Alternative opposition: Russia needs its own "hawks" !?

21
Alternative opposition: Russia needs its own "hawks" !?


I postponed the writing of this publication for a day, I wanted to think, is it worth it ..? After all, to say that everything is so bad today in Russia and its foreign policy is not true, but Vladimir Yurtaev’s article “Russia. No alternative fight"Showed what it is worth. All story Russian people and its statehood is based on the struggle for the right to exist, live and develop freely. Even the Americans partially showed and recognized this, namely in that short period of history, when we were allies, a very interesting chronicle through the eyes of the Americans 40's:



But the West has since become radically different, or simply removed the mask, and Russia is no longer the USSR. Russia's current political elite, due to its defeat in the Cold War and the collapse of the 90, is divided, as it were, conditionally on the 2 class. And I will pay your attention, shares, the main thing publicly and conditionally. The first class, actually ruling, - power. And second class - opposition. And the latter, for some reason, is necessarily liberal in form and spirit. In any case, such a picture develops in the information field. Like, damn Putin's dictatorial power and poor disadvantaged liberal opposition ... Of course, there are nationalists and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. In general, the duty "system" opposition. But nationalists, in my personal subjective opinion, will not be able to implement the concept of building a new Russian world. There are many reasons, so as not to go into the discussions, and to go into the jungle, everything is simple and understandable set forth here:

TOP-10 national ideas for Russia

As for the Russian communists. Here opinions differ. On the one hand, and from the point of view of political science, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation is ideally suited for the role of such a conservative party, a la "republican" for Russia. Which will periodically change the moderate and at the same time podnadoevshuyu and bureaucratic United Russia. But, as the events of the Swamp December 2011, and the whole of 2011, showed, not everything is so smooth in the CPRF. Sergey Kurginyan explains this very popular, accessible and a little academic.



It's a pity. It is precisely today that Russia lacks another political force that will stand on the principles of even greater patriotism, even greater statehood, and even greater unscrupulousness. We are not talking a bit about the bipolar system in the political model and the system of Russia, but we are talking about a normal, natural position / opposition for the Russian state, a political force that will ask new accents and tasks, and, of course, questions to the current government. If you believe all the "experts" and political scientists there, then allegedly such attempts took place in the Russian modern political life. It seems that the “Fair Russia” should have taken the baton, but something didn’t work, or it wasn’t originally intended to do that. Therefore, we will not guess.

So what should be the other opposition?

Strangely enough, it should also oppose the Putin regime, but constructively, efficiently and fruitfully. First of all, it should meet the aspirations of that part of a large people who today have to vote for United Russia or the Communist Party of the Russian Federation only because they do not let liberals, yesterday’s German, short-sighted nationalists in a multinational country with millions of Russians abroad and other belolentochnikov with American flags. In other words, why many people should begin their speech at anti-orange rallies and problem minutes for the country with the words: “I myself am not satisfied with the policy of the United Russia party, and I have complaints about them, but today, when the Kremlin has an enemy , it stands with white ribbons ... ”I immediately have a question, or maybe it is easier to appeal to that force and choose the force that simply will not allow such a“ belolentochnaya ”gathering at the Kremlin? Understand what you want. For those who have thoughts about acceleration and repression, I will say that I had in mind something else. This is not an admission of the ideological and economic basis for the protest))) Is that easier?

Who is this other opposition? If we take it as a basis, I don’t like the word “electorate”, people who are nostalgic and justifiably nostalgic for the USSR, as well as patriots, workers, people of small business, eager for order. It is all the same, somehow heterogeneous ... How can they formulate a political agenda, if not everyone likes the USSR, others like a market economy, and the third still something? As you can see, "monoideology" can slip a little. From this follows another question: “What emphasis should put the other opposition on the political agenda?”

Definitely no one will be against:

1. State capitalism in the main sectors of the economy
2. State planning of the economy (five-year, three-year, seven-year plan, etc.). Today the world comes to this. The market cannot judge anything.
3. Socialism in the economic life of society (arrange small business, trade unions, etc.)
4. Ideology. Fidelity to the principles of building Russian statehood: the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union. Postulates: Unity, Fatherland, Faith.

This is not enough for the national idea of ​​Russia, but more than enough for the ideological platform of supporters and improving the situation, and adequate responses for the challenges of modern Russia.

And then what place is “United Russia”?

This will be the maximum that a liberal during the Sabbath can afford: “I, of course, have many claims to United Russia, but today I can return the Soviets, Russian imperialism, orthodoxy to the Kremlin, I’ll have to vote for United Russia.” We "belolentochnikam" will not leave a choice. Why do we have to defend all the time? They held a creative rally, and we should leave all the cases, run to Poklonnaya to be considered with the majority with us, to prove that there is also our opinion ?!

How to achieve this? Of course, if we wake up tomorrow, or rather you have already woken up and are reading this in the morning, decide to create a party based on similar and similar principles, then we will still have to wait for complete pshyk ... And not because the “evil” Putin will not allow electoral field, and not because there is no money for the promotion of the party, although it is very important, but money did not help Prokhorov. And because in the country there are a lot of political parties of any orientation, and even the one that you firmly chose in the morning today, outlining its outlines. That question of cooperation, reunification with similar parties and platforms will drag on for years, get involved in political trading, and logically drown ..

What to do? Movement from below, only movement from below ... You can call it conditionally network, you can take the experience of the network structure, don't be scared - the “Muslim Brotherhood” is when not the parties come to power, but ideological forces, and only then these forces form the parties themselves ... Then the people will not need to search for theirs from 150 parties.

You can call yourself whatever you like: “Orthodox Brothers”, “For the Soviet Union”, “Sons of the Patronymic”, the main principles: movement from below, economic and social mutual assistance to each other on the ground, mercy to each other and, of course, the Network.

Is there a base for this? Variants of the sea: the Cossacks, warriors, but at least a new pioneer ... By the way, who likes Kurginyan, this is the "essence of time". The main thing is that initially it is not perceived as sham, symbolic and ritual. Otherwise, why then ...?


Tribute to tradition, ritual or something more?



And this is not an intelligent tea party at a round table ... Do not confuse with this. If we want to change something, we all have a lot of work to do. Recently, I was invited to one interesting event among the Russian Cossacks in Ukraine, be sure to post here a report.
21 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. YARY
    +6
    17 January 2013 07: 47
    Oh and needed!
    But those who "fly" and not those who grab them.
    Only here are few of these.
    1. +2
      17 January 2013 08: 45
      Quote: Ardent
      Oh and needed!
      But why do we need this? The author did not answer the most important question, Why are we always like in that song ... We will destroy to the ground, and then ... Are you tired of destroying? That's the strength of the current government, which many do not support, especially in the regions .... Power has given the majority at least some kind of economic background .. And now, destroying began to mean destroying one's own ...
      The modern opposition can only achieve and win something when it guarantees that those crumbs that are accumulated by the so-called middle class will not disappear in perestroika ... We have already lost everything for ideas and, as it turned out, for the sake of the new rich ....
      Any revolution, any perestroika always ended in the end with a period of tightening the screws, a period of sharp increase in reaction ... The opposition should, in my opinion, come out with calls not to ruin everything, but to remove the glaring difference in the standard of living of the poor and rich ...
      1. Nevsky
        +1
        17 January 2013 08: 53
        Somewhere there are the words revolution, perestroika, ruin? What kind of substitution of concepts? Do you know the concept of a change of power in fact on the same electoral field ?!
      2. donchepano
        0
        17 January 2013 09: 07
        Quote: domokl
        But why do we need that? The author did not answer the most important question-Why are we always like in that song ..



        Enemies around
      3. FID
        +1
        17 January 2013 10: 35
        Quote: domokl
        Power has given the majority at least some kind of economic background to life .. And now, to destroy has become to destroy its ...

        Excuse me, what economic background of life do you mean? Could you clarify? And what are we going to destroy our own? I have neither a factory nor a well, moreover, nowadays there are calls for a "normalization" of the labor market (an increase in unemployment and an increase in labor mobility). And how to remove the glaring difference in the standard of living? Who among the wealthy would voluntarily agree to reduce this difference?
        1. 0
          17 January 2013 11: 19
          Quote: SSI
          Excuse me, what economic background of life do you mean? Is it possible to clarify?
          Why not ... You can ... You have no factories or factories .. And your car is older ... But have you heard much about the Maybach or the Hammers being burnt in the courtyards? That the Nazis marked the odigarch? That the bank some kind of blew up?
          No .. Just those who have a car under the window, bought on credit, who do not have security, who have an apartment in a prestigious and, therefore, unprotected area, will suffer ... You should not make a surprised face just because it is not corresponds to your views .. However, in life it happens exactly what the most unprotected suffer. A large business is perfectly protected and it would be a crime to push those who have nothing to displease to destroy property ..
          And the most unpleasant thing is that you understand this, but push pseudo-patriotically ...
          1. FID
            +1
            17 January 2013 11: 42
            Quote: domokl
            And the most unpleasant thing is that you understand this, but push pseudo-patriotically ..

            Yes, yes .. Pseudo-patriotic push .. And what is the economic background? That I don’t have a car? Or is it that I live on the outskirts of Moscow and am afraid to lose it? And how will dissatisfied ruin what I do not have? I am not a supporter of forceful methods of resolving such issues, but do not you think that this current disaster contributes to the stratification of society and pushes dissatisfied people to ruin, etc. And the most unpleasant thing is that you understand this ....
      4. YARY
        +2
        17 January 2013 10: 50
        This is the strength of the current government, which many do not support, especially in the regions .... Power has given the majority at least some kind of economic background .. And now, to destroy has become to destroy your own ...


        Alexander Was that sarcasm right now?

        Well, about the "opposition" - a masterpiece of course.
        There is one OPPOSITION of power-the Russian people! On the opinion of which they spit from 1989 until now!
        1. +1
          17 January 2013 11: 22
          Quote: Ardent
          There is one OPPOSITION of power-the Russian people!
          ... Sarcasm is not sarcasm, but ... The opinion of the people is really of little interest to anyone (in other things, it has never been otherwise in Russia). But .... If you look carefully, the people also take power over the drum .. Muscovites take the Kremlin as a separate state, the rest of Moscow also perceive ...
          For us, the best power is one that does not prevent us from living ... laughing
      5. 0
        17 January 2013 11: 56
        Quote: domokl
        Oh and needed!
        But why do we need this? The author did not answer the most important question, Why are we always like in that song ... We will destroy to the ground, and then ... Are you tired of destroying? That's the strength of the current government, which many do not support, especially in the regions .... Power has given the majority at least some kind of economic background .. And now, destroying began to mean destroying one's own ...

        It is interesting what economic background of life and what power and to which majority. complete nonsense. Then they will probably make noise at rallies, get batons on the back, sniff chloroacetophenone and give the looted wealth to the authorities. No pipes, no one gives up power like that. They take power, but in what way the question is different. Nobody wants blood, only parliamentary remains, but not supported by the mass protests of the working people, it will fade. The Communist Party, perhaps the RSDLP will be able to convince people to vote for them, and most importantly, take control of the surplus so that there are no fraud. Then something happens.
      6. dmb
        +1
        17 January 2013 13: 31
        I would not want to remind a hackneyed phrase about good intentions and the road to one not too pleasant place. Ask even the most notorious marginal if he wants a change in the existing order to happen without violence, and he (if he is not registered with a mental hospital) will certainly say yes. Moreover, he will absolutely not dissemble. For why would he need violence if he achieved his peacefully. so with regard to destruction and blood, it’s more likely to one whose interests suffer as a result of a change in the social system. In this case, those gentlemen who profit from public property will suffer in the first place. And as you yourself understand, they will not give her up without blood.
  2. +4
    17 January 2013 07: 59
    Movement from below, only movement from below ... You can call it conditionally network, you can take the experience of the network structure, don't be scared - the “Muslim Brotherhood” is when not the parties come to power, but ideological forces, and only then these forces form the parties themselves ... Then the people will not need to search for theirs from 150 parties.

    1. State capitalism in the main sectors of the economy
    2. State planning of the economy (five-year, three-year, seven-year plan, etc.). Today the world comes to this. The market cannot judge anything.
    3. Socialism in the economic life of society (arrange small business, trade unions, etc.)
    4. Ideology. Fidelity to the principles of building Russian statehood: the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union. Postulates: Unity, Fatherland, Faith.

    I'm just for, with both hands. The movement can be called "Third Power" or "Third Rome". If only BOLTALOGY moved further.
    1. +2
      17 January 2013 08: 45
      Greetings Tatarus, hi
      It is impossible not to agree with these four points, but - to know what Mr. Nevsky himself is breathing. To speak beautifully to the needs of those who yearn for a "strong hand" (although - what other strong hand do you need, colleagues?) And "the oppressed, not seeing the light of the white, hungry and disenfranchised" is not such a daunting task. There is the same one mentioned in the article Prokhorov, how beautifully he speaks!
      Maybe I'm too suspicious, but somehow I don't really believe in the "high impulses of the soul" of Mr. NevsKAG.
      It seems that we are being offered another white-tape "minced meat" in a beautiful wrapper.
      1. Nevsky
        0
        17 January 2013 08: 56
        Prokhorov was mentioned as an elementary example - that money in politics and in victory, by no means always decide everything, only in this context. You saw some kind of sympathy for him, which caused me only a smile and bewilderment.?! wassat
        1. -1
          17 January 2013 09: 42
          Quote: esaul
          Prokhorov, as a beautiful verb!

          Quote: Nevsky
          You saw some kind of sympathy for him

          Maybe you saw something that I did not lay in the subtext?
          Quote: Nevsky
          what caused me only a smile and bewilderment.?!

          You have to smile - like that laughing or go to the dentist.
    2. +1
      17 January 2013 08: 54
      Quote: Tatarus

      1. State capitalism in the main sectors of the economy
      2. State planning of the economy (five-year, three-year, seven-year plan, etc.). Today the world comes to this. The market cannot judge anything.
      3. Socialism in the economic life of society (arrange small business, trade unions, etc.)
      4. Ideology. Fidelity to the principles of building Russian statehood: the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union. Postulates: Unity, Fatherland, Faith
      Absolutely contradictory points ... You put the struggle in the future in the program ... The feeling is that we don’t want to read the lessons of history ...
      The revolution and the subsequent struggle for power always casts the country many decades back ... which is what competing countries need ...
      1. +3
        17 January 2013 10: 12
        In principle, there is nothing contradictory.
        Quote: domokl
        1. State capitalism in the main sectors of the economy

        It depends on how it is understood. The strategic sectors of the economy belong to the state, the state is all of us, that is, to the people. They work for everyone, not a bunch of oligarchs. The first stage is nationalization.
        Quote: domokl
        2. State planning of the economy (five-year, three-year, seven-year plan, etc.). Today the world comes to this. The market cannot judge anything

        The same true statement. Now the Duma is in the former building of the State Planning Commission. So, stage two, disperse the Duma and create a state plan.
        Quote: domokl
        3. Socialism in the economic life of society (arrange small business, trade unions, etc.)

        Socialism does not reject honest private business, but welcomes it. Socialism rejects the oligarchy, crooks from business and predatory loan interest.
        Quote: domokl
        4. Ideology. Fidelity to the principles of building Russian statehood: the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union. Postulates: Unity, Fatherland, Faith

        One can agree with everything, except betting on religion. This cannot be done. Religious ideology should be separated from the state. In this matter, you can go the way of formulating the goals and objectives of the state, as well as formulating a moral code for a resident of the Great Russian Power.
        1. +1
          17 January 2013 14: 33
          Quote: baltika-18
          One can agree with everything, except betting on religion. This cannot be done. Religious ideology should be separated from the state. In this matter, you can go the way of formulating the goals and objectives of the state, as well as formulating a moral code for a resident of the Great Russian Power.


          The spiritual values ​​of all world religions are almost the same. Goals too. The ways to achieve it vary. And the "moral and ethical code of the inhabitant of the Great Russian state" cannot be created without a religious basis. Even Stalin returned to his roots and recognized the historic feat of the church. And the last to keep the oath to the sovereign were the fighters of the Wild Division (Muslims). The atheist is the most religious person on earth. He 100% believes that there is no God, the rest doubt - that means they are not confident believers.
    3. 0
      17 January 2013 11: 03
      Quote: Tatarus

      1. State capitalism in the main sectors of the economy
      2. State planning of the economy (five-year, three-year, seven-year plan, etc.). Today the world comes to this. The market cannot judge anything.
      3. Socialism in the economic life of society (arrange small business, trade unions, etc.)

      Sorry, but how to implement all this? What again, everything to the ground we destroy? Not tired of stepping on the same rake?
      We need a systematic and gradual evolution of economic institutions and relations, and the progressive implementation of social blocks and programs.
      In general, the most optimal option is a mixed economy and mixed forms of ownership, but controlled or accountable to the state. State capitalism is the road to nowhere and we, by the way, lived with him. Real socialism is possible only with full robotization and automation of all industries, in other cases either a dictatorship, or, as a rule, a stratification of society. This is such a vinaigrette. We have already passed the leveling and there is sad experience working only on the shaft, i.e. to the warehouse, not to the consumer.
      1. 0
        17 January 2013 14: 36
        What are your suggestions? I think these items should be binding for a limited period of 10 years. Then the referendum is popular. Well, like a stone at a crossroads.
        1. 0
          17 January 2013 19: 46
          I think we need to wait another 4 years and 25 years allotted for restoration after the change of formations will turn out (centuries-old world statistics indicate that 25 years are necessary for this) and then, if necessary, we will make a decision. Let Russia recover at least once, and then it will become clear what to do next. Maybe after this period no one in Russia will want to change anything anymore.
  3. -1
    17 January 2013 08: 00
    The guys cheerfully move to Bald Mountain to perform the traditional ritual of catching witches. The latter arrive on panicles and Lexuses.
    After burning a scarecrow of communism and drinking the blood of an innocently murdered liberal, both sides diverged very pleased with themselves.
    A photo of Kurginyan is attached to the report.
  4. admirer
    0
    17 January 2013 08: 04
    I agree that it is ripe, in principle, Ragozin in such positions, but will not pull, more than populism.
    1. donchepano
      +1
      17 January 2013 09: 08
      Quote: admirer
      in principle, Ragozin in such positions, but will not pull, more populism.



      Puffy, puffy he is.
      A chubby people will do nothing
      1. 0
        17 January 2013 14: 37
        Quote: donchepano
        Puffy, puffy he is.
        A chubby people will do nothing


        Urgent me to the LEADERS, I'm thin. And faster until worms are not deduced. laughing
  5. +3
    17 January 2013 08: 14
    1. State capitalism in the main sectors of the economy
    2. State economic planning (five-year, three-year, seven-year periods, etc.)

    Always adhered to these principles in the economy.
    In addition, state planning will exclude the economic policy of loan interest, or, well, reduce it.
    1. -1
      17 January 2013 08: 56
      Quote: Ustas
      In addition, state planning will exclude the economic policy of loan interest, or, well, reduce it.
      Planning will practically devour small and medium-sized businesses ... We will receive the Soviet ministry, only the minister will be the owner of the monopolist corporation ... wink
      1. 0
        17 January 2013 10: 27
        Quote: domokl
        Planning will practically devour small and medium-sized businesses ..

        You are wrong. There are fundamentally new planning schemes in which small and medium-sized businesses can rise and develop very successfully if they listen to the opinion of the state. As an entrepreneur, you probably would have arranged an interest-free loan for the development or organization of a project, or a loan at 1-2% per annum to increase working capital. Money should cease to be a means of accumulation, they need to return the original function of a means of payment, payment equivalent. Accumulation at the state level can and should only be in material form: resources.
      2. Cheloveck
        +1
        17 January 2013 11: 39
        Quote: domokl
        Planning will practically gobble up small and medium-sized businesses ...
        Planning planning strife. In the same former "socialist countries" small business got along well with the planned economy, as, incidentally, in the USSR before Khrushchev liquidated the cooperative enterprises in the late 50s.
        1. +2
          17 January 2013 12: 05
          Quote: Cheloveck
          Planning for planning is different.

          In Soviet times, in the last period, the planning function was actually replaced by the distribution function. This is a strategic mistake.
      3. 0
        17 January 2013 14: 42
        The state monopolies will be: defense industry, energy, space, and others, which ensure the security of key areas. Everything else is private traders. Moreover, monopoly is only a mandatory control of 60% of the shares by the state. In private traders to limit the state share of 20%
    2. 0
      17 January 2013 10: 14
      Quote: Ustas
      In addition, government planning will exclude the economic policy of loan interest,

      Yes, I support.
  6. 0
    17 January 2013 08: 22
    ..... Alternative Opposition: Russia needs its hawks!? ....

    The pro-Russian opposition is only needed, and the fact that she ran around the "Swamp" with white ribbons was not an opposition, and certainly not a pro-Russian one.
  7. 0
    17 January 2013 08: 27
    How popular it is, however, to find fault with ep, but really it is the most effective and popular force so far, all its criticism boils down to the fact that they are bad because they are there and I'm here, why on earth will competitors create themselves? Yes, this is a club of officials, but at the same time, the Duma adopts laws for life and does not engage in polemics and demagogy like all nineties
  8. fenix57
    +4
    17 January 2013 08: 36
    Quote: Bulls.
    the fact that she ran around the "Swamp" with white ribbons was not an opposition and certainly not a pro-Russian one.

    I support. All these clowns work on the order of star-striped and their ilk. hi
    1. +1
      17 January 2013 14: 45
      Quote: fenix57
      by order of star-striped


      Yes, these are not stars - these are goals.
      These are not stripes - these are worms, that is, worms.

      Quote: fenix57
      All these clowns work


      This is not work - this is the game WORMSWAR (war of worms)
  9. CCA
    CCA
    +1
    17 January 2013 08: 37
    The opposition to that is she and the opposition, that there should be an alternative platform ... It's like capitalism - communism in their extreme manifestations, and all that is now in the whole world is "dissenting from the side" on the basis of the distribution of power and resources ... all the contradictions in the concepts of the opposition ... How can the platform of destruction of one's own state and the destruction of the nation be considered an opposition ... if such an "opposition" comes to power, it will have to be called an occupation ...
  10. +1
    17 January 2013 08: 38
    What kind of fantasies? What movement from the bottom is the movement of small shopkeepers in support of state capitalists? A hedgehog and snake mix. In our country, in the sphere of power is not capitalism, but feudalism. The overlord sets up to feed his people. Grants them with earth, people and powers. In response, vassals are required to act on the orders of the suzerain.
    In economics, yes, state capitalism. But again, with a good share of feudalism. The leadership is not professionals, but loyal to the power of grayness.
    And the author wants the small business (the young bourgeoisie) workers (the proletariat oppressed by the capitalist) to rally in support of the current state of affairs? Two classes with initially opposing interests should unite and observe the interest of the third class (feudal bureaucracy, bureaucracy), which in essence is their enemy. The author clearly does not understand something.
    1. Nevsky
      0
      17 January 2013 08: 51
      Why fantasies, why misunderstandings, why support incumbent officials? Someone said that this is another youth wing of United Russia? Someone refuted the principle that when the political force changes, the officials of the previous regime remain in place? You stuck a buzzword here historical feudalism, which is a consequence of the 90s, I’m talking in an article about the state holder of resources in the country, and not the oligarchs-officials ... All is mixed up!
      1. 0
        17 January 2013 12: 09
        Quote: Nevsky
        Why fantasy

        Read your article calmly and carefully. Then re-read my comment. In my opinion, everything is connected and does not cause much bewilderment, which appears in your post on my comment.
        The meaning of your phrase is not clear:
        Quote: Nevsky
        Someone refuted the principle that when a political force changes, the officials of the previous regime remain in place?

        Please explain.


        And this:
        Quote: Nevsky
        You have stuck here the fashionable word historical feudalism, which is a consequence of the 90's, but I’m talking about the state resource holder in the country, and not the oligarchs-officials ...
        in general a phrase, the meaning of which is very "deeply hidden", at least for me. Here you just "mixed everything"
        What does it mean: "the buzzword is historicalfeudalism which is a consequence of the 90s "?? Buzzword is a consequence?"
        Who is it; "state holder of resources in the country"? Isn't this a "bureaucratic oligarch" now?
        The semantic absurdities in your article are supplemented by not competent construction of sentences in your post.
  11. andsavichev2012
    +3
    17 January 2013 08: 45
    I agree with the author. Unfortunately, the former Komsyuk Mironov turned out to be a miserable and insignificant person. The only social. party in the country fell apart, but comrade Mironov managed to grab his.
  12. vladsolo56
    +1
    17 January 2013 11: 40
    You can look into the very distant past of mankind, once in order to survive, a person united in a community, even then our ancestors understood that it was much easier to survive together. Now, in the age of private property, everyone is for himself. the person is essentially on this idea (I’m not going to kill mine) went crazy. After all, everyone will agree that 90% of the crimes of citizens and governments occur precisely on the basis of monetary relations. A person is infected with the virus of private property and its increase in any way, it all depends on the amount of money. 99,9% of people will agree to a crime for the greatest benefit. Here is the ideology of capitalism, and everything else that is affirmed about it is demagogy and propaganda for suckers.
  13. vedruss
    0
    17 January 2013 12: 43
    The opposition should propose a path and development options and not start a fight with ribbons on the forehead.
    It’s not clear from the bottom how to start?
    have you not forgotten that "the dark forces are viciously oppressing us"?
    "Unity, Fatherland, Faith."
    - Faith (the church) has discredited itself.
    Remains only Unity of the People, Great Fatherland. and Preservation of culture.
    My personal opinion, as you understand.
    Without culture, nowhere. Values, this is the main indicator of who is with us and who is against.
    Without culture, there is no people; culture is a way of life and the rules of life.
    other nations come to us and we must determine the rules. This is our land and our rules. May they respect our values.
    It is necessary to clearly declare Our values. Type in capital letters in each passport and at each customs office in all languages. And write in the constitution.

    And how else to determine where ours, and where not ours?
    Whoever is a multiculturalist, cosmopolitan, liberal or simply "gay" is not with us.
    who believes that our homeland is Europe there.
    Our overseas "partners" want to destroy our culture and the culture-bearers themselves, ourselves.
    Cultural Unity of the People in the Fatherland.
    1 goal is the path to the Russian billion. what leads to this is what we need, what does not lead unnecessarily.
    Landmarks are visible.
    It remains to understand how this is easier to do ...
  14. 0
    17 January 2013 13: 26
    The first class, the ruling one, is power. And the second class is the opposition. This is not opposition, but a laughing stock. Even Depardieu, far from the political struggle, showed that the opposition has no program.
    Fidelity to the principles of building Russian statehood: the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union. Postulates: Unity, Fatherland, Faith. The Soviet Union and Faith are incompatible concepts. Of course, if God is not replaced by Lenin.
    Putin allegedly will not let go on his electoral field, and not because there is no money to promote the party, although it is very important, but money did not help Prokhorov. Doesn’t it seem to readers that Prokhorov is a Kremlin project?
    You can call it conditionally networked, you can take the experience of a network structure, just don’t be scared - “Muslim brothers”, this is when not parties come to power, but ideological forces, and only then these forces form the parties themselves ... I don’t understand what the "Muslim brothers" have to do with it? Let them fear the "Christian brothers", we have ultra enough.
    You can call yourself anything you like: "Orthodox brothers", "For the Soviet Union", Not as you like, there is a difference, do not you see?
  15. wax
    0
    17 January 2013 13: 28
    You cannot cross a bull and a crocodile. Also, capitalism and socialism cannot be combined in one bottle.
    1. 0
      17 January 2013 14: 48
      Quote: Wax
      You cannot cross a bull and a crocodile.


      Our scientists crossed the Nuthatch (bird) and Vykhuhol (not a bird).
      The creep crawled out and immediately died, and the Pohuhol inside remained to him and so stable ... laughing