Military Review

Liberals have declared war on us. Need to defend

129
Liberals have declared war on us. Need to defend



On the Meeting of the School of Common Sense (22.05.2013) the idea of ​​the need for a distinctive national, and perhaps supranational, idea uniting the peoples of our country was voiced. Ideas that give people a high purpose for existence.

In my opinion, this is a very correct question. I touched on this topic in the article "Who needs what". Now, with a new urgency, I felt its extreme necessity and urgency. People of Slavic culture can have more than fashionable iPods, pretentious costume jewelry, meat delicacies and Turkey “on inclusive” need a high goal in life. Super task justifying existence. The idea of ​​a planetary, universal nature.

We have no illusions about socialism, but the memory of the nation-wide idea of ​​building a just society to all the inhabitants of the planet causes nostalgia for “strenuous” times.

Indeed, people formed in the Soviet state remember not only the queues for sausage and tights, but also high impulses of the masses, labor heroism and the burning of the spirit. The shock Komsomol constructions of the North, the exploits of geologists and sailors, designers and teachers, scientists and inventors - this is not a patriotic agitation. This is the reality that we saw with our own eyes. The reality in which we lived and participated. What prompted us to work miracles at work, what turned the population of the USSR into a fraternal Soviet people. The people, in which there were practically no national conflicts, where the Russian could be friends with the Chechen, and the Azerbaijani with the Armenian.

Now it's all lost. The pinnacle of ideology is the desire to protect the Fatherland, to preserve the family, to protect children from abuse and anesthesia. (Most of our society have weaned from even thinking about it.)

But this, unfortunately, is not enough. This will not be able to inflame the flame of the Russian spirit. People of Slavic culture in order to “get up from their knees”, unite against an internal enemy (a corrupt, soulless scavenger or agent of foreign influence), in order to forget about personal peace and security and to go “breast-feeding on a machine gun” is necessary OVERHIDE.

Fantastic, fabulous dream is needed today like air. More than bread, vodka and petrodollars.

Is there such an idea in Russia today? Where do we get “fuel” for the soul and how can such an idea sound?

Where to get the answer, when it is not known from what end to undertake the solution of a similar problem?

Perhaps the wise men of antiquity will help find some kind of clue. Let's try to ask the answer to the Holy Fathers and Scripture.

From the Old Testament, we know that God, having created Adam and Eve, blessed them with the words: "Be fruitful and multiply, and inhabit the limits of the Earth."

The wonderful elder and theologian of the last century, Saint Reverend Silouan of Athos, said these words: “The young man is looking for a bride, the girl is looking for a groom. This is earthly life blessed by God. "

In these postulates, and try to look for a hint.

So, according to God's law, the goal of human existence is in the population of the earth.

The “humanist liberals” united in the “Foundations of Wildlife”, the World Health Organization and other Bildelberg clubs do not agree with this categorically. What are their stated goals, besides boundless freedoms for sexual perversions, euthanasia and drug legalization?

The most important goal (which they do not think to hide) is to reduce the population of the Earth. Resources, they say, on the planet are limited and they need to be saved for the life of future generations.

So, for Russia, for example, Western “humanists” consider the population in 15 – 20 million sufficient. Exactly so much is needed to ensure the efficiency of the "pipe", pumping Russian wealth to the West. The rest of the people are redundant. Useless "mouths" that consume electricity and food, produce waste and pollute the atmosphere. 120 to millions of Russian citizens better die quietly. And do not waste resources.

What a touching concern for preserving the life potential of the planet! What a thoughtful forethought!

Only here the same humanists diligently inhibit the advancement of breakthrough technologies that can provide humanity with cheap food, electricity and heat.

They do not need economic progress. They need power. HUGE. ULTIMATE.

Over the whole earth.

They need a guarantee of preservation of power. For endless times!

This requires control. Over all of humanity.

Question: “Why is it necessary to control ALL humanity?”

Answer: “Because the uncontrolled part of humanity can rebel controlled, and this will put at risk the power of“ humanists ”.”

In exactly the same way as theorists raised the question of the complete and final victory of socialism in one particular country. (Let me remind you: in a single country, the complete victory of socialism is possible. The final is impossible. The final victory was recognized as possible only within the entire inhabited universe.)

So, it is necessary to control all.

Question: “How many people are easier to control, 7 billion or 2?”.

Answer: "2 billion."

Exactly 3,5 times.

It is precisely to facilitate complete control over humanity that “humanists” are needed, a reduction in the birth rate, the destruction of the family, euthanasia, a primitive education, the legalization of same-sex marriage, general anesthesia, universal chipization, and a slowdown in technical progress.

Humanity must become “compact”, demoralized, fragmented, stupid and “stoned”.

The idea of ​​fighting this global evil can become the very supranational idea of ​​a planetary scale capable of igniting the souls of our people. Raise them to the feat. Give them a high meaning of life.

The idea of ​​combating the venom of "liberalism" that corrupts our society. Dead all what he touches. Degrading human dignity. A person who is producing a cattle, whose purpose is to produce a useful product, and then (at the appointed hour of the owner) die quietly and without reproaches at the slaughterhouse.

The external enemy is clear - this is the global “liberalism” that destroyed the Russian empire, destroyed the Soviet Union built by I. Stalin, and now destroying the plundered Russia and the rest of the world.

The internal enemy is known - these are accomplices of Western “humanists”, debilizing our education, corrupting Russian Orthodoxy and traditional Islam, seeking to give our children to reproach sodomites. These are agents of foreign influence. They are unprincipled, burned in their conscience, corrupt.

The goal of the Russian patriot is to destroy the power of the “liberals”. Revival of society. Strengthening family, morality and ethics. Leading technical and intellectual progress of society. Population increase of the country. Providing opportunities for our children and grandchildren to live freely and morally.

THE PURPOSE OF THE WORLD-SCALE PATRIOT is the destruction of the power of “liberal” degenerates and enemies of the human race on a scale of all mankind.

“Liberalism” declared war on us hundreds of years ago. Ruthless war of annihilation. We have no choice. It has long been made for us and our descendants.

We have to die anyway.

Better to die in battle.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.peremeny.ru/books/osminog/7688
129 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. krasin
    krasin 1 June 2013 07: 49
    22
    Yes, it will be difficult to determine the general national idea.
    In the USSR, I somehow didn’t think about it, it was just that they were all together and didn’t divide the Tartar, you or the Georgians, just lived and that’s all. Maybe there was such an upbringing !? Or maybe we were not like that !?
    1. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 1 June 2013 08: 06
      +6
      Quote: krasin
      Maybe such an upbringing was !?

      That's right! Previously, our parents raised us, and now, in one word, democracy! By doing what you want, it's right. request sad
      1. astra
        astra 1 June 2013 11: 19
        11
        The position of liberals in the country needs to be weakened by cutting off cash flow from the west. Close all kinds of NGOs and organizations with foreign financing that, under the pretty cover of working with the needy population, quietly sponsors liberals and the media.
        1. Che
          Che 2 June 2013 21: 35
          0
          Astra, of course you are right, but there will be a lot of stench, you have to endure such a horr ... I hope we go this way.
      2. washi
        washi 1 June 2013 15: 30
        +6
        The October, Pioneer and Komsomol organizations, and of course teachers, were also brought up.
      3. yurta2013
        yurta2013 2 June 2013 16: 44
        +1
        Quote: tronin.maxim
        Parents used to raise us

        Earlier (in the USSR) we were raised not so much by our parents (they were almost always at work and came only in the evening), but by our "native" Communist Party. At that time, a whole department of agitation and propaganda under the Central Committee of the CPSU was engaged in this matter (both directly and through the Komsomol, pioneers, the education system, etc.). He determined what every Soviet person can think, speak and write, and what cannot.
    2. Gardamir
      Gardamir 1 June 2013 08: 48
      +8
      Maybe this is our idea. Just live together.
    3. NKVD
      NKVD 1 June 2013 08: 49
      20
      The national idea is a fight against "Russian" liberalism! Even FM Dostoevsky said: "If anyone ruins Russia, then it is not the communists, not the anarchists, but the damned liberals."
      1. NKVD
        NKVD 1 June 2013 10: 16
        +8
        The triumph of liberalism can be observed in Geyropa, the invasion of immigrants who do not reckon with the indigenous population and dream of establishing their own laws (Sharia) in these countries, rampant pide-growth, and in some countries they seriously discuss the resolution of pedophilia, supposedly this is also a deviation like homosexual , and any deviations should be treated with understanding. Do we really want this in our Russia too?
        1. Maks111
          Maks111 1 June 2013 17: 05
          +2
          Do we really want this in our Russia too?
          We don’t want to ... but who will ask us. There are the French now how many took to the streets? So what? Repealed the law? No. So no one will ask us. They’ll just introduce everything, and those who don’t like it will be dispersed by riot police. crying
          1. old man54
            old man54 2 June 2013 00: 26
            +1
            if at least 1/3 of the population of the country is ... for such laws, then no riot police will disperse, and besides, they will be afraid to "release" him. The power, any (if it is anti-people), is always afraid of the people, only the people cannot understand this in any way!
      2. Gari
        Gari 1 June 2013 10: 22
        10
        From the Old Testament, we know that God, having created Adam and Eve, blessed them with the words: “be fruitful and multiply, and inhabit the limits of the Earth” - according to God's law, the purpose of the existence of mankind is the population of the Earth.
        It was
        The “humanist liberals” united in the “Foundations of Wildlife”, the World Health Organization and other Bildelberg clubs do not agree with this categorically. What are their stated goals, besides boundless freedoms for sexual perversions, euthanasia and drug legalization?

        The most important goal (which they do not think to hide) is to reduce the population of the Earth.
        And so starting from the beginning of the 20th century: wars across the planet on ethnic, religious and other grounds.
        Drug addiction, alcoholism, AIDS and others it is not clear where from which laboratories the diseases were created.
        Sexual licentiousness, homosexuals, legalize same-sex marriage - that is, a blow to the main thing -
        family traditions.
        Worship is only profitable: money, and again money, must earn by any means, and the funds are all good.
        1. astra
          astra 1 June 2013 11: 23
          10
          Interestingly, many already understand that liberals are evil, but no one is fighting them. They give performances on TV, radio, newspapers and other media. Stalin would, at best, expel him from the country; at worst, he would put him to the wall.
          1. old man54
            old man54 2 June 2013 00: 28
            +2
            no, Stalin would, at best, send him to the camps, why liberals dislike him so much!
      3. old man54
        old man54 2 June 2013 00: 24
        0
        I think that it will sound better - LIBERASTS!
    4. Nevsky
      Nevsky 1 June 2013 11: 36
      +2
      Everything has been said here for a long time, we join:

    5. vjhbc
      vjhbc 1 June 2013 16: 02
      0
      I have to think not about a national idea, but a supranational idea (I suggest that in the near future the cosmos will transform the system into a distant star and the main idea is expansion of the race)
      Quote: krasin
      Yes, it will be difficult to determine the general national idea.
      In the USSR, I somehow didn’t think about it, it was just that they were all together and didn’t divide the Tartar, you or the Georgians, just lived and that’s all. Maybe there was such an upbringing !? Or maybe we were not like that !?
    6. V. Salama
      V. Salama 1 June 2013 16: 25
      0
      Quote: krasin
      Yes, it will be difficult to determine the general national idea.
      In the USSR, I somehow didn’t think about it, it was just that they were all together and didn’t divide the Tartar or the Georgian, you just lived and that’s it.
      The problem is that here simply a term (a word for a concept) is poorly selected.
      For example, in the Concept of National Security, approved by the Presidential Decree in 2000, national interests are understood as "the totality of balanced interests of the individual, society and the state." Naturally, nationalities are not opposed to each other here. The meaning of the term, for a number of reasons, does not always correspond to the content of the concept. Using special terminology at the everyday level and filling concepts with our own content, we will not understand the situation, but only get confused.
    7. The comment was deleted.
  2. JIaIIoTb
    JIaIIoTb 1 June 2013 08: 03
    +5
    Liberalism is a means to an end. How to find those who control the liberals? Among them are many who have lost their way, wishing the good of our country. But their brains are washed out and they do not understand that wanting good is harmful.
    1. sergey32
      sergey32 1 June 2013 08: 28
      +8
      In my opinion there was a substitution of concepts. What is liberalism? Here's how Wikipedia dislikes it.
      Liberalism proclaims the rights and freedoms of every person as the highest value and establishes them as the legal basis of social and economic order. At the same time, the possibilities of the state and the church to influence the life of society are limited by the constitution. The most important freedoms in liberalism are the freedom to speak out publicly, the freedom to choose religion, and the freedom to choose representatives for oneself in fair and free elections. Economically, the principles of liberalism are the inviolability of private property, freedom of trade and entrepreneurship. In legal terms, the principles of liberalism are the rule of law over the will of the rulers and the equality of all citizens before the law, regardless of their wealth, status and influence.
      As you can see, there is nothing wrong. It seems that our enemies are not related to the liberals.
      1. seller trucks
        seller trucks 1 June 2013 08: 42
        +1
        Quote: sergey32
        Liberalism proclaims the rights and freedoms of every person as the highest value and establishes them as the legal basis of social and economic order.


        not about any substitution of concepts is out of the question, the synonym of the word liberal has always been the word pid ..... Art.
      2. sergey32
        sergey32 1 June 2013 09: 39
        +6
        Please answer minus.
        We do not need rights and freedoms, a constitution, free elections, the rule of law, the inviolability of private property and the equality of all before the law?
        Do we need an absolute monarchy?
        1. aleks3897
          aleks3897 1 June 2013 09: 53
          -4
          Yes, we need a monarchy!
          1. washi
            washi 1 June 2013 15: 55
            +5
            And let us be monarchs. I'm gonna go crazy. So be it. What will you do after the adoption of monarchism? Well, the royal chambers - this is definitely. What next? What laws? Who to rely on? How to master a country, taking into account the desires of individual citizens for separation. Whose industry is it? How to relate to foreign investment?
            All this in the plan of your actions, after accession.
            In order not to reveal obvious mistakes, I propose: discuss the program on the forum (at the same time identify the opposing contingent of future residents of Providence)
          2. AlNikolaich
            AlNikolaich 2 June 2013 01: 09
            -2
            Quote: aleks3897
            Yes, we need a monarchy!

            We do not need any monarchy! Aristocracy is needed! Honest, decent, educated people in power!
            And not like now, bydlokratiya ... When all the trash climbs into power, using it as a feeder ...
        2. Atrix
          Atrix 1 June 2013 10: 44
          11
          Quote: sergey32
          Please answer minus.
          We do not need rights and freedoms, a constitution, free elections, the rule of law, the inviolability of private property and the equality of all before the law?
          Do we need an absolute monarchy?

          Past 12 years hammered that if a person is a liberal he is peda..st and against Russia. As many times have already written here that "either you are with us, or you are a liberal and jackal at the US Embassy" And you ask whether Russia needs the right to choose and freedom? Why do they need citizens? If you have the right to choose, then you are responsible for the person you have chosen. And all his failures are essentially your failures. And so it's easier Serdyukov stole billions and it seems like no one to do with, because Putin appointed him and everyone is happy with everything. In Russia, and probably in the entire CIS, citizens are accustomed to the fact that someone will always think higher for them. There is no future for people who do not even decide their own destiny for themselves, and even then it's not about liberalism. Many on this forum and not only here shout slogans that a king / ruler is needed who will decide how to live and when to die, and they will continue to live their lives like an amorphous mass. And if you are against the king, then you are against God and the country, haven't you heard this before? And now just such cries are heard only in the place of the tsar, Putin. Dissent is now suppressed in every possible way even in the embryo, you are immediately attributed to pedar..sims, pro-Western whore..hoy, what you don’t love your homeland, etc.
          If Russia wants a bright future, it needs citizens who will themselves be responsible for themselves and their actions.
          1. V. Salama
            V. Salama 1 June 2013 16: 04
            +1
            Quote: Atrix
            Russia's right to choose and freedom? Why are they citizens? If you have the right to choose, then you are responsible for the person you choose. And all his failures are essentially your failures. And so it’s easier Serdyukov was stolen by billions, and it seems like nobody had anything to do with it, because Putin appointed him and everyone is happy with everything.

            I apologize, but the conclusion is incorrect and unproven. Nobody would go to the polls then at all. Now less and less people go because they simply do not believe in them. But it will be eliminated soon. S.G.Shoigu suggested, citing foreign experience, non-voting deprive citizenship or punish hard labor.
            About freedom here finally kikos - I will not chew. And everything seems to be clear, there are only a lot of emotions. By the way
            Quote: Atrix
            you are immediately attributed to the pedar .. yourself, a pro-Western whore .. that you don’t love your homeland, etc.
            this is a technique, old already, but many fell for it, even the leaders of the productive healthy opposition quarreled. The one who is older did not fall into the trap, but fell into the category of "renegades", and the one who got into the "swamp slush" younger, substituted, in short, ahead of time.
          2. washi
            washi 1 June 2013 16: 19
            +4
            There is a popular expression: wee - do not toss bags. There are a lot of people wishing to equip OUR COUNTRY. But as was said about the Decembrists: They are very far from the people.
            I don’t understand at all, and here is the head of state (whoever he is). On the ground almost EVERYWHERE liberals are sitting-that is, grabbers.
            Modern "Decembrists-swamps" also do not want to let go of their serfs (workers and peasants who are paid at a minimum and individual entrepreneurs, who at the beginning are spread rot with low prices, then they buy or destroy. Then prices rise).
            I do not have enough ships and confiscation of property of ALL who were involved in the privatization of state. THOSE. MY PROPERTY. I do not have enough enforcement of laws with respect to liberals, although THEY SHOULD NOT ALLOW THE LAW OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE CPSU AND Komsomol and seized THEIR PROPERTY AND CASH. I PAYED CONTRIBUTIONS, i.e. I AM OWNER, UNDER MODERN LAWS.
            WHY MY SELLED WITHOUT ME?
            1. V. Salama
              V. Salama 1 June 2013 16: 35
              +1
              Quote: Vasya
              I don’t understand at all, and here is the head of state (whoever he is). On the ground almost EVERYWHERE liberals are sitting-that is, grabbers.
              Vasya, there are the concepts of "controlled" and "control subsystem", "subject" and "object" of control. Finally, there is a theory (if you are from SU) about "base" and "superstructure", which should correspond to each other. Well, this does not happen, it is not scientific in the old sense of the word. Again, on the same rake - ".... only the boyars are bad."
        3. washi
          washi 1 June 2013 15: 43
          +5
          We need the equality of ALL before the law. And the laws that suit most of the country, and not like in France. Laws adopted for the sake of the minority, and the rest do not care.
          T.N. The "dictator" Stalin, unlike his last ones, never made decisions alone. He always consulted not only with the Politburo, but also with ordinary performers. It was real democracy.
          1. V. Salama
            V. Salama 1 June 2013 16: 57
            +1
            Quote: Vasya
            We need the equality of ALL before the law. And the laws that suit most of the country, and not like in France. Laws adopted for the sake of the minority, and the rest do not care.
            If everything were so simple ... if we are led to all sorts of chukhnya and are not able to determine the true values, which also substitute, like the concept - "Squaw, what do you like more - these beads or the valley on the other side of the river?" Then you will believe that every nation (the majority) is worthy to have someone who has it. I do not know how ethical it is, but I will cite a repost to confirm:
            Let’s say about Putin: - yes, some of his actions upset me, well, for example, his statement that everyone cannot be equal before the law, well, there’s much more that makes me sad in his actions, but to say that HE ruined the country, and nothing positive happens in Russia - this is not fair.
            Nick removed it. This is what kind of bread it was necessary to chop, to put on one level, like blouses in a store, the opportunity to live in a country in which laws are not written for everyone.
            1. nerd.su
              nerd.su 1 June 2013 22: 47
              +2
              Quote: V. Salama
              This is what kind of bread it was necessary to chop, to put on one level, like blouses in a store, the opportunity to live in a country in which laws are not written for everyone.

              What kind of bread did you have to crumble to think that there is at least one country in the world where laws are written for everyone !?
              1. V. Salama
                V. Salama 1 June 2013 23: 15
                +1
                Quote: bot.su
                What kind of bread did you have to crumble to think that there is at least one country in the world where laws are written for everyone !?
                I give you a plus +. You justly caught me on my negligence. And you yourself put in a fat minus for your unwillingness to think and understand the meaning of what is written. And name at least one country where laws are not written for everyone. How they are applied is another matter. And also tell me how long a president, for example, the United States, will be in his place if he publicly declares this. In what other country, for example Europe or even Africa, "people grab it." We had a meal and this determines our present, and what the future awaits is also clear, ahead of a caste slave-owning society. We deserve nothing else ...
                1. nerd.su
                  nerd.su 2 June 2013 02: 04
                  -1
                  Yeah, minus me for the carelessness ...
                  Quote: V. Salama
                  And name at least one country where laws are not written for everyone.

                  Any monarchy, including constitutional.
                  “The identity of the King is inviolable; its ministers are responsible ”(Art. 63 of the Belgian Constitution); “The king cannot be held accountable for his actions” (§ 7 of the “Form of Government” of Sweden); etc. In other words, the monarch bears no political or legal responsibility for his actions.

                  About the model of democracy - the absolute monarchy of Saudi Arabia (if it is not a super-democratic country, why no one democratizes it?) Can not be mentioned.

                  Quote: V. Salama
                  And also tell me how long the president, for example the USA, will be in his place if he publicly declares this.

                  Well, the presidents of the United States and so could not soak.
                  Here is what George W. Bush said, two terms you supervised:
                  Another example is the Dredd Scott case, which went through the courts many years ago. It was said that the Constitution allows slavery, because ... because ... well, there is a right to personal property. This is a personal opinion. This is not what the Constitution says. The US Constitution says - we all ... we ... Well, you know, nothing like that is said there. The constitution does not mean equality in America.

                  What kind of democracy can there be in a country where an elected leader issues such pearls (the same Bush):
                  American children learn to be responsible citizens to take advantage of the opportunities our opportunist society offers
                  ;
                  We have lost too much time trying to talk to Africa fairly. However, Africa is a nation suffering from an inconceivable disease.
                  ;
                  Those who don’t think I can do my job underestimate me
                  ?

                  And nothing, 8 years led, and people hawala.

                  Quote: V. Salama
                  and what the future awaits is also clear, ahead of the caste slave society. We do not deserve another ...

                  Well, the United States has long been a caste society and nothing called democracy and forcing others ...
                  1. nerd.su
                    nerd.su 2 June 2013 02: 41
                    +1
                    Something I do not understand, is there a fan of George W. Bush on the site? laughing Gulchatai, open your face!
                  2. V. Salama
                    V. Salama 2 June 2013 13: 24
                    +1
                    The downside is not from me, so I don’t know for carelessness or what else.
                    Quote: bot.su
                    “The identity of the King is inviolable; its ministers are responsible ”(Art. 63 of the Belgian Constitution); “The king cannot be held accountable for his actions” (§ 7 of the “Form of Government” of Sweden); etc. In other words, the monarch bears no political or legal responsibility for his actions.
                    In our country (do not pay attention to the flag, it’s not a topic here), the president also does not bear any responsibility, according to the LAW. All types of liability were removed from EBN by the first Decree of the new President, and by the Federal Law that the new President pushed through - from all subsequent presidents of the Russian Federation. But we are somehow off topic, not talking about that. In monarchies that exist evolutionarily, the possible “arbitrariness” of the monarch in government affairs is conservatively associated with the “responsibility” of other officials, at least moral (this will depend on the specific situation). There is no absolute arbitrariness of the monarch even in the modern absolute monarchy (and even from history - the monarch lives until his arbitrariness does not contradict the corporate interests of the elite).
                    Quote: bot.su
                    About the model of democracy - the absolute monarchy of Saudi Arabia (if it is not a super-democratic country, why no one democratizes it?) Can not be mentioned.

                    We have not decided on the concept of “democracy,” so I would not like to touch upon this nuance now either, since we will speak different languages. Let me explain, democracy (the power of the people) appeared and existed as a form of the slave state. Only there, slaves were not considered for the people and did not have the right to vote. In ancient Rome, democracy was understood as the power of citizens, but in order to become a citizen it was necessary to serve in the army and start a family. What is democracy now understood? In the sense of talker-politicians, one gets the impression that they understand "the maximum possible for a given country (socio-political system) to involve the population in government." That is, the “dictator of Samos” has one family member and this is one democracy, and the EBN has a different family. In the USA - democracy too - put out the light, but your own.
                    Quote: bot.su
                    Well, the presidents of the United States and so could not soak. ... The constitution does not mean equality in America.
                    I put it on the scales, it does not outweigh (although I admit that a lot depends on the context and you can argue forever here), even if you put in the bowl “Those who don’t think that I can do my job, underestimate me,” then pulls. No one thinks that in the USA he is deceived as to his abilities and is perceived as self-criticism. And in the USSR, many did not think that the aging Brezhnev was doing his job and, before the law, not everyone was equal in law enforcement, but this was a serious problem, not a progressing trend (well, this is my opinion, which means that it is debatable).
                    Quote: bot.su
                    Well, the United States has long been a caste society and nothing called democracy and forcing others ...
                    Usually, when you think that it simply cannot be worse, in principle, and you stop resisting, it gets worse. And Russia has never been oriented toward the United States, although it lied, the positive can be found, but this is not the topic now.
                    1. V. Salama
                      V. Salama 2 June 2013 13: 57
                      0
                      PS Yes, about the main thing, what is the point in general, my meaning, I’ll explain:
                      I am a citizen of Russia and only Russia, I have no other homeland and did not have a passport and in real life. In general, now it doesn't matter to me what was bad before or in other countries. I know that I do not want to live in an environment where "the law is not for everyone" or "when not everyone is equal before the law." I hope the progress of the society is assumed in the thoughts and aspirations of the people. At least (at the initial stage) this "equality" should exist at least in the form of an official declaration, in the form of a goal to which all citizens of the country should strive, in the form of an official ideology. It is not clear to me that people take such things calmly. It seemed to me that you were trying to convince me either of the unattainability of this goal or its harmfulness, I did not understand, but it does not matter in this situation. I think I have now defined the subject of our conversation more clearly.
                      1. nerd.su
                        nerd.su 2 June 2013 17: 17
                        -1
                        Quote: V. Salama
                        I know that I do not want to live in conditions when "the law is not for everyone" or "when not everyone is equal before the law"

                        Do not want to - you just have to shoot yourself. Because there are no such states on our planet and will not be foreseen soon. Yes and to nothing. There are many laws, and the official duties of top officials, especially those related to the security of the state (president, prime minister, defense ministers, etc.) put these people before the choice between law and justice.
                        And in general ... I remember in recent years, before the collapse of the Union and until the 2000s, they only said that lawyers are forever, there should be lawyers in the Duma, because laws must be passed by professionals, political workers in the police are not needed, professionals and again lawyers ...
                        And what is the result? And everything, the development of the country has stopped. Lawyers cannot figure out what to do so that the mace hits targets, so that the satellites stop falling, so that agricultural and industry grow. But they can prove to everyone that according to the law they are not guilty of anything and can continue to work. Hence the conclusion - professionals should lead everything. Agronomists-agronomists, builders-builders, military-military, etc. And above all this should be a political leadership, preferably also emerging from professionals. The main thing should be the goal, everything should be subordinate to its decision. The law should be just an instrument of maintaining order and sweeping away obstacles to the goal. And no demagoguery.
                      2. V. Salama
                        V. Salama 2 June 2013 21: 56
                        0
                        Quote: bot.su
                        Do not want to - you just have to shoot yourself. Because there are no such states on our planet and will not be foreseen soon.
                        Strange emotion, oh well, I didn’t read that. You offer to lower your hands? I understood, but not in Russian it is a progress to deny. Have you heard anything about the Pskov-Novgorod veche democracy? And the fact that soon it is not expected ... but what do you think is complete when it is expected? Soon - not soon? After that, it will be necessary to build it, I would like to decide on the drawings in advance before picking up shovel hammers. “He who does not understand the meaning will expend the efforts of nine bulls and will not get the required result” (Chinese wisdom).
                        Quote: bot.su
                        confront these individuals with a choice between law and justice.
                        Usually opposed "by law or by conscience." And conscience - there is an idea of ​​the right (due), it is different with us. So it turns out?
                        Quote: bot.su
                        I remember ... they only said - ... laws should be passed by professionals ... in the police ... we need professionals ...
                        And as soon as you could believe it, it was a military information operation. It was then necessary to know that a “professional” is not the one to whom a large salary is paid, but the one whose special activity is highly effective. I mean not only its technological, resource and target aspects (“effective manager”), but axiological and full effectiveness, showing how the activities of this specialist satisfy the needs of a managed or managing subsystem, both at the level of the economy and the state. There is still a nuance, but so far I’ll miss it, it will not work out briefly. And so, there’s no problem here, but who needed it? So much for “yes and nothing”.
                        Quote: bot.su
                        Hence the conclusion - professionals should lead everything. ... And above all this should be the political leadership ... emerging from professionals.
                        And who argues, but what does it have to do with it? This is commonplace.
                        Quote: bot.su
                        The main thing should be the goal, everything should be subordinate to its decision.
                        Any activity by definition (- is the purposeful implementation of ... efforts) is purposeful. And the main goal (or function) is the backbone of the system (systems theory). This is not news either. What is a goal that needs to meet needs? Whose needs, subjects of a managed or managing subsystem? And what should be the priorities here?
                        Quote: bot.su
                        The law should be just an instrument of maintaining order and sweeping away obstacles to the goal.
                        This definition is internally contradictory, although it depends on what is meant by order. Yes, and the law is a tool, this is true, in principle, but have you heard the term "rule of law"? And "this right is the will of the people, formalized in the form of a law." Does this match your ideas?
                        Quote: bot.su
                        And no demagoguery

                        Now we are very reminiscent of demagogues here, but I still do not understand your views and what you are trying to convince me of, unfortunately.
                      3. nerd.su
                        nerd.su 3 June 2013 09: 04
                        0
                        Quote: V. Salama
                        Now we are very reminiscent of demagogues here, but I still do not understand your views and what you are trying to convince me of, unfortunately.

                        So yes, it’s not easy for us to understand each other. You should speak with your style somewhere at the Academy of Sciences. In principle, I understand what you are saying, but, excuse me, of course, I am always tormented by vague doubts when people with such a scientific style appear on such sites.
                        My views ... I do not believe in a "rule of law", "all are equal before the law" and other nonsense. This is a utopia, just like communism. At least at this stage in the development of society. This is a utopia harmful to Russia, we now have no time to fight for it. This is purely my personal opinion.
                      4. V. Salama
                        V. Salama 3 June 2013 10: 42
                        0
                        Quote: bot.su
                        I am always tormented by vague doubts when people with such a scientific style appear on such sites.
                        Let me explain: I served in the Army for a long time, what site should I be on? And such a style is more difficult to explain here. I think this is partly a professional deformation, but also the desire to switch to a single language of communication - operating with concepts at the household level and filling them with arbitrary content when discussing complex issues, we are doomed to misunderstanding.
                        Quote: bot.su
                        This is a utopia harmful to Russia, we now have no time to fight for it. This is purely my personal opinion.
                        Enough will not oppose progress and the transition to socialism will become inevitable. But this is also my purely personal opinion.
                        Quote: bot.su
                        I basically understand what you're saying
                        It means that we did not waste our time on this discussion. This is very rare "At least at this stage of the development of society"
  • Andrew-001
    Andrew-001 1 June 2013 15: 04
    +7
    I am not "minus", but I will answer: Yes, there has been a substitution of concepts. But since the masses of people understand by the word "liberalism" the freedom of one individual person from any obligations and his right to decide for everyone else, it is necessary to change the meaning of the definition in Wikipedia (and other reference books). For example, call it new liberalism. And our enemies have the most direct relation to him.
  • V. Salama
    V. Salama 1 June 2013 15: 14
    -3
    Quote: sergey32
    What is liberalism? Here's how Wikipedia dislikes it.
    Therefore, she is unloved, which defines concepts in violation of scientific procedures, which does not reveal the essence of the phenomenon being determined. In addition, this definition does not imply this: - "Liberalism proclaims the rights and freedoms of every person as the highest value ..." In principle, no one cares what he proclaims there, I would like to know what "liberalism" is - the essence of this phenomenon , a set of essential features. And the very term "liberalism" is a characteristic of capitalism. I don't need to explain what capitalism is.
    Quote: sergey32
    As you can see, there is nothing wrong.
    It's just that not everything "lies before our eyes."
    Quote: sergey32
    It seems that our enemies are not related to the liberals.
    If you look closely, liberalism bury the entire world economy, including the enemy. You just need to send them all out of the country and then I would make them friends.
  • washi
    washi 1 June 2013 15: 35
    +1
    I agree. The main implementation of the law of the country. But who wrote these laws and for whom?
    I want the Stalinist Constitution (the draft, and not what was adopted, thanks to the ancestors of the "Bolotniks") and the laws that were in force in 50 to be fulfilled in relation to me ..
  • old man54
    old man54 2 June 2013 00: 34
    0
    I don’t know where you got it, but the foundation of the liberalistic idea is the assertion that everything is permissible, what is good for a person, what he likes and what he wants. Those. no moral, moral, spiritual and religious framework can be a principle! Now you understand why there is such a riot of permissiveness and sexual debauchery in Geyrop? And why are these "freedoms" so protected by laws there.
  • AlNikolaich
    AlNikolaich 2 June 2013 01: 19
    +1
    Quote: sergey32
    It seems that our enemies are not related to the liberals.

    Clear business, have replaced concepts! Democracy is the same in fact the power of the people. And the true meaning of this word was clear in the days of the Soviet Union! The USSR was a real democratic country! And I add, the United States was a strangler of democracy and an enemy of a progressive world community! And only in the 90 years, we began to impose the opinion that democracy and the United States are synonyms! And how then this lie cut the rumor! Now we’ve gotten used to it, and we affirm that American democracy is the same as liberalism!
    1. yurta2013
      yurta2013 2 June 2013 17: 05
      0
      Quote: AlNikolaich
      Democracy is the same in fact the power of the people. And the true meaning of this word was clear in the days of the Soviet Union! The USSR was a real democratic country!

      The true meaning of the concept of democracy is always the same. It's just that politicians of all stripes use it in different ways. As for the USSR, there was no democracy there. The country and the people were completely ruled by the party through its officials. This is called bureaucracy-based partocracy.
  • NKVD
    NKVD 1 June 2013 09: 57
    0
    Quote: JIaIIoTb
    But their brains are washed out and they do not understand that wanting good is harmful.

    I doubt that they want benefit, all their actions are conscious and meaningful, and the goal is the collapse of the state ...
  • Gari
    Gari 1 June 2013 10: 26
    0
    The goal of the Russian patriot is to destroy the power of the “liberals”. Revival of society. Strengthening family, morality and ethics. Leading technical and intellectual progress of society. Population increase of the country. Providing opportunities for our children and grandchildren to live freely and morally.

    THE PURPOSE OF THE WORLD-SCALE PATRIOT is the destruction of the power of “liberal” degenerates and enemies of the human race on a scale of all mankind.

    “Liberalism” declared war on us hundreds of years ago. Ruthless war of annihilation. We have no choice. It has long been made for us and our descendants.

    We have to die anyway.

    Better to die in battle.

    We have nothing to lose, behind our families, our homeland
    Victory will be ours !!!
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 1 June 2013 10: 45
      +7
      And I agree with Sergey32.

      And the substitution of concepts occurs not only in relation to liberalism.
      The same can be said about democracy, communism, fascism, Zionism, socialism, etc. There was a shift ...

      You just need to call everything by their proper names and finally understand the terminology.

      Otherwise, we will become completely confused, do not agree, and lose quickly!

      And aleks3897 and pahom54, I advise you to read a story at your leisure on the topic of the monarchy.
      1. V. Salama
        V. Salama 1 June 2013 15: 42
        +2
        Quote: aviamed90
        And I agree with Sergey32.
        And the substitution of concepts occurs not only in relation to liberalism.
        The same can be said about democracy, communism, fascism, Zionism, socialism, etc. There was a shift ...
        I would like to draw your attention to the fact that "substitution of concepts" is not an objective phenomenon, it is a technique for manipulating consciousness with hidden goals. There has been a shift in the education system, not "some". If you own a scientific definition of a concept (a necessary set of the essential), then you will not be brainwashed, although there may be several scientific definitions of the same concept, but they should not be contradictory and defined correctly (according to the laws of logic).
        Quote: aviamed90
        Otherwise, we will become completely confused, do not agree, and lose quickly!
        This is the goal. Even Lenin warned: "an illiterate person is always outside of politics, as a subject and always in politics, as a means." We can draw conclusions ...
    2. Gari
      Gari 1 June 2013 11: 16
      0
      Here is someone put a minus
      1. aviamed90
        aviamed90 1 June 2013 11: 31
        +4
        By the way, something else about the substitution of concepts.

        Hitler never called his party fascist.
        Its official name is the "National Socialist German Workers' Party of Germany".

        Who will object?
        Do you dislike socialism? Do you not respect workers? Are you not interested in Germany? And you are against the nation? Then - to the wall!

        It is a patriotic sign.
    3. washi
      washi 1 June 2013 16: 28
      0
      I ALREADY read it on this site.
      Do not roll bags
      You can say EVERYTHING. Harder to do.
      Who, where, what did so that the Russian Federation, the USSR again became great.
      He built a house, planted a tree, gave birth to 3 or more children, produced and sold products without intermediaries, sued the bribe takers and the judges themselves who take the money?
      1. aviamed90
        aviamed90 1 June 2013 20: 47
        +2
        washi

        Do you want to offer something specific?

        The whole country to sue bribe takers and judges?

        And about the tree, three children and products - people are trying!
        Yes, something with our "steering" - it turns out badly! Everything disappears somewhere - both children (do not give birth because of poverty), and trees (cut down mercilessly, like the Khimki forest) and especially products (there is generally a dark and criminal story here)!

        I think that it’s enough if a citizen is law-abiding, works and benefits his country (it doesn’t have to produce something), protects it in case of war, honors his old people, loves children and his wife, respects fellow citizens, etc.
        This should be enough to be considered a worthy citizen.
        And, it’s not at all necessary to take up arms and pour the blood of those who disagree with your opinion!

        There must be a way - how to make "so that the Russian Federation and the USSR become great again" (your quote).
        We think and argue over this, sir!
  • old man54
    old man54 2 June 2013 00: 30
    0
    Finding "those" is difficult, I agree, but I know one thing for sure - they are most likely with sideways! But not privates, of course, but they sit sooo high!
  • Rustiger
    Rustiger 1 June 2013 08: 13
    +3
    Liberals declared war on us. We must defend ourselves.

    We have to die anyway.
    Better to die in battle.

    The article marks, in fact, the correct goals. But why, immediately from the headline, the attitude towards such a "defeatist position"? Not to "defend", but to strike back!
    The words of an Orthodox elder are given, but CHRISTMAS is condemned in Christianity.
    And the ending is generally decadent. Better say "We are ready to fight for our children and grandchildren so that they do not have to die!" angry soldier
  • seller trucks
    seller trucks 1 June 2013 08: 21
    +5
    THE GOAL OF THE RUSSIAN PATRIOT is the destruction of the power of the "liberals."


    recalled the motto "Orthodoxy or Death!" by the way in Russia he is recognized as extremist
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 1 June 2013 11: 18
      0
      seller trucks

      This is a slogan from the arsenal of the "Black Hundred" (the official name is "The Union of the Russian People").

      The formula of these guys: "Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality." But what about multinational and multi-confessional Russia?
      Dissenting bullet in the forehead and ditch?
  • Rattenfanger
    Rattenfanger 1 June 2013 08: 23
    +4
    ... people who formed in the Soviet state remember not only the lineup of sausage and tights, but also the high outbursts of the masses, labor heroism and burning spirit.

    When we have national ideaAs in a separate period of the "criminal communist regime", nothing is impossible for us. IMHO.
    The question arises: why the best friend of Russian skiers and judokas has not yet clearly formulated what the country will again tear its veins for? An attempt to reduce everything to the banal "get rich" (doubling GDP, etc.) clearly failed with this role. And if we want to become a full-fledged center of power again - without which the very fact of our survival looks doubtful - we need a breakthrough, and not a forward, unhurried movement.
  • shinobi
    shinobi 1 June 2013 08: 30
    11
    When I hear the words "democrat" and "liberal" my hand reflexively reaches for the official Makarov.

    PS: Sorry Slavs, paraphrased Goebels, but it hurts to the place of quotation.
    1. Prometheus
      Prometheus 1 June 2013 09: 07
      +3
      Not Goebbels, but Hans Jost. A quote really came to the place.
      1. Rattenfanger
        Rattenfanger 1 June 2013 09: 43
        +1
        Not Hans Jost, but Himmler. No.
        The exact author of the statement is not known.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • omsbon
    omsbon 1 June 2013 08: 31
    +6
    Best defense is attack.
    The axiom that does not require proof is applicable in war and in politics.
  • Bosk
    Bosk 1 June 2013 08: 37
    +3
    Aren't we too fixated on "humanists? Because any problem arises with inaction or with a passive attitude towards it." Liberals declared war on us "... it is rather they declared war on themselves, because they are not even a minority ... rather, at least in terms of max and many of their ideas are opposite to human nature, I want to notice not nature, namely NATURE. FREQUENTLY ...
    1. dmit-xnumx
      dmit-xnumx 1 June 2013 14: 10
      0
      - That is, an attempt is possible, but not a result.
    2. yurta2013
      yurta2013 2 June 2013 17: 20
      0
      Quote: Bosk
      "Liberals have declared war on us" ... it is more likely that they declared war on themselves, because they are not even a minority ... rather at least in maximum and many of their ideas are opposite to human nature

      Nature is not opposed to liberalism, but to its perversions. Any idea can be brought to the point of absurdity. This is what happened with modern European pseudo-liberalism. Before the sexual revolution began, liberalism in Europe corresponded fully to human nature, and before the start of multiculturalism, it corresponded to the common sense of the Europeans themselves in general. Perhaps Europe was really ruined by excessive humanism.
  • Vladimir_61
    Vladimir_61 1 June 2013 08: 41
    +4
    There were no illusions about socialism, as it was being implemented. The name is not the point - the idea, but it was carried out, albeit with errors. Any first creation is imperfect. Despite the shortcomings, there was a movement forward towards building a just society. What now? A burp of an old rotten world in a new package of fabricated theories. "They don't know what they are doing"? Of those who seem to have lost their way. Gone are the days when one could justify ignorance. They all know and understand. And it is necessary to fight them.
    1. yurta2013
      yurta2013 2 June 2013 17: 26
      0
      Quote: Vladimir_61
      Despite the shortcomings, there was a move forward towards building a just society.

      What was this forward movement manifested in? In the heyday of the end of the existence of the USSR hazing, cronyism, petty theft of state property, a gradually developing drug addiction and rapidly growing alcoholism? Soviet society was decomposing at an ever-accelerating pace, and perestroika only completed the process of its collapse.
  • avant-garde
    avant-garde 1 June 2013 09: 04
    +4
    fucking democrats and liberals roll away from our country here is your happiness
    1. avant-garde
      avant-garde 1 June 2013 09: 07
      16
      And here is our happiness !!!! and go ass fucking liberals
      1. Rustiger
        Rustiger 1 June 2013 10: 48
        18
        Quote: avant-garde
        And here is our happiness !!!!

        And here are our GOALS like men and fathers!

        1

        2

        And who will interfere - ground the muffler!
        1. avant-garde
          avant-garde 1 June 2013 11: 20
          +1
          plus 100000000500000000 !!!
      2. V. Salama
        V. Salama 1 June 2013 20: 32
        +1
        Quote: avant-garde
        And here is our happiness !!!!
        There is nothing to object. "What else do you need to be happy?" And here we also need confidence in the future for our children. And what needs to be done for this? - "Build a house, plant a tree ..." In short, "do business and less pi ...". It looks like we have no idea where to start.
        1. old man54
          old man54 2 June 2013 00: 48
          0
          all positive and patriotic must unite, create a single governing body (organization), in order to fight the 3,14dorasy. Forgot Lenin or what? Read his theory of revolutionary sitauatsii, a very true theory, relevant as never before.
  • the polar
    the polar 1 June 2013 09: 04
    +5
    What a fool this author of the article is Rozanov. So, in his opinion, the socialist idea has not justified itself, it is necessary to look for the idea from the "elders". Well, Christianity is two thousand years old and it was Christianity, including Orthodoxy, that gave birth to and nurtured liberalism.

    So, the proclaimed by the author "the goal of a Russian patriot ... of a worldwide scale", although it may be sincere, but stupid and illiterate sloganism.
    Well, the author has destroyed the power of "liberal" geeks and enemies of the human race, "but what next?
    What the author is going to build instead of liberalism, socialism does not suit him, because in his opinion, he “did not justify himself,” then what concept does he offer? Building churches to provide "breakthrough technologies for the overall happiness of mankind"?
    Some nonsense.
    1. Borat
      Borat 1 June 2013 09: 12
      0
      Quote: Polar
      Some nonsense.

      Totally agree with you! A very successful epithet to this article.
    2. V. Salama
      V. Salama 1 June 2013 20: 09
      0
      Quote: Polar
      So, the "goal of a Russian patriot ... of a worldwide scale," proclaimed by the author, although it may be sincere, is stupid ...
      This goal is not new, the author borrowed it from either Maxim Kalashnikov or Vladimir Bushin, I don’t remember exactly and I don’t have these publications at hand. But they both do not deviate from socialism and present it as a strategic goal, corresponding to the Russian mentality. In short, she does not seem stupid there. And the author may have an unseemly goal - "in order to discredit any idea, it must be brought to the point of absurdity." Or at least, to intercept an attractive idea and lead people in the right direction. The proposed strange symbiosis of this goal with something unidentified (I think this is an attempt to consolidate the people with the government under the flag of a great goal, there is no state ideology) really is a slogan.
  • Borat
    Borat 1 June 2013 09: 09
    0
    Ingenious! And how has no one guessed before ?! belay

    Disputes about the Russian national idea have been going on since the collapse of the USSR!
    Is your "common sense school" solely concerned with the invention of the bicycle?
  • avant-garde
    avant-garde 1 June 2013 09: 18
    +2
    on the site p..i..d..o..r be careful he puts down cons for the fact that happiness is a full-fledged family!
    1. dmit-xnumx
      dmit-xnumx 1 June 2013 14: 17
      +1
      Ay, "be afraid of wolves, don't go to the forest"! It's not scary, it's scary that the phrase from "Trembita" (operetta, feature film) "Rob, deceive, steal - just become a decent person!" - has entered modern life as a credo.
  • v53993
    v53993 1 June 2013 09: 19
    +4
    "I would uproot liberalism.
    Pedri ... there is no mercy ... "
    So today would begin his poem VV Mayakovsky
  • NKVD
    NKVD 1 June 2013 09: 30
    +2
    MORE ABOUT THE LIBERALS. F.M Dostoevsky "Our Russian liberal is first of all a lackey and only looks at how to clean someone's boots", and here's another:
    "... This fact expresses the whole essence of Russian liberalism of the kind I am talking about. First, what is liberalism, if we speak at all, if not an attack (reasonable or erroneous, this is another question) on the existing order of things? Well, my fact is that Russian liberalism is not an attack on the existing order of things, but an attack on the very essence of our things, on the very things, and not just one order, not the Russian order, but Russia itself. My liberal has gone so far as to deny Russia itself, that is, he hates and beats his mother. Every unfortunate and unsuccessful Russian fact excites laughter and almost delight in him. He hates folk customs, Russian history, everything. If there is for his excuse, except that he does not understand what he is doing, and takes his hatred of Russia for the most fruitful liberalism ... "You couldn't say better.
    1. avt
      avt 1 June 2013 10: 46
      +2
      Quote: NKVD
      FM Dostoevsky "Our Russian liberal is first of all a lackey and only looks at how to clean someone's boots", and here's another:

      Quote: NKVD
      My liberal has come to the point that he denies Russia itself, that is, it hates and beats his mother.

      That is why among the revolutionaries-first-borns, the Leninist guard, Tolstoy was "a mirror of the Russian revolution", and Dostoevsky was a "trashy old man"
      1. V. Salama
        V. Salama 1 June 2013 21: 00
        +1
        Quote: avt
        That is why the revolutionaries-Pervents, the Leninist guard ...

        But who only wasn’t there, then they sorted it out - someone with an ice ax, someone else ... There are many interests intertwined with regard to Russia, and, of course, heaps of different stripes stood under the banner of the Revolution. But in the end, it turned out as it should - Dostoevsky was in school. But at Chubais, the CIA went to assistants - and the result is appropriate and quite obvious. Maybe in this situation you’ll come up with some kind of joke too. I think the popularity will be ensured.
    2. Rustiger
      Rustiger 1 June 2013 11: 13
      +8
      Quote: NKVD
      FM Dostoevsky "Our Russian liberal is first of all a lackey and only looks at how to clean someone's boots"

      The rightness of Fedor Mikhalych is directly proved by this liberal
      In an interview with the London Financial Times, NANOtoliy Chubais said: “I have re-read Dostoevsky in the last three months. And I have an almost physical hatred of this man. He is certainly a genius, but his idea of ​​the Russians as an elected, holy people, his cult of suffering and the false choice that he offers make me want to tear him to pieces. ”

      They writhe like salted maggots. Such statements and understanding by PEOPLE of the true essence of liberalism prevent them, corpse eaters.
      1. dmit-xnumx
        dmit-xnumx 1 June 2013 14: 24
        +1
        100500! - get ahead! But I am ready to subscribe to your statement.
  • Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov 1 June 2013 09: 32
    +5
    Yes, everything will be fine men .. Russia has repeatedly crushed all the scum .. They are now screaming in a geyevropu .. and saliva sprinkle with anger .. the most dangerous are those who are quietly sitting .. and shitting .. and we will calculate them .. sooner or later !! .. The main thing is to educate sons by the real defenders of the Motherland ..
    1. Rattenfanger
      Rattenfanger 1 June 2013 09: 45
      +1
      Your words, to God’s ears.
    2. NKVD
      NKVD 1 June 2013 09: 46
      +1
      Quote: MIKHAN
      ..They are now screaming and running to geyevropu

      Russia is self-cleaning.
    3. V. Salama
      V. Salama 1 June 2013 22: 12
      0
      Quote: MIKHAN
      Yes, everything will be fine men .. Russia all the scum has repeatedly crushed ..

      As the ancients said: "The most significant things should not be judged too hasty." In short, I would not like to approach a serious matter with a hat.
  • Bort radist
    Bort radist 1 June 2013 09: 33
    +3
    "Liberals declared war on us"- I agree! Well, and further in the title is nonsense. They are defending themselves from a strong enemy. From whom to defend themselves. Everything is upside down ... the head is turned upside down. It's another matter to return traditions and for liberals to prepare reservations a la zoo park."
  • Semurg
    Semurg 1 June 2013 09: 35
    0
    Yes, some kind of hysteria from the author (it is better to die in battle) has not yet been at the mercy of wars, revolutions, perestroika. Why, once again, call people to the barricades, it takes another or two generations for the country to come to its senses, and here they’ll march left march march right march on the barricades. Well, and who wants to fight recently on a nearby branch, there was a record of volunteers in Syria (there in Syria, on the other hand, there are the same fighters for ideas), but such as the author will chase young people to die and remain behind to justify new ideas.
  • NKVD
    NKVD 1 June 2013 09: 39
    +1
    In my understanding, "Russian" liberalism is the Nemtsovs, Kasparovs, Kasyanovs, Ksenia Sobchachki and other bastards ... am
    1. Bosk
      Bosk 1 June 2013 10: 46
      +1
      LIBERALISM is something without nationality and orientation, and is aimed more at the idea than at the person ... By the way, gentlemen Nemtsov-Sobakevichi, they do not love their homeland, but love their love for the homeland (by the way for money), and liberals. ..for them people are cattle ... for them their own idea is dear and they cherish and cherish it ... I think they will not die out on their own ... but you need to contribute!
    2. V. Salama
      V. Salama 1 June 2013 21: 14
      0
      Quote: NKVD
      In my understanding, "Russian" liberalism is the Nemtsovs, Kasparovs, Kasyanovs, Ksenia Sobchachki and other bastards ...

      But what about Chubais, and those to whom he is so dear? - is this "other bastard?"
      It would have been better then to construct a phrase like this: "in my understanding, liberalism is another bastard ..." And this petty rascal could not even be mentioned.
  • Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov 1 June 2013 09: 43
    0
    You just need to live .. to educate the children and this foam will soon settle down ... in Russia it’s always like that .. But I don’t want to fight, but I’ll have to obviously .. they’ve already used all their tricks .. Russia is worth it !!! In Syria, everything will be decided .. I think
  • avant-garde
    avant-garde 1 June 2013 09: 46
    +2
    Quote: NKVD
    and other bastard ...

    let me disagree with you a little drinks, this is not a bastard, it is a hundred times worse and this abomination has no place in Russia!
  • marsavin.yu
    marsavin.yu 1 June 2013 09: 49
    +5
    The idea of ​​the Russians is justice! Justice in everything, in life in actions in relations with the state, more precisely in relations with the state. And you don’t need to look for it somewhere, it lives in everyone. And stop breeding about the idea. Better promote healthy lifestyles!
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 1 June 2013 10: 54
      +2
      In the state you will not find justice. This is not a legal term.
      The state operates with such a concept as LEGALITY.
      And you always confuse law and justice, although even Catherine II drew the attention of her contemporaries.
    2. V. Salama
      V. Salama 1 June 2013 21: 34
      +1
      Quote: marsavin.yu
      Justice in everything, in life in actions in relation to the state, more precisely in relations with the state.
      "Justice", however, is a party concept. The "party principle" (party - part) was introduced into everyday life by Aristotle. In fact, this is a social-class (if softer - socio-political) position, the principle of ideology, that is, an objectively existing phenomenon. He instructs us to distinguish - from the position of the interests of which social group (class) this or that activity is carried out. And the state is an instrument for protecting the ruling class. In real life we ​​have not a democracy, but an aristocracy (there was such a form of state in ancient times) or, in a modern way, an oligarchy. In short, in Russia corvee 10% was considered fair, but for me it is fair when there is no corvee at all, in other words, we and the oligarchs have a different understanding of justice.
      Quote: marsavin.yu
      Get better at promoting healthy living!
      Are you an oligarch that you take aside, giving such advice?
      1. nerd.su
        nerd.su 2 June 2013 02: 38
        0
        Quote: V. Salama
        And the state is a tool to protect the dwelling class. In our reality, it is not democracy, but aristocracy (in ancient times, this form of state) or, in modern times, oligarchy.

        And then where is democracy? In real life?
        Quote: V. Salama
        In short, in Russia, 10% corvée was considered fair, but for me it is fair when corvee does not exist at all, in other words, the oligarchs and I have a different understanding of justice.

        And they would live in the 19th century, it would seem that is fair. Taxes - is that fair? You can argue only about the size.
        1. V. Salama
          V. Salama 2 June 2013 21: 11
          0
          Quote: bot.su
          in the 19th century, it would seem that is fair. Taxes - is that fair? You can argue only about the size.
          The concept of “justice” requires mastering if you do not see the difference between “corvée” and “tax”. If the tax is unfair, what does the business do? Or goes into the shade or goes to the square. Here, at least there is an appearance of freedom. And what is justice? It’s not a matter of size, size, in this case, is the quality expressed by a number (quantitatively).
  • Andrey from Tver
    Andrey from Tver 1 June 2013 09: 50
    +4
    A revision of the results of privatization - what is not an idea? For Russia, besides supranational.
    The prosecution of those who were in power in the 90s, without a statute of limitations, the confiscation of the stolen from them or their descendants is also normal.
    Well, enhanced reproduction. wink
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 1 June 2013 10: 55
      0
      And when you review the results of privatization, what will you do? Reproduction?

      Good idea!
    2. V. Salama
      V. Salama 1 June 2013 22: 05
      +1
      Quote: Andrey from Tver
      A revision of the results of privatization - what is not an idea? For Russia, besides supranational.
      The idea is the essence of ideology in our case, the idea of ​​good and bad, useful and not useful, as well as the directions of development goals. There is also a scientific definition of the concept of "ideology". In short, the "revision of the results" is necessary, but not enough for "national" (I apologize for the term, it is generally recognized, although it does not correspond to the content of the concept) the idea does not pull.
  • pahom54
    pahom54 1 June 2013 10: 02
    -3
    Quote: sergey32
    Please answer minus.
    We do not need rights and freedoms, a constitution, free elections, the rule of law, the inviolability of private property and the equality of all before the law?
    Do we need an absolute monarchy?

    Yes, all this has never happened in Russia (and the USSR). And all the time I want to ask a question: well, what freedom do you (you) need ??? Freedom from what ??? Freedom for what ??? What freedom ??? I am sure that someone who, having angry, makes noise about the need for freedom (or a complex of freedoms), if he thinks well, will not answer himself.
    Yes, Russia needs, if not a monarchy, then, as they said earlier, an iron hand. Try liberal methods to restore our economy, especially agriculture!
    And why are you bad monarchy ??? Imagine, one dynasty rules, which does not need to plunder national wealth, but only increase it. Thirsty rat riches and riches do not tear to power (feeding trough), billions of dollars are not needed for their re-election (rats) ...
    All the same, the monarchy has advantages ... At least in the fact that the presumptuous prime minister can be publicly executed on Red Square by the decision of the monarch ...
    1. NKVD
      NKVD 1 June 2013 10: 23
      0
      Quote: pahom54
      All the same, the monarchy has advantages ...

      Are you talking about constitutional monarchy or absolute?
      1. pahom54
        pahom54 1 June 2013 10: 29
        -7
        The constitutional monarchy will not allow the presumptuous prime minister to execute on Red Square, so, obviously, we will talk about the absolute.
        Even if the monarch is g ..., but this is his g ... and not some kind of pseudo supposedly chosen by the people and who is the same g ...
        1. aviamed90
          aviamed90 1 June 2013 11: 04
          +3
          pahom54

          Do you dream of a new Peter I, Alexander III or Catherine II?
          Suppose you find them and set them on the throne. And who will guarantee that their descendants will not turn into degenerates and tyrants?

          Isn’t it easier to just choose a decent head of state without inheritance rights? Or is inheritance of power fundamentally for you?
        2. Rustiger
          Rustiger 1 June 2013 11: 31
          0
          Nicholas II was also a hereditary monarch, but he saved before the pressure of the West. Badly finished / unfortunately /. . .
          And he laid the foundation for this. . .
          1. aviamed90
            aviamed90 1 June 2013 11: 36
            +4
            Rustiger

            Do you think that under Nicholas II the people lived sweetly?
            Less listen to film director Mikhalkov and more often read the history of the Fatherland.
            1. Alexey K.
              Alexey K. 2 June 2013 01: 56
              0
              Dear aviamed90, here are some facts for your information - everyone will draw conclusions.

              Under Tsar Nicholas ll: - 2nd place in the world in terms of GDP (after the United States), - 4th place in the world in terms of total industrial production, - 5th place in the world in terms of living. - industrial production growth rates - 1st place in the world. - The growth rate of national income - 1st place in the world. - the rate of growth of labor productivity - 1st place in the world. - the level of concentration of production - 1st place in the world. - gold reserves - 3rd place in the world. - One of the hardest currencies in the world - the Russian gold ruble. - the world's largest oil exporter; - the world's largest exporter of textile products; - one of the world's largest producers of non-ferrous and ferrous metallurgy products; - one of the world's largest manufacturers of engineering products. - One of the largest countries in the world in terms of coal production. - One of the largest railway lines in the world. One of the highest rates in the world for the construction of railways. - the world's largest exporter of cereals, flax, eggs, milk, butter, meat, sugar, etc. Crops of crops are 1/3 more than the crops of Argentina, the USA and Canada combined. - a practically resolved land issue (80% of the land in European Russia and 100% of the land in Siberia was in the hands of peasants on the basis of property rights or leases). Increasing the fertility of the land and the number of crops, the active introduction of new tools, for example, tractors, new types of plows, etc. - the most developed social legislation in the world - for example, the wages of Russian workers are higher than European wages, second only (in the world) to American wages. The Law on Social Insurance was adopted before all European states and the USA. - One of the lowest tax levels among European countries (below the UK, France, Austria-Hungary and Germany, below the Russian taxes were only in Italy). - the world's fastest population growth rates (over the years of the reign of Nicholas II, the population increased by about 60 million. person). - fast-growing literacy. In particular, successfully functioning since 1908. universal primary education, in 1918 planned to introduce a universal average. The largest number of female students among all European countries. - A booming healthcare system. In terms of the number of doctors, Russia is in second place in Europe and third in the world. - One of the strongest armies in the world, which, moreover, is developing rapidly. The best Mosin rifles in the world, one of the best Maxim machine guns in the world, and some of the best 76 mm field guns in the world. The largest air fleet in the world. The world's best destroyers and some of the best battleships in the world, the world's best mines and mine production tactics. - The world's largest river merchant fleet. - The release of some of the best steam locomotives in the world. - Alcohol consumption per capita is lower than in the main European countries. - There are no problems with inflation and unemployment, since both of them are almost completely absent. - The crime rate is lower than in the United States and Western Europe.
              1. Rustiger
                Rustiger 2 June 2013 10: 57
                +1
                Hundred "+" to you, for being "ahead" with the answer!
                Quote: Alexey K.
                By 1980, Russia would become a superpower with a billion people, ranking first in military power and financial performance in the world!

                Well, who of the world's Judacratians might like this? It was urgently necessary to "end this situation." The world became, as they say now, "unipolar", that is, with a clear "bias of strength and human values" for Russia. From the West, all mechanisms have been undertaken to achieve "to rectify the situation." We saw the result AND REMEMBER !!! The goal of the non-humans was achieved then. ... ...
    2. Rustiger
      Rustiger 1 June 2013 11: 28
      0
      Quote: pahom54
      Yes, Russia needs, if not a monarchy, then, as they said earlier, an iron hand.

      In other words, MILITARY DICTATURE (not to be confused with the junta)! Why not? Who is afraid of her here?
      And we’ll tighten up with this, then either the abyss or total terror. . . Only whom and by whom? We or us. . .
      1. aviamed90
        aviamed90 1 June 2013 11: 51
        -1
        Rustiger

        Do you propose to appoint a general from the General Staff to the post of prime minister or, for example, minister of agriculture? Great destination!

        Just how will it differ from today's appointments to ministerial seats?

        Or do you mean by military dictatorship that a soldier with a Kalash will stand next to each official?

        By the way, remember the concept of "war communism" (this has already happened in our history). A very effective tool ... Especially for the destruction of people.

        What do you mean by the term "military dictatorship"?
        1. pahom54
          pahom54 1 June 2013 13: 16
          -2
          Everyone forgot about General Pinochet, General De Gaulle ... And they revived the country, and were national heroes. Afraid of a military dictatorship - why is a civil dictatorship better ???
          In general, this is a difficult question. Choose a worthy .... Yes, for how many years we have only been choosing it ...
          Speaking of generals: what do you dislike about General Sergey Shoigu - a real workhorse ???
          1. stranik72
            stranik72 1 June 2013 16: 52
            +1
            As for Pinochet, the issue is debatable, the Chileans themselves do not consider him a national hero.
      2. Atrix
        Atrix 1 June 2013 12: 04
        +3
        Quote: Rustiger
        Why not? Who is afraid of her here?

        Well, then you will tell when you will be sent to Siberia for a joke against the Party and the Tsar for 5 years, or the tsar will not like his party as you bow at the legs. And then tell us about the delights of dictatorship.
        1. aviamed90
          aviamed90 1 June 2013 18: 55
          +1
          pahom54

          Do you think that the last 15-20 years have given us the opportunity to choose?
          Or were there worthy candidates? All worthy were very far-sighted weighed out at the first stages of registration.

          About Pinochet ...
          You yourself warned about the inadmissibility of a military junta (your post above)!

          And who told you that a "civil dictatorship" is now in power?
          Many in the government and the Duma (not only the president) come from the KGB, FSB, army, etc.
          Our deputies acted especially exotic - they themselves assigned military ranks (and by no means lieutenant ones).

          And I'm not against Shoigu. In general, I am not against anyone (civilian, military, or something else) - but if only he was sane, he loved his country and his people, and most importantly, he didn’t talk on this topic, but really did something.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • aleks3897
    aleks3897 1 June 2013 10: 07
    -6
    Western liberalism, freedom of speech and democracy in all its glory!
    1. Gari
      Gari 1 June 2013 10: 23
      +4
      And it was possible without this vulgarity dear
    2. Rustiger
      Rustiger 1 June 2013 11: 34
      +4
      I’ll advise you to leave just a link to IT another time negative
      ) preferably with a description proposed for viewing)
      For example, children sometimes look over my shoulder. I do not want them to leave a great opinion about the site. . .
      1. marsavin.yu
        marsavin.yu 2 June 2013 10: 34
        +1
        But it’s not bad that children are trying to live by your interests. And you can explain the unpleasant moments yourself (if the children are of an acceptable age) without waiting for information to get through the liberals.
        1. Rustiger
          Rustiger 2 June 2013 11: 11
          0
          Well of course I agree with you! Children (boys) are so far simply interested in pictures of military equipment and weapons, their description. Articles on the site do not attract them yet. Yes, and they are difficult to understand. Till.
          We ourselves say that “when there is too much of such an abomination, and it is EVERYWHERE, natural immunity begins to suppress, as it were, the brain perceives it as a norm” and the words of the parents contradict the children they see. Therefore, everything has its time and PLACE. Well, you understand, I'm sure. ... ... yes hi

          In general, the word "p.i.d.a.r.a.s" in our family it is not considered obscene, but is used as offensive and judgmental in relation to everyone who is "carried away by the unconventional."
          Ugh, beat, I do not want to continue. . .
    3. yurta2013
      yurta2013 2 June 2013 17: 46
      0
      There is nothing to do with democracy. But to introduce a certain framework for liberalism and, in particular, for freedom of speech today is possible and necessary. In his own interests. Liberalism cannot be limitless, otherwise it turns into absurdity.
  • Valery-SPB
    Valery-SPB 1 June 2013 10: 08
    0
    Student theater of the 60s. Comes out "Komsomolets" (by role). He asks, - What can I do alone? From the other end of the stage comes the other, - And what can I do alone? After a while, there is a whole group on stage, randomly repeating the same question. Gradually the synchronicity of the voices and the rhythm are leveled A detachment is already on the stage, in a marching column, marching in a single rhythm ..., with the question - WHAT CAN I DO ONE?
    The eternal question in Russia. What to do?
  • aleks3897
    aleks3897 1 June 2013 10: 11
    14
    And the family is conservative, wrong and obsolete in the opinion of the West values ​​that oppress freedom of speech and democracy.
    Say NO to Gay-Western democracy and Western liberalism!
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Gari
      Gari 1 June 2013 10: 31
      +9
      Quote: aleks3897
      And the family is conservative, wrong and obsolete in the opinion of the West values ​​that oppress freedom of speech and democracy.
      Say NO to Gay-Western democracy and Western liberalism!

      No no no!!!
      Cool photo, but it’s even better.
      1. Gari
        Gari 1 June 2013 10: 49
        0
        In general, the holiday today is June 1 - International Children's Day (Children's Day).
        Happy all children
        grow up healthy and happy !!!
        1. Gari
          Gari 1 June 2013 11: 14
          +3
          Here it is happiness
        2. Rustiger
          Rustiger 1 June 2013 11: 47
          +3
          Quote: Gari
          In general, the holiday today is June 1 - International Children's Day

          Yo-mine. . . Thank you reminded !!!
          I was completely worn out with a load of worries. But he promised the elder a new spinning, and the younger the helicopter is in control, but they don't forget. If I don’t buy, in the evening they will be sure to "present for payment".

          How coincided:
          1. Yesterday the "anniversary" of my acquaintance with my wife.
          2. Children's Day (from) laughing .
          3. Holiday at the KSF.
          It is a sin not to note them all at once. . . drinks
          1. Gari
            Gari 1 June 2013 14: 17
            0
            Quote: Rustiger
            Yo-mine. . . Thank you reminded !!!


            Please

            Quote: Rustiger
            How coincided:
            1. Yesterday the "anniversary" of my acquaintance with my wife.
            2. Children's Day.
            3. Holiday at the KSF.
            It is a sin not to note them all at once. . .


            It’s a sin not to mention a pleasant evening
      2. Alexey K.
        Alexey K. 2 June 2013 02: 05
        +2
        There are a lot of good people in Russia.

        THE FATHER BROUGHT 120 CHILDREN
        In the Perm region, the priest raised 120 children
        Boris’s father has six relatives, for another 21 he’s a guardian, but he’s not used to dividing him into his own and others. So she is engaged with everyone together in the shelter at St. Lazarevsky Monastery. Moreover, the educational institution has now become a model for the entire district.

        Our correspondent Alexei Zbarsky visited a large family:

        The guys running out on a general gathering signal are not at all a detachment of one of the many recreation camps that are scattered throughout the Perm Territory. These are children of one family. And although some still have different surnames, one of their father is Father Boris.

        These are only those children who returned from school after the first shift. Boris’s father has six of his own, another 21 adopted children, and a total of 37 people found a roof over his head and warmth in his shelter.

        Boris Kitsko, priest, head of the orphanage: “When we started, when there was no identical spoon, fork. You go into the bedroom where the boys sleep - the beds are all different, who gave what ... "

        Boris’s father’s shelter has its own zoo. Cows and goats, habitual in each farmyard, are rabbits next to camels, yaks, peacocks, arctic foxes and ferrets. Each teenager takes care of several animals.

        Dima Tetyuev at the shelter for two years. There is no father, the mother who made him beg was deprived of parental rights. Out of years, a serious and strong-willed teenager was entrusted with caring for capricious camels.

        Dima Tetyuev, pupil of the shelter: “When you drive them in, Bai rushes at the person. He does not like, but the Countess with a modest character, comes home. The door itself opens. ”

        Since 1995, since the shelter arose, 120 people passed through it. New pupils constantly come here - some are thrown up while they are still breast-fed infants, some are brought by the hand of their mother. Father Boris admits - because of bouts of despair, sometimes hands are dropped.

        Boris Kitsko, priest, head of the orphanage: “It happens that you get so tired, think about it, probably give it away. But when you think about sitting, you’ll give it back, but what awaits him? In life, nothing happens just like that. If a child came to us, then this is what the Lord arranged. And if I refuse now? But the Lord sent, but I refused ... "

        At first, the public accepted the idea of ​​an Orthodox shelter with caution - many believed that children would be turned into monks without exception. However, during all this time, most of the graduates have remained to live in peace. And they continue to consider themselves children of Boris’s father.
        1. Rustiger
          Rustiger 2 June 2013 11: 16
          +1
          There is nothing to "comment" on. A bunch of "+" to you!
  • NKVD
    NKVD 1 June 2013 10: 41
    +5
    Fedor Tyutchev, poet
    Wasted work!

    No, you can’t understand them:
    The more liberal, the vulgar;
    Civilization is a fetish for them,
    But their idea is not available to them.

    As before her, do not bend, gentlemen,
    You do not get recognition from Europe:
    In her eyes you will always be


    They are not servants of enlightenment, but servants.
  • Vitaly Anisimov
    Vitaly Anisimov 1 June 2013 11: 03
    +1
    Quote: pahom54
    The constitutional monarchy will not allow the presumptuous prime minister to execute on Red Square, so, obviously, we will talk about the absolute.
    Even if the monarch is g ..., but this is his g ... and not some kind of pseudo supposedly chosen by the people and who is the same g ...

    The monarchy is clearly not enough for us wassat and also hordes of Mongol-Chinese with swords to break up into principalities ... hehe again Kulikovo battle Swedes Poles Napoleons Entente Hitlers and liberals ... bully
  • runway
    runway 1 June 2013 11: 19
    +1
    Search for enemies - get to the last line. Worse, when a fool in life is given the right to hang labels - this centrist, and this leftist .... All this has already happened. It is no coincidence that some comment on the ideologists of fascism (this is on a patriotic site!). "To the place of the quote," they say. This is how it all began. From quotation books, from torchlight processions, from pogroms .... Internally, they are already ready to kill, liberals today, everyone tomorrow.
    1. Atrix
      Atrix 1 June 2013 12: 07
      0
      Quote: piston
      Search for enemies - get to the last line. Worse, when a fool in life is given the right to hang labels - this centrist, and this leftist .... All this has already happened. It is no coincidence that some comment on the ideologists of fascism (this is on a patriotic site!). "To the place of the quote," they say. This is how it all began. From quotation books, from torchlight processions, from pogroms .... Internally, they are already ready to kill, liberals today, everyone tomorrow.

      Yes, in Germany, too, everything seemed to start beautifully, but everything ended as always.
  • Svyatoslav72
    Svyatoslav72 1 June 2013 11: 53
    +5
    It has always touched me how some people are looking for simple answers to simple questions. It was always annoying how some reality is replaced by illusion, creating a non-existent world with nonexistent rules.
    AND! let's not give. Let's do it wisely and logically:
    1. Religion will destroy the Russian Federation. Religion can only be State, but: not Christian; not catholic; not Muslim and not sectarian. They are all (Religions) for their Power, for their Rules and for their Position, for their Law and for their Benefits.
    2. Faith can only be National (but not Russian, on "this rake" more than one empire and any other artificial formation collapsed). Faith in your people, in your "living space", in your morality, in your ethics, in your physical, spiritual and intellectual strength. This will give Fairness and Legality, consistency in development and self-preservation / security.
    3. The leading role and "backbone" of the State can be only one (Choose which one? Russian Caucasian Asian). The driving force of the National Movement can only be One (multi-party system is political schizophrenia, beneficial to Masons and Oligarchs). Unified management provides concentration and mobility, adequacy to the existing threats and challenges of the time. In fact, we have only one Party - the People's Party, but it is not.
    4. Capitalism - abolishes Statehood, and does not accept National priorities (Profit - above all else). The monarchy is an obsolete form of government, relying on the Feudal lords and religion (not at all by this time). Any National form of government is based on socialism, which guarantees stability and consistency and efficiency (in the USSR, socialism was not built, and most likely did not gather, there the Monarchy and Religion were replaced by the Party Monarchy, which slammed everything).
    5. Globalization Multi-confessionalism Market relations Multi-ethnicity Capitalism WTO cooperation and similar nonsense are not the Ideology of National Independence, all these are Political methods for assimilation and increase of destabilization in order to weaken and gain control over new territories / markets / resources.
    Conclusion: Topics by type: - How can we all do nothing and live together? Not viable, and dangerous, they will not lead to anything. AND! the search for methods and solutions for Statehood and Nationality can easily run into the UK.RF. or World accusation of Fascism and Nazism. "To each his own".
    1. optimist
      optimist 1 June 2013 12: 07
      +8
      They explained everything very sensibly. On my own I will add: an article, another clone of the anecdote about the Sharp Falcon, which only in the fourth month saw that there was no fourth wall. After 25 years of "wild capitalism" they woke up. Putin's "stability" is rapidly approaching its logical end and the government is looking for external enemies: the United States, liberals, terrorists, extremists and other masturbators ... And it’s ridiculous to talk about the fight against liberals when they form the basis of the Russian government. So we will look for the guilty until the "ataman" finally runs out of "gold reserves". And there again is the scenario of 1917-1922 ...
    2. marsavin.yu
      marsavin.yu 2 June 2013 10: 26
      +1
      I agree with all points! Our "elite" will never come to this understanding in any way, apparently the "golden calf" is closer to the heart.
  • lexe
    lexe 1 June 2013 12: 12
    -1
    Liberalism today is an enemy with many faces. He is fluent in the method of reincarnation. Capitalism, communism, fascism, the monarchy are forms of manipulating the masses. Gorbachev has come out of communism. We want Gorbi again? You know the stock market has the concept of bulls and bears, they’re enemies at work, but after a cup of coffee friends. And the next day they change the roles of the players in one word.
    For the equality of nations, forget-to quarrel them in a brotherly family is simple (if we want USSR-communism). Everything needs to be done to strengthen the Russian people because it is the core. And there will be the core allies in the person of all our peoples. The Russian people are essentially not bloodthirsty and everyone knows this and they will believe us again. What form of government is needed for this? - a monarchy with a strong government and the Russian Empire, but taking into account the mistakes of 1917 and 1991. It is ridiculous that the liberals asked (elections \ voting \ discussion) any feasibility Remember the vote in the USSR? And it would be necessary to fulfill the desire of peoples, albeit with a temporary delay. And repaint (not blood) the country into the Russian Empire. I would like so. This is my opinion.
    1. V. Salama
      V. Salama 1 June 2013 23: 41
      +2
      Quote: Lexi
      Liberalism today is an enemy with many faces. He is fluent in the method of reincarnation. Capitalism, communism, fascism, the monarchy are forms of manipulation of the masses. Gorbachev left communism. Do we want Gorbi again? ... This is my view.
      Look, I must say, unclear -
      Quote: Lexi
      What form of power is needed for this? - a monarchy with a strong government and the Russian Empire, but taking into account the mistakes of 1917 and 1991.

      then such a monarchy is not a "form of manipulating the masses" will be, why all of a sudden? Yes, and "communist" and "member of the CPSU" are not the same thing, it would be high time to understand. You understand the difference between "righteous" and "preacher". So here is the same thing, and Gorbachev was never a communist, even when he was General Secretary.
  • Pashhenko Nikolay
    Pashhenko Nikolay 1 June 2013 12: 30
    +2
    Quote: optimist
    . And it’s funny to talk about the fight against liberals when they form the basis of the Russian government.

    It's nice that there are people on the site who understand where the hands of the very liberalism are growing from. And how can we deal with it if the majority voted for our savior of the fatherland, which actually indulges the spread of the notorious liberalism?
    1. optimist
      optimist 1 June 2013 13: 00
      0
      Well, it's not for nothing that our country is called the Country of Fools. "Noodles" about the "good tsar" and "bad boyars" have been rolling for 1000 years! laughing
      1. Nitup
        Nitup 1 June 2013 13: 04
        +3
        How did the "fools" create the largest country in the world?
        1. optimist
          optimist 1 June 2013 20: 58
          +1
          You'd better ask yourself how the "smart guys" fucked her up in 91 and continue to do it successfully?
        2. V. Salama
          V. Salama 1 June 2013 23: 53
          0
          Quote: Nitup
          How did the "fools" create the largest country in the world?

          Wrong conclusion. Fools are one of our three troubles. Problems (shortcomings) must have the courage to admit. Yes, the third trouble is that there are too many fools now - "this is our main and inexhaustible resource" for all structures without exception.
  • My address
    My address 1 June 2013 13: 06
    +1
    Attack is the best defense.
    A misprint, just a misprint, in the absence of quotation marks in the "Liberals" in the title of the article. I do not agree in piety for Russia until the age of 17 and for religion. So all is well. As I understand it, liberals in quotation marks are liberals without quotation marks?
  • lexe
    lexe 1 June 2013 14: 10
    0
    If Russia comes to consolidation, everyone will trample against us: capitalist-liberal and fascist from religious to national and monarchy and a country with a left ideology. Brotherly Orthodox Bulgaria even opposed us in World War I (skillfully pitted them with Serbia). Isn't that indirect evidence of the flexibility of the liberal idea? When do liberals need to unite the inseparable against us. And what shield is better against this? But we have the richest history of wars with different rabble in the Russian Empire. There is experience. We can no longer ignite the left-communist idea of ​​our allies. . But there is a chance for a national monarchist and with a high level of education (thanks to the USSR).
  • Russ69
    Russ69 1 June 2013 14: 41
    +1
    Our liberals often talk about a possible lustration of how they come to power. I think it's time to apply this law on lustration now, but against them.
    And it turns out nicely, in the West he works against the Communists, and why not work for us, but with a different sign? smile
  • dropout
    dropout 1 June 2013 15: 14
    +1
    No unrealistic dreams
    No beautiful utopias.
    We old solve the issue:
    Who are we in this old Europe?

    V. Bryusov
  • 12345666
    12345666 1 June 2013 16: 29
    +1
    First post))

    Quote: krasin
    Yes, it will be difficult to determine the general national idea.


    The idea is as simple as 3 kopecks - justice.
    He worked honestly all his life, raised children - get a happy old age.
    Honestly earned a billion)) (well, you never know) - God help you - work further for Russia
    He suffered in the war - be calm - the family will help and you will not be forgotten
    Stole, killed - your house is a prison, etc.
    If so, then no liberalism is terrible, and here it is

    "THE GOAL OF THE RUSSIAN PATRIOT is the destruction of the power of the" liberals ". The revival of society. Strengthening the family, morality and ethics. The outstripping technical and intellectual progress of society. Increasing the population of the country. Providing opportunities for our children and grandchildren to live freely and morally."

    All will be))
  • washi
    washi 1 June 2013 16: 38
    +1
    We have no illusions about socialism, but the memory of the nation-wide idea of ​​building a just society to all the inhabitants of the planet causes nostalgia for “strenuous” times.
    Do you mean the perversion that arose due to Khrushchev?
    Under Stalin, the principle worked: from each according to his ability - to each according to his merit
    After him, another began to work: from each at will - to each - obligation.
    The principle of socialism (according to K. Marx: from each according to his ability - to each according to his work)
    The distortion of the principles of socialism do not deny socialism itself
    1. 12345666
      12345666 1 June 2013 17: 30
      -1
      2 Vasya - Do you mean the perversion that has arisen thanks to Khrushchev? - no
      I mean that every citizen must I am sure that if he goes the right way it will be rewarded, if not, it will be punished (the principle of carrots and sticks without Stalin, Khrushchev, and K. Marx)))
      It seems to me that this is currently not the case. In the meantime, no - it makes no sense to talk about

      "The revival of society. Strengthening the family, morality and ethics. The outstripping technical and intellectual progress of society. Increasing the population of the country. Providing opportunities for our children and grandchildren to live freely and morally.",

      because money for the revival of society and those progress will be sawn)), a disabled war veteran or a poor teacher will not give birth to children, and opportunities for our children and grandchildren to live freely and morally, obtained by the blood of the Second World War, while children and grandchildren will prosrut (crossed out) will be exchanged for jeans and chewing gum
  • ded10041948
    ded10041948 1 June 2013 17: 11
    +1
    Quote: sergey32
    ... In legal terms, the principles of liberalism are the rule of law over the will of the rulers and the equality of all citizens before the law, regardless of their wealth, position and influence ...


    Try to explain this postulate to our pseudo-liberals. They recognize liberalism only in relation to their loved ones.
    1. V. Salama
      V. Salama 2 June 2013 00: 15
      +1
      Quote: ded10041948
      Try to explain this postulate to our pseudo-liberals. They recognize liberalism only in relation to their loved ones.
      And you don't need to explain to them, they are "FOR!" two hands will be. You understood everything and wrote it down in the second sentence. The ancient principle is "kill your enemies and accept the law that murder is punishable by death." Laws are written by whom? We have these laws as an umbrella for corruption. Yes, and remember - "the law, that the pole, where he turned, went there and out" and at the same time everything is according to the law. And yet, "the president and the government are not power - they are a screen of power, power is something that cannot be rotated."
  • Yarosvet
    Yarosvet 1 June 2013 17: 55
    +5
    Liberalism is the freedom to make decisions and enforce them within the framework of a law that suits most citizens of the state, with full personal responsibility for their decisions and actions.

    Democracy is the process of fulfilling the will (order) of the majority of citizens of the state by the citizens themselves and (or) their representatives, taking into account the possibilities of natural, economic and social resources within the borders of the state.

    You can play with words for a long time, but the essence of the concepts of "liberalism" and "democracy" is the same as indicated above.
    Socialism-communism, democracy and liberalism are inextricably linked - one cannot happen without the other.

    Now the essence of these definitions has been perverted: what is now called liberalism is more appropriate to call neo or ultra-liberalism.
    Neoliberalism is a fascist system with a division by property, where the law is not the same for everyone, where the opinion of minorities means more than the opinion of the majority, where society does not make an order, but chooses from what it is offered, imposed.
    The source and conductor of neoliberalism are the oligarchic groups of different countries integrated into each other, in essence the supranational oligarchy and its goals are quite obvious - the restoration of feudalism and slave system at a new level - this is all that goes for.
    1. aviamed90
      aviamed90 1 June 2013 20: 07
      +2
      Yarosvet

      Totally agree with you.
      And there’s nothing to add!

      In the posts above, this has already been discussed - the substitution of concepts.
      1. Yarosvet
        Yarosvet 1 June 2013 20: 46
        +4
        Quote: aviamed90
        In the posts above, this has already been discussed - the substitution of concepts.

        Yes, but to many, alas, it does not reach. Unfortunately, many people not only do not know how, but do not want to learn to think independently - it is easier for them to operate with cliches invented by someone, without any comprehension of the latter.
    2. Borat
      Borat 2 June 2013 08: 33
      +1
      It's nice to see a well-reasoned, reasoned post.
  • ajden
    ajden 1 June 2013 20: 08
    -3
    Liberalism, I think +, is permissiveness (read licentiousness), and we (read the Slavs (and not only)) have always fought against this. We will continue to fight. I hope our rulers too.
  • Yarosvet
    Yarosvet 1 June 2013 20: 36
    +3
    ajden

    Liberalism is freedom, in other words, a recognized need, and permissiveness with licentiousness - they are permissiveness with licentiousness.
    Moreover: permissiveness and licentiousness are inherent primarily in closed hierarchical and hereditary-hierarchical systems (for example, nomenclature, monarchist, etc.), and "our" rulers are now just building such a system.
    1. lexe
      lexe 1 June 2013 22: 17
      0
      Liberalism is now a utopia because technological progress does not catch up with it. Who is the liberal now? the one who can buy all the high-tech \ good is the true liberal and the rest? what should they do?
      So copy them as they can-beer \ TV \ comp-virtual reality.
      A closed society is an attempt to cut off unrealizable dreams among fellow citizens. So (if we are about a monarchy. Others do not want to discuss) closedness is a form of humanism ...
      And permissiveness and licentiousness is a full-fledged life, to live as a person himself wants, then all this is FREEDOM! True and not bluff
      Monarchy is humanism and freedom! But closed societies 100 years ago and now have 2 different concepts.
      1. Yarosvet
        Yarosvet 1 June 2013 23: 31
        +2
        Somehow you are all confused.

        In your opinion, freedom (liberalism) is a utopia due to lagging behind it (freedom) of technological progress? Then what, in your understanding, is freedom, and how does it relate to progress?

        Is he free who in the conditions of the economy of loan interest can afford more material wealth, that is, has more opportunities to indulge his own Wishlist? And where does the freedom?

        The supremacy (and de facto - dictate) of a closed system is actually a way to cut off fulfilled dreams, and this is done in conditions of limited resources in order not to cut down your own Wishlist.
        Any closed system not only has nothing to do with humanism - it always tends to degenerate rapidly. Creating to solve certain problems, any closed system very quickly slips to the solution of only one task - maintaining its own existence.

        Permissiveness and licentiousness to a fulfilling life have the same relationship as desomorphine to health. Any freedom is not freedom from reason, it is not freedom from anything - you can be free from something only FOR something, and this "FOR" is determined exclusively by reason.

        The monarchy is an opportunity for one to dictate his Wishlist to everyone, regardless of the delusional nature of the latter. As for the temporal differences of closed systems, regardless of changes in their form, their essence never changes.
        1. lexe
          lexe 2 June 2013 16: 29
          -2
          Is that your argument?
          And what are your dreams? - that’s the essence. In the USSR, they flew more airplanes \ more moved around the country \ more engaged in sports, is this not freedom?
          But isn’t there true freedom in your heart and soul when you don’t see homeless people \ sick old people \ dying peers from different dope \ street children \ do you have a headache in which pocket you have a wallet? This is a social environment that can liberate and can strain. ..
          In a tense social environment, dreams of only one thing — to survive and snatch — are a complete degeneration of the personality in the end. And whoever fulfilled these dreams is dream No. 2 above so they don’t get it. Hamsters with a wheel in a cage.
          I am a supporter of capitalism and loan interest. A loan is a lever and a stick with 2 ends. There was a loan for legal entities in the USSR as well.
          But how to combine sane social environment and capitalism?
          The monarchy is the answer. The monarch has a sacred meaning for a person - that there is a dad over everything. But you don’t need to give dad all the powers.) 1 person in power is too vulnerable. Liberalism is a temporary measure, most likely from not knowing the authorities how to develop further. But also under the graceful wrapper who? - Yes, we all consume resources.
          We need an old construction (monarchy), tested for centuries but in a new design.
          1. Yarosvet
            Yarosvet 2 June 2013 20: 26
            0
            The point is not in dreams, but in real substantiated needs, in necessity. Compared to modern Russia, the USSR appears to be an icon of liberalism (freedom) and democracy (democracy).

            A social environment in which conscious necessity plays a dominant role cannot be stressed - Wishlist and uncertainty in the future, generated by loan interest and the capitalist model, strain.
            Credit in the USSR and modern Russia are completely different things.

            It is impossible to combine capitalism (big capital) and the "sane social environment", between them it is only possible to conclude a long, but temporary truce - the goals of society and capital are radically different.

            The monarchy is not the answer, and in the figure of the monarch there are no sacred meanings. The appearance of such meanings is created artificially, just as a sense of ideological-slogan pseudo-patriotism is artificially created when a person is inspired to believe that he should love and honor the object in fact. As a result, a person is deprived of his liberty and turns into cannon fodder, dying for free for the interests of a fattening Power.

            The existing system is new liberalism and has nothing to do with freedom. Not only Russia - the whole world is rolling back towards feudalism, and this does not happen from "ignorance of the authorities", but quite purposefully. It is likely that in the event of the establishment of feudal relations, the latter will eventually be replaced by a monarchy dear to your heart - the only problem is that any monarchy does not at all correspond to your idea of ​​it.
            If this ongoing process is not stopped, then the result is completely predictable: if you already do not have at least a hundred lyam cabbage rubles, then your descendants will be slaves, if any.
            1. lexe
              lexe 2 June 2013 21: 13
              0
              It’s hard for you to understand, you do not care. Capitalism is a means and Monarchy is a form. And now capitalism is a form and a means at the same time. You are waiting for the slave system to come. NU-NU ...
              that’s what human brains are for progress. But the elite is also not averse to a trip to Mars and live longer, and without human brains that gush with ideas, this is not possible. Will the slaves help in progress? I think not. Read less fiction and think with your own head.
              1. Yarosvet
                Yarosvet 3 June 2013 03: 27
                0
                It is difficult to understand - ask, I will answer.

                For all your love of the monarchy, you yourself are confused in terms: the monarchy is of course a form, or rather a kind of political system. Capitalism is also a form, but an economic system, a kind of distribution system of goods.
                We now actually have a monarchy, and not very constitutional, but not hereditary: the guarantor has powers in its scope and functionality similar to those of the monarch, but I do not think that you really like the current state of affairs in the country.

                I do not expect the arrival of the slave system, I just see where everything is going. Of course, this system will be outwardly different from the usual slavery under the whip, but in essence it will be precisely slavery.

                Human brains ... But the elite is also not averse ...

                In the world of 10 million dollar millionaires and billionaires combined - how much do you think they need personnel, starting with peasants and personal protection, and ending with doctors and scientists, for their comfortable life? A hundred for one maximum? Total - a billion. And if you take into account only those who have a fortune of 100 million or more?

                slaves help in progress?

                Do you personally greatly help the progress? No? And then what's the use of you? You only consume limited resources, and therefore you must either be destroyed or reduced to livestock - the logic here is simple.

                Look at what is happening in the world - do you think this is a natural process? )))
                1. lexe
                  lexe 5 June 2013 17: 19
                  0
                  Yes, with a lot of what you write, I agree only the conclusions we have are different.
                  1. In the world of 10 million dollar millionaires and billionaires - Who are they? If the rude porters are overseers. They will simply not be needed when the goods are delivered to their destination. Previously (and now) any authority needed their services but with progress in t. h and in the social sphere of management they are ballast and dangerous (after all, they are overseers).
                  2. The nature of the appearance of genius (creator of progress) of man
                  not studied. Maybe any neighbor Baba Klava
                  covering in the morning and develops talent in the future genius? And what will happen if this Claudia is removed?))) and put the genius in a greenhouse environment? -yes nothing!
                  In other words, distorting the entire food chain will kill the whole chain, and geniuses will become mammoths.
                  3. I heard one clever idea. Geniuses only feel more subtle and are just ordinary predictors (see the future). And they see this future, they are looking at us at ordinary people!

                  So, in the end, our Earth will soon face the fate of Japan, overpopulated with the maximum possible variety of DNA types. Yes and 99.99% of them will be just Klava and Vani, and 0.01% are stupid predictors.
                  Sincerely.
  • OTAKE
    OTAKE 1 June 2013 20: 36
    +1
    FOOT! THE PHOTO IS THE SAME VOLVO EC360B IMHO A GREAT EXCAVATOR!
  • Vikmay16
    Vikmay16 1 June 2013 21: 33
    +1
    I agree! Patriotism is not enough!
    1. Karabin
      Karabin 1 June 2013 23: 52
      +1
      Quote: Vikmay16
      Patriotism is not enough!

      We have a lot of patriotism, but the mind is not enough. As the liberals were put on their necks in the late 80s, so do we carry. We still have hope and hope that the Chief Liberal will finally make his subordinates work for the people's interests.
      1. OTAKE
        OTAKE 2 June 2013 07: 37
        +2
        Quote: Karabin
        We have a lot of patriotism, but the mind is not enough. As the liberals were put on their necks in the late 80s, so do we carry. We still have hope and hope that the Chief Liberal will finally make his subordinates work for the people's interests.
  • regsSSSR
    regsSSSR 2 June 2013 04: 34
    -1
    I’ll go to the question from the other side! I’ll try to voice an idea that didn’t even sound, or I read the comments inattentively. what great feats were accomplished by the Soviet people, the pride for which we feel and honor until now is a victory in the Second World War and the FIRST citizen of the Earth will fly into space !!! we need an idea! need a breakthrough! need shtob people again believed and proud of the country WE NEED THE FIRST STEP ON MARS !!! to take this first important step in space exploration not for the sake of making money for the sake of the idea itself! after all, for 20 years we have not understood what we are doing! crush everyone! make fat cats participate in all this! we can be the first again in something very grandiose! in a peculiar design of the century! wishing to keep up with us, the WHOLE PLANET which can be chased after us in the Martian race will finally go off the rails of the eternal war. Giant funds are spent on weapons all over the world. Well, why should they let go to the peaceful exploration of outer space, you need to give an example to the world to take the first step to push everyone in a space race, so to speak, we can still allow ourselves this to have hurt since the days of the USSR. I personally am ready to work for a bowl of soup for the sake of such an idea and it will be enough for me that I will know that in May the country is the first and best country in the world !!
    here such a utopian-romantic-stupid idea visited me
  • ddmm09
    ddmm09 2 June 2013 06: 14
    -1
    Quote: Karabin
    Quote: Vikmay16
    Patriotism is not enough!

    We have a lot of patriotism, but the mind is not enough. As the liberals were put on their necks in the late 80s, so do we carry. We still have hope and hope that the Chief Liberal will finally make his subordinates work for the people's interests.

    I want to disagree, we have more than enough intelligence! We should have less traitors in the leadership, as they reach the heights of power, they immediately begin to consider themselves tsar-barins, in the best case, harming their inaction.
  • ddmm09
    ddmm09 2 June 2013 06: 15
    -1
    Quote: Karabin
    Quote: Vikmay16
    Patriotism is not enough!

    We have a lot of patriotism, but the mind is not enough. As the liberals were put on their necks in the late 80s, so do we carry. We still have hope and hope that the Chief Liberal will finally make his subordinates work for the people's interests.

    I want to disagree, we have more than enough intelligence! We should have less traitors in the leadership, as they reach the heights of power, they immediately begin to consider themselves tsar-barins, in the best case, harming their inaction.