Military Review

Liberalism is fascism today

98
Liberalism is fascism todayLiberalism, from my point of view, is a great utopia. As a system, it never existed anywhere and could not exist in principle. Outside of society, man does not exist. Society is always imposes certain limiters. The beginning of society is the introduction of the first taboos. Historically, the ban on incest as an act of introducing the first taboo creates a society. Liberalism proclaims another program, the exact opposite - de-taboisation.


Freedom always has a subjunctive mood. She suggests a question - freedom from what? Freedom in relation to what? In itself, freedom outside the context of these issues is absurd. Freedom, taken as a pure idea, as it was brilliantly shown in A. The Rebellious Man A. Camus leads to the suicide of humanity.

Liberalism historically developed as an ideology of removing social clips - religion, state, people, in the long term - the family. Mother and father are the same restraints in relation to the freedom of the individual as the state.

Liberalism carries the idea of ​​denial. There is no positive program in it. This is an idea that puts a minus. Historically, liberalism could exist only mixing with other ideologies. There are political options for mixing it with both socialism and conservatism. The genesis of liberalism was to divorce it with other positive ideologies. Initially there was a divorce with national teachings, then with social ones. Today we are witnessing a divorce of liberalism with democracy, which is classically understood as democracy by the people.

So liberalism has never existed as a pure model. But why then was this liberal cover necessary?

Liberalism has always existed in a paradoxical combination. Freedom of some implied lack of freedom and exploitation of others. Outside this dichotomy, we do not find liberal practice anywhere. The collision of a minority with a majority constituted the social paradigm of the assertion of the liberal concept.

Short historical an excursion confirms this thesis empirically. Ancient world: Greeks put forward the idea of ​​freedom. But it is in the Hellenic world that slavery flourishes. The slave, as you know, was not considered a person by the Hellenes. According to Aristotle, this is a living tool, a beast of burden. Freedom, therefore, was not meant for everyone. In any case, it did not apply to slaves.

In the Middle Ages, slavery does not disappear. The most prosperous, free trading posts of Genoa and Venetian were the leading centers of slavery and slave trade. Venetian slaves were trafficked throughout the Mediterranean. How did it fit together - urban freedoms and slave trade? The concept of man again did not apply to all. Not being a citizen of Venice, the slave was not a man.

New time is characterized by the development of the idea of ​​political freedoms. But at the same time, a system of world colonialism is emerging. In total, over the period of colonial expansion, more than 80 millions of slaves were exported from Africa. It is significant that many theorists of liberalism were among the slave-owners. The owners of slave-owning plantations were, in particular, the founding fathers of the United States - Presidents Washington, Jefferson, Madison. The value of freedom was surprisingly combined in their presentation with the commonness of lack of freedom. The concept of "person" was still selective. The same reason had the paradox of the Russian feudal liberals.

Only in the XIX century. a ban is imposed in Europe, and later in the USA on slavery. But it was at this time in the process of the formation of the colonial system that the colonialists learned to use the mechanisms of exploitation through indirect coercion. Direct physical slavery is replaced by economic slavery. The freedom of some - the owners of the resources is still combined with the lack of freedom of others, which are now formally free.

In the light of the above, the nature of the combination of the liberal get-together of the 1990s becomes clear. with a sharp social degradation of the majority of the Russian population. This, in fact, was the meaning of the implementation of the liberal concept - the robbery of the majority ("cattle") in favor of a group of free individuals. The freedom of this group of new owners of life was built on the lack of freedom of the rest of the population. Otherwise, with a consistent movement on the liberal patterns and could not be.

I summarize: today liberalism is a variant of neocolonialism, it is a mechanism of non-force economic slavery. Fascism and liberalism are related phenomena. They reflect two historically manifested variants of Western expansion in the world. At one time, it was condemned one of these options - fascism. It is time to raise the question of liberalism, as a phenomenon related to the fascist ideology.
Author:
Originator:
http://vbagdasaryan.ru/
98 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. krez-74
    krez-74 8 July 2013 12: 30 New
    +3
    Questions: Why, people, are always thrown from one "-ism" to another? Isn’t it easier to live normally, according to human standards?
    1. domokl
      domokl 8 July 2013 12: 36 New
      +2
      Quote: krez-74
      Isn’t it easier to live normally, according to human standards?

      And what are these norms? Freedom, equality, fraternity? Or religious, such as all power from God?
      They don’t throw people. After some time, people simply realize that they are again slaves and begin to search for the truth in ism ... The essence of all revolutions and social re-pipe in an elementary shift is close to the feeding trough. No more than that. Dreams that someday they will be able to get, if not to the feeder itself, then at least to the place where it falls that fell out of the mouth of the feeders ...
      1. krez-74
        krez-74 8 July 2013 13: 00 New
        10
        People just throws and throws! And all of this because the majority always want to live for free, are always dissatisfied, and always greedy, and all from the fact that they did not receive proper upbringing in childhood and were not accustomed to respect people, respect work, working people, respect other than one’s opinion, etc. There will be upbringing, and there will be no desire for a feeding trough, since society itself will condemn what should be condemned! Everyone understands freedom in their own way, and therefore unbridledness. Equality? So it’s utopia, since hard workers and parasites, smart and obscurantists, heroes and traitors should not be equal! Brotherhood? So here, utopia. What fraternity can be, for example, with countries that wish us to collapse and forever burrow into our lands and wealth?
        And yet, I do not like when people and societies are called a herd, only because they have a different opinion, behavior and desires!
        1. Mairos
          Mairos 8 July 2013 13: 18 New
          +2
          An ideal society with ideally educated people is like an ideal gas in physics. ))
          1. krez-74
            krez-74 8 July 2013 13: 51 New
            +4
            There is nothing perfect, and there’s no need to look for it! Everything is very simple, there is no need to substitute concepts and present the bad in a good light, and vice versa. Self-interest, crimes, lies, and all that should always be punishable, no matter what the political system, political conjuncture, etc. will be. Instead of how this is happening now, we will always spit in our history.
            1. Ruslan_F38
              Ruslan_F38 8 July 2013 14: 58 New
              +1
              Quote: krez-74
              There is nothing perfect, and there’s no need to look for it! Everything is very simple, there is no need to substitute concepts and present the bad in a good light, and vice versa. Self-interest, crimes, lies, and all that should always be punishable, no matter what the political system, political conjuncture, etc. will be. Instead of how this is happening now, we will always spit in our history.


              That's right, you need to live according to your conscience, as your parents taught. You need to be a person and not justify your wrong actions by ideologies and religions, but to be able to answer for them. There are eternal, unshakable values, the so-called foundation. Liberalism is the complete absence of such a basis, the absence of morality and ethics, the ability to justify any wrong deed and any evil.
              1. krez-74
                krez-74 8 July 2013 15: 11 New
                +2
                good All right! There are eternal, unshakable values!
            2. Orik
              Orik 8 July 2013 18: 01 New
              +2
              "... we must try to achieve the best - otherwise we will not be able to achieve even relatively good." V. Frankl
          2. explorer
            explorer 8 July 2013 14: 18 New
            0
            good and the result of the development of such a society is "heat death".
  2. domokl
    domokl 8 July 2013 12: 31 New
    +8
    Bravo Vardan! Tough, but true. Replacing physical slavery with economic slavery is necessary in order to reduce the costs of maintaining a slave. And nothing more. Primitive slavery is ruinous simply because the slave needs to be fed, clothed, and built at the expense of the slave owner. slavery allows you to simply use slaves without worrying about preserving the population.
    1. Tatanka Yotanka
      Tatanka Yotanka 8 July 2013 12: 50 New
      +4
      only Putin does not agree with this
      1. Ruslan_F38
        Ruslan_F38 8 July 2013 17: 53 New
        +1
        He means economics, he chose the word poorly, that's all)). In general, VVP has repeatedly said that Russia has a different path from others, well, remember, like Pushkin ...
        1. Tatanka Yotanka
          Tatanka Yotanka 8 July 2013 18: 47 New
          0
          Quote: Ruslan_F38
          He means economics, he chose the word unsuccessfully, that's all)

          the economy rules politics, if the economy is liberal then politics becomes liberal

          Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is no less liberal than many of those so called, but he does not realize his liberal ideas in words, but in practice. Such a statement in an interview with Itogi magazine was made by the press secretary of the Prime Minister Dmitry Peskov.
          the brightest examples, it's no secret that now paid medicine and education, etc.
  3. Kerch
    Kerch 8 July 2013 12: 34 New
    +2
    interesting article, in general I support the author
  4. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 8 July 2013 12: 34 New
    +2
    Everything would be understandable, there is only one thing, but if you try very hard, then you can break any ideology to smithereens. And it doesn't matter what it is called: democracy, socialism, capitalism or liberalism. In fact, as long as there is a state, there is power, as long as there is power, there is an ideology. But no matter how you call it, any ideology will serve the government and those to whom the government serves. To some extent, the behavior of the authorities usually depends on social and political conditions. But the fact that no government serves for the good of the people is absolutely.
    1. domokl
      domokl 8 July 2013 12: 46 New
      +3
      Quote: vladsolo56
      . But the fact that no government serves the good of the people is absolute.

      It seems to me that initially you didn’t have the right thesis. Everything else is logical and beautiful. The state, as an apparatus for oppressing people by some group, is your basis of reasoning. But in the beginning, the state was nothing more than a lever for controlling the majority of the minority. The state was social, or, if you like, socialist. And the laws were written precisely as the opinion of the majority.
      But the separation from the majority of groups (at the expense of the mind, military merit, and other things) of the richer led to the creation of the state as the oppressor of the majority by the minority. completely perverted the very essence of statehood.
  5. Southerner
    Southerner 8 July 2013 12: 41 New
    +3
    This statue of "Liberty" has become a symbol of a policeman, an authoritarian state that watches over the whole world, being the world's gendarme for 20 years, the United States has lost its status of the freest state on earth
  6. papss
    papss 8 July 2013 12: 43 New
    +4
    today liberalism is a variant of neo-colonialism, it is a mechanism of non-force economic slavery
    , as an instrument would say ... But that "not power" ... I disagree. Namely, the inculcation of the dogmas of liberalism is forceful, compared with fascism - bloodless, but forceful ... By virtue of the proclamation of the inviolability of rights, even worse is a utopia than other utopias, since it implies "individual human freedoms" ... And they can be defended and asserted as you know, any society ..., and most importantly, always without an answer for what they have done ... If anyone reproaches and evaluates their activities ... their main answer is, to "a hundred troubles" - we brought freedom. ..and that's it ... you can start from the beginning ... and many times ...
    1. buzuke
      buzuke 8 July 2013 13: 01 New
      +4
      .If anyone reproaches and assesses their activities ... their main answer is to "a hundred troubles" - we brought freedom ... and that's it ... you can start from the beginning ... and many times .. ...

      the fact that they cover up their ugliness with freedom, democracy, etc., does not make these concepts ugly. at least in my eyes. it only reflects their hypocrisy more clearly
  7. buzuke
    buzuke 8 July 2013 12: 45 New
    +3
    some kind of stupid comparison of warm with soft. where does slavery, incest, Chubais, etc.? liberalism has never been positioned as a system, it is rather a process with goals, means and direction. he is neither good nor bad in himself. It's just that liberalization of the 90s turned into chaos in our country, but if everything was carried out more competently, smoothly and planned, then there would be no disgusting aftertaste. To summarize: the perception of liberalism by society depends on the methods of its implementation
  8. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 8 July 2013 12: 56 New
    +8
    In Russia, the word liberal is an abusive word among a large and adequate part of the population.
  9. Dema239
    Dema239 8 July 2013 12: 59 New
    13
    "If anyone destroys Russia, it will not be communists, not anarchists, but damned liberals." (Fedor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky)
  10. taseka
    taseka 8 July 2013 13: 00 New
    10
    Liberalism brings into our family - corrupt geypropaganda, juvenile justice, pacifism and drug tolerance !!! Already for this, the warm-rotten liberalism must be driven by a filthy broom from Russia !!!
    1. omsbon
      omsbon 8 July 2013 13: 57 New
      +3
      Quote: taseka
      Liberalism brings into our family - corrupt geypropaganda, juvenile justice, pacifism and drug tolerance !!! Already for this, the warm-rotten liberalism must be driven by a filthy broom from Russia !!!

      It is unlikely that it will be possible to drive out this evil spirits, but to expose their every lie, not to let go in anything, not in one dispute, etc. To knock out their rotten ideological props.
  11. Nevsky
    Nevsky 8 July 2013 13: 02 New
    +9
    And you know, gentlemen and comrades, there are more and more liberals on this site, and therefore in society, already five minuses have been slapped into the article, and many commentators have been asked for no reason. am
    1. nov_tech.vrn
      nov_tech.vrn 8 July 2013 14: 25 New
      +1
      do not worry, they received the tranche, they are working it out.
      1. Nevsky
        Nevsky 8 July 2013 16: 26 New
        +3
        On the site, 10 liberals have already put a "-" sign for the article. This is a "record" for this patriotic resource. get impudent, gain 20%. am
  12. Black
    Black 8 July 2013 13: 03 New
    +3
    Any --ism inevitably falls into the extreme with all that it implies. Some isms lead to total lack of freedom, while others lead to it under a different sauce.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  13. gorozhanin
    gorozhanin 8 July 2013 13: 11 New
    +5
    liberalism has never been positioned as a system, it is rather a process with goals, means and direction. he is not good or bad in himself


    It is not true.
    Liberalism has positioned and is still positioned (reborn today into neoliberalism) as one of the three systems of the modern era that replaced the patriarchal model.
    Two other systems are fascism (not to be confused with Nazism, long before the Third Reich there was historical Nazism of the Jews) and communism.
    All three systems have ideologically the same root - a denial of God based on social Darwinism.
    All three systems, by and large, assumed the existence of a selected beneficiary.
    Liberalism is a free person in a space of supposedly equal conditions (as opposed to a non-free "cattle" and losers).
    Fascism is the beneficiary of the chosen state (which means there are also unsuccessful states, weak ones).
    Communism is the beneficiary of the chosen class (working class).

    In the clash of systems, liberalism was able to defeat communism only by making the decision to degenerate into neoliberalism.
    Neoliberalism is much worse than fascism (since the author compares it to fascism, in my opinion fascism is still a more humane system than liberalism).
    This is generally an antisystemic chimera. Antihuman. Denying the person as such.
    1. buzuke
      buzuke 8 July 2013 13: 37 New
      +2
      as for me - this is how you confuse socio-economic systems with ideological models of society
    2. papss
      papss 8 July 2013 13: 41 New
      +1
      gorozhanin  Today, 13:11 New
      liberalism has never been positioned as a system, it is rather a process with goals, means and direction. he is not good or bad in himself
      It is not true.
      Liberalism has positioned and is still positioned (reborn today into neoliberalism) as one of the three systems of the modern era that replaced the patriarchal model.
      Two other systems are fascism (not to be confused with Nazism, long before the Third Reich there was historical Nazism of the Jews) and communism.
      True! Liberalism is a flow, not a system ... and its signs can be in any system ... And the power system is a set of elements of its control ...
    3. lucidlook
      lucidlook 9 July 2013 01: 02 New
      0
      Quote: gorozhanin
      This is generally an antisystemic chimera. Antihuman. Denying the person as such.

      And I believed that liberalism postulates precisely the supremacy of man, personality in relation to any law - be it economic, social or any other. Denial of the right of a particular person to freedom has always led to dire consequences for society. An example is restrictions on the freedom of market relations and private property.

      I would call a country denying a person as such where citizens have no rights - the right to free movement, the right to work without coercion, the right to freedom of religion, etc. And not on paper, but in practice.
  14. Sergey Medvedev
    Sergey Medvedev 8 July 2013 13: 15 New
    +3
    Good article. Down with the fascists and liberals!
  15. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 8 July 2013 13: 19 New
    +1
    Quote: buzuke
    . To summarize: the perception of liberalism by society depends on the methods of its implementation

    Idealogy is usually put at the service of someone. The perception of liberalism, in our case, depends on the goal. From the goal of the USA in relation to the USSR and ultimately to Russia. And the goal was destruction and destruction, hence
    methods.
  16. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 8 July 2013 13: 36 New
    +2
    The article is correct and timely. But Chubas would be better off selling flowers, and the day is not far off when he will be put on trial. After all, no enemy has inflicted such damage on our Motherland as the liberals led by Gaidar and Chubais. And it’s not for nothing that our people have staunch rejection. liberals and liberalism in any form.
  17. papss
    papss 8 July 2013 13: 48 New
    0
    Quote: buzuke
    .If anyone reproaches and assesses their activities ... their main answer is to "a hundred troubles" - we brought freedom ... and that's it ... you can start from the beginning ... and many times .. ...

    the fact that they cover up their ugliness with freedom, democracy, etc., does not make these concepts ugly. at least in my eyes. it only reflects their hypocrisy more clearly

    And who makes these concepts ugly? And in my eyes - these concepts are not ugly ...
  18. slaventi
    slaventi 8 July 2013 14: 09 New
    +3
    For some reason, in Russia, liberalism and betrayal became synonymous. Even during the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-1905, liberals wished Russia defeat in the war. In 90x, the country was plundered by the liberals. Liberalism, removing all taboos, liberates the instincts in man and turns him into an animal. Liberalism ultimately will lead not to freedom, but to world dictatorship. The liberal idea brings destruction to the whole world, and in Russia it is absolutely not acceptable.
  19. Avenger711
    Avenger711 8 July 2013 14: 14 New
    0
    Liberals have always been extremely radical forms of intolerance. It appears at all levels.
  20. ImPerts
    ImPerts 8 July 2013 14: 40 New
    +1
    we at one time were sung a lot about liberal values ​​as the basis of democracy.
    In truth, liberalism is incompatible with democracy. Liberalism does not exclude democracy as a wrapping ideology (on the contrary, this is the basis upon which everything should be adjusted. Since the power of the people is above all), but in reality with complete economic freedom, the power of the people is impossible. This will kill liberalism. There are pensioners, people with disabilities, etc. - extra burden. It is ruled by business and its highest manifestation - large corporations that make elections fictitious and remove people from power (who needs a socially oriented state and its obligations?). In the interwar period, the class of owners supported the Nazis, who denied parliamentary democracy. Since then, very few have remained “liberals,” but demagogues who have defended one's interests under the brand of freedom ™ have become numerous over the edge. A chic example of how liberalism destroys all democratic institutions in the bud is the 90 in this country: as soon as the liberals took control of their property, everyone was ordered to shut up, they had to shoot from the tanks in 1993. You can also recall the USA of 20-40, where every politician was someone’s puppet, for example, Hoover was considered a protege of the mafia, and only Roosevelt began to timidly try to free the US government from the influence of the mafia and tycoons with the current result a little more than nothing. Kennedy still recalls that his victory without the help of trade unions subordinate to mafia structures might not have happened. Sinatra, Dzhankana, etc. ... And now it’s not better.
    Our liberal-liberalists are a boil on the body of the state. Fyodor Mikhailovich, in the case of Smerdyakov, was well written. It doesn’t matter to the lackey that the state and him then, in the long-term perspective, will feel bad. He needs to be good now, and then the grass does not grow. And for this he will stand in the mountains, but only until the moment when his ass gets into the pan, there his fuse will end and he will clean his boots.
    At one time, Lyon Feuchtfanger correctly put it: - "However, ridicule, grunts and grudges are so beloved for many that they consider life without them impossible. In all languages ​​there are many different words for this lesson, and I imagine that there are some restrictions freedom to swear seems pure despotism. "
    Well, they don’t let our goreliberals swear, they don’t.
    And finally, I remind you:
    "... in Zelenograd, our medicine recorded 36 deaths due to starvation. To this, Gaidar answered simply: radical transformations are underway, it is difficult to make money, but leaving people who are unable to withstand these transformations is a natural thing."
    Chubais - “What are you worried about these people? Well, thirty million will die out. They did not fit into the market. Do not think about it - new ones will grow”
    "Imagine being organized in a country
    truly fully democratic elections, based on the will of the workers with equal access to the media, to money ... The result of such elections would be an order of magnitude worse, and perhaps just disastrous for the country. "
    Khodorkovsky - “Our attitude to the authorities? A few months ago, we considered power a good that would not interfere with us entrepreneurs. In this respect, Mikhail Gorbachev was the ideal ruler. That was enough at the stage of our development. Now that the entrepreneurial class has gained it’s already impossible to stop the force and the process, our attitude towards the government is changing. Neutrality towards us is no longer enough. The principle is necessary: ​​the one who pays the one orders the music "
    1. lucidlook
      lucidlook 12 July 2013 10: 18 New
      0
      Quote: ImPerts
      Lackey does not care that the state and later, in the long term, will feel bad. He needs good now, and then the grass does not grow.

      Isn't that how all those big businessmen think now, who, on the one hand, suck all possible resources from the country (including human resources), and on the other hand, feed the ruling elite with the money received? Isn't that their slogan? Or maybe they care about the homeland? They defend its interests in every possible way, and even when the chervonets is benefited from the transaction, then they invest 9 rubles from it in the development of their native country?

      Ps who said "Offshore" there ?!
  21. Asgard
    Asgard 8 July 2013 14: 41 New
    +5
    As a special article about liberalism))))
    Why is this being implanted with us?
    There is a struggle on the planet, at first they made hairy anthropoids from Humans (by crossing and gene mutations)), depriving them of their full-value existence in symbiosis with the planet by its information field ....
    Then they wrote a book "Kabbalah-Talmud" for these non-people, in which they wrote ready-made Images-symbols (the human brain is designed so that it can only perceive IMAGES)))
    and full-fledged People do not use such "books"))) they themselves can generate images in their own Brain ...
    they do not need TV and comics, this is also a kind of Talmud-ready-made images))))
    Then religions appeared, it was necessary to scribble People somehow (notice not to form)) The Russians had a harmonious system of views (not religion)) about the structure of the world (PravYavSlavNav)), the Christians fought with it, people were killed, Tsar Peter burned all the books early period, We still do not know about the CIVILIZATION OF SIBERIA, have heard about Tartaria and that's it GREAT UNION OF SLAVES was ...
    and that not a single work and mention in the History textbook)))

    So about Liberalism ..., So, they tried to destroy People physically, but karmic laws intervened and nothing happened))))
    the liberal model is being introduced, this is when We ourselves must destroy ourselves ...using IUD in power.
    after all, wait the invented schemes work ... many do not live BY LABOR, namely DIAGRAMS ...
    Labor has ceased to be the fundamental principle of man ....- it's Dangerous.
    true - this can only last for a while (very, very limited)))
    there is a dollar crisis ahead (the currency of liberalism)) a change of government and a complete change of relations in society ...
    What is implanted Wait is not viable (JUVENAL justice, family destruction, pressure from banks over production, deBills in power, and everywhere .... This (naglossaks)) "Bill" the President of Russia signs a law on joining the WTO untranslated into Russian (and before so far))))
    Liberalism destroys the centers of ANCIENT civilizations-Yugoslavia (Vinci culture)) Iraq (Sumerians), Greece, Egypt, Syria, Iran and the latter We are Russia ....
    as we can see everything is going according to plan \\\\
    inhuman .....
    but by the hands of "people" (I can't call them people))
    1. fzr1000
      fzr1000 8 July 2013 15: 04 New
      0
      According to your theory, it will reach the American continent - ancient Indian cities, and to China and India too.
      1. Asgard
        Asgard 8 July 2013 15: 10 New
        +1
        There, ethnic groups building These cities have not survived ... \ then they howl with the people! And not with biorobots))))
        So there can no longer be a revival ...
        Liberalism is afraid of this (or rather, those who are behind it.
        but they have already lost ...
        game in the endgame))))
  22. ksan
    ksan 8 July 2013 14: 58 New
    +2
    I agree with most commentators - liberals are harmful to a strong state. All great countries or empires were destroyed from the inside by liberals. In the modern world (unfortunately) a state of the "fascist" type is stronger. For example, USA - everything is in the name of America, everything is for America's sake, everything for America. And if you don’t think so, then we will bomb you because you are not “democratic” or “so God wants.” That’s all liberalism.
  23. sumcream56
    sumcream56 8 July 2013 15: 08 New
    +1
    Gentlemen! Why would you be afraid to call the liberal demagogy swindlers and thieves? The liberal idea is simple - "The freedom of one begins where the freedom of the other ends." By the way, there is still one well-known "liberal" party in Russia - Zhirinovsky's Liberal Democratic Party. What is difficult for her to say is liberal. But liberals are quite powerful parties in Canada, Great Britain, and Japan. In Russia, people and movements are called according to the principle: "There is little where it is written: in my shed ... it is written, and there the firewood is lying." The liberal ideology of statism is opposite: “The state is everything, the person is nothing.” But there is so-called libertianism — a perverted understanding of democracy — ensuring the rights of wretched people with disabilities, including gays and lesbians, blind, deaf, migrants, refugees, etc. And here classical liberalism is unclear.
    1. Nevsky
      Nevsky 8 July 2013 15: 29 New
      +1
      sumcream56 Minus you for trying to show the existence of good moderate liberalism, bad neoliberalism, and the perniciousness of state patriotism. This rhetoric is the promotion of the same Western values.

      Here is for your reference: "Eastern Europe. The last argument of the liberals."

      http://topwar.ru/23230-vostochnaya-evropa-posledniy-argument-liberalov.html
    2. lewerlin53rus
      lewerlin53rus 8 July 2013 15: 44 New
      +2
      Quote: sumcream56
      The liberal idea is simple - "The freedom of one begins where the freedom of the other ends"

      But I think the opposite: "The freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another begins." We in Russia have our own values ​​and our own understanding of freedom. That is precisely why all liberal freedom must end where our freedom begins, i.e. at least, not further than the state border.
      1. Nevsky
        Nevsky 8 July 2013 15: 51 New
        +2
        Quote: lewerlin53rus
        Quote: sumcream56
        The liberal idea is simple - "The freedom of one begins where the freedom of the other ends"

        But I think the opposite: "The freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another begins."


        But I consider all these games in the interpretation of liberalism with supposedly local specifics, it's like comparing who will quickly fall into the abyss - Zaporozhets or Mercedes? After all, both move in the same direction, but at different speeds. Some with comfort: the cult of sex and perversion of the already official factory assembly, and someone with tuning, despite the limitation of the official factory assembly.

        Liberal today, tomorrow neoliberal, this is an axiom.

        Not every liberal is gay, but every gay is a liberal.
  24. Boot under the carpet
    Boot under the carpet 8 July 2013 15: 20 New
    +1
    Capitalism is fascism today!
  25. Normal
    Normal 8 July 2013 16: 06 New
    0
    I didn't understand. While reading everything I agree with the author, but here is the last paragraph ...
    Let me summarize: today liberalism is a variant of neo-colonialism, it is not a mechanism of forced economic slavery.

    Well, yes, no doubt.
    Fascism and liberalism are related phenomena.

    ?????
    They reflect two historically manifested variants of Western expansion in the world.

    Sorry, but this is "There is an elderberry in the garden, and there is an uncle in Kiev"
    If expansion is used to substantiate kinship, then all empires can be called related phenomena, regardless of the social system, ideology and historical time of existence.
    At one time, condemnation was given to one of these options - fascism. The time has come to raise the question of liberalism as a phenomenon related to fascist ideology.

    In my opinion, to condemn liberalism as an ideology under the cover of which the West is leading civilization to the abyss, there is no need to braid fascism.
    I understand that it happened so historically that fascism is not acceptable to us, it has an unambiguously negative image, and everything that is somehow connected with it is also perceived negatively. But you can't be so primitive.
    I believe that the ideologies of liberalism and fascism are, if not opposite, then certainly not related.
    Moreover, liberalism in the form that we are seeing now is much more harmful and dangerous than fascism, as it leads to the degradation of society, enslavement and extinction of humanity.
    1. andsavichev2012
      andsavichev2012 8 July 2013 16: 11 New
      +1
      Well, and probably also do not forget that fascism and Nazinal-socialism are different things.
  26. papss
    papss 8 July 2013 16: 09 New
    0
    [quote = Nevsky] [quote = lewerlin53rus] [quote = sumcream56] The liberal idea is simple - "The freedom of one begins where the freedom of the other ends" [/ quote]
    But I think the opposite: "The freedom of one person ends where the freedom of another begins." [/ quote]

    But I consider all these games in the interpretation of liberalism with supposedly local specifics, it's like comparing who will quickly fall into the abyss - Zaporozhets or Mercedes? After all, both move in the same direction, but at different speeds. Some with comfort: the cult of sex and perversion of the already official factory assembly, and someone with tuning, despite the limitation of the official factory assembly.
    I agree with Nevsky and "+" I will add to the above ... that this is not a completely liberal idea ... but this is not the point ... but in the incident with which it carries - freedom of one person often interferes, and sometimes takes away the freedom of another ...
  27. Gato
    Gato 8 July 2013 16: 18 New
    +2
    With the states it is clear - there is state fascism (IMHO).
    There is kleptocracy in Ukraine.
    And what term can be called the existing regime in the Russian Federation? What is it -cracy or -ism?
    1. Yarosvet
      Yarosvet 8 July 2013 22: 29 New
      +1
      Quote: Gato
      And what term can be called the existing regime in the Russian Federation?


      Nomenclature-kleptocratic oligarchy.
  28. lexe
    lexe 8 July 2013 17: 19 New
    +1
    Yes, liberalism is worse than fascism ...
    A person who was born without understanding why he lived dies. Before, at least there was a point in the fight against isms. Well, for example, with fascism.
    No, liberalism has clear goals so that no one speaks. And it has its own icons - Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and others. So we see new beneficiaries except for crooks and thieves, without which there is also nothing. Human genius is at the forefront - all other dust, which is constantly blown away to see and find the diamond.
    But on the other hand, the idea of ​​liberalism is the collapse of the human essence. The inability to combine progress and tradition will hit in the end on these two concepts. I would like to recall Mendeleev, a nationalist and a monarchist by the way.
    I think a narrow stratum of people wants to witness the complete triumph of progress during their life and will gain a foothold in this capacity for long years ... Yes, yes, by including a longer life. The masks have been dropped. I think they are waiting for a rude and hard bummer, this is an encrypted code the people are its inseparable component ... Mendeleev, if you like, was that code of the Russian village people from flesh and blood but with different brains laughing
  29. Corsair5912
    Corsair5912 8 July 2013 17: 32 New
    +4
    Fascism is liberalism without camouflage
    The Nazis openly divided people into lower and higher races, liberals do the same, only hide it under a verbal husk about "universal democratic values," the right of individuals to express themselves, the advantage of the individual interests of an individual over the interests of society and the state, tolerance, etc. .d. etc.
    What kind of right of expression can nidopov, pedophiles, thieves, scammers, drug addicts, parasites and other garbage have?
  30. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 8 July 2013 17: 39 New
    +3
    Quote: Gato
    With the states it is clear - there is state fascism (IMHO).
    There is kleptocracy in Ukraine.
    And what term can be called the existing regime in the Russian Federation? What is it -cracy or -ism?

    In Russia, all this does not take root, no matter how hard someone tries, RUSSIA JUST BELIEVE !!! and all
  31. Rattenfanger
    Rattenfanger 8 July 2013 17: 55 New
    +2
    Liberalism is fascism today

    In this case, it would be nice to organize Nuremberg for the "Supreme Liberators".
  32. ImPerts
    ImPerts 8 July 2013 17: 59 New
    +2
    Find and read.
    http://libes.ru (и много других)
    Nikita Garaja
    Liberals about the people
    Everything in Russia is good, only bad people
    foreword
    15 years of reforms allow us to understand the content of the liberal model and whether it can be applied in our country for peaceful purposes.
    During and after the collapse of the USSR, the Soviet and post-Soviet intelligentsia were the spokesmen for the ideas of liberalism and the “free market”. However, when this same coveted “free market” came, the intelligentsia became impoverished and pauperized. Moreover, it lost the role of the “brain of the nation”, it ceased to be a factor of progress, a factor of national renewal. Therefore, the Russian intelligentsia now does not exist in the sense in which this category was previously understood. There was an intelligentsia in the USSR. In the Russian Federation there are state employees.
    The former intelligentsia is being washed away from Russia to the West in the form of immigration. The former intelligentsia is dying out. And with it, the carriers of liberalism are dying. No wonder. After all, liberalism is a derivative of the white Christian, Protestant civilization. And at present, everyone - ethnic groups belonging to this civilization, demonstrate negative demographic dynamics. Simply put, they refuse to reproduce. And this refusal is a sure sign of the extinction of not just ethnic groups, but of a civilizational idea. Such a reduction in the size of the ethnic group is based on liberal thought, liberal values ​​- the destruction of traditional family institutions, transcendental hedonism, individualism, and politically correct. A logical conclusion - the extinction of the carriers of liberalism - is a direct result, the triumph of this ideology.
    They say that liberalism is the most effective model in the economy. But in most cases, this is not confirmed by practice. Yes, and history does not know examples of the implementation of the liberal model in a correctly pure form. The liberalization of the world economy was imposed on the world by the United States of America after World War II. This policy ensured the unlimited growth of American national wealth due to the issue of the dollar, due to the fact that the so-called monetarist principles universally imposed by international financial organizations on all their clients never spread to the United States.
    It must be understood that such a liberal "economic policy" has nothing to do with economic theory. This is an ideology either promoted by the dollar or driven in by a boot.
    Similar liberal trends are also characteristic of Russian business. In the framework of the liberal paradigm, he has only predatory prospects, when, in the apt expression of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, for most of our large business representatives, Russia was not a native country, but a “territory of free hunting”. Thus, liberalism is the policy of the strong with respect to the weak. And this policy deprives the weak of any chance of becoming strong.
    Therefore, liberals do not like Putin. Putin is bad for liberals not because he is doing something wrong, but because he is not weak. If Putin even did everything wrong, but was on the verge of losing power, he would be good. His strength prevents the elite from being sovereign. That is the main claim of the liberals to Putin's Russia - it prevents the elite from enjoying omnipotence. All this is also compounded by the general not just pro-Western, but the comprador character of our liberal elite ...
  33. Grif
    Grif 8 July 2013 18: 54 New
    +2
    I remember, as a child, I was terribly afraid of the statue of liberty, looking at it in the pictures of Bidstrup. And he still cringes when I see this dead man's face and disgusting dead eyes.
  34. Gardamir
    Gardamir 8 July 2013 19: 15 New
    +2
    Do you remember how perestroika began? What is not prohibited is permitted. Since there was a conscience in Soviet society before, many things were not prohibited, only because many already knew what was not allowed and what was possible.
  35. individual
    individual 8 July 2013 19: 23 New
    +1
    We saw the riot of liberal ideas in Yeltsin's Gaidar government.
    All the actions of those liberals are defined simply. As Livshits said, the Minister of Finance of Russia in 1997: “It is necessary to share.” M. Kasyanov, the prime minister, simply and quite liberally acted for the signature of the business project - “Misha two percent.” The liberal's mercantile interest is free enrichment in The dashing 90s showed the full extent. According to ideology, there are also indicative demands of the radio journalist Y. Latynina, she demands that the people not be allowed in the elections as an institution of democracy. She believes that the people are not ready for elections and must be admitted according to the financial qualification.
    It turns out the people are subhuman, - all according to the ideology of fascism.
    The government is dominated by liberal capitalist ministers.
    And we wonder how these liberals with the ideology of fascism freely broadcast on state radio and television represent Russia at international forums? am
  36. tank64rus
    tank64rus 8 July 2013 19: 32 New
    +1
    Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky long ago defined the essence of the liberals in one word - "devils" and that says it all.
  37. My address
    My address 8 July 2013 19: 46 New
    +2
    I read on the Rambler an article from the Free Press "The United States organized Chernobyl in Iraq." About massive diseases in the city of Fallujah. Cancer and other delights from the main Liberasty.
  38. polly
    polly 8 July 2013 19: 47 New
    +1
    Fascism is terrible, and liberalism, in addition to this, is also extremely dirty morally!
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 8 July 2013 22: 15 New
      +1
      Quote: polly
      Fascism is terrible

      Liberalism is even more terrible, because, unlike fascism, it very skillfully pretends to be white and fluffy, praying we are liberals, we are for freedom of opinion, we do not oppress anyone, including the fascists - because they have the right to their opinion ...
  39. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 8 July 2013 20: 23 New
    +1
    Quote: gorozhanin
    Two other systems are fascism (not to be confused with Nazism, long before the Third Reich there was historical Nazism of the Jews) and communism.

    In my opinion, it makes no difference, it's me about fascism and Jewish Nazism. Most likely, even the first grew out of the second. It looks like Hitler read the "Protocols of Zion
    wise men. "
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 8 July 2013 22: 26 New
      0
      Aloizievich himself invented the protocols of the Elders of Zion. Jewish nationalism does not need any protocols to assert the superiority of its nation over all. On my own I will add that according to the stories of their relatives, these same Jewish Natsiks got a lot of people even in Israel, especially our former compatriots - they call them "Russian pigs" request
  40. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 8 July 2013 21: 18 New
    0
    In Russia there has always been a golden mean between all "isms, phobias, etc." This is not ours, alas !! but we are going through it (or rather, they are trying to impose something on us throughout history .. to call us .. sometimes we believe ..) They rob us, kill .. and we become stronger and stronger .. Paradox !!! So the phrase "Russia cannot be understood by our minds. . In Russia you can only believe !!! ".. it works and it means Russia is alive !! Many members of the forum will think about slogans ... I swear by my words .. It's just a shame for the State .. it happens
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 8 July 2013 22: 28 New
      0
      Quote: MIKHAN
      Many members of the forum will think about the slogans

      There is nothing wrong with the right slogans, and it is not a sin to repeat them smile
  41. vezunchik
    vezunchik 8 July 2013 22: 04 New
    +2
    SARATOV, 8 July - RIA Novosti, Eduard Demyanets. Hundreds of residents of the Saratov city of Pugachev, where during a fight a 16-year-old teenager stabbed a former paratrooper with a scalpel, on Monday they blocked traffic on the federal highway for some time, according to the region's Ministry of Information and Press. The incident took place on Saturday at the Zolotaya Bochka cafe: a quarrel took place between a 20-year-old former Airborne Forces soldier and a 16-year-old visitor, which turned into a fight. During it, the teenager inflicted mortal wounds on the man.

    “According to employees of the GUMVD in the Saratov region, the protest action in Pugachev is on the decline. The owners of cars involved in blocking traffic on the federal highway voluntarily vacated the carriageway. Traffic on the road has been restored, ”the message says. How long the track was closed is not specified.

    Earlier, the Prosecutor General's Office reported that local residents had already organized rallies twice in two days, at which they demanded that “persons of Chechen nationality” be evicted from the city and protected from visitors from the Caucasus.

    According to the Ministry of Information and Printing, about a hundred participants remain near the highway, with whom active negotiations are underway, the police are conducting explanatory work with the protesters.

    “The mood of people has become much calmer, some of them voluntarily leave the place of the action. The police cordon continues to patrol the highway, ”the authorities say.
  42. Albert1988
    Albert1988 8 July 2013 22: 23 New
    +1
    The article is excellent, but it seems to me that the author did not mention one important fact - liberalism is very beneficial to the political elite due to its extreme flexibility. For example, it is necessary to strike a blow at traditional values ​​- then the liberals say this: “traditional values ​​are a relic of the past, they enslave a person, put barriers to personal development and restrict personal freedom, etc. and so on. They contradict light and progressive liberal ideas, finally! ". Or vice versa - it is necessary to whitewash someone, the same fascists, then the rhetoric changes to the opposite: "Are the fascists talking about the superiority of one over the other? They deny liberalism? So they have the right to their own opinion - after all, liberalism ..."
  43. The comment was deleted.
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 8 July 2013 23: 03 New
      0
      Do not offend the author so - take a closer look and find that liberalism in its modern form is the ideological justification for hedonism and nothing else.
      PS As for Islamism - I agree
      1. Tykta
        Tykta 9 July 2013 01: 06 New
        0
        So what did I write? what he perceives as liberalism is just the idea of ​​the permissiveness and depravity of hedonism, while the obvious currents of fascism are acquiring ever clearer outlines in Islamism. the author probably does not see the difference between fascism, Nazism and Francoism - and these are just the classic ideas of fascism, but they will not possess that monstrous critical mass of hatred of humanity until the oligocracy directs it in the right direction, and everything is exactly the same with Islam - religion is turning into an instrument of oligocracy, overthrowing regimes, economies, priorities, governments ... at first glance, the factors of fascism are not noticeable, but just look at the gray mass that arranged coups in Libya, Iraq, now in Syria. These are all Islamists as a weapon of oligocracy in the struggle for resources and geopolitical influence. In Aedov's book, unfortunately, this topic is not very developed, although the forecasts are quite clear ... the author -> author -> the author is simply divine ... as if without insults? short-sighted, tongue-tied and not educated ... take it simply and blame all the troubles on the liberals, although this is not the case, the feeling that the article is custom-made and designed for uneducated readers who will take everything that they will not be presented with.
  44. Yarosvet
    Yarosvet 8 July 2013 23: 15 New
    +2
    Eh - citizens, gentlemen, comrades - we got entangled in IZM.

    Before discussing such topics, it would be nice to dig in dictionaries, although they are unlikely to give a clear answer - there are no clear ISMES, they all interfere to one degree or another, even in a single person - this must be understood.

    ISMs are just a conditional gradation designed to save time (using ISMs in the discussion - there is no need to list all the signs of the trend in view).
    In this vein, it would be nice to take the following as a basis: IZMOV have, albeit broad, but definite boundaries in which a set of features exists. But if another one, extremely significant and completely, in essence, opposite to the others, is added to the system of these signs, then this is already another ISM, and it needs to look for a different definition.

    What is LIBERALISM? Initially, the meaning of this concept is freedom to make and implement their decisions within the framework of laws, norms and traditions that suit the majority of citizens, with full personal responsibility for their decisions and actions .

    Does anyone see something like this in a mattress? It is unlikely, since liberalism died there long ago, and in its place came what can be called neoliberalism (camouflaged fascism, based on property and class qualifications, and moving the mattress towards the revival of feudalism in a new guise).

    Alas, we have the same crap, but only in profile, however - as in the whole world.
    1. lexe
      lexe 8 July 2013 23: 37 New
      -2
      Yarosvet so what kind of liberalism (read anarchy) are you? And you think liberalism is the perpendicular of neoliberalism (read feudalism)?
      Yes passed ... The same rake with the USSR. All communists disown Trotsky as a devil. But without Trotsky and his ideas there would be no USSR! The same crap with liberalism. The same ... only in profile.
      And you didn’t get your definition of liberalism (in bold) from textbooks compiled by them.
      Here in the Second World War, the enemy was called in different ways - the Germans, the Germans, the Nazis, Hans ss ... ki, etc. Political instructors did not care laughing
      Under liberalism (anarchy), it is possible to approach not only feudalism but also cannibalism laughing (within the framework of traditions did you write? -will introduce new traditions)
      1. Yarosvet
        Yarosvet 9 July 2013 01: 53 New
        0
        Quote: Lexi
        Yarosvet so what kind of liberalism (read anarchy) are you? And you think liberalism is the perpendicular of neoliberalism (read feudalism)?
        Lesh, come on before you post nonsense - will you look into the dictionary? Otherwise, your personal freedom within the framework of the law is equal to the freedom of lawlessness.

        Yes passed ... The same rake with the USSR. All communists disown Trotsky as a devil. But without Trotsky and his ideas there would be no USSR! The same crap with liberalism. The same ... only in profile.
        I remember that you do not like the Union, but how is it sideways here? What does Trotsky have to do with it, what connection, what parallels?

        And you didn’t get your definition of liberalism (in bold) from textbooks compiled by them.
        Who are "them"?

        Here in the Second World War, the enemy was called in different ways - the Germans, the Germans, the Nazis, Hans ss ... ki, etc. Political instructors did not care
        Under liberalism (anarchy), it is possible to approach not only feudalism but also cannibalism (within the framework of traditions, did you write? -Will introduce new traditions)
        You can call it whatever you like, the main thing is that everyone understands what exactly you mean, just don't purposefully confuse liberalism and anarchy.

        However, I understand your irritation, because your beloved empire is almost the same as neoliberalism in my understanding, the same division into classes, unequal access to benefits, selective application of laws. I don't know what you like about all this, but in my opinion it is disgusting.

        As for cannibalism, so it was in many societies, and in some places it remains a tradition, and neither politics, nor economics, nor any ISMS affect its presence or absence.
        Yes, at least read "Christianity and Ergot".
        1. lexe
          lexe 9 July 2013 08: 44 New
          -1
          liberalism (in my understanding) is a release of creative energy bypassing all social barriers, the same Silicon Valley, for example ...But where is this possible?Where the% of venture capital is high? Correctly only in a country with a printing press - the USA. And not anywhere else. Only in the USA a loan for any invention (conditionally crossing an elephant with a hedgehog) is readily available. The volume of venture capital bubbles there is huge, as well as frauds in the securities market So before WINDOWS appeared in a patent in the USA the whole world paid for so many crazy experiments that our magazine Yuniy Technik just had a rest. But in the USA money was given for any botanist's sneeze. And this money was earned not only by the American economy, but rather American military power. Besides, maintaining the status quo (system of brands and patents) is costly for the world. This is a tribute. Moreover, this tribute speaks of low efficiency in scientific endeavors.
          But liberalism in other countries without a printing press is a completely different concept.
          Although the form seems to be all the same. But the main thing is not enough - stupid money and the dictatorship of the law at least at the middle-grassroots level.
          So what do you want crystal liberalism? -First, an empire must be powerful in the military plan. Otherwise, it is a Roman colony with the adoption of the pantheon of Roman gods and inexorable extinction and stupefaction of the people.
          1. Yarosvet
            Yarosvet 9 July 2013 14: 07 New
            +1
            You are not talking about liberalism, but about capitalism as a global system and about ways of getting rich at someone else's expense.

            Any ISM is a gradient definition of a particular tendency generated by an idea and striving for its implementation.
            ISMES may be worth giving up altogether - they bring too much confusion.

            There are no pure ISMs in society - let us take as an example the institutions of juvenile justice, its Western version: the guys, whom everyone considers liberals, support it, and the state guys oppose it.
            But this is nonsense - YU is a state institution and not a single liberal will support the state's interference in his private life, and a statesman, on the contrary, should not oppose state standards of control and education - but in reality?

            The reason for such inconsistencies is, firstly, in the confusion of tendencies both in society and in the worldview of an individual person, and, firstly, in the substitution of concepts.
            Therefore, in the discussion of a particular topic, it is worthwhile to focus not on ISMS, but on the analysis of each sign of a particular trend - which one is good, which one is bad and why - these 3 questions (what is good? What is bad? Why? And their variations) in general are the basis and essence of understanding any system related to human activity.
        2. lexe
          lexe 9 July 2013 16: 12 New
          -1
          division into classes, unequal access to goods, selective application of laws.

          It is not.
          The basis of the White movement was made up of people who fought for freedom and equality no less than the Bolsheviks themselves. in Russia, there was tremendous progress in the field of economic partnerships (and this is in the war!) The communities and local mutual aid funds were developed. The classes were an atavism and everyone already understood this and the struggle was not at all for the former privilegesIt was not for nothing that most of the nobility were on the sidelines in civilian life and peacefully drank wine at the resorts.
          So Chubais came and put a bold cross on his privatization, but now we could have a middle class of working owners -for this and white fought in the civilian.
          And now the path is again only on the beaten track under the slogan beat the oligarchs. Instead of revising privatization, there is a new privatization ...
          1. Yarosvet
            Yarosvet 9 July 2013 18: 31 New
            -1
            Quote: Lexi
            The basis of the white movement was made up of people who fought for freedom and equality no less than the Bolsheviks themselves.

            We are not utopians. We know that any laborer and any cook are not able to immediately take over the government. On this we agree with the Cadets, and with Breshkovskaya, and with Tsereteli. But we differ from these citizens in that We demand an immediate break with the prejudice that only the rich or officials from rich families are able to manage the state, to carry out the everyday work of management. We demand that training in state administration be carried out by class-conscious workers and soldiers and that it be started immediately, that is, all the working people, all the poor, should be immediately involved in this training.
            If everything was as it seems to you - where did this quote come from?


            By 1917. In Russia, there was tremendous progress in the field of economic partnerships (and this is in the war!) The community and local mutual aid funds were developed.
            Yeah - with 80% of the illiterate population.

            The classes were an atavism and everyone already understood this and the struggle was not at all for the former privileges
            Oh really? And what for then Civil, coupled with the intervention started?

            It was not for nothing that most of the nobility was on the sidelines in the civilian and peacefully sipped wine at the resorts.
            This "know" then was the same as what is now understood by the "liberal intelligentsia."

            So Chubais came and put a bold cross with his privatization, but now we could have a middle class of working owners
            Yes - albeit in conditions of gradual degradation, but they could. Only that was not the goal, and the redhead was just a performer.

            And now the path is again only on the beaten track under the slogan beat the oligarchs. Instead of revising privatization, there is a new privatization ...
            And the reasons for what, is it that these same "oligarchs" have gone too far?
            Concerning privatization 2 - questions to Vova.
            1. lexe
              lexe 9 July 2013 19: 27 New
              0
              The losses in the Civil War were enormous, and one must be a fool to think that then the nobles fought against the workers and peasants.The peasants fought with the peasants!Many people didn’t like how temples were blown up, robbed and raped. They still find hidden utensils. Who was hiding? The people ...
              It's time to admit that people were converted to a new faith, and this is always blood. (80% of Russians today believe in God). Well, what about this today?
              And the fact that there should be literate people in management is a fact.And not with fake crusts and problems with the law, today's reality.
              80% ... What do you think then, the world was very literate? In the United States, they did not go far in education. And the fact that 20% were very educated by those standards is not enough? (Out of 180 million) Education in the West took place under the pretext being drawn into difficult economic relations - credit / lease, etc. The debtor needed a literate one in short. So no need to laugh about educated slaves.
              In the 20th century. the technological revolution broke out and it was naive to get along with managers only from rich families. Even the tsars understood this, gradually surrendering the positions of the nobility. There were few generals who came from the peasants? So your arguments missed the mark.
              But I see you joined the red laughing - Well, well, truly in the liberal! And zamusovali strong-current I do not understand who are the liberals or the Trotskyists? Apparently there is a very thin line between you laughing
              Share what was the ultimate goal of Chubais? we are not liberals, how do we know.
              1. Yarosvet
                Yarosvet 9 July 2013 22: 46 New
                0
                Quote: Lexi
                The peasants fought with the peasants!
                Of course - they just had nothing else to do.
                Nobles, officers and soldiers of the former tsarist army, Cossacks, and foreigners fought against the "Reds". The representatives of the ordinary peasantry, among this fraternity, were scanty.

                Many people didn't like how temples were blown up
                The number of temples blown up? Where does infa come from that many did not like?

                Who was hiding? People ...
                When and from whom? And x / s - yes?

                It's time to admit that people were converted to a new faith, and it's always blood.
                Is there a difference for you between faith and scientific reasoning?

                (80% of Russians today believe in God). Well, what about it today?
                How are you rudely substituting concepts laughing
                I remember the media trumpeted that 80% of all believers are Orthodox, and the percentage of believers from the entire population was not named.
                The criteria for the survey were not named, and there are also no clear criteria - who exactly should be considered a believer.
                In general, to put it mildly, an unsubstantiated statement on your part.

                And the fact that there should be literate people in management is a fact
                The point is that the acre of the Bolsheviks, no one was going to educate the people.

                And the fact that 20% were very educated by those standards is not enough? (Out of 180 million)
                Literacy and education are two different things: out of 20% of the literate, there were 5 percent educated, and half a percent would not be "highly educated".

                The debtor needed a literate shorter.
                Thanks - neighing laughing

                So no need to laugh about educated slaves.
                Key phrase! - relating both to tsarist Russia in particular, and to capitalism in general.

                In the 20th century. the technological revolution was breaking out and it was naive to get along with managers only from rich families.
                Yeah - and that's why Kolya shot the crows instead of building schools.

                Few generals who came from the peasants?
                Did you list or give a link laughing

                Share what was the ultimate goal of Chubais?
                Willingly:
                1. lexe
                  lexe 10 July 2013 01: 32 New
                  0
                  No ... well, the truth is both funny and sad ...
                  1. Who were the soldiers of the tsarist army? From peasants ...
                  Are there any Cossacks?Who do you think? Noble merchants? The same peasants, but with an increased sense of duty to the Motherland, served the tsar and blow into the stanitsa to plow like ancestors. Yes, the Cossacks are a military peasant caste, who just didn’t weighed out for Russia — and to the Poles and French and Caucasians, etc. And you are so about them ...
                  Probably you have not heard about the mass peasant riots? Trotsky himself admitted if the whites had the slogan of the peasant tsar, the revolution would have failed.
                  Minuscule-Where is infa? Only with a merciless peasant revolt such human losses are possible. You yourself said the country is a peasant, and where did so many victims come from? Did you open your veins yourself?
                  The foreigners were already tired of WWI and when they saw such a batch they were not very active. The massacre was arranged, a fact, and you have to ask them for this.
                  2.About the temples and the disaffected --- Do you want the Soviet government to leave a lot of information? -They were not fools. Are you out of your mind? -The people live for centuries their way of life and then an explosion ... People really believed that the end of the world was coming- Well, we had a devout people. Do you think priests drew a new paradise life in churches for peasants? Hell and how to accept this hell was the choice of the Russian believing peasant. And they took up axes ...
                  Interestingly, you intertwine the logic of liberalism with the terry propaganda of the USSR agitation laughing
                  after all, even in the USSR, the party members understood the absurdity of many incidents in our history.
                  Well, about education, I already understood that you are an adherent of a new faith. And any faith should be so arranged as a person. Well, be consistent and respect the faith of others. And formalize your faith as it should, and then there will be a subject in dispute.
                  How do you know what the Bolsheviks wanted. Namely, Comrade Trotsky? Here Stalin taught the people. I respect the Stalinists because they are statesmen.
                  I would be quite satisfied with the level of education in Germany or the United States. I think Russia would be on a par with them. But with a much larger population ...
                  Healthy people need education. And has Russia been sick for a long time, instead of a healthy lifestyle? laughing No science is needed, but only to those who are drawn to knowledge. You cannot be cute.
                  Well, all right, we have worn the fringes and it will be laughing
                  1. Yarosvet
                    Yarosvet 10 July 2013 04: 43 New
                    0
                    First on YOU, then on YOU ... Somehow you are undecided laughing

                    Who were the soldiers of the tsarist army? From the peasants
                    What does it change? For you, there is no difference between "being a peasant" and "being a native of peasants"?

                    [b] The Cossacks are the same peasants, but with a heightened sense of duty to the Motherland ... Yes, the Cossacks are a military peasant caste, who did not weigh
                    Not a caste, but an estate. By the way, how did you determine the level of your sense of duty?

                    Perhaps you have not heard about the mass peasant riots?
                    About those that the Cossacks crushed?

                    peasant country, but where did so many victims come from?
                    How many? From 8 to 10 million for the period of the FIRST WORLD AND CIVIL (killed, from hunger, from disease, due to old age) - all together?

                    Foreigners were already tired of the 1st World War and seeing such a batch were not particularly active.
                    Super laughing Did they tell you this themselves?

                    And took up the axes
                    With a cry - beat the eaters.

                    And any faith should be so a person. Well, be consistent and respect the faith of others. And form your faith as it should and then there will be a subject in dispute.
                    Just curious - what are these conclusions based on? This is how a person is arranged that faith is obligatory? With what joy should I respect that which I do not share? What kind of faith are I talking about, what and what should I formalize?
                    And we already have a subject - liberalism.

                    How do you know what the Bolsheviks wanted, namely Comrade Trotsky?
                    According to their declarations and actions confirming or refuting these declarations, but again - where does Bronstein have to do with it?

                    I would be quite satisfied with the level of education in Germany or the United States. I think Russia would be on a par with them. But with a much larger population ...
                    What period of education?
                    Mendeleev did not take into account wars, epidemics, cataclysms and education in his calculations. lol

                    Healthy people need education.
                    Without education, there is no health, and life expectancy is appropriate.

                    No science is needed, but only to those who are drawn to knowledge. You cannot be cute.
                    Everyone is drawn to knowledge, but many are beaten off by this craving.

                    The bottom line is that we need to decide what is good for us and what is bad, and act accordingly.
                    1. lexe
                      lexe 10 July 2013 13: 24 New
                      0
                      Thanks for grabbing my comments on quotes. laughing
                      It's nice when someone re-prints your thoughts
                      I will not frame your arguments laughing
                      8-10 million since 1914
                      Cheto reminds me of this ... 1st figures of losses in the Second World War.
                      There is a comparative historical analysis.How many people died in the dashing 90s?This is without open intervention, without active military confrontation between the Reds and the traitor liberals, without mass starvation, the presence of all the same militia (albeit a corrupt one), in contrast to the massacre-dispersal of the police after 1917. seasoned criminals, too, at least partially sat on bunks in 1991. How many?
                      I saw figures from 25 million people. There are figures comparable to the Second World War!
                      Now to the civil ... The fighting white-red is the tip of the iceberg. The chaos and the mess after 1917 is comparable to the mess after 1991.
                      So for me Trotskyism and Liberalism are the essence of the same methodmanifested in different years under different banners!
                      And if you consider that then the people believed in God! Without looking back, the intensity of the struggle was higher ...
                      How many? From 8 to 10 million for the period of the FIRST WORLD AND CIVIL (killed, from hunger, from disease, due to old age) - all together?


                      50 million Russians - this was the price of a change of faith. And maybe more. Well, how is it necessary not to respect the Russian people to think that he would so easily forget the faith of his ancestors?
                      But Stalin came, yes, too, a tyrant .. But he stopped the lawlessness of people without a name and a tribe.
                      And Putin came, yes, too .. and stopped the chaos.
                      A good method. First, shock and shock therapy. And then stop the car, reverse. And under the impression that the executioner took his finger off the trigger.
                      ready to accept a new faith. Not all is true.
                      But Stalin had a people with families of 10 people - the wound healed quantitatively (not qualitatively).
                      What does Putin have? It's right that the families of other people also have 10 children.And it was the most massive and monstrous genocide in history.
                      1. Yarosvet
                        Yarosvet 10 July 2013 16: 56 New
                        0
                        Quote: Lexi
                        8-10 million since 1914
                        Cheto reminds me of this ... 1st figures of losses in the Second World War.
                        There is a comparative historical analysis: How many people died in the dashing 90s?
                        As the population declines, yes, it does.

                        The chaos and mess after 1917 is comparable to the mess after 1991.
                        That's right - there are many parallels here.

                        So for me Trotskyism and Liberalism are the essence of the same method
                        And here by: the fact that Russia is being sold under the sauce of liberalism - liberalism has never been.

                        And if you consider that then the people believed in God! Without looking back, the intensity of the struggle was higher ...
                        Perhaps one of the main points: if the church "taught" what it claims (philanthropy, ALL forgiveness, etc.) it could be different. But the church did not “teach” and could not “teach” this due to the fact that both Christianity and Scripture have nothing in common with philanthropy.
                        What kind of church it was, what kind of "faith" it was - L. Tolstoy described in his letter to the synod.


                        50 million Russians - this was the price of a change of faith. And maybe more. Well, how is it necessary not to respect the Russian people to think that he would so easily forget the faith of his ancestors?
                        And how should one not respect the people in order to call Jewish nonsense the faith of their ancestors?
                        Where does 50 million (35%) of the population come from? You here and emigrants recorded and seceded Finland, etc.?

                        But Stalin came, yes, too, a tyrant .. But he stopped the lawlessness of people without a name and a tribe.
                        Here I am pleased with such statements - why is Stalin a tyrant? belay

                        And Putin came, yes, too .. and stopped the chaos.
                        Have you seen a lot of lawlessness in '99?

                        What does Putin have? It's right that the families of other people also have 10 children.
                        Decommissioned at the moment thanks to the countries' knee lifter.


                        Oh, Lesha - how did they get us out of this ... Someone got hooked on religion and the tyrant Stalin, someone with the amer's and orange threat, some kind of vague liberalism.

                        And the enemy sits under his nose, not particularly encrypted ...
  45. Xnumx kopeek
    Xnumx kopeek 9 July 2013 02: 07 New
    +1
    Liberalism is a weapon of Zionism, like anti-Semitism
  46. cumastra1
    cumastra1 9 July 2013 09: 42 New
    +1
    Monument to Freedom, was donated to the United States by the French. This is a copy of a statue erected in France. It is noteworthy that during the revolution, a guillotine was located opposite this statue. The blood of those executed in the name of freedom of equality and brotherhood (remember the famous "one hundred thousand heads!"), Splashed at the foot of this very freedom. The sister of this bloody freedom stands in the USA. How symbolic, isn't it?
  47. sumcream56
    sumcream56 9 July 2013 10: 50 New
    -5
    Comrades, gentlemen! Who opposes liberalism speaks out:
    - for religious obscurantism, because freedom of speech and press and non-interference in private life are basic liberal values;
    - for scientific and technical backwardness, because advanced scientific and technical ideas can interfere with someone;
    - for the complete arbitrariness of the authorities and embezzlement, because the basic liberal value is the election of the authorities;
    - for the rationing system, because competition and freedom of entrepreneurship are also basic liberal values.
    And the USA is not a liberal, but more of a conservative country.
    Who is against the liberals is a fascist or a communist. Just take a history textbook and read how these regimes ended. By the way, the liberals in Egypt gave up the same Islamic fascists. And they really wanted to even get into bed. In fact, China is in many ways a more liberal country than the United States or France. Paying an income tax of 78% could be thought of by the social liberal defenders of the humiliated and oppressed. A liberal is a person who, thanks to his activity, replenishes the budget, and the social liberals, communists, fascists are keen not to create efficient production, but to rob what has already been created.
    1. lexe
      lexe 9 July 2013 14: 57 New
      -1
      The United States lives in two dimensions, traditional and innovative. And all this is held together by the Pentagon and the stock exchange. We would now have such villages and small cities as in Texas, but already in Ryazan.
      Pay income tax of 78%

      How much does a startup pay in US tax and how easy is it to get a loan against it?
      How much taxes does a farmer pay? All risks with bad weather and sales are hedged by the state!
      Bolivar (MIR) will not withstand the 2 successful capitalist super-states of the USA and Russia. And there is also a factory-China ...
      Capitalism is possible without a printing press. It is not for nothing that all this talk about gold. And there are even those in the West who suggest returning to the origins of sound state capitalism, but this time on a new technological base (obtained by the way thanks to the printing press).
      Progress is always a loop with a return to the past - you didn't know that?
      We need sound social capitalism with positive aspects from communism, while liberal anarchy with rampant production of 1000 brands of unnecessary branded products (and not here!) And shock and extinction of peoples (90% conservative in their essence, otherwise such a people would quickly decay )WE DO NOT NEED.
      Self-restraint is inherent in a person. This is his essence. The main thing is not to go too far both under communism and under liberalism. Yes, there are passionaries who are not enough. There are 2 ways - the historical one with hard labor and the new one ... with the valleys. laughing and closed universities. Let them look for the meanings of life. Yes, and in Russia I would also add monasteries, and the seers were strong laughing
  48. Xnumx kopeek
    Xnumx kopeek 9 July 2013 10: 58 New
    +1
    Quote: cumastra1
    Monument to Freedom, was donated to the United States by the French. This is a copy of a statue erected in France. It is noteworthy that during the revolution, a guillotine was located opposite this statue. The blood of those executed in the name of freedom of equality and brotherhood (remember the famous "one hundred thousand heads!"), Splashed at the foot of this very freedom. The sister of this bloody freedom stands in the USA. How symbolic, isn't it?
    -
    -This stuffed animal was brought to America by the same Freemasonry that helped their Amer. brothers-masons of the North / "fathers of the nation" /, when they already ate their boots from hunger, etc. and lost the war to the rich and independent Buratins of the cotton South. - So the Freemasonry of the North became the masters of America.
    --Then they came up with the name 'civil war', etc.
  49. nod739
    nod739 9 July 2013 11: 26 New
    +1
    imagine an anthill. or a hive, and each bee thinks only of itself, dragging nectar into its egg capsule

    so are people, when hedonists - in discord, when ants - can create something grandiose

    although not entirely true allegory, they would not have crawled out of the caves if they were longing only to eat in the cave, without claims to neighboring territories
  50. Yoshkin Kot
    Yoshkin Kot 4 August 2013 12: 57 New
    0
    I do not see the difference between communism, national socialism and librastism, all three movements are leftist and misanthropic and anti-Christian in essence