Military Review

The quiet joys of a very leisurely policy

57
The recipes of the country's happiness, no matter how discussed on our website, always inevitably run into a clear watershed. He is called Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation.




Opinions are diametrically different, which is not surprising. Without giving any assessments, I want, because of my abilities, to look at the problem from the other side. Maybe find a compromise?

So, a little political science. All the tsars-priests, presidents, commissars and other rulers repeat the simple evolutionary cycle of “revolutionary” - “stabilizer” - “builder”. The revolutionary breaks the old social and social framework that prevent the country from developing. An example of a revolutionary - Boris Yeltsin.

The stabilizer stops the revolution until the liberated people in revolutionary frenzy destroyed the country itself. Thermidorism is not an invention of the French who were horrified by the blood, but tough historical need. This need in Russia is embodied by Putin Vladimir Vladimirovich.

The builder develops new models of society, economics, and politics. According to historical logic, Medvedev Dmitry Anatolyevich could become a builder. But did not. Not because there is nothing to build, but, apparently, because of the inability of a systematic and integrated approach to management.

The circle is closed. The authorities began the cycle “stabilizer” - “stabilizer”, which does not bode well. For problems are accumulated, their resolution requires either decisive development, which redesigns all pits and garbage heaps of public problems into new foundations and roads, or, after a not very long historical cycle, will again have to cause a revolutionary bulldozer.

And because of this state of affairs, I personally find it extremely unwise to consider repressive mechanisms to be the only cure for Russian ills. It is impossible to deny them, without repression, the country is slipping into anarchy, but then what? In order for a country to develop, it is necessary to have integrated management on the basis of a well-thought-out strategy, and this commissioner with Nagan cannot solve this problem. Although, of course, the simplicity of this approach appeals to many.

Next, a little elite theory. King, as you know, plays retinue. Retinue, in turn, is also played, and often even more energetic than the king himself. And in this situation, even though you are Ivan the Terrible, even though the dragon is GuGu, you can’t manage to drive out the servants to the frost. Especially in the case when all the servants are assigned in order for you not to do something bad in the heat of something. In this embodiment, there are several simple ways to get rid of annoying courtiers, and at the same time from their patrons. The easiest way is called genocide. He has two problems - international isolation and the impossibility of stopping the process. Yes, and it is used only in the case of retaining personal power, which in the current situation is not very relevant, because the fruits of such a power are almost impossible to use.

The second option is a revolution. However, she is known to devour her parents regardless of their desires. In addition, in modern Russia there are no prerequisites for any revolution, with the exception of the liberal-democratic one. But here the form of holding on to conquests is again complementary to genocide in some kind of “one-democratic” form.

The third option we are seeing now. This is an evolutionary change. They are, of course, disgusted with the Russian spirit, for they are very unhurried and do without hanging dissenters by the neck at the gates of a manor house. But the reality is that the elites just will not leave. Either destroy them, or weaken them, letting them grow new. And the second takes time and is completely invisible to society.

And a little political economy, where are we without it. Sorry for Marxism, but the modern economy is closer to politics than any other science. So, for the normal development of the country as an economic power, it must be integrated into various institutions of world trade and world production. Of course, these institutions are far from a social poorhouse, and often there are more problems from them than benefits — the WTO, for example. But when you come to the market as a meat seller, no one asks you whether you will sell meat in the meat line or for you to look for a place among the milkmen. Stand up, look around, get your customers, and then negotiate.

Why do we need these world trade institutions? Without them, somehow easier, like. But it is now. The huge amount of problems that was triggered by Russia's entry into the WTO is offset by the mere fact of having a place in the market. And when the world smells fried (and the smell is already distinct), we have a chance to realize all our advantages. This chance is also without integration into the world trading system, but this is a breakthrough “from zero”, from the position of an outsider. Which of these is simpler, I cannot seriously argue in connection with the scarcity of economic knowledge, but on the whole it is inevitable to enter the market, although it is possible to argue endlessly about the forms and methods. Moreover, the money of oligarchs through international structures is much easier to control. Perhaps, in fact, this is the only option for such control.

And finally, about Putin V.V.
First, he managed, if not to get rid of unfriendly courtiers, then to put them in place. And the question of their weakening is under special control. And the fact that these guys are not trampling on Siberian expanses is quite understandable from the point of view of court logic. The enemy must be close, in front of his eyes, so that he cannot hide and weave intrigue. Intelligence is taught that way.

Secondly, the dynamics of evolutionary development seems to be quite reasonable. The speed of individual processes can be discussed, but the development process is the right one. I wonder how Putin has enough patience to prepare these or other steps for years, but this is only a question of the psychological stability of the leader, with whom everything seems to be in order.

Third, the construction of a new Russia. Putin, as an ideal stabilizer, cannot be a great builder. These are incompatible psycho. And it may happen that the nomination of Medvedev DA just was an attempt to find a builder. It is encouraging. So, there will be a new attempt, and I really hope that it will be successful.

And the last, from physics. Any unstable system reacts to an abrupt change in some parameter or some object inside it in a most unexpected way. It may crystallize, may break, or may change its structure. And it's not for the object inside the system to decide how it will change. The object has its own properties, the system has its own. So that the system does not become aggressive, alien, changes must occur adaptively. And our country is an object in the world unstable system. We can change, but how we will do this is a far from idle question. We can become stronger, and we can imperceptibly get such a complex of problems that we have to remember again what a tribe is. So when we talk about the Russian flag over the Capitol - I join. But let's give a report that for this we need many, many, many things to do, and absolutely not worth fussing about.

And why Vladimir Vladimirovich does or does not do something as it seems to us correct? It seems to me that he has hundreds of options for each step. But as a stabilizer, he chooses the principle of "do no harm." And from a global perspective, this is a very effective policy, which we observe. But the builder will come - let's look at the principle of "forward at any cost." I very much hope that this person will be able to preserve a considerable share of Putin's conservatism so that we together would not change our place of residence for the sake of another great construction project and would not put our modest savings on the altar of the great light idea. Who has them, of course.

Yours sincerely, Botanologist.
Author:
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Melchakov
    Melchakov April 12 2013 15: 18 New
    +1
    Well, that’s it. Now come, the "true patriots", all-enforcers and neopagans. They will assure that Vasily Melnichenko spoke correctly, and that he is the best candidate for president. And if Putin leaves, it won’t be worse ...
    1. dmitreach
      dmitreach April 12 2013 15: 24 New
      +1
      Edward Lucas(not a filmmaker, but the same is a science fiction):
      Putin's days in power are numbered (!)
      wassat
      ("Russian service" Voice of America "", USA)
      Editor of The Economist magazine on the globalization of the Magnitsky list, the Cyprus phenomenon, Sochi, Femen, Berezovsky and the new Russian tandem
      http://www.inosmi.ru/russia/20130412/207988466.html
      Here is the man who "calculated" Putin. And we don’t even know recourse
      1. tarks
        tarks April 12 2013 15: 44 New
        +4
        And Berezovsky spoke such a text about Putin's days. For BAB, it all ended weirdly.
        1. smile
          smile April 12 2013 19: 16 New
          +3
          tarks
          Alas, for Bab it all ended naturally ....
      2. fzr1000
        fzr1000 April 12 2013 15: 58 New
        +5
        I read an eccentric interview of some kind. He also receives money for his word-making.

        He is the author of two investigative books: The New Cold War (How the Kremlin Threatens Russia and the West) and the Deception published in March of this year (Deception: Spies, Lies, and How Russia Fools the West).
        Clinic.
        1. dmitreach
          dmitreach April 12 2013 17: 05 New
          -1
          the most accurate comment for that article:
          Velia: (no title)
          12/04/2013, 14:10
          Today is just a holiday! Edena Lucas, then Kimushka Siegfeld. Still would Andryushka Glucksman and a good mood for the weekend is provided.

          In the name of Glucksman Russophobia, on that site they even came up with a scale of delirium - One Glitch. Lucas has a surname - a fantasy director. laughing
    2. baltika-18
      baltika-18 April 12 2013 19: 54 New
      +4
      Quote: Melchakov
      Now come, "true patriots", all-encompassers and neopagans

      This means, in your opinion, opponents of Putin. I must say that you are somewhat mistaken about this. Personally, for example, I am not a supporter of Putin, but I also do not belong to these categories.
      Now, according to the article, Botanologist correctly determined the cycle of creating the country: a destroyer-stabilizer-builder. Somehow in one of my comments I already drew an analogy of building a country with building a house. Here I agree.
      I do not agree that Medvedev was planned for the role of a builder, because he was originally planned for the role of "a hat that is left in place as a sign that the place is taken."
      Further, the evolutionary version is naturally preferable, because it does not involve defeat, but it does not have a high speed, and can take more than one year, if not a dozen years, and maybe even more. And we do not have much time.
      A revolutionary transformation from above would be much better, but Putin unfortunately is not capable of this, you correctly defined his role, but laying the foundation is his duty, which he ignores.
      At the beginning of the article, the question was raised of finding a compromise between opponents and supporters of Putin. I don’t know about this, because one of the main points of disagreement is the issue of nationalization and revision of the results of privatization. Putin said that this will not happen. So a compromise is hardly possible. Yes and thieves and corruption lawlessness plays a very important and negative role.
  2. zevs379
    zevs379 April 12 2013 15: 23 New
    +1
    + Reasonable. Weighted opinion. Better on the sly than on guillotines in each square.
    1. old rocket man
      old rocket man April 12 2013 15: 45 New
      +5
      I join Zeus, although knowledge of grammar does not hurt God.
      Article "+", but I foresee a lot of objections from those who want to get "everything, and immediately"
      1. Melchakov
        Melchakov April 12 2013 15: 58 New
        +2
        Quote: old rocket
        to god.

        .. with a capital letter ...
        1. old rocket man
          old rocket man April 13 2013 00: 00 New
          0
          Quote: Melchakov
          Quote: old rocket
          to god.

          .. with a capital letter ...


          This is for someone like, according to the rules of grammar it is not defined.
      2. scrack
        scrack April 12 2013 23: 50 New
        0
        We need to move away from this psychology, we need to learn to find a middle ground
    2. Atlon
      Atlon April 12 2013 16: 30 New
      +7
      Quote: zevs379
      Better slowly than guillotines in each square

      Well, the people might have amused the guillotines ... But some of the most zealous ones forgot about the "shock therapy". Slowly saying! Come on faster! In the 90s, it was not fast enough to develop immunity? The country was ruined, banditry was dismissed, terrorists were spoiled, people were robbed, industry was destroyed ... What, someone wants to be quicker? Well, there’s a way ... Head down from the balcony! Fast, efficient, reliable! Recommend!
      And we will go slowly, without shocks and experiments. However, looking back 10 years ago, I can’t remember anything radical and "fateful", no breakthroughs and "great victories", but nevertheless, the country is different! Yes, how much different! Is this not a confirmation of the correctness of the course?
  3. Black
    Black April 12 2013 15: 32 New
    +4
    Firstly. State building should not be unambiguously lead to cliched cliches, such as “revolutionary-stabilizer-builder,” these processes are very complex and not linear.
    Secondly. Putin tried Medvedev as a "builder"? Do you believe that yourself?
    Here the next chain is drawn: "revolutionary-stabilizer-nobody-much-and again the same and for a long time."
    Thirdly. Personally, I’m afraid of the “major builder”. It is not much different from just a "revolutionary." Even if in general - in small steps. This may concern the development of medium-sized businesses, pension reform, culture, education, even the stabilization fund. But...
    -not in the fight against embezzlement (in relation to Serdyukov there can be 100 options !!)
    -not in the revival of his agricultural
    -not in investing YOUR money in the real sector of the economy
    - etc.
    1. Botanologist
      April 12 2013 19: 18 New
      +4
      Quote: Chen
      It is not worth state building to unambiguously lead to cliched cliches, such as “revolutionary-stabilizer-builder”, these processes are very complex and not linear


      Yes, I'm not talking about construction, I'm talking about development cycles. Of course, they are non-linear.

      Quote: Chen
      Putin tried Medvedev as a "builder"? Do you believe that yourself?


      I just assumed. They will not tell us the truth.

      And the rest I agree. Yes, I did not justify anyone and nothing. Actually, I wanted to show that there is no and will not be a new messiah, which 7 will feed everyone with bread, and even for free. A lot of things are floating, the bottom is often not visible belay
      1. Black
        Black April 12 2013 19: 52 New
        +1
        Quote: Botanologist
        A lot of things are floating, the bottom is often not visible

        That's right.
        You know, one wants to believe in "evolution." Perhaps you are right that the elites standing at the trough themselves will not leave. Let's hope that GDP has the strength and determination. In any case, no other "foreman" can be seen either on the surface or on the bottom.
  4. Pacifist
    Pacifist April 12 2013 15: 33 New
    +4
    So when we talk about the flag of Russia over the Capitol, I join. Just let’s be aware that for this we need to do many, many, many things, and do not fuss at all.

    Join. drinks

    +
    1. scrack
      scrack April 12 2013 23: 52 New
      +1
      Great words
  5. xmike
    xmike April 12 2013 15: 33 New
    0
    According to this logic, the revolutionary should be Gorbachev IMHO
  6. tarks
    tarks April 12 2013 15: 38 New
    +1
    One weak point in the discussion: the author simply announced that the stabilization period had ended and that the construction period would not begin.
    Is not a fact. And as for the personalities ... Medvedev is definitely neither one nor the other. Although more suitable for the role of a stabilizer-damper.
    Threat.
    Putin is an evolutionary. I said it myself. And “builds nothing” is a controversial statement. Than the article is good. You can debate. smile

    1. Locksmith
      Locksmith April 12 2013 16: 03 New
      +1
      Quote: tarks
      Medvedev is definitely neither one nor the other. Although more suitable for the role of a stabilizer-damper

      This is not a royal matter. Medvedev is the coolest photographer (Cartier Bresson cries quietly in the corner) and iPhone wink and you are a builder ... laughing
  7. Kyrgyz
    Kyrgyz April 12 2013 15: 49 New
    +1
    And when one hundred people support the president and three hysterically against him, can this be considered the opposite of opinions?
    1. kris
      kris April 12 2013 16: 32 New
      0
      Quote: Kyrgyz
      And when one hundred people support the president and three hysterically against him, can this be considered the opposite of opinions?

      so it does not support 100 people!
      and three in hysterics are ostentatious opponents.
      http://www.levada.ru/11-04-2013/vladimir-putin-god-posle-izbraniya-prezidentom
      IN WHICH ARE YOU TRUSTING VLADIMIR PUTIN? %

      May 08 Mar. 13
      totally trust 28 7
      rather trust 56 50
      rather not trust 10 25
      totally trust 2 10

      INTERESTS WHICH LAYERS OF POPULATION EXPRESS, AT YOUR LOOK, VLADIMIR PUTIN?
      "Oligarchs", bankers,
      large entrepreneurs 26%.
      "Siloviks",
      intelligence workers,
      Army, Ministry of Internal Affairs 31%.
      Government officials
      bureaucracy 24%.
      The immediate environment
      B. Yeltsin, “families” 10%.
      “Ordinary people” - employees,
      workers, workers of the village 20%.
      WOULD YOU WANT PUTIN TO BE ELECTED FOR THE POST OF THE PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA FOR ANOTHER TIME AFTER 6 YEARS OR OR TO CHANGE THE BEARS OR ANY OTHER MAN AFTER 6 YEARS?
      I would like to see Putin again in 6 years
      He was elected to the post of President of Russia 22%.
      I would like to see Putin in 6 years
      as President of Russia, Medvedev was replaced by 8%.
      I would like that after 6 years of Putin at the post
      The president of Russia was replaced by another person 47%.

      WOULD YOU WANT OR DO NOT WANT TO SEE VLADIMIR PUTIN AT THE POST OF THE PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA AT THE END OF HIS PRESIDENTIAL PERIOD ENDED AFTER 2018?
      We would like 34%.
      Would not like 40%.
      1. ABV
        ABV April 12 2013 17: 34 New
        +3
        I’m always wondering where did such poll data come from? Whoever you ask - Putin is approved, and according to alleged polls, 20-30% of the current? where are the firewood from?
        It's like a poll under Medvedev - how many citizens approve of 0 ppm --- 80% ..... where does this figure come from? I DO NOT KNOW ANY SUCH MAN .... where polls are conducted.
        It’s like in bank agreements in small print --- the survey was conducted among XXXX people in XXXX cities of Russia (I don’t remember the numbers). We divide the number of respondents into the number of cities, we get 6-8 people in the city. Most citizens of Russia! within the statistical error! CIRCUS!
        1. kris
          kris April 12 2013 20: 38 New
          -3
          Quote: ABV
          I’m always wondering where did such poll data come from? Whoever you ask - Putin is approved, and according to alleged polls, 20-30% of the current? where are the firewood from?

          or maybe they weren’t asked.
          officials or Chechnya will have 100%.
          but in a single-industry town. where there is no place to work 0%.
          look at the 2012 election results (even the official ones).
          out of 109 860 voters included in the voters list 331 or 45% voted for Putin.
          And if you remove the frank registry and violations, then you get your 20-30%.
          1. 1goose3
            1goose3 April 12 2013 22: 04 New
            +1
            And if you remove the frank registry and violations, then you get your 20-30%.

            Mr. Chris, at least ugly, using official information to add "marsh" interest. This is first, secondly 41.5% of those included in the lists, but not of those who participated in the voting. Thirdly, you provide the survey data without specifying by whom it was conducted and in what environment. And so it is possible in the fourth, in 5 onwards.
            The above positions allow me not to respect you and call you a provocateur.
            Lord, thank you for letting me be so tolerant.
            1. kris
              kris April 12 2013 23: 13 New
              0
              Quote: 1goose3
              Mr. Chris, at least ugly, using official information to add "marsh" interest.

              This is math. And what does the miserable marsh?

              Quote: 1goose3
              secondly, 41.5% of those included in the lists, but not of those who participated in the voting.

              I said so.
              out of 109 860 voters included in the voters list 331 or 45% voted for Putin.
              Quote: 1goose3
              Thirdly, you provide the survey data without specifying by whom it was conducted and in what environment.

              The survey was conducted March 22-25, 2013 on a representative all-Russian sample of urban and rural population among 1601 people aged 18 years and older in 130 settlements of 45 regions of the country. Distribution of answers is given as a percentage of the total number of respondents along with data from previous surveys. The statistical error of these studies does not exceed 3,4% .http: //www.levada.ru/11-04-2013/vladimir-putin-god-posle-izbraniya-preziden
              tome

              And you, dear, do not distort and lead the discussion using the facts.
      2. sergey32
        sergey32 April 12 2013 18: 14 New
        +6
        I do not understand why Chris cons.
        About myself. I have never voted for Putin. Yes, I admit, it was possible to keep the country under him and the economy began to grow. But explain to me why thieves and bribe takers can be planted in Belarus, but not with us. Why is Old Man crushing corrupt officials there, but the system does not collapse and industry envy us. Why is there national wealth going to the people, and we have on the accounts of oligarchs and officials?
        Recently, a Belarusian told me that for families with children a mortgage of 1% per annum, I could be wrong, but when a third child is born, the state pays three quarters of the apartment, the fourth in full. And this is a poor country in general, where there is no oil. What prevents us from planting thieves for 13 years. Corruption then blooms and smells; it has already crawled from the public sector to the commercial one. In large firms and banks, hired managers are taking back kicks from suppliers. Here is such a competition.
        When Taburetkin, Luzhkov and Skrynnik are put in prison, then I will vote for Putin for the first time.
        1. optimist
          optimist April 12 2013 20: 27 New
          +2
          You will not have to, dear, vote for GDP. Because they will not be planted. And even if they plant, then the "guarantor" of himself, as a well-known substance, his environment will merge into the toilet ...
        2. Yarbay
          Yarbay April 15 2013 12: 37 New
          +1
          Quote: sergey32
          When Taburetkin, Luzhkov and Skrynnik are put in prison, then I will vote for Putin for the first time.

          not soon!
          Former Minister of Defense Anatoly Serdyukov is going on a case of embezzlement in the department as a witness, because there are no weighty arguments to change his status, said presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov.
          http://news.rambler.ru/18600088/
      3. antidote
        antidote April 12 2013 21: 34 New
        -1
        This poll was clearly conducted on Echo Matzah. Do you refer to it. Do you support Liberastov?
  8. Sergey_K
    Sergey_K April 12 2013 15: 56 New
    -2
    I think the next will be Shoigu?
  9. Comrad
    Comrad April 12 2013 15: 56 New
    +1
    Very good article!
    Among readers of VO there are a lot of comrades who should read this article in order to understand that not everything is so simple. In my opinion, they do not realize that in our world everything is very connected. There is opposition to every action, and every thoughtless “hang, put in spite of everything, soak in the toilet”, the “democratic pestilence” will find how to use it so that it would only make us worse.
  10. Bigriver
    Bigriver April 12 2013 16: 07 New
    +3
    ... the evolutionary cycle "revolutionary" - "stabilizer" - "builder".

    I came up with a new word wassat
    Putin, as he is a slow builder, is an evolutionary.
    In general, speaking without a warped face, such a cautious and careful attitude to changes in the country arouses only respect in me.
  11. Zubr
    Zubr April 12 2013 16: 13 New
    +1
    good Those thoughts that are in my head are fully set forth in this article.
    "Botanologist" thanks!
  12. aleks71
    aleks71 April 12 2013 16: 17 New
    +6
    patiently prepares steps .. well, well ... on the basis of the information that he has, and plans, unequivocally (so I think) not alone, but with analysts and strong analysts .. But guys, as they say, with ours " the belfry "is seen all in a slightly different way .. Damn, they allocate trillions, and then where and how they will be spent as if they don’t care .. The main thing is to highlight .. And what they are stolen and taken away over the hill is then the accounting chamber determines, but then the money already bye-bye, don’t get it ... Is it that GDP helps Western banks so much? It seems like they need money themselves .. Plush privatization has started, it is selling off the remnants of state property .. It is exchanged for freshly printed pieces of paper, real production ... This is how to understand ? With my informative base, such steps are perceived as-not an open betrayal of Russian interests .. Yes, and much more is not clear .. Education, medicine, the army ... Why do we arm someone first and not ourselves? I understand, we earn money (which steal is not weak in the army and in other industries), but you can it’s not needed tomorrow, but now, look what’s going on in the world .. Questions, questions, questions ... Correct if it’s not right ...
  13. Tatanka Yotanka
    Tatanka Yotanka April 12 2013 16: 29 New
    +7
    yeah - filosovskaya article, in mymymu author with his philosophy tried to veil laudatory odes of GDP
    And the fact that these guys do not trample the Siberian open spaces is quite understandable from the point of view of court logic. The enemy must be near, in front of his eyes, so that he could not hide and weave intrigue. In intelligence, they teach this.
    in Siberian open spaces, control of the thorn will be much better, and much cheaper
    There are several simple ways to get rid of annoying courtiers, and at the same time from their patrons. The easiest way is called genocide.
    according to this logic, plant high-ranking thieves - called genocide
    Thirdly, the construction of a new Russia. Putin as the perfect stabilizer
    Yes, construction cannot do without migrants, yes Russians are leaving the Stavropol region steadily
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lkVgdRfq8I
    But as a stabilizer he chooses the principle of “do no harm”
    1. Botanologist
      April 12 2013 19: 34 New
      +2
      Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
      the author of his philosophy tried to veil the laudatory odes of GDP


      Well, after all, I tried to camouflage, I tried, and they split like a sucker belay .
      I shake your hand, O Whoever Reads Thoughts in the distance!

      Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
      in Siberian open spaces, control of the thorn will be much better, and much cheaper


      Control of whom? Sixes? Yes, at least be controlled, others will come in their place. You need to fight the disease, not the symptoms.

      Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
      plant high-ranking thieves - called genocide


      No need to juggle. Thieves need to be planted, but I wrote about those who keep the economy and finances. And with them everything is more complicated.
      1. Tatanka Yotanka
        Tatanka Yotanka April 12 2013 20: 33 New
        +3
        Quote: Botanologist
        Well, after all, I tried to camouflage, I tried, and they chopped belay like a sucker.
        I shake your hand, O Whoever Reads Thoughts in the distance!

        thank you for your appreciation hi
        Quote: Botanologist
        Control of whom? Sixes? Yes, at least be controlled, others will come in their place. You need to fight the disease, not the symptoms.

        the next six will see the prospect and the fate of the first, if there is no medicine yet for the disease or have not learned how to treat it, they will remove symptoms, anesthetize to make breathing easier

        Quote: aviamed90
        No need to juggle. Thieves need to be planted, but I wrote about those who keep the economy and finances. And with them everything is more complicated.

        You yourself wrote about the courtiers, but how to deal with the “who holds” - there are no answers, or rather one answer, everything is complicated, but if for simple, I will answer with a phrase from the movie, “you don’t have any methods against ...... no "
        1. Botanologist
          April 12 2013 21: 43 New
          +1
          Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
          the next sixes will see the perspective and fate of the first


          I would like to believe, but it does not work. I know a little ... how anyone sees prospects. And what is happening now is the worst horror for the Sixes. After all, if someone is planted, they say "gone too far" or "started not according to the rules" and something like that. Like, myself, but they are smart! And now the rules of the game are changing! It is just beginning, but in the eyes ... everyone understands that here he is, the arctic fox, already at the door! Believe me, this is a stronger motive than the usual spontaneous fear of stripping.

          Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
          you have no methods against ...... no


          Well, if it weren’t, no one would go to Putin's reception. But they go, they stand in line ... So, they know what they are afraid of.
          1. Tatanka Yotanka
            Tatanka Yotanka April 12 2013 22: 30 New
            +1
            Quote: Botanologist
            And now the rules of the game are changing! It is just beginning, but in the eyes ... everyone understands that here he is, the arctic fox, already at the door!

            in 2000, I thought the same way — he came with iron eggs, an anti-corruption committee was created, and all along the same lines, BUT the bureaucrats then increased and the theft figures cannot be comprehended, it turns out that this is only now beginning, so why then start this business and they set the rules of the game for themselves, they are like cards-shuffled, dealt, shuffled again, and their main motive is not to fall out of the deck, although of course the sixes fall out, the aces remain
            Quote: Botanologist
            Well, if it weren’t, no one would go to Putin's reception. But they go, they stand in line ... So, they know what they are afraid of.

            I usually go to the reception at the scheduled time, I doubt about the queue, is Chubais really afraid or Ignatiev. It’s not enough to nationalize the central bank, or put your own person, and this is already a big economy
      2. dmb
        dmb April 12 2013 21: 00 New
        +1
        You know, and I got the impression of an "ode" (especially remembering your specialty). One could agree with linearity, but it’s probably worthwhile to “decide where you are facing” (Zhvanetsky). What will the future "builder" actually build? It doesn’t matter the name, the principles of existence are important. And the previous “destroyer” and the current “stabilizer” mutter something inaudible about this, trying to get rid of general phrases like: “Well, that everyone should be fine.” That is, me and you Roma Abramovich with Chubais? Here I have strong doubts, including that Roma and Tolyasik will decide overnight that they already have enough money, and they will not steal them from you and me anymore. A propos, And who do you designate in your concept for the role of a builder after the "destroyer" of Lenin and the "stabilizer" of Stalin?
        1. Tatanka Yotanka
          Tatanka Yotanka April 12 2013 21: 47 New
          +1
          each leader can be described as a destroyer-builder, because everyone broke the previous control system and built his own, especially brightly in the line of Brezhnev-Gorbachev-Yeltsin-Putin, yes, and Gorbachev, because he was building a new system of relations with the world, another question is successful or no
          1. Bigriver
            Bigriver April 13 2013 08: 05 New
            0
            Quote: Tatanka Yotanka
            ... and Gorbachev, because he was building a new system of relations with the world ..,

            He allowed the creation of new relationships in the world, excluding the USSR from the system of relations.
        2. Botanologist
          April 12 2013 21: 53 New
          0
          Quote: dmb
          And who do you designate in your concept for the role of a builder after the “destroyer” of Lenin and the “stabilizer” of Stalin?


          Stalin is unique, he managed to develop a new system with builders. The main builder, perhaps, Beria. Oddly enough, but this man has become the main target of liberals and falsifiers. But in fact, he was completely different. Well, let's not forget that this was his department that built everything - missiles, factories, planes ...
          1. dmb
            dmb April 12 2013 22: 25 New
            0
            From your answer, I conclude that you agree with the first part of my comment. Well, okay. As for Stalin and Beria, it is somehow completely linear. In my opinion, it is absurd to consider Lenin a "destroyer", and Stalin a "builder". If the country did not go over to the NEP under Lenin, there would be no one with whom and nothing with whom Stalin would carry out industrialization. I am not going to deny the importance of the latter’s personality for the country, but many on the site for their own convenience oppose these, without exaggeration, the great figures of our state, not wanting to admit that their goals and objectives were absolutely identical on certain segments. And do not sculpt from Stalin and Beria humanists. They were not them. And in their struggle for power they crossed the corpses. Including people who sincerely love the homeland, and who can bring it benefits no less than they do. Try not to discriminate against the Leningrad case.
  14. aviamed90
    aviamed90 April 12 2013 16: 55 New
    -2
    He didn’t even vote. Some nonsense on the topic of a change of power.
  15. ABV
    ABV April 12 2013 17: 26 New
    +3
    quote:
    "And it may happen that the nomination of Dmitry Medvedev was just an attempt to find a builder. This is encouraging. So there will be a new attempt, and I really hope that it will be successful."

    God forbid !!!!!!!
    Medvedev is already "on you-tried" .... only 0 ppm, and "supposedly canceling THAT" is enough. And the experiments with the time and the police, the police, the people still never forget!
  16. aksakal
    aksakal April 12 2013 18: 05 New
    +2
    Any unstable system reacts to a sharp change in some parameter or any object inside it in the most unexpected way. It can crystallize, it can collapse, and it can also change its structure. And it is not up to the object within the system to decide how it will change. The object has its own properties, the system has its own “Greetings, Botanologist.” From mushrooms to politics, it’s like evolution is a plus, although there is a pattern in this -)))). I wanted to fix it a bit. The logical contradiction here: "the system reacts to a sharp change ... of any object inside it" does not strike with the statement "And it is not up to the object within the system to decide how it will change." That is, the system reacts precisely to a change in the object, then why does not the object decide? Any system has periods of stability and instability - it depends on external conditions or on the inherent internal dynamics of development. During the period of instability (physicists just say "at the bifurcation point") the system is very sensitive to the slightest fluctuations in the parameters or even vibrations of particles, this system of components (the vibrations are so small that physicists called them "fluctuations", and they say about the sensitivity of the system to the slightest vibrations that the system "sharply increases the sensitivity to fluctuations"). The “object within the system” can be aware of the instability of the system within which it is located (feel the “fresh wind of change”) and become active, trying to become exactly the “fluctuation” that played a decisive role. They say about such “objects” at the right time in the right place and said the right phrase, pushed a heartbreaking speech -))))). By the way, the statement “It can crystallize, it can collapse, or it can change its structure” at the moment of instability disclosure is also not quite true - the “bifurcation point” implies only two competing development paths at a time, and where both of these paths lead is completely well predicted. Not only the moment is predicted which of the two possible states can be selected. As a compressed eraser in your hands - either bend to the right or left - you cannot predict, but you know very well that in the end the gum will be bent either to the right or to the left. And they will lead only to two states called by mathematicians "attractors (attractors, attraction pools) in the phase coordinate system." In relation to social systems, there are two pools of attraction - either in democracy or in autocracy. Under whatever slogans a revolution may take place, in the end there will be only two results - either democracy (the dominance of the interests of the elements over the interests of the system connecting these elements) or authoritarianism (on the contrary, the dominance of the interests of the system over the interests of the elements, this system of components).
    1. Normal
      Normal April 13 2013 10: 14 New
      0
      Quote: aksakal
      From mushrooms to politics

      I read it three times. I'm sitting - trying to comprehend belay The only conclusion: do I lose time on hell? sad I certainly understand that; "A thing, a thing, what to do?" But still; "be simpler and people will reach for you" hi
  17. anarh
    anarh April 12 2013 18: 58 New
    +2
    Promoted an article.
    Not because I do not agree with the conclusions.
    I disagree with the arguments.
    Weak arguments.
    "-Why?
    "-Because we observe something similar when boiling water"
    As May teacher of literature said:
    "In the garden of elderberry, and in Kiev - daddy"
    And frankly untenable arguments profane the result.
    Even if the result is correct.
    1. Botanologist
      April 12 2013 20: 16 New
      +1
      Quote: anarh
      And frankly untenable arguments profane the result, even if the result is correct.


      +
      Just as incorrect conclusions can be well-argued, so the right decision can have no argument. Actually, that's why I did not write a dissertation. Firstly, the topic is endless, and secondly, why in a discussion article to give assessments? He said his position, heard the interlocutor - and fine. And the argument can be endless.
  18. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 April 12 2013 19: 06 New
    +8
    Well, let's start from the beginning. Under Yeltsin, criminal gangster Russia has developed. From all state institutions, which is especially sad from the army, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB removed decent and smart specialists in various ways. In their place came either outright bandits or those who are friends with bandits. What Putin has done for more than 12 years at the helm of power, he has not even moved the whole colossus toward decency and honesty by a millimeter. All the latest scandals are just a redistribution of power. There was not a single high-profile case when a high-ranking official would be imprisoned for a long time. Yes and never will. Economics here I can trust knowledgeable experts, but certainly not Kudrin and Chubais. Therefore, he is inclined to believe Gubanov and Musin. So, according to their analytics, nothing globally new is happening in the economy either. and judging by the plans of the government, it will not happen until 2020. Gubanov correctly says that in economics it is not enough to be a mathematician, you must understand what is happening in society.
    As our people were accustomed to the idea that they say nothing can be fixed in a short time. Only now our government does not offer any deadlines at all. We are out of habit promised a normal life in the future, in which? after how many years? it is a state secret. Simple, no one knows. Here is my opinion that in vain you so optimistically drew our life and prospects.
    1. vladsolo56
      vladsolo56 April 12 2013 19: 21 New
      0
      minus of course it’s interesting, only I would like arguments
  19. anarh
    anarh April 12 2013 19: 21 New
    +1
    Quote: ABV
    Yes, God forbid !!!!!!! Medvedev is already "on you-tried" .... only 0 ppm, and "supposedly cancel THAT" is enough. And the experiments with the time and the police, the police, the people still never forget!

    In the nineties, at the time of sulfonation, Yeltsin was very annoyed that one woman offered her heart to save him.
    The annoyance was so strong that it brought it to his students (for those days - he taught).
    Their reaction: - Andrey Stepanovich, do not worry. She is so kidding.
    Wise children.
    Doggy ABV, don't worry.
    There are a lot of options.
    For example, as in a joke about Monya when he sued Abrashka.
    Moni's question to the lawyer: - And what if the judge should bring the goose?
    - And do not think, this is an honest man.
    The litigant Monya attorney:
    - And I sent the goose to the judge. True signed from Abrashka.
    Disavowing a character by giving him some freedom - why not move?
  20. Orik
    Orik April 12 2013 19: 38 New
    +3
    laughing A botanologist who is not very versed in economics, which is closely connected with politics, wrote an article. What for?
    The elite (from Latin electus, English fr. Élite - the chosen one, the best [1]) - in sociology and political science - an integral and important part of any society. The keyword is "best," but who is better and who is worse? What are the criteria for determining this? There will be many options, even more than peoples and countries. There are no "universal" values; each nation has its own and often opposite. Moreover, there is no logical evidence. Which elite ideal is closest to us? I think most agree that this elite is based on sacrificial service. Nobody will donate for loot, on the contrary, the more dough the greater the desire to live in order to enjoy life. The author, a reservation according to Freud, writes about the same "... so that we do not together change our place of residence for the sake of another great construction project and put our modest savings on the altar of a great bright idea." Compare, comments are superfluous.
    Let’s get back to service, so for the sake of what, to serve and sacrifice not only “place of residence” and “savings”, but life ?! With the answer of the people to this question, the state begins. In the meantime, we are repeating as a mantra "we will live better." Is it all or just today's "elite" ?!
    The conversation should go on for what we live, vital meanings should be intangible, matter is only a continuation. Only then will another ELITE come and replace today's kakistocracy. Until you sit down, there will be no result; replacing consumers with consumers is pointless.
    Two shift options. The first, conscious, when a new elite is formed under the idea. Repression in this case is only a tool that is used as necessary. We must cut the nasty fifth column and the lousy corrupt sheep, as well as achieve the results as soon as possible. Unfortunately this is our case, and snot lovers of warm places on the side. The second is tectonic shifts in the external environment, when the question of the country's future is posed "to be or not to be." And without repression, in this case, one can not do, time is shrinking.
    1. Botanologist
      April 12 2013 20: 23 New
      -1
      Quote: Orik
      What is the ideal of the elite closest to us? I think most agree that this elite is based on sacrificial service.


      The elite are those upstairs. Everything. The rest is an empty concussion.

      Quote: Orik
      The conversation should go on for what we live, vital meanings should be intangible, matter is only a continuation. Only then will another ELITE come and replace today's democracy


      This is not the topic of what I wrote. I described a little situation, without ratings. And you rushed to teach me what your elite should be like. Go to the regional administration, open the office of any deputy governor - in front of you is the elite, whether you like it or not. And make it what you dialectically wrote to us here. Then show what happened.
      1. Orik
        Orik April 12 2013 21: 16 New
        +1
        The elite are those upstairs. Everything. The rest is an empty concussion.


        Recognize that you are a slave ?!

        This is not the topic of what I wrote. I described a little situation, without ratings. And you rushed to teach me what your elite should be like. Go to the regional administration, open the office of any deputy governor - in front of you is the elite, whether you like it or not. And make it what you dialectically wrote to us here. Then show what happened.


        I do not teach anyone, especially you, it is useless. You don’t understand the elementary thing, the people make the elite. You do, with your licit obsession, “The elite are those that are above. Everything.” Is done by those who bring money there, and first of all 80% of people who want to consume as well as the “elite” and get them bred for this. "You don’t need a knife for a fool, you show him a penny and do what you like with it."
        Written about the meanings is not for you, do not strain.
        1. Botanologist
          April 12 2013 21: 59 New
          0
          Quote: Orik
          Recognize that you are a slave ?!


          A young man, with your show-offs in the men's room ... be aware.

          Quote: Orik
          You don’t understand the elementary thing, the people make the elite. You do, with your licit obsession, "The elite are those that are above. Everything.", Are made by those who bring money there, and first of all 80% of people who want to consume as well as the "elite" and get them bred.


          A new word in history and politics. And from whom does the people make the elite? From the modern elite to the studio fellow
  21. Gorchakov
    Gorchakov April 12 2013 19: 59 New
    0
    Personally, I do not see Medvedev and his entourage in the builder ... He will build us ...
    1. UFO
      UFO April 12 2013 20: 54 New
      +2
      "Mom in the morning: Dima, get up, it's time to go to work. Dima: I won’t go, they don’t respect me there. Everyone laughs at me. Mom: Get up, you have to go, you are PRIME!" laughing
  22. optimist
    optimist April 12 2013 20: 16 New
    -2
    Very ch.m.osh.naya and smelly little article. The author is similar to a doctor persuading a patient at the 3rd stage of cancer: "Dear, let us anoint the tumor with brilliant green, maybe it will resolve itself?". The only way out of this situation is an “operation” to change the social and political system. Neither GDP nor its ub.blucodile environment will NEVER do this. So we are quietly waiting for the “2017th” - and all over again.
    1. Botanologist
      April 12 2013 20: 28 New
      0
      Quote: optimist
      The only way out of this situation is an “operation” to change the social and political system.


      How old are you?
      Just wondering, did you find perestroika in your full mind, or do you think the revolution is cute and fun?
      1. optimist
        optimist April 12 2013 21: 55 New
        +4
        I am 43. I know Russian history relatively well. And I really love my country. And I understand that there is simply no “soft and evolutionary” way out of this situation. An endless chatter about a "bright capitalist future", an imitation of the fight against corruption and further looting of the country with the tacit consent of the "guarantor" will continue. Until the price of a barrel of oil collapses or the creeping World War 3 touches our borders. And I do not need about perestroika: it was not even a revolution, but a banal betrayal by the then leadership of their country and people. For which so far, by the way, no one has answered ... I have not in vain cited an example about a patient with cancer: an operation is dangerous and painful. But waiting is deadly.
    2. antidote
      antidote April 12 2013 21: 40 New
      0
      Yeah, let’s disperse everything, we’ll ruin everything. And in a couple of years instead of Russia there will be a dozen or two autonomous states to the joy of AI. See how they run into GDP in the Western media. Look who your enemy is .. But Borka and Gorbi were very respected in the West.
      And the statet is really stinky
  23. UFO
    UFO April 12 2013 20: 19 New
    +1
    "Step forward, turn and 2 back ...", systematic and progressive - it is, of course, good under any regimes, but not in our situation, after 2 decades of deliberate collapse of the country. In some places, it would not hurt to “chop”, deliberately and carefully, of course, but “chop”. Even in the West they are surprised by the difference in salaries between the lowest and highest paid citizens. And we have “untouchable witnesses”, 13-room “arrested”, etc., and this is “what, they ran away again?”, And the people, who every day “with full bast shoes” slurp this life, tell him what to expect next while this "riding the brakes will erase the pads"? I am for GDP, because there is no Alternative, but stomping on the spot in some matters, and reluctance to “knock dust” out of top civil servants raise VERY many questions, especially in the concept of JUSTICE. what
  24. antidote
    antidote April 12 2013 21: 42 New
    -3
    The article is purely liberal. Well, liberals do not like Putin. Only these are clever liberalists. They do not directly criticize, and so, gradually, slowly
    1. Botanologist
      April 12 2013 22: 07 New
      0
      Quote: antidot
      Well, liberals do not like Putin. Only these are smart liberalists. They do not directly criticize, and so, gradually, slowly



      Yektyl, like Putin - urapatriot, do not like it - liberal ... You really decide.
  25. igor12
    igor12 April 12 2013 21: 58 New
    0
    This does not mean that the Botanologist is right, he is simply mistaken. Or rather, HE IS NOT RIGHT !!!!!!!!
    1. optimist
      optimist April 12 2013 22: 36 New
      +1
      It would be very nice if he were just MISSED. And then the article very much smacks of a banal "ordering".
  26. AleksUkr
    AleksUkr April 13 2013 12: 00 New
    0
    While loyal - I do not touch you and close my eyes to what you are doing. But if….
  27. GP
    GP April 13 2013 12: 21 New
    0
    Duc. The author is funny. Before you build something, you need to understand how to lay the foundation, to determine the boundaries of construction. And here begins a historical joke. For the whole history of the existence of the Russian state to the question of where it begins and where it ends, the Russian land was able to answer only 1 person - Stalin! Before him, Russian people did not have a clue where the state ends (only the smartest ones had a vague idea of ​​Dezhnev, Bering ...). Now you also can’t tell where these borders are, in order to begin the construction of something similar in grandeur to the USSR. Putin will be able to answer this question, then it will be clear what to build and how. Get it - no questions asked in the mausoleum, instead of Lenin.