 2020 12: 24 New
                +5
                Vyacheslav Olegovich, but you are a writer! )) You can also in an allegorical form, for example, pistils and stamens. However, I distract you from the important conversation on the topic of camo coming and xy from xy)))
                1. Senior seaman
                  Senior seaman 11 October 2020 14: 43 New
                  +3
                  The secrets were divorced ...
                  Haste is needed when catching fleas, making love with another man's wife and diarrhea.
              2. Cherry Nine
                Cherry Nine 11 October 2020 13: 05 New
                +2
                Quote: kalibr
                Not for women's ears ...

                Intrigued.
            2. Ross xnumx
              Ross xnumx 11 October 2020 13: 45 New
              +1
              Quote: depressant
              Uh ... Colleagues, enlighten!)))
              A flea has been caught.

              There are only two cases for you when you need to rush. You will understand immediately:
              1. Catching fleas.
              2. Diarrhea.
              3. Adultery with another man's wife.
              wassat
              1. depressant
                depressant 11 October 2020 14: 15 New
                +2
                Thank you! wassat Everything is very intelligible)))
                And then Vyacheslav Olegovich was somehow ashamed. Or he did not want to descend from the heights of an ideological dispute to anecdotal situations. Indeed, how can liberalism be applied to diarrhea and adultery with another man's wife? )))
    2. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 11 October 2020 09: 46 New
      +1
      The author would rather get in his fabrications to the main Russian liberal, our Respected Leader.

      This will never happen. Education (purely humanitarian - ideological) will not allow.
      1. kalibr
        11 October 2020 10: 44 New
        +1
        No, Sergey, the reason is different. Everything we are talking about ... turned brown. These are archival documents and monographs written by clever people, these are classics. And the fact that some do not know and do not understand is their problem. What about today? Documents are handed over to the archives with a delay of 10 years. Nobody will let me into the current archive of the President. The words that he said yesterday, 10 years ago and he says now ... have no serious meaning. Words - they are words! Air! "I gave my word, I took it back!" And you suggest that I draw some conclusions on such a shaky basis, especially on such a complex issue? God be with you!
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 10: 57 New
          +3
          "I gave my word, I took it back!"
          "The boy said - the boy did it! He didn't - he said it again!"
          1. depressant
            depressant 11 October 2020 12: 29 New
            +6
            Laughed for a long time)))
            This interpretation is new to me. I got used to something else: I want to give it to you, I want to take it back according to the state law.
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 11 October 2020 12: 35 New
              +2
              It is you, Lyudmila Yakovlevna, who did not communicate with ordinary Russian bandits.
              1. depressant
                depressant 11 October 2020 12: 47 New
                +5
                Colleague, you are mistaken, talked)))
                Only it was in the 90s, when many aphorisms were not yet born, or were known in a narrow circle. Just in the midst of wild liberalism))
                Such was simple liberalism: if I am strong, arrogant, armed and very dangerous, then why should some Depressant restrict my natural, so human needs? Once she was restrained by a piece of iron rebar. The bandit's accomplices laughed, he was discouraged. But now, in the riot of established liberalism, I will not dare to do this. For the bandit is now with deputy status, or in police uniforms and with a set of liberal laws in hand.
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 11 October 2020 12: 51 New
                  +4
                  My name is Anton. hi
                  In your case, this is not communication, but opposition.
                  1. depressant
                    depressant 11 October 2020 13: 30 New
                    +2
                    Anton, and then the implementation of liberalism took place at the level of personal confrontation: whoever has a stronger fighting spirit, he defended his right to his own life, as he understands it. Now, to resist the legislatively formalized liberalism, no fighting spirit will be enough, for you will find yourself face to face with the state machine, in which the gangster spirit is embedded. The old-fashioned naive liberals do not understand this and, tormented by pride, not accepting the apocrypha of the liberal Bible, stuck in the 90s, they prefer to self-burn - it is not known what and to whom having proved.
                    Liberals, the apostates, work according to the apocryphal interpretations of a pure idea written by them, allowing them to work in the field of gang warfare that have passed to the level of big business and the power it is establishing. That is, like Navalny, selling his services. And we are trying to perceive this as a struggle for law and order.
                    1. 3x3zsave
                      3x3zsave 11 October 2020 13: 46 New
                      +3
                      Speak the common truths, Lyudmila Yakovlevna!
                      This comment became my ten thousandth on this resource ...
                      1. Operator
                        Operator 11 October 2020 14: 21 New
                        0
                        Damn, you are catching up with a terrible speed laughing
                      2. 3x3zsave
                        3x3zsave 11 October 2020 14: 29 New
                        +6
                        Duc, I'm a "fool", mostly, and you are at war ...
                    2. depressant
                      depressant 11 October 2020 14: 23 New
                      +4
                      Anton, congratulations from the bottom of my heart! love )))
                      You are right about me in terms of common truths ... Yes, something today was not spoken like a child)))
                    3. 3x3zsave
                      3x3zsave 11 October 2020 14: 30 New
                      +2
                      It happens. Anyone needs to speak out. Even here.
                  2. bubalik
                    bubalik 11 October 2020 15: 31 New
                    +3

                    ,,, and the time is flying
                  3. Phil77
                    Phil77 11 October 2020 18: 01 New
                    +1
                    Quote: bubalik

                    ,,, and the time is flying

                    Anton, congratulations!
                    10000 is power!
                    But in the photo with the tank there is clearly something, or rather someone is missing? wink
                  4. 3x3zsave
                    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 18: 13 New
                    +2
                    Thank you!
                    The dog is missing! Where am I without a dog ????
                  5. 3x3zsave
                    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 19: 24 New
                    +1
                    Oh, the wicked "doghunter" woke up!
              2. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 11 October 2020 18: 02 New
                +2
                Thanks, buddy!
                True, Uncle Kostya sees my image more optimistically:
              3. Phil77
                Phil77 11 October 2020 18: 13 New
                +2
                Quote: 3x3zsave
                Thanks, buddy!
                True, Uncle Kostya sees my image more optimistically:

                Oh! Fit! wink
          2. Korsar4
            Korsar4 11 October 2020 17: 45 New
            +3
            Golden Machine Gun Prize?
          3. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 11 October 2020 18: 15 New
            +4
            Not "Golden Raspberry", and that's good!
          4. Korsar4
            Korsar4 11 October 2020 18: 24 New
            +3
            Rather, cloudberry suits you.
          5. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 11 October 2020 18: 31 New
            +4
            Exactly!
            I can't stand her! negative Neither collect nor eat.
        2. bubalik
          bubalik 11 October 2020 19: 03 New
          +3
          Raspberry, blueberry
          Fragrant berry - strawberry.
          And yesterday I found out
          I laugh all day -
          Turned out to be a berry
          Berry! Watermelon!!!
          (C) drinks
        3. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 19: 12 New
          +4
          And for real guys - lingonberries! laughing
          My favorite "vegetable" is banana, in general, cereal.
        4. Korsar4
          Korsar4 11 October 2020 19: 48 New
          +1
          Banana is a herb. Banana family.
        5. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 19: 54 New
          +3
          Waited for your reaction! good
        6. Korsar4
          Korsar4 11 October 2020 19: 58 New
          +2
          This is my "boot", which I can judge. True, sometimes I am free-thinking.
        7. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 20: 22 New
          +2
          In the sense of "boots"?
        8. Korsar4
          Korsar4 11 October 2020 20: 31 New
          +2
          "Judge, friend, not higher than a boot" (c).
        9. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 20: 41 New
          +2
          Oh, this ... For which I have always been criticized, for the last 30 years ...
        10. Korsar4
          Korsar4 11 October 2020 20: 57 New
          +1
          The main thing is to do and reflect on what you love.

          And if you can do it professionally, then it's very good.
        11. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 21: 10 New
          +2
          And if you don't like what you do professionally?
        12. Korsar4
          Korsar4 11 October 2020 21: 17 New
          +1
          Internal contradiction. You drive it inside, and you can't brush it off.
        13. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 21: 22 New
          +1
          Do you think I don't understand this? laughing
        14. Korsar4
          Korsar4 11 October 2020 22: 10 New
          +1
          I'm sure - you understand. So he answered a rhetorical question to the best of his understanding.
        15. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 22: 47 New
          +1
          Alas, it does not save ...
        16. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 22: 52 New
          +1
          At some stage, 20 years ago, "burned with a profession"! Nowadays, stupid money making
        17. Korsar4
          Korsar4 12 October 2020 04: 29 New
          +1
          “It is hard to change the skin” (c).
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 20: 54 New
    +2
    "In banana-lemon Singapore ..." (C)
  • Korsar4
    Korsar4 11 October 2020 20: 58 New
    +1
    "Babe - flowers, children - ice cream" (c).
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 21: 03 New
    +2
    Bananas for Anton. laughing
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 21: 14 New
    +1
    Thank you, Uncle Kostya! I now have a customer from Ecuador, so I'll limit myself to direct deliveries.
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 21: 27 New
    +1
    In Ecuador, a lot of different things happen and not only with bananas. sad
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 21: 50 New
    +2
    You are too flat about Latin America ...
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 22: 02 New
    +2
    I was not there, so I can’t judge, but this photo is just for fun.

    Somewhere where Che used to partisan.
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 22: 17 New
    +2
    The Argentinean Guevara, killed in Bolivia, has nothing to do with Ecuador.
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 22: 26 New
    +1
    And this is not Ecuador. But also Lat. America, and somewhere there, it's generally south of the canal. I just liked the photo.
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 22: 42 New
    +2
    That's it! What can you say about Finnish-Swedish relations? That Sweden and Finland are somewhere in Scandinavia? And meanwhile, these shtetl relations are not easy.
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 23: 14 New
    +2
    And why, I don't care about them all, I don't go further than the neighboring village.
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 23: 19 New
    +2
    Uncle Kostya! This sentence is not worthy of you!
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 23: 28 New
    +2
    Why? What can change my attitude to some problems between the Scandinavian countries? Nothing, absolutely nothing, let our "pike vests" blow in each other's ears with or without reason, but I already have enough serious problems in this life.
  • Korsar4
    Korsar4 11 October 2020 21: 19 New
    +2
    You, Konstantin, justify this yesterday's hybrid of a portrait and a still life.
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 21: 22 New
    +2
    Ha, funny noticed, but I did not remember. laughing
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 20: 49 New
    +2
    Well, if he is still fuccycling in the desired mode, then certainly no one will refuse.
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 20: 20 New
    +3
    My friend, congratulations on the Anniversary! smile love drinks
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 20: 29 New
    +3
    Thank you, Uncle Kostya! What would I do without you (this is serious) !!!
    However, where is my dog ​​in the collage I gave (for your authorship)!
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 20: 44 New
    +3
    Came a photo of a dog, there will be a collage with a dog. After all, the accuracy in the image is important, and not the sticking of the muzzle of any dog ​​into the illustration of a historical document. wink
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 21: 06 New
    +3
    Necessarily! Certainly, on occasion !!
    For what am I without a dog? A naked, defenseless monkey? And with the dog, the conqueror of the world!
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 21: 21 New
    +1
    And with the dog, the conqueror of the world!

    I remember I played Fallout too. smile
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 21: 37 New
    +2
    Uncle Kostya, you can mock me as you like! But over my "dog loyalty" is not worth it. For my dog, I can kill inadvertently ... Sorry for such frankness.
  • Catfish
    Catfish 11 October 2020 21: 44 New
    +2
    Absolutely no mockery, but you have to fight to the death for friends, I can bleed anyone for my Cat too. drinks
  • 3x3zsave
    3x3zsave 11 October 2020 21: 46 New
    +2
    We understood each other.
  • Boris55
    Boris55 11 October 2020 08: 09 New
    +1
    Quote: V. Shpakovsky
    ... start by defining what the liberal idea is in general. This can be done in one word: it is ideology.

    What is ideology?

    "Ideology - a product of ideological power, controlled by conceptual power.

    Ideology - This is the concept of governance, set out in a way that is understandable to the masses of the people so that it does not cause them to be rejected, much less actively targeted against it. The object of influence of ideological power is the whole society, however, with the exception of those who are themselves conceptually powerful, and therefore stand above ideological power. Ideology is needed for conceptual power in order to form a worldview of people in society corresponding to the chosen concept so that people are under its power in changing life circumstances.

    The function of ideological power - to clothe a conceptually beneficial concept in such ideological forms in which it would appear in the opinion of people handsome and therefore acceptable, in which the concept would not cause rejection, and even more so - a targeted active opposition to the introduction of the concept into management practice up to the development and implementation into the life of an alternative concept to her.

    Freedom from ideologies - This is self-deception, but not spontaneous psychological, but purposefully cultivated by conceptual power. An ideology can be understood or not understood, accepted or denied, but members of society always encounter manifestations of one or another ideology, which is the shell of the concept of managing society from the side of conceptual power carriers.

    Ideological power - conceptually powerless, because it only adapts the concept to specific historical circumstances and is not capable of developing a concept.

    The quality of life of society:
    - first of all, it is determined by the management concept - its essence;
    - secondly, it is determined by the quality of management within this concept. "

    So it turns out that in order to understand liberalism, their ideology, you need to understand what kind of conceptual power they serve.

    ps
    "The term 'conceptual power' should be understood in two ways:

    firstlyas that kind of power (if we correlate with the system of division of specialized powers), which gives the society the concept of its life as a single whole in the continuity of generations;

    Secondly, as the power of the concept (Idea) itself over society (i.e., as an informational-algorithmic internal skeletal basis of culture and support for the entire life and activities of society).

    In the first sense, this is the power of specific people, whose personal qualities make it possible to see opportunities, choose goals, find and work out ways and means to achieve their chosen goals according to their own will, and to introduce all this into the algorithm of the collective psyche of society, as well as into the structure of statehood.

    Conceptual power is represented by stages one through four inclusive of the complete management function.



    If people do not possess the personal qualities necessary for conceptual rule, then they are conceptually powerless - they are hostages of conceptual power in both meanings of this term. Exactly for this reason, in a society of conceptually powerless people, neither democracy nor human rights are possible".
    1. depressant
      depressant 11 October 2020 12: 03 New
      +1
      Oh, wow ... Tutorial!
    2. Ross xnumx
      Ross xnumx 11 October 2020 14: 05 New
      +2
      Quote: Boris55
      If people do not possess the personal qualities necessary for conceptual rule, then they are conceptually powerless - they are hostages of conceptual power in both meanings of this term. It is for this reason that neither democracy nor human rights are possible in a society of conceptually powerless people. "

      Is your name, by any chance, Nadezhdin?
      Conceptual - worldview, semantic, philosophical ...
      What do you mean by conceptual dominance?
      Sometimes you read whole articles on and around the topic. And the essence of the problem is expressed in two or three sentences.
      There are no people in the world who have the qualities of a ruler from birth. It is another matter in whose interests the ruler rules and who supports him. The terms of government and the way of living depend only on this. You can end like Hitler, Ceausescu, Hussein, Gaddafi ... Or you can, like the majority of those who "left in time" ...
      Human rights, democracy and norms are possible when power rests on the majority. This is what gives the system a duration of existence, because:
      You can deceive part of the people all the time, and the whole people for a while, but you cannot deceive the whole people all the time.
  • samarin1969
    samarin1969 11 October 2020 08: 38 New
    +7
    If we put aside the verbal husk, then liberal slogans are the path of traders to power. Whoever did not know how with sword and sword - he demanded "equality" from the military class.
    Thanks to the author for putting the issue of liberalism on the plane of property. This is the essence! The author's view of the events of the XNUMXth century in Russia was quite interesting. The methods of the "enlightened" Peter and his heirs once again convince the speculative theories of Locke, Montesquieu, etc.
    Now everything has returned to its "normal": aristocrats behind the scenes, hipster nobles, dynasties of officials, etc. ... The same "conservatism" - only without nations and borders.
    1. depressant
      depressant 11 October 2020 12: 13 New
      +5
      Well yes. Establishing conservatism in the form of a feudal system with elements of capitalism, the government demands from us a liberal attitude to this. The completion of the construction will be a land reform. Cooking. Soon. And then we will find that we have the power of landlords and capitalists. From what they left, they came to that. We look down from our turn of history as from a balcony, and there far below - the previous turn of history gleams dimly with flashes of conflagrations.
      1. Kwas
        Kwas 11 October 2020 13: 35 New
        +1
        That's right, the main thing is "sacred property", no matter how received. The only strange thing is that these same people are then offended when they are then hung on the lanterns together with their families.
  • Moskovit
    Moskovit 11 October 2020 09: 16 New
    +7
    “If Nikanor Ivanovich’s lips were put to Ivan Kuzmich’s nose, and if I could take some swagger like Baltazar Baltazarych’s, and, perhaps, add Ivan Pavlovich’s stoutness to this, then I would have decided immediately.”

    In its pure form, liberalism has not passed anywhere. In the west, they also saw that the magic hand of the market can do this. Therefore, the state also interferes in various spheres of life there.
    Well, our "liberals" have defiled the meaning of this word. Although what is wrong with an independent court, equality of all before the law, accountability to the authorities, freedom of speech and religion. Possibilities of choice ..
  • Undecim
    Undecim 11 October 2020 10: 01 New
    +6
    Yes, the sequel shows that my assumption in the form of David Bergland's statement "The ideas in this book are available to few." in relation to the article on liberalism is confirmed.
    Offensive complacency and ignorance of the type “I don’t know, and I don’t intend to, all sorts of liberalisms and other isms are from the evil one.” And here the author with his article on the ideology of liberalism and its influence on modern political processes. Problems."
    Several clarifications on the article.
    The supreme power also benefited from the deprivation of the church of its lands and the growth of small noble land tenure. But they managed to defend them at the cost of an important ideological "bribe": the church declared the royal power to be divine in nature.
    Here you, Vyacheslav Olegovich, are wrong. The ideological justification of autocratic power as a God-given church was carried out before the problem of church land tenure arose. There is one interesting point. The main ideologist and opponent of both ecclesiastical (non-possessors) and secular (heresy of the Judaizing) supporters of depriving the church of land property, which clearly impeded the development of the state, was the Monk Joseph of Volotsk. However, on December 7, 2009, with the blessing of Patriarch Kirill, Joseph Volotsky was declared the patron saint of Orthodox entrepreneurship and business. As they say, what you fought with, over that and patronize.
    under Peter I in 1721, the church was deprived of not only its lands, not only the institution of the patriarchate
    Peter the Great did not take the land away from the church. He deprived them of the opportunity to dispose of property and income, reviving the monastery order. That is, in modern terms, he turned the church into a budgetary organization, making it the head of state. And the church was deprived of land by Catherine II.
    1. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 11 October 2020 11: 25 New
      +6
      As they say, what you fought with, over that and patronize.
      Once, having gone to a local church in his hometown, in order to buy candles (mother asked, father was buried), the brother said the following: "Judging by the cost, the wax for these candles was produced by the great martyr bees!"
      1. Icelord
        Icelord 11 October 2020 12: 06 New
        +3
        When I was burying my mother, I ran into it, in the end, so that there was no scandal, my friend was doing this
        1. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 11 October 2020 12: 17 New
          +2
          Igor! hi
          That Tashkent, that Polyarnye Zori are all one, the parish is small. And within the framework of the "ROC holding", the lion's share of "upward" must be unfastened ...
          1. Icelord
            Icelord 11 October 2020 13: 27 New
            +1
            You're right. It was just that I was depressed then. Difficult to take monetization
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 11 October 2020 13: 43 New
              +4
              The monetization of faith is always difficult to perceive. That Christianity, that communism ...
              1. Icelord
                Icelord 11 October 2020 22: 50 New
                +2
                Thank you, Anton. By the way, congratulations on the anniversary in the comments
                1. 3x3zsave
                  3x3zsave 11 October 2020 22: 54 New
                  +2
                  Thanks Igor! Glad to our communication!
  • Phil77
    Phil77 11 October 2020 10: 07 New
    +5
    Quote: Moskovit
    Well, our "liberals" have defiled the meaning of this word. Although what is wrong with an independent court, equality of all before the law, accountability to the authorities, freedom of speech and religion. Possibilities of choice ..

    Here, isn't this where the rejection of liberal ideas grows? good
  • Griffit
    Griffit 11 October 2020 10: 36 New
    -1
    It is high time to recognize liberalism as a totalitarian ideology, and send liberals to Mars, where they will have complete freedom from everything. And it is high time for the human community to switch to neolegism, or as they used to say, from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs.
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 11: 31 New
      +1
      Oleg, why is it so primitive. What do you dislike freedom of conscience? You have already used freedom of the press, why is freedom of movement bad? But liberals do not even call for "complete freedom". Who told you that? Freedom is a conscious necessity and no one’s personal freedom should infringe on the interests of other people.
      1. 3x3zsave
        3x3zsave 11 October 2020 12: 07 New
        0
        Vyacheslav Olegovich, what is "freedom of conscience"?
        Thank you for the article!
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 12: 12 New
          +1
          The ability to freely believe in God ... and worship him. Do not be persecuted in any way for this. Naturally, your faith should not call for the destruction of dissidents.
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 11 October 2020 12: 20 New
            +2
            Sorry, this is freedom of religion. By the way, in this sense, Islam is more liberal than Christianity.
            1. kalibr
              11 October 2020 13: 03 New
              +2
              The Constitution of the Russian Federation in Art. 28 defines freedom of conscience in a narrow sense, implying by this category a person's attitude to faith and religion. Hence, freedom of conscience in this context is the right to profess or not to profess any religion. This is what I meant.
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 11 October 2020 13: 33 New
                +1
                My opinion about the Constitution of the Russian Federation, is adequate to him, about the "Sukharev Convention of Children of Lieutenant Schmidt." With the only difference that the violators were the second, inevitable punishment awaited.
                With regard to Art. 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, in my opinion, is the most raped and trampled paragraph in the main law of the state.
          2. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 11 October 2020 13: 09 New
            +2
            Quote: kalibr
            Naturally, your faith should not call for the destruction of dissidents.

            )))
            It does not happen.
            Another thing is that now it is expected that such angles of faith will be carefully handled. Questions can and should arise to people who just insist on the holy war.
          3. Kwas
            Kwas 11 October 2020 13: 42 New
            +1
            Quote: kalibr
            Naturally, your faith should not call for the destruction of dissidents.

            There are so few faiths that do not call for destruction, and almost none at all that do not oppress others.
        2. Hantengri
          Hantengri 11 October 2020 12: 19 New
          11
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          and what is "freedom of conscience"?

          This is when the conscience is so free that it wants to come to torment you, but it wants to and will not come ...
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 11 October 2020 12: 27 New
            +3
            What a bastard, that Muse, that Conscience!
            You cherish them, cherish them, but in the end ...
            "And you didn't come again today,
            And I waited, hoped and believed "(C)
      2. Griffit
        Griffit 11 October 2020 12: 55 New
        0
        Basic definitions are the lot of idealists. We must clearly understand that equality, freedom of movement, freedom of the press, freedom of choice, etc. do not exist. Only real dogmas make it possible to build a reliable and strong construction of a social society. If the basis of a society is false and ephemeral dogmas, this society will not last long. The example of the USSR is an example of this. In words and in law, it was almost an earthly paradise for ordinary people, but in fact it raised corrupt non-people, and not a responsible elite. Liberalism is also based on false ideas and, accordingly, the result of liberalism will be similar.
  • Griffit
    Griffit 11 October 2020 10: 43 New
    +4
    Liberals are parasites of society. We all live thanks to the existing social society. And to be free from obligations to this society and at the same time to pump their rights is called a simple word - parasitism.
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 11: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: Griffit
      And to be free from obligations to this society and at the same time to pump their rights is called a simple word - parasitism

      And who told you that the liberals are calling for this? Where did such ... fabrications come from?
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 11 October 2020 13: 13 New
        +4
        Quote: kalibr
        And who told you that the liberals are calling for this? Where did such ... fabrications come from?

        You cannot help but understand that your work, dedicated (for now) to classical liberalism, collides with a) current liberalism, which has nothing in common with the classics, and b) with self-named Russian liberalism, which is all the more not about a person and his rights, but about the refusal of the responsibility of the state to citizens. This mutant of liberalism is inaccurate, but closely corresponds to the current Russian understanding of "sovereignty", however paradoxical it may sound.
      2. Griffit
        Griffit 11 October 2020 14: 08 New
        +1
        A simple task. Two people found a nugget of gold. Both are liberals. Question. Since the two of them have the freedom to choose whether or not to take, which of them will take the nugget? Ideally, liberalism may be good, but people's rotten nature will ruin everything.
      3. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 12 October 2020 09: 37 New
        +2
        Quote: kalibr
        Quote: Griffit
        And to be free from obligations to this society and at the same time to pump their rights is called a simple word - parasitism

        And who told you that the liberals are calling for this? Where did such ... fabrications come from?
        And this is not fabrications! This comrade watched the surrounding reality and made the correct conclusion. That's what..
        1. kalibr
          12 October 2020 17: 43 New
          -1
          Quote: Reptiloid
          This comrade watched the surrounding reality and made the correct conclusion.

          The question is where did you observe? It is possible from a window carved in the shape of a heart in a narrow house knocked down from planks, from the roof of the Montparnasse tower ...
  • Silhouette
    Silhouette 11 October 2020 10: 47 New
    -1
    The topic has not been disclosed. "Liberalism and Conservatism". The author gave a miserable soviet definition of liberalism. You can agree with him or not. But the definition of conservatism is not. Why? .... Their interaction and interdependence are not shown, their causes and interrelation are not revealed. Further. "From theory to practice". This is generally a failure. There is not even anything from the theory of liberalism as a philosophical category, which Shpakovsky did not hesitate to write down in ideology. Although there are other points of view on this score. I share the view of liberalism - as a general designation of various variants of socio-political views and practices. This is not an ideology. Communism, fascism, Zionism, etc. have ideology. and liberalism is based on several principles that superficially minded people try to put into practice. Individually, this sometimes works, but always and everywhere for everyone it does not. Because liberalism is a combination of utopian principles. But since the theory and practice of implementing the principles of liberalism has not been considered, not disclosed, there is nothing to talk about. The same applies to conservatism. Here the author has demonstrated a complete zero.
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 11: 35 New
      0
      Quote: Silhouette
      based on several principles

      And fascism, communism and Zionism are not based on several principles ... But what are they based on? You write - it is a collection of utopian principles. And fascism is not based on a utopian principle, is it? Where is the logic?
      1. Silhouette
        Silhouette 11 October 2020 12: 15 New
        +2
        The logic is that both communism and fascism, and Zionism and liberalism are utopian, unrealizable principles for the development of any social system. But only liberalism has no signs of ideology, in contrast to the above. As well as conservatism, by the way, conservatism is not an ideology, but a projection of life experience on the proposed changes. Conservatism is a commitment to gradual, evolutionary development, taking into account the accumulated experience. Everything else involves revolutionary changes based on utopian inferences and schemes.
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 12: 57 New
          +1
          Where did you get this, I don’t know. Above Boris55 laid out everything about ideology ...
        2. kalibr
          11 October 2020 12: 59 New
          +1
          It was not you who wrote: "Because liberalism is a combination of utopian principles." And then this: "But only liberalism has no signs of ideology, in contrast to the above." How can this be? Are there principles, but no ideology? Don't you find it funny?
          1. Silhouette
            Silhouette 11 October 2020 16: 33 New
            0
            The principles still need to be developed into ideology. But with liberalism it doesn't work that way. Even on freedom it is not possible to agree. Everyone understands it in his own way among the same liberals. It turns out even worse when they try to put these principles into practice.
            1. kalibr
              11 October 2020 16: 56 New
              +1
              Quote: Silhouette
              Even on freedom it is not possible to agree.

              We agreed a long time ago. Everything is in the key document called the "Universal Declaration of Human Rights". Do you own the Internet? You type and read.
              1. Silhouette
                Silhouette 11 October 2020 18: 53 New
                -3
                This declaration is - the main thing is to crow ... In 1948, Stalin also recited it. So what? .... Is Stalin a liberal?
                1. kalibr
                  12 October 2020 09: 48 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Silhouette
                  In 1948, Stalin also recited it.

                  So he supported. And you wrote that it is not possible to agree. However, it succeeded!
                  1. Silhouette
                    Silhouette 12 October 2020 18: 13 New
                    0
                    Already Stalin was registered as a liberal! Bravo! Keep it up!
        3. evgen1221
          evgen1221 11 October 2020 18: 49 New
          +1
          I agree with you t Silhouette. Liberalism is as unrealizable an ism as other isms before and after. Freedom and the law for all speak lierals and at the same time the murderers are calmly released by an incompetent jury or on bail, I am silent about large contracts, The same unrealizable carrot for controlling the masses. When the population in the countries was relatively small, it could easily be rolled out in its pure form, and today it is nothing more than fiction and deception. I personally see the future in symbiosis and unification of several systems into one whole (something from communism, something from capitalism, etc.)
  • Was mammoth
    Was mammoth 11 October 2020 10: 59 New
    +5
    I admire! Write two big "follow-up" articles for the same conclusion! In your own words.
    Liberalism - universal equality and freedom with "inviolability of private property." Well, at least in the second part I was born with a definition!
    And, this is written by a former party agitator, PR-specialist and a fan of "Paretta's law"! Who, if not him, know that this is a utopia. The key is in the plane of private ownership of the means of production. It's not about private ownership of pants or even a house.
    The height of perfection is to look for traces of equality and freedoms in autocrats and large feudal lords in the Middle Ages! wink
  • Silhouette
    Silhouette 11 October 2020 11: 30 New
    +2
    If we consider the material in isolation from the title, as an attempt to consider the history of Russian liberalism, then talking about the Russian autocrats or Shuisky as liberals is simply stupid, even in the context of their activities. Well, which of Catherine 2 is a liberal?
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 12: 14 New
      +1
      Quote: Silhouette
      Well, which of Catherine 2 is a liberal?

      Why are you reading so inattentively? Where is it said that she is a liberal?
      1. Silhouette
        Silhouette 11 October 2020 12: 49 New
        +1
        This follows from the context of your article on the history of liberalism in Russia. In terms of liberal reforms, she, her husband Peter 3 and Shuisky distinguished themselves. Other liberals are not mentioned. I will quote "Now it was necessary to gradually extend these civil liberties to more and more new groups of the population."
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 12: 55 New
          0
          Quote: Silhouette
          Now it was necessary to gradually extend these civil liberties to more and more new groups of the population.

          So what? It is not right? Or was this not the case in Russia? Had, but very slow ...
  • kalibr
    11 October 2020 11: 38 New
    0
    Quote: There was a mammoth
    The height of perfection is to look for traces of equality and freedoms in autocrats and large feudal lords in the Middle Ages!

    And who is looking for traces in them? For some reason, you always read my materials very inattentively. But even so. But there are "traces" in everything. Gold can be mined from seawater. Only it will be very expensive ... So it is here ...
    1. Was mammoth
      Was mammoth 12 October 2020 14: 30 New
      0
      Quote: kalibr
      For some reason, you always read my materials very inattentively.

      Rather, you carelessly read the comments. Aren't you confused by the number and content of critical comments to this "philosophical-historical treatise"? If only the "unreasonable" write them. Not worth your attention. The PARETO law itself is about this. wink
      "The dog is buried" in definitions, and further down the slope.
      PS Earlier at school they talked about the disputes between Westernizers and Slavophiles. Newness is required. Liberals versus Conservatives.
      PSI
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      The very first liberal, not in words, but in deeds in Russia, was Khan Batu.

      The first liberal was a primitive man who did not eat a captive from a neighboring tribe. wink
      1. kalibr
        12 October 2020 15: 36 New
        -1
        Quote: There was a mammoth
        You are not confused by the number and content of critical comments to this "philosophical and historical treatise"

        The content is mostly stupid, and the quantity only confirms Pareto's law. 80% and 20%. Well, for the site what people write about does not matter at all. He has what they write at all, but with that everything is fine. So what are you talking about? People let off steam, amuse themselves with the thought that they wrote something smart ... the investment attractiveness of the site is growing. Well, thank God! The first liberal was a primitive man who did not eat a captive from a neighboring tribe .. It could be!
        1. Was mammoth
          Was mammoth 12 October 2020 17: 42 New
          0
          Quote: kalibr
          The content is mostly stupid, and the quantity only confirms Pareto's law.

          Liberal's true answer. Infallibility. Only fools can doubt your mind. Why did you decide you wrote a smart article?
          By the way, you did not answer how the freedom and rights of individuals are equalized by the presence of private property. One has a shish in his pocket, the other has a corporation and are they equal in court? wink
          1. kalibr
            12 October 2020 21: 35 New
            -2
            And you want to say that all the comments shine with erudition, right? People do not know the elementary things, neither about Akhenaten's reforms, nor about what ideology is, and your "Paretta law" is your heap. And after that, you still ask me if my article is smart? Having the Internet under your nose? And the ability to check from there all the facts, examples and provisions? It's funny. Moreover, I will tell you more. You should not look at the comments that are written by the same people over and over again. And on the rating indicator. Clear? Is it growing or decreasing. And if it grows, then ... then everything is OK. And you can look at it on the site so that no more questions arise. And watch it regularly, if you really care about it. As for the equality of "shisha" and "corporation", in theory they should be equal in court. Yes. But we live in a practical world and in it we must use any of our advantages. Who gave them to you? The God! And he knows what he is doing! So I would "shish" just pay and he would take the application from the court! That's all.
            1. Was mammoth
              Was mammoth 12 October 2020 22: 45 New
              0
              Quote: kalibr
              So I would "shish" just pay

              But what about the foundations of liberalism? So who are they, liberal-naive altruists or political crooks? And what about the basis of your article?
              Quote: kalibr
              And you want to say that all the comments shine with erudition, right?

              Is erudition a sign of intelligence? Under oath in court, I confess that I did not know the interesting facts that I learned from your historical articles. But, with logic, analysis and conclusions you have problems.
              1. kalibr
                13 October 2020 07: 04 New
                -2
                Quote: There was a mammoth
                But, with logic, analysis and conclusions you have problems.

                This is your problem. Do you think that if a person writes about liberalism, then he must necessarily confess its foundations? Don't give a damn about them! And when I write about tanks, what do I want - I want to make everyone tankers, right? Do you call this logic?
                Quote: There was a mammoth
                Under oath in court, I confess that I did not know the interesting facts that I learned from your historical articles.
                But this is the main thing. A lot of people do not even know how to write this ... You, unfortunately, are under the influence of soviet maximalism. A poet is more than a poet, a book (article) should teach life ... And there were absolutely ..., and "masters of the word" at the very top. Those days are over. Now there are many, many "steps" of knowledge, intelligence, ability to write. And each has someone who in some way satisfies someone's interests and needs. Someone - Ermak-Cortez, someone - my materials, someone ... And I perfectly understand that there are a lot of those who write better, think deeper, and only have logic like God. Here, however, I have not met anything like that, but it should be so. But there are also many for whom the fact that there is "bread" here. And they are people too and have the right to consume what suits them. Like this!
                1. Was mammoth
                  Was mammoth 13 October 2020 08: 03 New
                  0
                  Quote: kalibr
                  Don't give a damn about them!

                  Quote: kalibr
                  ... And I understand perfectly well that there are a lot of those who write better, think deeper, and only have logic like God. Here, however, I did not meet something like that ....

                  Do you consider yourself the chosen one, the elite, the new "blue blood"? This is not true.
                  Quote: kalibr
                  But there are also many for whom the fact that there is "bread" here.

                  I believe that this is the reason why you are writing here. Material order.
                  I didn’t write comments to hurt. Because I am sure that there are things of a moral, spiritual nature. This is not about you. You are doing harm with such articles that claim to be philosophical.
                  1. kalibr
                    13 October 2020 09: 15 New
                    -2
                    Quote: There was a mammoth
                    I didn’t write comments to hurt. Because I am sure that there are things of a moral, spiritual nature. This is not about you. You are doing harm with such articles that claim to be philosophical.

                    Spiritually and morally you can't go far. Someone bakes bread, someone cleans outhouses, someone writes articles. And he gets paid for it. Try to write at least one article. Free! I'll see how you like it. By the way, the last two professions are, haha, somewhat similar, right? But where did you see the philosophical foundations in this article? There is one information, accurate, corresponding to our modern knowledge. And nothing else. If you don’t understand this, then the matter is absolutely bad: obviously you are overwhelmed by the maximalism of the previous years, but there is no return to it and everything will be as I wrote to you above. There are many steps and each has its own level of awareness and presentation of the material.
                  2. kalibr
                    13 October 2020 17: 57 New
                    -1
                    Quote: There was a mammoth
                    I believe that this is the reason why you are writing here. Material order.

                    So you prefer to work for free? Well ... congratulations. The birds of God do not sow, do not reap, and the Lord God feeds them with manna, so do you, right?
  • kalibr
    11 October 2020 11: 38 New
    +1
    Quote: There was a mammoth
    "Paretta's law"

    Pareto
  • Kwas
    Kwas 11 October 2020 13: 08 New
    +4
    To start with, this is:

    (second Stalinist TSB)
    What's the point? It is correct to oppose liberalism not to conservatism, but to democracy and socialism. If the most important thing for a democrat is “Democratic Freedoms”, no matter how we treat them, then for a liberal the main thing is to observe the right to property, regardless of how it was acquired. With equal fervor, a liberal will defend the rights of a landowner or owner of a latifundia, an industrialist or a crown prince, but by no means the laborers whose ancestors were driven from the land by the landlords. And by no means the children of Soviet workers who built some, for example, "Norilsk Nickel", but only its current owners, this plant ... privatized, and their children, of course.
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 14: 11 New
      0
      Liberalism is an ideology that proclaims the recognition of the political and economic rights of an individual within the framework of laws that are a generalization of natural needs and the inalienable rights of people to life, freedom, property, security, order.
      1. Kwas
        Kwas 11 October 2020 17: 10 New
        +2
        No, you got it wrong. An ideology that proclaims the priority of democratic rights is called democratic, and its adherents are called democrats. Conservatives always want to leave everything "as is", expressing the interests of the ruling class. For liberals, both are not at all a prerequisite. They express the interests of the bourgeoisie, so the main thing for them is money and unlimited property rights. Therefore, struggling with feudal privileges (and most importantly, restrictions on property rights), they may well be at one with the democrats, having become the ruling class, they immediately begin to take a conservative position, quite easily spitting on these very "rights and freedoms." Take the Whigs in England (where the Liberal Party came from). Yes, at first they opposed kings, feudal lords, etc., but as soon as they came to power ... who opposed the Chartists and various other socialists? And it is extremely significant that in the end they quietly entered the Tories (Conservatives) party, and not some Labor Party. The same is with the Whigs of the United States, who, at first supporters of independence, also quite successfully joined the ruling Republicans in 1854. True, some joined the southerners, apparently counting on their victory and the preservation of the Negro slaves (cotton Whigs) in their property.
  • Trilobite Master
    Trilobite Master 11 October 2020 13: 19 New
    +5
    Vyacheslav Olegovich, dear, they have already explained to you here many times, but you cannot understand such a simple thing, you are getting clever ... Remember and don’t fool people's heads anymore: liberalism is a collection of all the most disgusting and disgusting that you can think of, this is a lie and theft, anger and envy, vile lust and cruel, inhuman abuse of all the saints that humanity has.
    A maniac in the forest attacked a girl - liberalism. The wife cheated on her husband - a typical liberal woman. Nassano is at the entrance - these are the liberals who came, there is no one else. My head hurts in the morning - the liberals are to blame, who else?
    I'll explain to you what's what. Look: there are liberals, and there are Jews. All Jews are liberals, but not all liberals are Jews. Jews run liberals. Clear? And you know who is leading the Jews? Trotskyists! Only the most Jewish Jews are accepted into the Trotskyites and put them in charge of the Russian people.
    And we don't need to rub in here about any ideas anymore. The liberals have only one idea - to take away from the Russian people everything that they have good and replace it with everything bad that the liberals only have, and eat and drink the good things ourselves. Well, or break and spoil in every sense, if you can't eat and drink.
    So we don’t need these all sorts of sophistry-mofizms. A liberal is a liberal and the bestial grin of his Jewish-Trotskyist face cannot be hidden by liberal verbiage, no matter how hard you try!
    laughing wassat laughing
    I believe that I have now exhaustively covered the position of many commentators on your article. laughing
    But seriously, I already wrote in the comments to the previous article that the idea of ​​liberalism is not formed by a list of freedoms granted to someone in a particular state. You can take all possible liberal freedoms and extend them to a limited circle of the population, or you can take only one freedom and extend it to everyone without exception. And the second case, it seems to me, will be more suitable for the concept of "liberalism". So which of our rulers gave freedom to the nobles and in what quantity is the tenth thing, these processes have nothing to do with liberalism itself.
    The first truly liberal society in Russia was created, perhaps, only by the Bolsheviks. Alexander II tried to make some progress in this direction, but did not particularly succeed, although he managed to achieve certain results. As for his predecessors, they did not go beyond words on the issue of asserting liberal values.
    The very first liberal, not in words, but in deeds in Russia, was Khan Batu. It was he who first brought to the territory of Russia, and moreover, Europe, such a purely liberal right as freedom of religion and not only brought it, but also extended it to all inhabitants, without exception, including peasants. smile
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 16: 10 New
      +1
      I missed it all! Thanks!
    2. Silhouette
      Silhouette 11 October 2020 16: 42 New
      +1
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      You can take all possible liberal freedoms and extend them to a limited circle of the population, or you can take only one freedom and extend it to everyone without exception.

      Are you really serious?
      If all freedoms are extended to a limited circle of people, we get elitism, but not liberalism.
      If you take only one freedom and extend it to all - then what are you talking about? What is taka - one freedom for all? If it is a religion, then yes, Genghis Khan is a liberal. And Batu too. They were all liberals.
    3. bober1982
      bober1982 11 October 2020 19: 31 New
      -2
      Quote: Trilobite Master
      The first truly liberal society in Russia was created, perhaps, only by the Bolsheviks

      This is because liberalism is a kind of "soul" of any revolution.
      Any revolution begins with empty liberal slogans, slogans and shouts, then monstrous experiments begin and all liberal dreams quickly disappear.
  • Operator
    Operator 11 October 2020 13: 48 New
    0
    Liberalism and conservatism are absolutely not antonyms, all of a sudden.

    Liberalism is freedom, conservatism is the preservation of traditions. If the tradition is liberalism, then it turns out quite viable liberal conservatism.

    In general, to write political science articles, it is not enough to be a historian of the CPSU laughing
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 14: 14 New
      -1
      The history of the CPSU ended in 91. It's 2020 now!
      1. Operator
        Operator 11 October 2020 14: 24 New
        -1
        Unfortunately, warm and soft are still confused.
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 16: 11 New
          +1
          Quote: Operator
          Unfortunately, warm and soft are still confused.

          This is amazing!
  • BAI
    BAI 11 October 2020 14: 37 New
    +2
    The author begins to embark on the Samsonov path. Russian autocrats (Shuisky, Peter 1, Anna Ioannovna and others) - liberals? Or maybe they are also democrats? All their actions were dictated not by a desire to improve something and release someone, but were a forced compromise in order to seize and / or retain power.
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 16: 17 New
      +2
      Quote: BAI
      Russian autocrats (Shuisky, Peter 1, Anna Ioannovna and others) - liberals?

      But where did you read that in the article? Well, once again then, by syllables ... An-na Ioa-nov-na signed-la Con-di-tsion ... in them there was-lo OG-RA-NONE-CHE-NIE SA-MO-DER -ZHA-VIA, then they pod-rala and self-der-zha-vie ver-nu-la; You chose Shui as tsar under ... conditions ... then removed. Don't read obliquely. The same Peter the Great ordered the publication of Hufflepuff's book, where it was about ... Well, he liked him, and he saw something useful there. And there was something that was not useful ... Did you explain what was written?
      1. BAI
        BAI 11 October 2020 18: 50 New
        +4
        And what relation do these kings, and the English nobles from the first article have to do with liberalism? All the actions of all of these persons are reduced to the struggle for privileges for a narrow circle of people, and not for freedom for all. All of them have nothing to do with liberalism - the topic of the article has nothing to do with it. Why braid them then? To gain the volume of the article?
        For that matter, the most notorious liberals in Russia are Razin and Pugachev (and Bulavin, who joined them). In a global context, you can still remember Spartacus. Then the history of liberalism will expand.
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 20: 25 New
          -2
          Quote: BAI
          All of them have nothing to do with liberalism - the topic of the article has nothing to do with it.

          Under them, the first attempts to curb autocratic power took place, that is, there were germs of Russian liberalism. Is this something that is accessible to your understanding? But the rebellious slaves really had nothing to do with the liberals.
        2. kalibr
          11 October 2020 20: 27 New
          -1
          Quote: BAI
          Then the history of liberalism will expand.

          The article is devoted to the history of RUSSIAN LIBERALISM. Why expand it?
        3. Icelord
          Icelord 14 October 2020 21: 03 New
          0
          By the way, let's remember Spartacus, a very mysterious person, nothing is clear with him, until he was a slave or not. If you clarify, I will be grateful
  • evgen1221
    evgen1221 11 October 2020 18: 39 New
    +2
    Are they these liberals in Russia in the sense that the author described at the beginning? My opinion is that they are sooooo few and mostly without power in the kitchens. And the fact that he proclaimed himself liberals was nothing more than corrupt little people mixed with agents of state influence on wages. Try to refute? -Will not work. These pseudo-liberals have one manual in their heads and a calculator in their eyes and nothing else. Creating a howl for any reason that can benefit the country and outright sabotage and sabotage. I hope this circus will be shut down someday.
    1. kalibr
      11 October 2020 20: 22 New
      -1
      Quote: evgen1221
      outright sabotage and sabotage

      And what has not been covered up until now?
      1. evgen1221
        evgen1221 11 October 2020 21: 01 New
        0
        Who will do it? And in order to do it, you also need to do it for yourself and in your group will decide on the concepts, and with this problem, because Gorbachev's pluralism (2-infinite opinions and all correct) won. So we have walking in a circle and for a long time we will break our brains and spears, because it is planned to separate so that no large group of healthy and evil like-minded people appears, the trifle chokes elementarily or again gets into derby terminology. Something like this. IMHO it is necessary to define clearly what is bad what is good and proceeding from this move.
        1. kalibr
          11 October 2020 21: 18 New
          -2
          There are competent authorities that are obliged to suppress the actions you indicated. If they do not do this, then A - this does not exist, and B - the power of these people is HUGE. Since we see that it is not huge, then it is not. And you take advantage of the fantasies of our media, which disseminate information beneficial to the top, that there are enemies not only external, but also "internal". This allows them to write off many of the internal troubles of their incompetent government on them.
  • kakvastam
    kakvastam 12 October 2020 00: 51 New
    0
    It has long been known that intelligence, decency and liberal beliefs are easily combined in one person.
    It is a pity that it is exclusively in pairs.

    In an amicable way, there are only two views on society: society-system (society-organism) and society-environment. And adherence to this or that model is determined by personal preferences: someone fancies himself as a mighty helminth or a free maggot, and someone is satisfied with the modest role of the epithelial cell. Jedem is known to be das seine.
  • tacet
    tacet 12 October 2020 16: 16 New
    +1
    I disagree with "all good things for everyone and for everyone." Vyacheslav, you shouldn't idealize humanity.
  • kalibr
    12 October 2020 17: 40 New
    -2
    Quote: tacet
    Vyacheslav, you shouldn't idealize humanity.

    Well, I want everyone to be happy and "let no one leave offended." And there further, everyone has their own. Someone has a bucket of moonshine ... and so that it doesn't run out ...
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Alexander Greene
    Alexander Greene 12 October 2020 21: 48 New
    +2
    To put all citizens in the same position, classes must be abolished, so all previous history, with the exception of the primitive state, was the history of class struggle.

    The abolition of classes is necessary so that all citizens have equal access to work in social production, on public land. Therefore, the communists express their theory (Marxism) in one word - destruction private property (private ownership of the means of production and land). For those who do not have private property, its sanctity disappears by itself.

    Liberalism, conservatism, reformism, etc. Is a deception for the naive, who remain wage slaves as long as private property and capital reign. The preaching of liberalism is a denial or veiling of the class struggle, it is hypocrisy and deception in politics, and in this deception bourgeois scribblers like Shpakovsky were very successful.
    1. kalibr
      13 October 2020 09: 28 New
      -2
      Quote: Alexander Green
      very much even succeeded.

      Thanks for the compliment. But all the others did not succeed in distinguishing the wheat from the chaff. And if so, why not use it? People are told: this is bad, but this is good. Do not do bad, do well. They don't listen ... Well, if that's the case, then let them blame themselves, don't they ?!
      1. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene 15 October 2020 00: 50 New
        +1
        Quote: kalibr
        Thanks for the compliment.

        This is not a compliment, this is an accusation.
    2. kalibr
      13 October 2020 09: 37 New
      -2
      Quote: Alexander Green
      its holiness disappears by itself.

      Together with the state, old age pensions, a well-established life and other things ... The right of a man with a gun, strong, and ... greedy, triumphs. Which of the theory grasps only slogans. A slave at heart, a boor who imagines himself to be a man. As a result, such people cannot do anything worthwhile. Tired of themselves, although well-being for children, straighten difficult paths for them. And again there is nepotism, closed distributors, envelopes for bosses. And the draft animals, as they were below, remained there. All this has already happened in history many times. Including in our ...
      1. Alexander Greene
        Alexander Greene 15 October 2020 00: 51 New
        +1
        Quote: kalibr
        And the draft animals, as they were below, remained there.

        It is thanks to people like you ....
        1. Reptiloid
          Reptiloid 23 October 2020 18: 39 New
          +1
          Quote: Alexander Green
          Quote: kalibr
          And the draft animals, as they were below, remained there.

          It is thanks to people like you ....
          hello, Alexander! Now it’s okay to read the comments, don’t you think it’s a personal grievance? Quite often? Something personal-personal and offensive-offensive for the opponent? ...
          1. Alexander Greene
            Alexander Greene 23 October 2020 21: 20 New
            +1
            Quote: Reptiloid
            Quote: kalibr
            And the draft animals, as they were below, remained there.

            Quote: Reptiloid
            Don't you think it’s some kind of personal grievance?


            No, this is most likely his kitchen swagger as a bourgeois, that he is above everyone, smarter than everyone, more successful than everyone. This is something like the Polish "psia krev" (translated into Russian "dog blood"). Poles widely use this expletive when they want to humiliate someone by equating his blood with a dog and thereby show that he is a creature of lower rank than them.
            1. Reptiloid
              Reptiloid 23 October 2020 21: 35 New
              +1
              No, Alexander, I do not agree with you. ANY old comments were about plumbers, tiles ,,, ..... This is a long-standing topic, or who can you get? Whom? Although I guess what a modern construction worker lol It so happened, my uncle could not do anything with his hands, and the other grandfather, and so did I. Nothing qualified. Only in the country to dig sad Therefore, I respectfully those who know how.
              1. Alexander Greene
                Alexander Greene 24 October 2020 18: 39 New
                +1
                Quote: Reptiloid
                Therefore, I respectfully those who can

                In my opinion, everyone deserves respect if they do not consider themselves better than others.
                1. Reptiloid
                  Reptiloid 24 October 2020 20: 32 New
                  0
                  Quote: Alexander Green
                  Quote: Reptiloid
                  Therefore, I respectfully those who can

                  In my opinion, everyone deserves respect if they do not consider themselves better than others.

                  That's right, Alexander. I'm just talking about working professions and others.
  • Baron pardus
    Baron pardus 13 October 2020 01: 14 New
    +1
    I can see very well what the liberals led the USSR to, modern liberals led the United States and want to move in the same direction. Let's not forget that it was the liberals who betrayed the Kaiser. sorry, but I will stand under anyone's banner so that this process of moral, social and cultural entropy and decay was stopped and destroyed. Liberalism is a serious mental illness.
  • Baron pardus
    Baron pardus 13 October 2020 01: 14 New
    +1
    I can see very well what the liberals led the USSR to, modern liberals led the United States and want to move in the same direction. Let's not forget that it was the liberals who betrayed the Kaiser. sorry, but I will stand under anyone's banner so that this process of moral, social and cultural entropy and decay was stopped and destroyed. Liberalism is a serious mental illness.
    1. kalibr
      13 October 2020 09: 26 New
      -2
      Quote: Baron Pardus
      Liberalism is a serious mental illness.
      But, nevertheless, everything that we now have we are obliged to this illness!