Russia at a crossroads
If you go to the right, you will save yourself, you will destroy your horse,
you go to the left - you will save the horse, you will destroy yourself,
If you go straight, you will find glory, but you will destroy yourself and your horse.
you go to the left - you will save the horse, you will destroy yourself,
If you go straight, you will find glory, but you will destroy yourself and your horse.
The role of personality in history
Philosophers of all times and peoples, starting from Antiquity (Thucydides, Xenophon and Plutarch), through the Middle Ages (Jean Calvin, R. Collingwood and others), the Renaissance (N. Machiavelli and others) and the Age of Enlightenment (Voltaire, Thomas Carlyle , Plekhanov, N. K. Mikhailovsky, Kautsky) and up to the present day (M. Sahlins, E. Service, R. Carneiro, H. Klassen), came to one conclusion: story humanity is the history of heroes.
Of course, some thinkers, for example, G. V. F. Hegel, L. Tolstoy, and others, reminded us that each person contributes to history. This is absolutely true, but the scale of the impact is completely different. Like the old joke:
The man lived, lived, and died. And now, at the heavenly court, he stands before the Lord and asks:
“God, enlighten me. And he lived a long life, and did not understand why I was born into the world.
The Lord answers:
– Do you remember that in 1985 you were on the Moscow-Vladivostok train?
Yes, Lord, I remember. And what?
- Well, in the restaurant you were asked to pass the salt shaker to the next table.
Yes, Lord, I remember. And what?
- Well, here it is.
“God, enlighten me. And he lived a long life, and did not understand why I was born into the world.
The Lord answers:
– Do you remember that in 1985 you were on the Moscow-Vladivostok train?
Yes, Lord, I remember. And what?
- Well, in the restaurant you were asked to pass the salt shaker to the next table.
Yes, Lord, I remember. And what?
- Well, here it is.
Someone is just a manure producer. And someone is Nikola Tesla or Faraday, or Archimedes, or Mendeleev, etc., and their contribution to the development of our civilization cannot be assessed.
Of course, we agree, with the formulation of Thomas Carlyle, that the history of mankind is the history of heroes. Lev Gumilyov introduced a new term for heroes - a passionary. A passionary is a person endowed with excess energy, the impulse of which exceeds the impulse of the self-preservation instinct, as a result of which the passionary is able to sacrifice his life for the sake of an idea.
“Passionarity,” Gumilev wrote, “is an irresistible inner desire (often unconscious) for activities aimed at achieving some goal. This goal seems to a passionate individual more valuable than even his own life, and even more so the life of fellow tribesmen and contemporaries.
"It's the motor that drives everything." Of course, Gumilyov wrote, passionarity is a deviation from the species norm, it is a mutation, but the mutation is small, not leading to pathology. Although normal people (who believe that if they risk their lives, then for big money) often call passionaries fanatics and crazy.
"It's the motor that drives everything." Of course, Gumilyov wrote, passionarity is a deviation from the species norm, it is a mutation, but the mutation is small, not leading to pathology. Although normal people (who believe that if they risk their lives, then for big money) often call passionaries fanatics and crazy.
The term "passionary" is more logical to use due to the fact that the term "hero" does not reveal the reasons why the hero became a hero (with the exception of unverified versions that Hercules was the illegitimate son of Zeus, etc.). The term "passionary" explains the appearance of the hero - this is a mutation. Passionary is the result of human evolution.
All the leaders of the tribes and all the commanders were passionaries. All scientists and discoverers are passionaries. All entrepreneurs, artists, writers, poets and composers are passionaries. All the discoveries in the world were made and implemented by passionaries. It turns out that passionaries created our civilization.
Passionaries, sometimes against the will of the majority, dragged tribes of people from the primitive system into the modern world. But the path of passionaries is not easy. They are welcomed and honored only when the ethnic group is in danger. To avoid death, people are ready to mobilize under their leadership. And then, when the danger has passed, they try with all their might to push the passionaries away from power. They push it away so that they do not interfere with a calm and lazy life. After all, all passionaries are uncompromising fanatics. And it is so hard to live with uncompromising fanatics and it is so unpleasant to feel your imperfection.
Passionarity is not an acquired, but an innate quality. This means passionarity, like any mutation, is inherited. But passionaries, due to objective reasons, are always a minority. After all, they are ready to sacrifice their lives to achieve their goal. For them, the meaning of life is in achieving the goal, and not in prolonging the family. For this reason, passionaries die earlier and live shorter lives than the bulk of people. They do not always leave offspring. Like, for example, Icarus or Danko.
As L. Gumilyov put it: “Passionarians are always a minority in an ethnic group, but they constitute the core on which the entire ethnic system rests.”
At the head of any progressive ethnos is a successful passionary. Unsuccessful passionaries, standing at the head of an ethnos (or a research institute, or at the head of some enterprise), either perish themselves as a result of their unsuccessful experiments, or they are destroyed by their own associates due to the unsatisfactory result of the experiments (ruin or degradation of the state, dead-end branch of scientific research, the ruin of the company).
If the results of the experiment are satisfactory, then such passionaries are honored and approved for the extension of their right to a leadership role (at the head of the state, research institutes, enterprises).
If the results of the experiment are unsatisfactory, then such a sovereign or the director of a research institute, or the director of an enterprise, is “stoned” and expelled. The factor of the presence of progress in neighboring states (or other research institutes, or at other enterprises) has a particularly irritating effect on the people (or colleagues or subordinates). The classics described this state of affairs with a succinct formulation: "the upper classes cannot, but the lower classes do not want to."
Aging, a successful passionary transfers his power to his successor. The sovereign - to the heir, the scientist - to the student, the director - to the deputy. The most important thing when choosing is for the successor to be able (according to the conviction of the current passionary) to continue what he started. And happiness continues until an unworthy head-passionary is at the head.
The heir may not be a passionary, for example, for the following reasons:
- the heir turned out to be non-native, due to extramarital conception;
- or due to crossing a successful mutation with a string of unsuccessful mutations.
Remark. By the way, it is for this reason that dynastic marriages are so developed among monarchs and the richest families in the world. In the Rothschild clan (the approximate value of the state is more than 5 trillion dollars), it is customary for marriages to take place within the family. For example, Betty Rothschild married her uncle James, and their daughter Charlotte married her cousin Nathaniel. And so it goes… for centuries. The same tradition has been going on for centuries in the Rockefeller family (the fortune of this clan is about 3,5 trillion dollars) - marriages are made exclusively within the clan. That is, uncles marry nieces, second cousins marry second cousins, etc. Only sons are allowed to manage the family business. Here is such a fight for the purity of blood.
A successor to a scientist or a successor to the director of a successful enterprise may turn out to be unsuccessful due to the fact that he was not chosen by the founder of a successful research institute, but, for example, was appointed from the ministry. That is, it was simply a mistake as a result of an unsuccessful personnel decision.
And, like a ship that has lost its rudders and sails, an ethnic group (or a scientific research institute, or an enterprise) begins to drift downstream (under the influence of external factors) and dies, running aground (slow degradation), or crashes on reefs (death of a state as a result of a war or ruin of the enterprise in the competitive struggle). That is, without successful passionate leadership, the state (or research institutes, or enterprises) perishes under the influence of external or internal factors.
But a happy accident can also happen. Suddenly, a new passionary, who happened to be nearby in time, seizes power from the weakened hands of an unsuccessful sovereign (or director of a research institute, or director of an enterprise) and leads the ethnic group (or research institute, or enterprise) to a happy future. In the future, which he considers happy.
The birth of the American ethnos
Ethnos (Greek ἔθνος - people) - in some theories of ethnicity - a historically established set of people united by common objective or subjective characteristics, in which various authors include origin, a single language, culture, economy, territory of residence, self-consciousness, appearance, warehouse mind and more, a synonym for the term "people".
Before the emergence of the United States, an ethnos, as a rule, consisted of monolithic representatives of one nationality, one or several close clans. The reason is simple. At the time of the formation of ethnic groups, people did not have the means for high-speed movement and information transfer. As a result, people settled in the first prosperous place that came across and began to live there, and, if possible, develop.
The United States turned out to be the first and super-successful project of creating a new type of ethnos. It happened in the following way.
In 1620, the Anglo-Saxons decided to appropriate a new continent - America. In order to clear the territory from the natives, they unleashed another uncompromising war of annihilation. The Anglo-Saxons killed 14 million out of 15 - destroyed 93,5% of the population. It was not the first and not the last genocide perpetrated by the Anglo-Saxons, but there was no more successful genocide in the history of the Anglo-Saxons. The continent became depopulated, and the question arose of settling the continent.
On a new continent, a colonist could get land for a symbolic price. In those days, the industrial revolution had not yet taken place, and therefore it was the land that was the main material resource. On the new continent, any colonist could take as much land as he could keep. That was incredible. And crowds of thirsty poured into America.
The fruits of labor were not easy to transfer to the continent, so the big European land magnates were not interested in land in America. And in the first wave of emigration to the United States, there were mostly poor people who counted on the results of their work on the ground to provide for themselves and their loved ones. But, regardless of who and for what reasons emigrated to the United States, they were passionaries.
“The passionarity of an individual can be combined with any abilities: high, medium, small, it does not depend on external influences, being a feature of the psyche of this person; it has nothing to do with ethics, it equally easily gives rise to exploits and crimes, creativity and destruction, good and evil, excluding only inaction and indifference.
Gumilev wrote.
That is, a great commander, and a scientist, and a writer, and a poet, and a pirate can be a passionary. And, we say - any colonist.
I think that you will agree with the statement that all the settlers were passionaries. After all, few are willing to risk their lives and the lives of their loved ones for the sake of a ghostly dream of finding their own well-being on an unknown continent. After all, in the new place there will be no doctors, no police, no narrow specialists who can lay down a stove or build a house, etc. You had to be able to do everything yourself. But all the fruits of labor would belong undividedly to the colonist.
And there was a unique nation. If in the usual ethnos there are 7–10% of passionaries, then in the new American ethnos there are 50% or more of them (the heads of families and all their children are carriers of a successful mutation). All unsuccessful (and part of successful) passionaries died during the development of a new continent. Only the successful remained.
Then there was a second wave of emigration - for gold. And already almost 100% of the settlers were from passionaries. After all, gold diggers are men who are not burdened with families. Following this, the industrial revolution - and again the emigration of passionaries in order to create new industrial enterprises. And in this wave of emigration, more than 50% of passionaries.
Remark. A curious side effect - as a result of the emigration of passionaries from different states to the United States, there was an outflow of passionaries from other states. The result was a weakening of the progressive force in these states. The British in the late XNUMXth and early XNUMXth centuries puzzled for a long time and gathered numerous conferences to establish the reason for the loss of Britain's leading position in world GDP production.
The share of the most developed countries in world industrial production:
As a result, the best sons of different peoples were melted down in this American cauldron and a new ethnic group was born - American. In the American ethnic group, the number of passionaries is 5–10 times greater than in any other ethnic group. Therefore, what the American ethnic group is capable of is most likely not available to any other ethnic group.
But each Achilles is born with its own sinew.
Dao capitalism
One of the main categories of Chinese philosophy is the “path” that the world around and all people should follow, the path of improvement in the implementation of a set of moral and ethical standards.
The main stages in the development of capitalism
Pure capitalism (market economy) is an economic system consisting of a huge number of start-up entrepreneurs freely competing with each other. Commodity prices are set on the basis of the laws of supply and demand (later this mechanism is destroyed by monopolies).
Monopoly capitalism - this is the stage of capitalism, the main distinguishing feature of which is the replacement of free competition by the domination of monopolies (V. I. Lenin).
Stages of the birth of monopoly capitalism:
- Consistent takeover of single-industry companies until there is only one company in the industry - a monopoly. Or several companies in the same industry affiliated with the same individuals. Monopolies have the ability to set any price for their product, since there are no competitors.
- Industry monopolies are successively absorbed until one monopoly remains in all sectors of the economy.
– Banks are also sequentially absorbed until there is only one bank left. Or rather, several banks owned by the same persons.
– There is a merger, due to absorption, financial monopoly and industrial monopoly. That is, at this stage, in fact, the entire economy of the state belongs to one group of people who own the industrial and financial monopoly that has defeated all competitors.
State-monopoly capitalism - this is the stage of capitalism, when the industrial and financial monopoly that has won everyone places its people in all government posts, including the first person. As a result, the entire state apparatus begins to serve the interests not of citizens, but of the industrial and financial monopoly that has swallowed up the state.
Thus, the entire state, with all its cities, villages, rivers, lakes and lands, with all citizens, becomes, in fact, the property of the owners of the victorious industrial and financial monopoly.
Global capitalism (the process of formation - globalization) - this is the stage of absorption of some financial-industrial-state monopolies by other monopolies. Modern philosophers describe the final stage of globalization as a "single capitalist world-system". In other words, the entire planet, with oceans, seas, continents and humanity, will belong to the owners of the victorious industrial and financial monopoly.
When the Western world entered the era of pure capitalism, the United States, with its gigantic army of passionaries, entered into a struggle with the Old World. And the US predictably defeated Europe.
The gigantic concentration of passionaries in one place provided a powerful impetus to the development of the United States and scientific and technological progress. The US entered the stage of monopoly capitalism 200 years ago. The creation of the Fed marked the end of the monopolization of the financial sector, and the Great Depression marked the birth of the US state financial and industrial monopoly.
"Give me the right to issue and control the country's money, and I won't care who makes the laws!"
- this is how Mayer Amschel Rothschild formulated the goal of creating the Fed.
The process of absorption by the United States of Europe lasted until 1993. With the creation of the European Union, the United States essentially swallowed up Europe.
Thus, having completed the construction of global capitalism (the completion of the globalization stage), the owners of the victorious industrial and financial monopoly will receive the entire planet in their undivided possession.
The apotheosis of the Tao of capitalism is the construction of a society where the efforts of all mankind are aimed at meeting the needs of a small circle of people who own the victorious financial and industrial monopoly.
Dao socialism
Socialism is nothing but a state-capitalist monopoly, which is turned to the benefit of the entire people and therefore has ceased to be a capitalist monopoly. V. I. Lenin.
That's it. I think not everyone has read this definition. But it is precisely this definition that accurately describes the essence of the transformation of a capitalist society into a socialist one.
At first glance, the main difference between socialism and monopoly capitalism is only the change of ownership. Under monopoly capitalism, the state and the entire economy belong to a group of shareholders, and under socialism, to the state. But this is only at first glance. Consider what the distribution of labor results looks like in these systems.
Socialism:
• investments in science;
• investments in industry and agriculture;
• maintenance of the state apparatus and the army;
• Maintenance of citizens of the country.
Monopoly capitalism:
• investments in science;
• investments in industry and agriculture;
• maintenance of the state apparatus and the army;
• maintenance of citizens of the country;
• maintenance of shareholders of the monopoly.
That is, under state capitalism, the fruits of the labor of all citizens of the country go to the owners of the victorious industrial and financial monopoly, and under socialism, the fruits of the labor of the entire state are directed to improving the level and quality of life of all citizens (society).
Under socialism, the goal is the well-being of the entire society (society - people, ethnic group). Under capitalism, the goal is the welfare of the capitalists. As well as in the slave system, the goal is the welfare of the slave owners, and under the monarchy, the welfare of the royal family.
Under socialism, there is no need to necessarily derive profit from activities. Under socialism, you can easily create projects that in themselves do not bring any profit at all, but only bring losses, but allow the implementation of other super-successful projects. For example, free healthcare. The project is unprofitable, but free medicine provides a longer life expectancy for all citizens, low infant mortality and healthy citizens of the country. Or, for example, to finance scientific research up to fundamental, which ensured the tremendous speed of discoveries and the unprecedented rate of scientific and technological progress in the 30-60s. XX century in the USSR.
Impressive economic successes in the USSR were achieved on the basis of fundamentally new, hitherto unknown to the history of social relations. In industry, state trusts occupied key positions, in the credit and financial sphere - state banks, in agriculture millions of disparate farms merged into collective farms and state farms. Labor productivity in the agricultural sector increased by more than 20 times, which made it possible to redirect the released villagers to factories and plants. If in 1922 about 20% of citizens lived in cities, then by 1954 the urban population was already more than 50%.
Separately, it is necessary to say about the financial miracle of the USSR called "two-loop financial system."
Remark. Once upon a time at the dawn of mankind, people, having invented the division of labor, improved productivity for the first time, but faced the need to create a universal mechanism that allows them to exchange the results of labor with each other - honey for fish, grain for meat, etc. To solve the problem of commodity exchange, they invented money. Money is a universal exchange fund, in units of which all goods in the economy are nominated. After many experiments, all countries of the planet for a very long period settled on gold as money. The amount of money in the economy can be calculated using the formula "the law of money circulation". Here is the formula:
Quantity of money = (Value of all goods sold in the state in a year) / (Number of money turnovers during a year). Very little gold was mined in those days. The number of goods produced annually, and their nomenclature has not changed for centuries. Therefore, the balance between the amount of money and the value of goods produced in the economy has not changed for centuries. As a result, prices have not changed for centuries. That is, there was no inflation or deflation.
With the growth of international trade turnover, the first problems began.
Consider example #1.
State No. 1 produces commodity A in a quantity exceeding the needs of the state itself. State No. 1 begins to sell the surplus of this commodity to State No. 2. Having accepted gold as payment, State No. 1 exports it from State No. 2 to itself. As a result, in state No. 2, the money supply is reduced, which leads to an increase in the duration of the circulation of money in the economy. Due to the lack of money in state No. 2, the economy begins to slow down. Deflation is coming. If all the gold is pumped out of state #2, the economy in this state will practically stop. Only natural exchange will remain. Imagine how much time you need to spend, for example, to exchange cucumbers for building materials for a house, what can we say about building rockets or a nuclear power plant. Problems will also arise in state No. 1. An increase in the money supply in the absence of an increase in the quantity of output leads to an increase in prices. That is, inflation sets in in State No. 1.
Consider example #2.
Let's say state #1 has already moved away from gold as money and just prints it. State No. 1 decided to build many factories. To do this, it is necessary to increase the amount of money in the economy by the cost of building materials for factories - and the state No. 1 simply printed the necessary amount of money. But if the construction organizers turn out to be not entirely honest performers, they can spend part of the money allocated for the construction, for example, on themselves - increasing their salaries, and their friends too. As a result, there will not be enough money for the construction. And the money withdrawn from the construction cycle will be used to purchase goods not for construction, but for themselves. That is, the amount of money in circulation between citizens will increase and the demand for consumer goods will increase, which will lead to an increase in prices - that is, to inflation. And to complete the construction, it will be necessary to print more money. In addition, after the completion of the construction cycle, the released money will again fall into the same place - into the circulation of consumer goods, which will lead to an avalanche-like increase in prices for everything. There will be rampant inflation.
What to do - you ask. And the answer was prepared and implemented by Soviet economists back in 1925. They came up with the idea of dividing the contours of the circulation of money. It was decided to make some money only for citizens - this role was assigned to cash. Other money was made only for enterprises - this role was assigned to non-cash money. The third money was made only for international trade - this role was assigned to gold and foreign currency.
Due to the division of cash flows, the state was able to increase the mass of non-cash rubles (for example, for the construction of factories, factories, etc.), and this did not accelerate inflation in cash rubles. That is, the state could create and distribute money to enterprises in the required quantities, but this did not affect consumer prices.
The state annually counted the quantity (and value) of consumer goods produced during the year. And if the quantity (and cost) of manufactured consumer goods increased compared to the previous year, the state would receive an accurate answer on how much to increase the cash supply. As a result, it was possible to increase salaries or increase the number of vacancies.
But even here the brilliant Soviet economists came up with a more elegant solution. In the USSR, annually (after calculations), prices were falling, and the amount of money was not increasing. As a result, the value of cash increased. And the value of savings made by citizens grew.
It was possible to transfer non-cash rubles into cash (“cash out”) only within strictly limited limits - each Soviet enterprise received cash at the cash desk of the State Bank in a strictly defined amount, intended exclusively for paying salaries and covering travel expenses. It was even impossible to steal non-cash rubles, because you could not go to the store with them or spend them in any other way. Therefore, 99% of all embezzlement in the USSR accounted for raw materials, unaccounted for industrial products, agricultural products.
Enterprises, having produced products and profitably sold them to another enterprise, could spend their profits only on self-development - the expansion of production, scientific research, the construction of roads, kindergartens, sanatoriums, sports complexes, etc. As a result of this approach, Soviet enterprises quickly inflated economically and overgrown with social facilities - they built their own hospitals and clinics, their rest houses and pioneer camps, their boiler houses and microdistricts.
A pleasant bonus due to such isolation of two cash flows was the almost eradication of corruption.
According to the results of the first five-year plans, from 1930 to 1940 the number of higher and secondary technical educational institutions in the USSR quadrupled and exceeded 4. By 150, about 1941 new enterprises had been built. If in 9 the GDP of the USSR was less than the GDP of the USA by more than 1925 times, then by the end of the second five-year plan, the USSR ranked second in the world in terms of industrial output, second only to the USA. GDP growth during 7–1925 amounted to 1954%.
The unthinkable has happened so far. The path that the most powerful state of capitalism, the United States, took about 200 years and the lives of several generations to overcome, the USSR passed in 10 years (from 1928 to 1938). And if not for the war, by 1954 the USSR would have already overtaken the United States.
Western economists also recognize the extraordinary efficiency of the Soviet economy. Thus, the English magazine The Economist writes:
“Contrary to popular claims, the historical development of the Soviet economy is one of the greatest successes achieved in the twentieth century. The USSR turned out to be one of two countries in the world that rapidly broke into the group of industrialized countries: the second country is Japan. Among the largest countries in the world, only Japan exceeded the per capita income level of the USSR. This allowed the Soviet Union to eradicate extreme poverty, provide social insurance services, create one of the most comprehensive social security systems in the world, achieve one of the highest levels of education and health care, and create a powerful military potential comparable to that of the United States. In addition to the defense industry, Soviet technology has proven its ability to prove itself at the highest international level. And all this - despite the blockade in the technological field by Western countries, from which Japan, by the way, did not suffer.
Under these conditions, the development of the USSR is one of the largest economic achievements in world history.
Under these conditions, the development of the USSR is one of the largest economic achievements in world history.
The USSR proved that if society is freed from senseless competition, which, as it turned out, absorbs up to 90% of progressive energy, then the pace of scientific and technological progress will be many times faster. And along with scientific and technological progress at an unprecedented pace, the well-being of the socialist people is possible.
But each Achilles is born with its own sinew.
Dao communism
The main stages in the development of socialism:
Transition period from capitalism to socialism - a historical period that begins with the conquest of political power by the working class and ends with the building of socialism (K. Marx).
Socialism. The stage of building a powerful economy, allowing you to move on to the highest phase - communism. At the stage of building a powerful economy, socialism will not be able to immediately ensure universal equality of consumption, so the classics formulated the relationship between citizens and the state as follows: “from each according to his abilities, to each according to his work.” In other words, everyone should invest in the construction of socialism to the best of their ability, and wages will be uneven, piecework - to each according to his merits. V. I. Lenin formulated two basic principles of socialism: "who does not work, he does not eat" and "equal pay for equal work."
Communism. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" - the slogan reflects the communist ideal of production and distribution of its results. According to the Marxist view, production should be based on the voluntary use of their abilities by members of a given society. The results of such labor should be sufficient for the free satisfaction of the needs of all people without the need for any equivalent exchange in the distribution of goods and services. Such a scheme will be possible as a result of the very high labor productivity that will be achieved in a developed communist society.
At the time when the theorists of communism were writing their works, Abraham Maslow had not yet been born into the world. But in 1943, A. Maslow published two of his works: “Introduction to the theory of motivation” (A Preface to Motivation Theory) and “The Theory of Human Motivation” (A Theory of Human Motivation), where he formulated the theory of the hierarchy of needs of any person.
A person's life is determined by his needs. Needs, both physical and spiritual. According to Maslow,
“Human needs are arranged in a hierarchy. In other words, the appearance of one need is usually preceded by the satisfaction of another, more urgent one. The lower needs, starting with the physiological ones, are at the same time more urgent. If they are not satisfied, all activity is directed to their satisfaction, while the rest of the needs simply do not exist for the individual at the moment. When the needs of the physiological level are satisfied, they cease to determine behavior; comes the turn of security needs, etc.”
A. Maslow identifies five groups of needs:
1. physiological needs. The most basic, most powerful, most indispensable of all human needs are those associated with physical existence - the need for food and shelter. A subject who lacks food, self-esteem, and love will first of all require food and, until this need is satisfied, will ignore or push into the background all other needs.
2. The need for security and protection. These needs reflect the interest of any person in long-term survival. Any individual will gain a sense of security if events in the world surrounding the individual are predictable. A sense of security will arise if the individual's standard of living and consumption is stable. In addition, the individual's sense of security will be strengthened if he is sure that threats to his health will be prevented in a timely manner.
3. The need for belonging and love. These needs already need to be divided into two parts - individual and social. When physiological and security needs are satisfied, people tend to start a family and have children (satisfaction of the need to love and be loved). Also at this stage, it becomes important for each person to become a member of a stable group - to be accepted into this group.
4. Esteem Needs. A. Maslow also divides this need into two parts: the need for self-respect and showing respect from other people. Self-esteem is achieved through confidence in one's competence and skill. Respect from others is manifested in the recognition of skills and competencies. It is obvious that this need can be satisfied in the labor collective, on the part of colleagues and grateful consumers.
5. Needs of self-actualization. Maslow described self-actualization as the desire of a person to become what he can be. A person who has reached this highest level achieves the full use of his talents, abilities and potential of the individual, that is, self-actualization means becoming the person that we can become, reaching the top of our potential.
Five groups of needs according to A. Maslow.
Having studied this work, we, ordinary citizens, understand the great intention of the theoreticians of communism. The result of building communism should be a society where all citizens of the state (or the planet) can afford to fulfill themselves.
Self-realization (from Russian self- and lat. realis - material, real) - the realization of the potential of the individual, the realization of one's human purpose, vocation.
Consider how people's needs are met under communism and capitalism.
communist society.
1. Physiological needs (food and shelter). Already in the USSR (not yet communism), the state provided all citizens with free housing. All citizens were guaranteed the right to work and pensions (i.e., all citizens were guaranteed a regular personal income). In other words, the physiological needs of all citizens are satisfied forever.
2. Needs for security and stability (predictability of events, stability). Already in the USSR housing is guaranteed forever. Guaranteed income for everyone and forever (including the disabled and pensioners). Free healthcare for everyone and forever. There are no taxes. There is no inflation. That is, already under socialism, the needs for security and stability were satisfied for all citizens of the USSR.
3. Needs of belonging and love. Social affiliation: children - Octobrists, then pioneers, teenagers - members of the Komsomol. All citizens are the masters of the country. The feeling of community was noticed by all foreigners when visiting the USSR. In the USSR, very early marriages are 18–20 years old. Because the future is guaranteed, there is housing, there is work. The result is natural population growth. That is, already under socialism, the needs for belonging and love are satisfied for all citizens of the USSR.
4. Respect needs. Stable work and a stable team work wonders. Boards of honor, certificates, pennants, vouchers as a reward, etc. Retirement is called a well-deserved rest and the whole team escorts them to retirement. Children are brought up to respect adults, and especially the elderly. Raised to protect the weak.
5. The need for self-actualization. Of course, the USSR is far from being communism, and citizens could not devote their entire lives exclusively to their favorite pursuits. But children in the USSR were already doing what they wanted. Pioneer camps, hikes, sections, aircraft engineering circles, shipbuilding and much more - and everything is available to all children, and absolutely free.
A lot that adults could afford. What just was not already in the USSR (not yet under communism). And the search for the Yeti, and the expedition to the Tunguska meteorite. Hang gliding, climbing, hiking, traveling by car and train across the country (after all, all people on earth crave new experiences) and much more.
capitalist society.
1. Physiological needs (food and shelter). Housing is expensive and not for everyone. As a rule, in a capitalist society, the stage of guaranteed satisfaction of physiological needs is stepped over by citizens only in the period of capable age. In old age, many are forced to work for pennies and live in poor (but cheap) conditions until their death. Under capitalism, even these basic needs are not available to everyone.
2. Needs for security and stability. Lack of pensions (must be able to save money from salary to spend in old age). Unemployment. Inflation. High property taxes. I don't even know what to write. Getting sick under capitalism is deadly. Capitalism a priori cannot give confidence in stability and security. After all, this is a society of continuous competition. Everything is unstable, everything changes.
3. Needs of belonging and love. Man is a wolf to man - a proverbial expression from the comedy of Plautus (III-II BC) "Donkeys" (lat. Asinaria), which is used to characterize such human relations and mores, in which extreme selfishness, enmity, antagonism prevails. That is, under capitalism. Under capitalism, the average age of first marriage is 30–35 years. That is, when citizens were able to earn housing and saved up money to afford to have a child. After all, children under capitalism are very expensive. Kindergartens are paid, schools are paid (more precisely, all additional classes are paid), sections are paid, children's recreation is more expensive than for adults. Children late or no children at all. Under capitalism, it is very difficult for a person to find a society of interest. After all, capitalism is a community of individualists. Under capitalism, citizens have complete distrust of each other and, as a result, marriage contracts in families. Under capitalism, it is extremely difficult to satisfy the need for belonging and love.
4. The need for respect. Since money is a fetish under capitalism, the measure of the amount of respect is the amount of accumulated capital or the amount of wages (for example, in Japan, citizens, when they get to know each other, tell new acquaintances the amount of their salary. Thus, a hierarchy is built in relationships). With age, productivity is lost, and older employees are not needed. Retirement is a death sentence. Further poverty and death. Therefore, the need for respect is satisfied only among the successful part of the population. Under capitalism, satisfaction of the need for self-esteem is available to about 5% of the population.
5. Needs of self-actualization. A. Maslow writes:
“Because “generally satisfied people” are the exception in our society, we are not familiar, both experimentally and clinically, with the phenomenon of self-actualization. His research is a matter for the future."
(Maslow, 1943, p. 385).
(Maslow, 1943, p. 385).
That's it. Under capitalism, self-realization is practically not available.
Communism is an amazing dream. And with the development of robotics even more achievable.
The apotheosis of the Tao of Communism is the creation of a society of happy people in which the needs of all citizens are fully satisfied. And in this society, everyone can afford to engage in self-realization. As the classics put it, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
The quintessence of the confrontation between capitalism and socialism
According to the US foreign policy doctrine of the times of the USSR, the very existence of the Soviet Union was incompatible with American security, - Yuri Drozdov, Head of the Illegal Intelligence Directorate of the KGB of the USSR.
The peoples inhabiting the planet are progressing at different rates. Different peoples at different times left the primitive communal system, and some have not yet left it. It took peoples an uneven period of time to go through a period of feudal fragmentation, etc.
The same is true with scientific and technological progress. Different nations at different times entered into a scientific and technological race. And peoples go through the stages of this race in different times and with varied results. Today, the world has entered the era of the fourth technological revolution. Consider what kind of revolution it is.
Remark. In the pre-industrial era, up to 90% of the population of any state was employed in the agricultural sector. The labor of the agrarians was low productive, mechanization and, especially, fertilizers were completely absent. And even the work of 90% of the able-bodied population did not always save the state from starvation. Therefore, in the pre-industrial era, the armies were very small - no more than 50 people. In 000, two of the most powerful armies in the world of that time met near the city of Poltava. The King of Sweden, Charles XII, had up to 1709 thousand soldiers with 37 guns, the Russian army numbered up to 41 people with 50 guns. 000 years later, in 102, Napoleon needed to gather soldiers from all over Europe to create the greatest army of all times and peoples - an armada of 100 people. And after another 1812 years, in the First World War, Germany already put up 600 million bayonets, France - 000 million, England 100 million, Russia 12 million bayonets, respectively. The colossal growth in the size of the armies and the growth of the technical equipment of the armies were the result of technical progress and an increase in labor productivity in the agricultural sector. It was the liberated peasants who became soldiers.
First industrial revolution - mass transition from manual labor to machine, from manufactory to factory. At this time, there is an increase in labor productivity, including in the agricultural sector. As a result, the liberated part of the rural population moves to the cities and becomes workers. In countries that experienced the first technological revolution, to provide all citizens with everything they needed, it was necessary to involve approximately 50% of the working population in the agricultural sector and 50% in the industrial sector. Violation of these proportions in any direction leads to the need to import either industrial products or food products.
Second industrial revolution. Further growth of labor productivity, development of fertilizers, mechanization of labor in agriculture. Creation of large agricultural enterprises. The sectoral monopolization is coming to an end. There is a birth of the state financial and industrial monopoly. In countries in which the second technological revolution took place, in order to provide all citizens with everything they needed, it was necessary to involve approximately 20% of the working population in the agricultural sector and 30% in the industrial sector.
The liberation of part of the population from productive labor made it possible for the first time in the history of mankind to form armies of millions, maintain a powerful repressive apparatus, and create a bureaucratic machine that takes everything into account. And at the same time, about 10% of the population remained superfluous. For the first time in the history of mankind, a huge human resource is released - 10% of the able-bodied citizens.
These people can do anything. Naturally, the governments of various states identify and release from the work of geniuses and scientists. For this reason, countries that have gone through the second industrial revolution can afford to enter the third - the scientific and technological revolution.
Third industrial (scientific) revolution. The third scientific and technological revolution (STR) is characterized by a radical, qualitative transformation of the productive forces based on the transformation of science into a leading factor in the development of social production, into a direct productive force. At this stage, all production processes are automated. The introduction of computers, etc. As a result, countries that have gone through the third scientific revolution can afford to use no more than 2-3% of the working population in the agricultural sector and no more than 25% in the industrial sector for self-sufficiency.
Of course, there are still scientists, the army, the repressive apparatus, the bureaucratic one, but still approximately 50% of the population remains redundant. This is how the scientific revolution gave rise to a new social problem - unemployment. For this reason, in countries that have passed the stage of the scientific revolution, governments of states are doing their best to agitate the population to engage in creativity, small business, etc. So to speak, no matter what the child is amused, as long as it does not interfere.
At this stage, in the capitalist countries, the victorious GK monopolies of some states can afford to start absorbing the monopolies of other states (together with these states) not by military means, but through financial interventions.
Fourth industrial revolution. This is the era robots and artificial intelligence. I don't know what the self-sustaining workforce needs will be in the final stages of this era. But there are already farms, fields, etc., where there are no people at all. We have all seen how robots create cars and other robots in deserted workshops. Artificial intelligence is used in almost all spheres of life. Obviously, the need for human resources will become even smaller. At this stage, the largest GC monopoly will obviously swallow all the remaining GC monopolies on the planet.
So, today, about 50% of the population is superfluous. But they need to be supported, fed, watered, treated, entertained. And for all this you need to spend part of the profits. From the point of view of the owners of the GK-monopoly, these are unnecessary and non-production costs. 20-25% of the monopoly produces everything that one hundred percent of the population needs, and the rest are not needed for anything, but absorb 3/4 of the resources. From the point of view of cost optimization, we need to get rid of non-core assets. That is, it is necessary to reduce the population so that it does not waste resources senselessly.
If we look at the problem even more closely, it becomes clear that the population must be reduced to such limits that the efforts of the remaining part of the people would be sufficient to support the owners of the GK monopoly. But such a sparsely populated state can become an easy prey for another state, or rather another GK monopoly. Therefore, it is necessary to first absorb all the other GK monopolies on the planet, and then optimize costs and non-core assets (reduce residents).
Everything seems to be logical, but you say: “But this is pure fascism!” Well, yes, that's right, fascism is the process of globalization of monopoly capitalism into global capitalism. The capture of the largest possible number of countries (all countries), with the simultaneous absorption of the financial and industrial sector. Then, probably, open genocide under various pretexts. China, India, Australia and Oceania, South and North America, Vietnam - have already experienced the horror of optimization from the Anglo-Saxons. Well, then, probably, a “sudden” outbreak of a coronavirus or something else and voila - 99% of humanity has been disposed of.
The socialist countries stand in the way of realizing this harmonious plan. Not only are they not going to absorb anyone, they are not going to reduce their population yet. For the reason that the entire population is the owner of the state, and therefore these countries do not want to commit suicide. This means that the main opponent of global capitalism on the way to nirvana is the socialist states.
You may exclaim: “What does Russia have to do with it? After all, Russia is not a socialist state, but a capitalist one, which is at the first stage of development!” Yes that's right. And therefore Russia is not a rival, but a victim, at the stage of absorption. The US rival is China.
How often should the king be changed?
Let us prove by contradiction.
Evidence “from the contrary” (Latin contradictio in contrarium), or apagogic indirect evidence is a type of evidence in which the “proof” of a certain judgment (proof thesis) is carried out through the refutation of the negation of this judgment - the antithesis.
The creators of our civilization are all passionaries. And scientists, and generals, and sovereigns, and poets, and artists, and sculptors, and spiritual leaders, etc. Since they are all passionaries, they all have a similar behavior model. All passionaries are united by uncompromisingness in achieving the goal (or result) in the form in which the author-passionary imagines it.
For example, consider Leo Tolstoy and his work "War and Peace", well, or his own work "Anna Karenina". And let's ask ourselves a question - how often would we need to change the author in the process of writing a novel? To get the best result? That is, how often would we have to drive L. N. Tolstoy away from the table and make Ivanov, the incorruptible, and then Sidorov, etc., sit down to write?
Absurd? You say that this is some kind of game? But you are ready to change the head of our state every 4 (or 6) years. Not allowing the author to finish the work. Not even imagining what he was thinking there. But Tolstoy wrote "War and Peace" for 6 years. And building a state is harder than writing a book.
Similarly, let's ask ourselves a question - how often did we need to send Kurchatov or Korolev, or Baibakov, or Semashko somewhere. Send them to hell and transfer their yet unborn offspring to the management of some young and ambitious, but not yet realized themselves. But the nuclear industry or rocket science, or the oil industry, or the health care system are only parts of the state.
The change of power is not absurd. Change of power is a mechanism for eliminating a competing organization. This mechanism allows you to regress and destroy anything - the state, research institutes, universities, any enterprise. Like a swan, a crayfish and a pike, changeable leaders pull the cart in different directions in turn. And nothing has changed.
You ask: “How did we get convinced to change the chapter every 4 years?” Yes, it's pretty simple. But first, let's make a little digression into psychology.
As you know, 95% of the skills a child (and an adult too) masters not as a result of trial and error. And learning happens through observation.
Observational learning is a term coined by A. Bandura (USA) to describe learning that occurs simply by having a learner watching someone else do what needs to be learned. See social learning theory. Also called imitation learning. (J. Frager, J. Feidiman, p. 705).
Trial and error learning is learning that is characterized by trial and error in response, with the gradual elimination of ineffective responses. Thorndike's opinion that this is the main way of mastering all complex actions has now been rejected.
Trial and error learning is learning that is characterized by trial and error in response, with the gradual elimination of ineffective responses. Thorndike's opinion that this is the main way of mastering all complex actions has now been rejected.
In simple words, in order for a student to learn a new skill, he needs to demonstrate how the teacher, using this skill, gets what the student would like to receive. In this case, the skill must be available to the student. For example, a teacher shows a child (or a monkey) how to put a stool, open a wall cabinet and get sweets. This is, of course, a simplified example, but that's how it works. This is how the Anglo-Saxons teach our children what they need. They teach through cartoons, films, social networks, videos, clips, etc. They teach you to love the USA, hate Russia, be boors, ignoramuses, etc.
In exactly the same way, the Anglo-Saxons trained the leadership of our country and other countries. They announced that such a high standard of living for ordinary citizens and scientific and technological progress in the United States is due to the frequent turnover of presidents. That this is democracy. Everyone looked: they like the result, they can organize elections. And they began to repeat like monkeys: they have a president - and we have a president, they have 4 years - and we have 4 years, they have colleges - and we have colleges, etc.
Yes, only they have an uncompromising irremovability of course in everything, regardless of whether the leader is a Democrat or a Republican, a Negro or a white man, an old man or an uncle in his prime, a fool or a smart one. Because in the US, elections and the president are just theater. Theater for spectators from the country of fools (that is, from fool countries).
Based on the above reasoning, it becomes obvious that a successful model of government is the continuous rule of a successful passionary throughout his entire effective period of life. The transfer of government should not take place in a revolutionary way (because any revolution is the destruction of the previous one, the displacement of local leadership - in order to put in new allies, the disorganization of the life of the population, the deterioration in the quality of life of people, etc.) Any changes should be slow, not worsening the quality the life of the people.
The transfer must be made to a like-minded person. This, as a rule, should be an heir, but not a fact - after all, it is not known how the heir will grow up (Peter I and his son Alexei, Joseph Stalin and his son Vasily, etc.). The best management principle is meritocracy.
Management principles are the rules, norms and regulations that govern all processes in an organization. The impact on personnel is carried out by regulation, regulation, instruction. The principles of control may be the same for different systems. The principles of meritocracy can be applied in the socialist system, and in the capitalist, and in the slaveholding, etc.
Meritocracy
Meritocracy (lit. “power of the worthy”, from Latin meritus “worthy” + other Greek κράτος “power, rule”) is the principle of management, according to which the highest (main) leadership positions should be occupied by the most capable people, regardless of their social background and financial wealth. The word is used primarily in two senses. The first meaning of the word corresponds to a system in which leaders are appointed from among specially tutored talents (such a system is largely the opposite of both aristocracy and democracy). The second meaning, more common, involves the creation of initial conditions for objectively gifted and hardworking people so that in the future they have a chance to occupy a high social position in conditions of free competition.
China in our time has been able to implement this principle of governance. Direct elections in China are possible only in the first link of societies - in the villages. All the citizens there know each other. And they choose their leader from among their fellow villagers. Each candidate submits to the court his program for the development of the settlement. An obligatory condition of the settlement development program is the economic component. Namely: the candidate describes how he is going to earn additional income for the implementation of the declared program. That is, the candidate does not promise hypothetical playgrounds and new shops at the expense of alms from the center, but proposes, for example, to start producing product A and sell it to place B, as a result, get profit C and spend it on improving D.
Such a program is understandable and close to fellow villagers. And the result of the activities of the elected head is easy to assess - did they produce, sell, make an improvement? And in the next election, the candidate either has a stronger position or a tarnished reputation. And voters vote not for wavy perpendiculars, but for specific things that they personally need.
The wavy perpendicular is an allegory for inconclusive evidence.
“Panikovsky ... took from Balaganov's hands a carved resort cane with a slingshot instead of a knob and, drawing a straight line in the sand, said:
- Look. First, wait until the evening. Secondly ... And Panikovsky from the right end of the straight line led up a wavy perpendicular.
“Secondly, he might just not go out tonight. And even if it comes out...
Here Panikovsky connected both lines with a third, so that something similar to a triangle appeared on the sand, and finished:
- Who knows? Maybe he will walk in a big company. How will it look to you?
Balaganov respectfully looked at the triangle. Panikovsky's arguments did not seem particularly convincing to him, but such a truthful hopelessness was felt in the triangle that Balaganov hesitated.
I. Ilf, E. Petrov
“Panikovsky ... took from Balaganov's hands a carved resort cane with a slingshot instead of a knob and, drawing a straight line in the sand, said:
- Look. First, wait until the evening. Secondly ... And Panikovsky from the right end of the straight line led up a wavy perpendicular.
“Secondly, he might just not go out tonight. And even if it comes out...
Here Panikovsky connected both lines with a third, so that something similar to a triangle appeared on the sand, and finished:
- Who knows? Maybe he will walk in a big company. How will it look to you?
Balaganov respectfully looked at the triangle. Panikovsky's arguments did not seem particularly convincing to him, but such a truthful hopelessness was felt in the triangle that Balaganov hesitated.
I. Ilf, E. Petrov
There are no more direct elections in China. If the vacancy of the head of the city (in our opinion - the mayor) is vacant, the head of the city is elected by the meeting of the heads of the settlements that are part of this urban district, and is elected from among the heads of the settlements. And again, the candidate presents his program with an economic component. And they discuss programs, and choose the best sons of the settlements. And they (heads of settlements) vote again not for wavy perpendiculars, but for specific things that their settlements need. The head of the region is elected by the heads of cities (from themselves), the governor - by the heads of regions (from themselves). And so to the very top. For example, below is the work path of the President of the People's Republic of China Xi Jinping.
Chinese statesman and politician Xi Jinping was born on June 1, 1953 in Fuping County, Shaanxi Province.
His father Xi Zhongxun was the closest associate of Mao Zedong and served as Vice Premier of the State Council of the People's Republic of China.
In January 1969, Xi Jinping began his career in the Liangjiahe Brigade of Wenan Commune in Yanchuan County, Shaanxi Province.
He joined the Komsomol in 1971 and joined the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 1974.
He was the secretary of the party organization of the Liangjiahe brigade of the Wenyany commune in the Yanchuan county of Shaanxi province.
In 1979 he graduated from the Faculty of Chemistry and Technology of Tsinghua University.
Graduated from correspondence postgraduate studies at the Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences of Tsinghua University with a degree in Marxist Theory and Ideological and Political Education. Doctor of Law.
From 1979-1982, he worked as secretary of the office of the State Council of the People's Republic of China and the office of the Central Military Council (CMC).
From 1982 to 1983, he was deputy secretary of the Zhengding County CPC Committee (Hebei Province).
From 1983 to 1985, he was the secretary of the Zhengding County CCP Committee.
From 1985 to 1988, he was a member of the Standing Committee (PC) of the CCP and Vice Mayor of Xiamen City (Fujian Province).
In 1988, Xi Jinping took over as secretary of the Ningde County CCP Committee in Fujian Province.
In 1990, he became secretary of the CCP committee and chairman of the PC of the People's Congress (PCC) of Fuzhou City (Fujian Province).
In 1999, Xi Jinping was appointed Acting Governor of Fujian Province, and in 2000, Chief Executive of Fujian Province.
Since 2002, he served as the head of the administration of Zhejiang Province, in 2002-2003 - and. O. Chairman of the Government of Zhejiang Province, in 2003-2007 - Secretary of the CPC Committee, Chairman of the PC of the People's Congress of Zhejiang Province.
In 2007, Secretary of the Shanghai CCP Committee.
In 2007, Xi Jinping became a member of the PC of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee, a member of the secretariat of the CPC Central Committee, and rector of the Party School under the CPC Central Committee.
In 2008, he was appointed Vice President of the People's Republic of China.
On November 15, 2012, Xi Jinping was elected General Secretary of the Communist Party of China by decision of the Plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the country held in Beijing.
On March 14, 2013, Xi Jinping was elected President of the People's Republic of China and Chairman of the Central Military Council of the country.
His father Xi Zhongxun was the closest associate of Mao Zedong and served as Vice Premier of the State Council of the People's Republic of China.
In January 1969, Xi Jinping began his career in the Liangjiahe Brigade of Wenan Commune in Yanchuan County, Shaanxi Province.
He joined the Komsomol in 1971 and joined the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 1974.
He was the secretary of the party organization of the Liangjiahe brigade of the Wenyany commune in the Yanchuan county of Shaanxi province.
In 1979 he graduated from the Faculty of Chemistry and Technology of Tsinghua University.
Graduated from correspondence postgraduate studies at the Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences of Tsinghua University with a degree in Marxist Theory and Ideological and Political Education. Doctor of Law.
From 1979-1982, he worked as secretary of the office of the State Council of the People's Republic of China and the office of the Central Military Council (CMC).
From 1982 to 1983, he was deputy secretary of the Zhengding County CPC Committee (Hebei Province).
From 1983 to 1985, he was the secretary of the Zhengding County CCP Committee.
From 1985 to 1988, he was a member of the Standing Committee (PC) of the CCP and Vice Mayor of Xiamen City (Fujian Province).
In 1988, Xi Jinping took over as secretary of the Ningde County CCP Committee in Fujian Province.
In 1990, he became secretary of the CCP committee and chairman of the PC of the People's Congress (PCC) of Fuzhou City (Fujian Province).
In 1999, Xi Jinping was appointed Acting Governor of Fujian Province, and in 2000, Chief Executive of Fujian Province.
Since 2002, he served as the head of the administration of Zhejiang Province, in 2002-2003 - and. O. Chairman of the Government of Zhejiang Province, in 2003-2007 - Secretary of the CPC Committee, Chairman of the PC of the People's Congress of Zhejiang Province.
In 2007, Secretary of the Shanghai CCP Committee.
In 2007, Xi Jinping became a member of the PC of the Politburo of the CPC Central Committee, a member of the secretariat of the CPC Central Committee, and rector of the Party School under the CPC Central Committee.
In 2008, he was appointed Vice President of the People's Republic of China.
On November 15, 2012, Xi Jinping was elected General Secretary of the Communist Party of China by decision of the Plenum of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the country held in Beijing.
On March 14, 2013, Xi Jinping was elected President of the People's Republic of China and Chairman of the Central Military Council of the country.
It's quite a shame that China looked after the management on the principles of meritocracy here, in the USSR. During the reign of I. V. Stalin in the USSR, management was implemented according to the principles of meritocracy. But without the economic component. The economic component was added by the Chinese communists.
Achilles tendon of the Soviet Atlanta
"Both mediocrities and even those standing below the average, as well as children and idiots, can become historical figures if they fall into the hands of great power."
K. Kautsky.
Meritocracy is offensive and incomprehensible to mediocrities with great ambitions. They also want to receive the privileges of their superiors, but they lack the ability. If only to give up the slack and begin to let mediocrity into the power, they, like a cancerous tumor, will very quickly absorb the entire administrative apparatus. The control apparatus of mediocrity will be seized for reasons of their own safety. Because one individual of mediocrity surrounded by uncompromising meritocrats can be quickly identified and expelled from the management apparatus. Therefore, the mediocrities that have penetrated the administrative apparatus try their best to surround themselves on all sides with other mediocre individuals who will protect each other. First of all, a mediocre individual, having made his way into the control apparatus, will try to neutralize the defense mechanisms - the army, the police, the KGB.
This is exactly what happened after the death of I. V. Stalin. Stalin's meritocrats allowed deliberate mediocrity into the administrative apparatus. They viewed Khrushchev's persona as temporary, and they knew that Khrushchev was mediocrity. Therefore, no danger was expected from Khrushchev. But Khrushchev liked being at the top of power and, in order to protect himself from the claims of uncompromising meritocrats, he immediately began to destroy them. Whom he killed, whom he arrested, whom he fired.
In order to neutralize the Red Army, Khrushchev decided to start reducing the army in order to dismiss most of the officers who had gone through the crucible of the Great Patriotic War. The army of the USSR was in itself an invincible force that could easily sweep Khrushchev away. But he hit first, vilely - in the back:
This reform was remembered by many, first of all, by large-scale reductions in personnel in the army and navy, as numerous eyewitnesses of that time recall, "they cut like a living thing." So, in 1955-1958, while still under Defense Minister Zhukov, Khrushchev initiated the first reduction of the Soviet Armed Forces by a third, and this is almost 2 million 140 thousand (according to other sources, 2 million 100 thousand) soldiers and officers. Further, in January 1960, the Supreme Soviet of the USSR, without discussion, approved the Law "On a new significant reduction in the Armed Forces of the USSR." Up to 1 million 300 thousand (according to other sources, 1 million 200 thousand) soldiers and officers were dismissed from the army and navy, this is almost a third of the total number of all military personnel in the USSR by that time.
The very first stage of the cuts was the most painful, when in less than three years over 2 million people were fired from the army and navy, a huge figure, along with their families, these cuts affected the fate of millions of Soviet people. Not only military educational institutions, various repair and industrial enterprises were reduced, but also real deployed combat units and warships.
The wave of continuous demobilization gave rise to discontent among the most devoted and conscious category of Soviet citizens, in the officer corps itself. Often, many officers were fired even without pensions, there were those with pensions who went through the whole war, but they could not find a job on their own (author: Andrey Lebedev).
With the end of the Great Patriotic War, crime in the Soviet Union broke all records. Despite Stalin's firm hand, civil society was terrorized by hooligans, robbers and murderers. The rampant crime was no less than in the notorious nineties. There were several objective reasons contributing to this situation. And it took more than one year and a lot of resources to defeat rampant banditry.
According to the reports of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, over a year (January 1946 - December 1946) over 7 thousand criminal groups were liquidated, 210 thousand bandits were destroyed. From the beginning of 1947, the criminal intensity began to decline. But individual bursts were recorded until the country built favorable conditions for a well-fed life.
(Source)The very first stage of the cuts was the most painful, when in less than three years over 2 million people were fired from the army and navy, a huge figure, along with their families, these cuts affected the fate of millions of Soviet people. Not only military educational institutions, various repair and industrial enterprises were reduced, but also real deployed combat units and warships.
The wave of continuous demobilization gave rise to discontent among the most devoted and conscious category of Soviet citizens, in the officer corps itself. Often, many officers were fired even without pensions, there were those with pensions who went through the whole war, but they could not find a job on their own (author: Andrey Lebedev).
With the end of the Great Patriotic War, crime in the Soviet Union broke all records. Despite Stalin's firm hand, civil society was terrorized by hooligans, robbers and murderers. The rampant crime was no less than in the notorious nineties. There were several objective reasons contributing to this situation. And it took more than one year and a lot of resources to defeat rampant banditry.
According to the reports of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, over a year (January 1946 - December 1946) over 7 thousand criminal groups were liquidated, 210 thousand bandits were destroyed. From the beginning of 1947, the criminal intensity began to decline. But individual bursts were recorded until the country built favorable conditions for a well-fed life.
To combat banditry, a huge number of demobilized intelligence officers and the military were attracted to the bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. They took them to the police only on the recommendation of party cells, that is, the principles of meritocracy were observed impeccably. They did not have a special education (they received it already during the service). But these were the best and most experienced warriors, hardened in the battles of the Great Patriotic War. In the "war after the war" in 1945-1955, 25 thousand military men, NKVD soldiers and policemen died, 32 thousand people from among the Soviet party activists. That is, by 1953, the apparatus of the Ministry of Internal Affairs was a perfect machine for combating crime and protecting the rule of law in the USSR, a machine headed and filled with uncompromising passionaries. And this car was a danger to Khrushchev, so he struck his second blow in the back of the people's militia:
... Khrushchev ... disbanded the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs, dispersing its functions among the republican ministries.
Among other things, such a “downsizing” was done in order to reduce the central office. Back in 1956, 20 people were fired from the Union Ministry of Internal Affairs, which at that time numbered about 1 thousand people. In 300, they got rid of another 1959 people. In total, in 1-800, about 1958 thousand people were dismissed from the Ministry of Internal Affairs (mostly senior officers), and for the entire time of the “Khrushchev perestroika” - about 1859 thousand. They were replaced by former civilians.
Pavel Gingerbread
Among other things, such a “downsizing” was done in order to reduce the central office. Back in 1956, 20 people were fired from the Union Ministry of Internal Affairs, which at that time numbered about 1 thousand people. In 300, they got rid of another 1959 people. In total, in 1-800, about 1958 thousand people were dismissed from the Ministry of Internal Affairs (mostly senior officers), and for the entire time of the “Khrushchev perestroika” - about 1859 thousand. They were replaced by former civilians.
Pavel Gingerbread
And now 10 years later:
... In the mid-1960s, the situation in the domestic internal affairs bodies had many now familiar features. Poor, poorly equipped, demoralized militia. Poorly educated - in some important services, up to half of the employees did not even have a secondary school behind them. Unpopular - the police, in which they "beat", gave rise to a wave of anti-police riots. When Minister Shchelokov returns from his first trip around the country, he will share his impressions of his subordinates: “I don’t know about enemies, but this army terrifies me.”
The Ministry of Public Order (that was the name of the Ministry of Internal Affairs until November 1968) under Khrushchev was decentralized, scattered across the republics, depriving the union superstructure. The investigation was withdrawn from the MOOP (a kind of a single investigative committee was created). They joyfully reported about the reduction of organs annually by 10-15 thousand people ... Helpful statistics seemed to confirm at first that everything was being done correctly. But then the answer of the criminal world followed: the number of especially dangerous crimes (you can’t hide them) jumped by a third at once!
Urgently, even under Shchelokov's predecessor, Minister Vasily Tikunov, they began to correct the excesses: they returned the investigation of ordinary criminal cases to the police, restored the allied vertical ... However, Shchelokov already fell to bringing the police back to life after destructive experiments, rebuilding it anew.
Sergei Credov, writer
The Ministry of Public Order (that was the name of the Ministry of Internal Affairs until November 1968) under Khrushchev was decentralized, scattered across the republics, depriving the union superstructure. The investigation was withdrawn from the MOOP (a kind of a single investigative committee was created). They joyfully reported about the reduction of organs annually by 10-15 thousand people ... Helpful statistics seemed to confirm at first that everything was being done correctly. But then the answer of the criminal world followed: the number of especially dangerous crimes (you can’t hide them) jumped by a third at once!
Urgently, even under Shchelokov's predecessor, Minister Vasily Tikunov, they began to correct the excesses: they returned the investigation of ordinary criminal cases to the police, restored the allied vertical ... However, Shchelokov already fell to bringing the police back to life after destructive experiments, rebuilding it anew.
Sergei Credov, writer
The enemies of the USSR were very much afraid of the KGB. And Khrushchev was also afraid. After killing Beria, Khrushchev set about disarming the KGB apparatus:
As I. A. Serov reported in the Central Committee of the CPSU in 1957 ... “more than 18 thousand people were fired from the KGB bodies”, including “more than 2 employees for violations of socialist legality, abuse of official position and official misconduct. About 300 people were fired from the Central Office of the KGB, 200 were stripped of their general ranks.
... compared with 1954, the number of KGB personnel was reduced by more than 50%, and in 1955 the number of personnel was further reduced by 7 units and 678 officers were transferred to the position of workers and employees.
On this occasion, in one of his speeches in February 1959, N. S. Khrushchev emphasized: “We ... have significantly reduced our state security agencies, and we are still aiming to reduce them.”
In April 1959, A. N. Shelepin, who became chairman of the KGB, proposed reducing the staff of operational workers in the center and in the field by another 3 units, and the staff of workers and employees by 200 people.
It should be noted that such a protracted campaign of “purges” and layoffs in the state security agencies had a bad effect both on the results of work and on the state of the moral and psychological climate in the Chekist teams, giving rise to feelings of insecurity among employees, underestimation of the importance and necessity of work to ensure security of the state and its citizens.
In February 1960, by a decree of the Council of Ministers, the 4th, 5th and 6th directorates were abolished ... in fact, the entire counterintelligence of the country, from the moment the KGB was formed until its abolition, was successively headed by P.V. Fedotov, O.M. Gribanov (1956–1964 gg.), S. G. Bannikov, G. K. Tsinev, G. F. Grigorenko (1970–1984), I. A. Markelov (1984–1985), V. F. Grushko) (Source).
... compared with 1954, the number of KGB personnel was reduced by more than 50%, and in 1955 the number of personnel was further reduced by 7 units and 678 officers were transferred to the position of workers and employees.
On this occasion, in one of his speeches in February 1959, N. S. Khrushchev emphasized: “We ... have significantly reduced our state security agencies, and we are still aiming to reduce them.”
In April 1959, A. N. Shelepin, who became chairman of the KGB, proposed reducing the staff of operational workers in the center and in the field by another 3 units, and the staff of workers and employees by 200 people.
It should be noted that such a protracted campaign of “purges” and layoffs in the state security agencies had a bad effect both on the results of work and on the state of the moral and psychological climate in the Chekist teams, giving rise to feelings of insecurity among employees, underestimation of the importance and necessity of work to ensure security of the state and its citizens.
In February 1960, by a decree of the Council of Ministers, the 4th, 5th and 6th directorates were abolished ... in fact, the entire counterintelligence of the country, from the moment the KGB was formed until its abolition, was successively headed by P.V. Fedotov, O.M. Gribanov (1956–1964 gg.), S. G. Bannikov, G. K. Tsinev, G. F. Grigorenko (1970–1984), I. A. Markelov (1984–1985), V. F. Grushko) (Source).
Of course, Khrushchev could not ignore the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. After all, there was a concentration of meritocratic scientists who could explain and prove the destructive activities of Khrushchev.
The role of the academy in the development of the country in the post-war period is also huge: the struggle for genetics, for theoretical physics, the rapid development of atomic and space projects, which brought our country to the forefront, turned it into a scientific superpower. It is surprising that it was during this period, in the late 1950s and early 1960s, that the threat loomed over the academy again, when the head of the country, N. S. Khrushchev, initiated another reform, as a result of which 50 academic institutions were transferred to the jurisdiction of sectoral ministries. - Closer to life. This caused a negative reaction from the President of the USSR Academy of Sciences A. N. Nesmeyanov. Disagreeing with the position of N. S. Khrushchev, he was forced to resign. M. V. Keldysh, who replaced him as president of the academy, also fell out of favor three years later, when T. D. Lysenko, who had secured the support of the ruling elite, was not elected to the academician. This caused an extremely sharp reaction from N. S. Khrushchev, and in July 1964 at the plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU, he said from the rostrum: “Comrades, for political leadership, I think we have enough of our party and the Central Committee, and if the Academy of Sciences is intervene, we will disperse the hell out of the Academy of Sciences.
Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2014, vol. 84, no. 10, pp. 63–73. In the USSR, since the time of the NEP, private business has played a significant role in the life of the country. Under Stalin there was no difference: you work at a state or private enterprise. Any work was honorable, and in the legislation on rights, on work experience and other things, there was necessarily the wording "... or a member of an artel of commercial cooperation."
By 1953, there were 114 (one hundred and fourteen thousand!) Workshops and enterprises in the USSR in a variety of areas - from catering to electronics, from gold mining to the chemical industry. More than two million people worked in private business, which produced almost 000% of the USSR GDP. Artels and industrial cooperation produced 6% of furniture, 40% of dishes, more than a third of all knitwear, almost all children's goods.
About a hundred design bureaus, 22 experimental laboratories and even two research institutes worked in the business sector. Moreover, within the framework of this sector, its own, non-state, pension system operated! Not to mention the fact that artels provided loans to their members for the purchase of livestock, tools and equipment, and housing construction. In the post-war years, up to 40% of all items in the house (dishes, shoes, furniture, etc.) were made by artel workers.
The first Soviet tube receivers (1930), the first radiograms in the USSR (1935), the first television sets with a cathode-ray tube (1939) were produced by the Leningrad Artel Progress-Radio. Stalin and his team strongly opposed attempts to nationalize the business sector. Stalin wrote about this in his last (1952) work, Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR.
In the USSR until 1953 there was no equalization of wages. The workers had precisely piecework wages (according to the precepts of Ilyich). And someone, like Stakhanov, went to work in a private car, and someone lived on bread and water. The salaries of professors and directors of factories exceeded the wages of workers by 10 or more times. Private entrepreneurs in the USSR earned very well, they were wealthy and respected citizens.
But from Khrushchev's point of view, this could not continue. It is not good when the owners of artels earn more than the People's Commissar. And the salary of any worker should be equal to the salary of a director or a professor, or even be higher, otherwise what a hegemon he is.
And Khrushchev liquidated all artels. On April 14, 1956, the Decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR “On the reorganization of fishing cooperation” appeared, according to which artel enterprises were transferred to the state. The property of enterprises was alienated free of charge.
Artels were organized by the most active part of the population - passionaries. With this order, Khrushchev transferred this huge army of very energetic and enterprising people to the camp of implacable enemies. Not only did he take away their sources of income and property. He humiliated and trampled on their honor and dignity. Yesterday they were respected people, but today they have become outcasts of society. And the enemies of the USSR.
The question immediately arose - who will produce the millions of units of products that these artels produced. How cafes, restaurants, ateliers, photo studios and much more will work.
Khrushchev had an answer to these questions - new leaders should be appointed. And where to get them? Each of us can become a janitor, but only a few can lead an enterprise. And proposals for the most part were made to the former owners of artels. Someone refused in the hearts. And someone agreed. So Khrushchev gave rise to the shadow economy.
Under Stalin, there was an annual accounting of the cost of manufactured consumer goods, and instead of additional printing of money, each year there was a decrease in prices for consumer goods (by 5-15%).
As you remember, artels and cooperatives in the USSR produced up to 40% of consumer goods. As a result of the liquidation of artels, the production of consumer goods almost halved, as well as a change in the range of goods produced. The reduction in the range, quantity and cost of goods produced were not taken into account. But in order to maintain prices for goods, it was necessary either to withdraw part of the money from civil circulation (to reduce salaries) or it was necessary to increase the prices of the remaining goods. But this was not done. People began to accumulate money, and goods from the sale disappeared. So Khrushchev gave birth in the USSR deficit goods.
Yesterday's owners offended by the Soviet regime, and today's directors carried out the plan during the day, and on the second shift they drove products for themselves. From raw materials saved in the first shifts. Second shift workers had no idea that they were working illegally.
Here it must be said that Khrushchev, having nationalized the artels, transferred the planning of production to the State Planning Commission. The leadership of the State Planning Commission in every possible way denied planning the quantity and range of consumer goods - after all, it is unthinkable - to plan what style of underpants and in what quantity will need to be produced in five years. And as for whether these shorts would be fashionable, there could be no question. And so they did with millions of things - suits, coats, dresses, buttons, shoes, toys, etc., etc. They did the same with catering - after all, cafes and restaurants were also nationalized and transferred to the State Planning Committee for planning new products in fast food and "branded" restaurants for the next five years. Nonsense, of course, but that's how it was.
But Khrushchev was relentless. As a result, all modern things disappeared from the shelves, their places were taken by family underpants, the same suits and the same dresses, permanent “Kiev cutlets” appeared in restaurants, etc., etc.
And in the second shift, the factories drove quite modern things. The new director of the factory had to close the eyes of the district police officer - so that he would not pay attention to the fact that the factory was working at night. The factory director also had to negotiate with the directors of retail stores about the sale of left-handed things. Store managers had to take into account the interests of sellers and close the eyes of a higher authority. And so to the very top. Thus, carefully conspiratorial corruption chains were born from the very bottom - to the very top, to the very Kremlin walls.
Similar processes took place in public catering. The saved raw materials from the canteen or restaurant had to be sold on the market. And close the eyes of the director of the market and the precinct. And so on and so forth. In a taxi - left orders. On motor depots - the left flights. And kickbacks, kickbacks, kickbacks for everyone - shift foremen, taxi fleet directors, and so on to the very top, to Moscow, to the Kremlin.
Very quickly, corruption, like a cancerous tumor, entangled the entire administrative apparatus of the Land of Soviets. After all, Khrushchev tried to replace the ideological meritocrats with opportunists. As a result, all officials, traders and light industry became criminals. So Khrushchev created corruption in USSR.
Folk wisdom says: “A lazy fool is half the trouble; an active fool is a headache for everyone, but there is nothing worse than a fool with initiative, and even in office.
Of course, the USSR did not fall immediately. It took Khrushchev's nestlings another 20 years to destroy the USSR.
Khrushchev's henchman Andropov, having taken the post of head of the KGB, organized the training of "economic killers" in Austria. In the photo: Gaidar, Chubais, Ulyukaev, Shokhin, Aven in Austria, where they were trained under the International Visitor Leadership Program (IVLP), organized by the US Department of State.
Andropov prepared Gorbachev on his own. In 1983, Andropov instructed Gorbachev and Ryzhkov to start preparing economic reform. Therefore, after the death of Andropov, the post of General Secretary was taken by his student - Gorbachev.
The nestlings of Khrushchev's nest dealt many blows, and one of the most devastating blows was the destruction of the "two-loop financial system."
A. N. Kosygin, using his power as Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, despite the fierce objections of leading economists, in 1965, by a strong-willed decision, allowed the transfer of part of the profits of enterprises to incentive funds. That is, he allowed enterprises to turn a part of non-cash rubles into cash. This was done under the pretext of good intentions - they said that this should solve the problem of stimulating labor, interest labor collectives in fulfilling and overfulfilling plans. But it helped only thieves and corrupt officials. Millions have already begun to steal in the USSR.
The barrier between cash and non-cash money, which used to be tightly guarded, has weakened. The negative consequences were not long in coming. Unsecured money supply began to accumulate in the hands of the population, in the bins of secret millionaires and on the accounts of enterprises. The harmonious economic system of the country collapsed before our eyes.
As a result, by the beginning of the 1980s, the country came up with a shattered economy. The "foremen of perestroika" removed the last barriers between cash and non-cash money supply. This led to disaster. The economy collapsed.
First, we learned what “non-payments” are. Then they began to run in search of investments. After that, they began to put the population on loans, so that the population would buy at least something ...
It makes me want to say, “Oh! But if…” Yes, but history does not know the subjunctive mood.
The subjunctive mood (subjunctive, subjunctive, lat. modus conjunctivus or subjunctivus) is a number of special forms of the verbal mood of most Indo-European languages, expressing through a subjective relation a possible, conjectural, desirable or described action.
Achilles tendon of capitalist Atlanta
Nothing new under the moon:
What is, it was, will be forever.
And before the blood flowed like a river
And before a man cried ...
(Experienced Solomon's wisdom, or thoughts selected from Ecclesiastes).
All ethnic groups, evolving, successively went through the same stages of social formations: primitive, communal-clan, feudal, capitalist, and some peoples reached the collectivist stage (communist).
Primitive formation (primitive system). At this stage of social development, the process of the formation of man himself as a biosocial being took place. People used the simplest stone tools and subsisted mainly by gathering, hunting, and fishing. They led a nomadic lifestyle, united in small local and isolated groups under the leadership of the leaders, who became the strongest and most successful members of the group. All members of the group were close relatives. And, like relatives, they took care of each other.
Communal-clan (family-clan, tribal) formation. The family-clan group was based on kinship relations. Such groups included several generations of relatives descended from common ancestors, in some cases also strangers accepted into the community. The completeness of power in the tribal community belongs to society as a whole, the operational leadership is carried out by the leader - the sole head, as well as the council of elders. A strictly fixed system of labor, food distribution, and marriage and family relations developed in the family-clan community. All members of society occupy a clearly defined place in the community in accordance with their profession - hunters, farmers, warriors, etc. All members of the community are still the closest relatives. And the leader, as the head of such a large family, takes care of everyone.
Feudalism. The origin of feudalism is associated with the collapse of the communal-tribal system, the last stage of which was the so-called military democracy. The warriors of the leaders' squads received land with the peasants (especially during conquests) and thus became feudal lords. The tribal nobility also became feudal lords. Family ties between feudal lords and peasants are very blurred, but they are all still distant relatives.
The power of the king is interpreted as the power of the paternal:
“All the subjects of the king are his children... Monarchical power, and any power that any government has over a nation, has paternal government as its principle and basis; the king is thus the father of a large family” (Louis XVI).
That is, throughout the entire time of the existence of mankind in the times of all social formations up to capitalism, there was one and the same social code - all people are relatives, and the head of state (clan, tribe, feud) is the father of the people. And, like a father, the head assumed obligations to protect and take care of the people, as if they were his own children. And the people took upon themselves the obligation to protect the sovereign, as their father. Religion cultivated the same values - mutual assistance, mutual assistance, sacrifice, etc. For centuries, the primacy of public interests over personal ones was cultivated. And in order to stop internecine wars, the “divine” right of the sovereign to the throne was secured, and the rights of the courtiers to their shares of power and privileged position.
This went on for centuries, but with the advent of the era of capitalism, these unshakable foundations were shaken. Citizens began to appear in the state, gaining actual power at the expense of accumulated wealth. These citizens did not have the right to power by birth (they were the first capitalists, not nobles), but in fact they had this power and wealth. Moreover, these citizens clearly violated the age-old commandments of mutual assistance, mutual assistance and sacrifice - they brazenly profited at the expense of their own fellow tribesmen and claimed power.
Therefore, an ideology was urgently needed that would make it possible for such individuals to legalize the right to power, the right to enrich themselves to anyone who was not necessarily endowed with this right by birth. This ideology became liberalism.
Liberalism (lat. liberalis - free) is an ideology based on the absolute value of the individual, recognition of his inalienable rights and freedoms, advocating limiting state intervention in society, freedom of entrepreneurial activity, and the development of civil society. The emergence of liberalism in the late XVII - early XVIII century. associated with the works of J. Locke, S. L. Montesquieu and others (The latest political dictionary).
Or this:
Liberalism is a political ideology focused on ensuring individual freedom as a universal goal, upholding the priority of individual rights and freedoms over the interests of the state and society, an independent attitude to traditions and habits (International Law. Dictionary-Reference 2017).
Sounds absurd. How is it possible, if all citizens of society act only in accordance with their personal, selfish interests, then who will go to war - to die for those who will then live well? What about moral standards? One wants to shit right in the middle of the church or in the middle of the street, and the other wants to beat his wife. And the wife does not want to be beaten. How to be? How can this be done so that everyone would do whatever they want, and everyone would be happy at the same time?
But no way. It's just a hoax. Declaring the right for all, the liberals envisaged only their own personal interests. After all, in addition to the right and desire, it is also necessary to be able to do what you want. If you have the money to hire enough guards, then you can afford to shit in the middle of the church. And the other, without protection, the parishioners will simply kill.
After all, each of us has the right to have breakfast, lunch and dinner at the most expensive restaurant in your city. But not everyone has the opportunity to do so. Here is what Lenin said about this:
Liberalism is a system of political ideas, views and aspirations, characteristic of the ideologists of the industrial bourgeoisie of the era of its rise, defending, cowardly and inconsistently, political freedoms in the interests of “freedom to acquire” and exploit the proletariat (V. I. Lenin).
Now let's look again at the postulates of liberalism. If we discard the verbal husk, we get the following postulates:
- The right of a person to act in purely personal, selfish interests.
- Ignore the opinions of other people, ignore traditions and any moral norms.
– Act in your own interests, even if it harms other people and the world around you.
And so it begs to add a quote from A. Hitler here: "I free people from the burdensome restrictions of the mind, from the dirty and humiliating self-torture of a chimera called conscience and morality." But that was on a different occasion, we will discuss it another time.
Ideology is not tangible, but vitally very important thing. Ideology gives a point of support and life guidelines for each person. Ideology allows each person at any time to get an answer to any of the questions: “Is this good? Or bad?
And Alexander Matrosov, having answered this question for himself, closes the machine-gun embrasure with his chest. Ivan Susanin, having answered this question for himself, leads the Poles into the swamp. For centuries in Rus', houses were not closed and there was no police, because everyone could answer for himself the question: “Is stealing good or bad?”
Ideology, introducing uniform norms of morality for all, binds individual people into a single whole. And such a people is ready, in case of danger, to stand up in defense of the Fatherland or perform labor feats. As they say, in such a state, a pure girl can go through the whole country without fear of anything.
But liberalism does not bind people together. Liberalism divides all citizens. For example, liberal scientists are very afraid to share their ideas with colleagues. They keep their ideas secret until they patent them. It is not that they are not ready to share their ideas with their students, they are afraid to have students themselves - so that these students do not steal their ideas (after all, there are no moral standards). Therefore, under capitalism, even the very concept of a scientific school is absent.
Liberalism consistently destroys all norms of morality, all moral guidelines. Having lost its vital guidelines, a society infected with liberalism will perish.
If a state infected with liberalism is subjected to external aggression and enemy troops enter the territory of such a state, then it will inevitably suffer defeat. None of the liberals will come out to defend the fatherland. This is how the Roman Empire (with which the United States identifies itself) perished. Likewise, having become infected with liberalism and rejecting all norms of morality, the Roman Empire collapsed almost 1 years ago. None of the enemies could defeat Rome. The Roman Empire withstood hundreds of wars and spread over half of the world known at that time.
In the beginning, the Roman army consisted exclusively of the best (noble) sons of the Roman Empire. And this army did not know defeat. At sunset, the Roman army was already an army of mercenaries. The citizens of the Roman Empire simply did not want to die defending the empire's borders. And they didn’t want to serve, because it was much more pleasant to bask under the warm sun of Italy.
Aristotle (ancient Roman philosopher), along with Plato, is a block of philosophy and, in fact, the founding father of all Western civilization. It was the book "Politics" by Aristotle that gave rise to a huge layer of various literature, became the beginning of that avalanche of work of thought, thanks to which today's Western civilization is just that. So, Aristotle formulated the postulate of a free citizen:
“Every man should be free and have three slaves” (Aristotle).
Both funny and sad at the same time. The Roman Empire collapsed from within. Having lost a common ideology, the empire first slipped into a struggle for power between some aristocrats with each other. Then, to strengthen the arguments, some aristocrats began to remove the legions from guarding the frontiers and brought these legions into Rome. The legions at that time were a kind of prototype of modern PMCs, because the legions at that time were simply staffed by mercenaries. And the legions (or PMCs) protected the interests of the one who paid.
Ordinary citizens of the empire, having lost the norms of morality, plunged into sensual and carnal pleasures. Moral norms have disappeared, and along with them the guidelines have disappeared - what is good and what is bad. Civil wars began, with the participation of PMCs. Through the borders, on which there were no longer border troops, hordes of German barbarians poured. The barbarians first captured and plundered the outskirts, and then Rome fell.
To avoid destruction, the modern state, struck by liberalism, must make every effort to eliminate all armies in all other countries. And to maintain their army in such menacing proportions that other states were afraid to even think about attacking Atlanta. Atlanta on clay feet.
In the US ring against the Russian Federation
"Hey Moska! know that she is strong that she barks at the Elephant!
Deciding to dismantle the USSR, Andropov and his team liquidated the USSR GK monopoly. And the GC-monopoly of the USSR was at that time the only equivalent opponent in the world of the CC-monopoly from the USA. The reformers of the USSR split the mighty GK-monopoly into millions of fragments - millions of entrepreneurs. Having inspired them with bright dreams of future prosperity, they sent them to fight with each other, so that the most nimble one, having absorbed most of his kind, would give rise to a new, already private GK monopoly. In addition, the reformers decided to add intrigue and launched megalodon (GK monopoly from the USA) to aquarium fish.
Megalodon (Carcharocles megalodon, "big tooth") is the largest predatory shark in the history of the Earth. The body length of the shark, according to scientists, was 30 meters. For comparison, the great white shark can theoretically reach seven meters in length.
In 1986, the USSR was at the same stage of development as the United States. These states went head to head. The number of scientists, GDP of states, armaments, advances in robotics, computerization, even population are almost identical.
The intention of the reformers, who decided to push the USSR back 180 years, is absolutely incomprehensible. After all, the United States was at the free market stage around 1800. Having eliminated the ministries and trusts, destroyed the entire system of administration and broken the chains of business ties, the reformers proposed to the USSR that they go all the way from individual entrepreneurs to the GK monopoly. At the same time, apparently, to make it more interesting, they opened wide all the borders. Let me remind you that during the period of market capitalism, all countries were protected by protective duties in order to protect their domestic market from attacks by foreign monopolies.
In other words, Russia decided to fight the United States not on the “battlefield”, but on the “field of the economy”. And Russia has put Russian fighters in the economic ring in the form of a disorganized crowd of 1800-style aspiring businessmen. The United States, on the other hand, put up monolithic legions of an industrial and financial megamonopoly, which by that time had swallowed up all of the United States, almost all of Europe, and about half of the world.
In my opinion, there is no intrigue here. On the battlefield called "capitalism" the US will swallow Russia and not even choke. It is rather naive to count on the fact that the United States will not absorb the most resource-rich country in the world.
It turns out that Russia has no future in a world built according to the rules of capitalism. What then to do?
This means that Russia needs a different path. Tao socialism and Tao communism. With an effective management system - meritocracy.
By the way, by choosing this path, Russia will find a powerful ally in the face of China. Today China is not an ally. Because Russia is an underdeveloped capitalist country, and China is a socialist Atlas, straightening its shoulders. Today our countries are temporary companions.
Russia at a crossroads
Russia, of course, is at a crossroads. But Russia is a horse, not a rider. And the rider (hero) is the leader of Russia, its president. And the decision is not to be made by the horse, but by the president:
“If you go to the right, you will save yourself, you will destroy Russia,
you go to the left - you will save Russia, you will destroy yourself,
if you go straight, you will find glory (in the legends of your descendants), but you will destroy yourself and Russia.”
What will he choose?
Information