Military Review

Something about the national idea

39
Something about the national idea



Being a foreigner, I often think that, nevertheless, perhaps, I overcome a certain line when I write something. There is a line between what people can say about the country in which they were born and raised, and what the teapots can say about it. I think I have overcome this barrier several times already, and the following article (or articles; I have no idea how long I will write) is probably another step across this line. Recently, I increasingly want to talk about the new ideology of Russia.

Should a foreigner write about ideology for the country to which he came? No, it should not. But, as they say in America, “fuck it” (I’ll do it anyway, in this context). I just see that I have something to say. The more open and honest I am with you, the better, so I'm going to put all my thoughts on what a new Russian ideology / national idea could be. Even ONF demands from the society opinions on the new national idea, and ideology is actively discussed in the media.

In addition, although many Russian thinkers are radically changing my outlook, I noticed that they do not do very well with the detailed elaboration of ideas and thoughts, and besides, they do not know how to popularize them at all. (This program is an excellent example: there are several people deeply respected by me in the studio, but practically no specific idea was expressed). Remember, I'm from the States! We created Model-T, McDonald's and Twitter; we can both reduce and present everything to the masses, so I feel

I warn you: this is NOT the ideology itself, but only considerations on the topic. By the way, one of the key factors of ideology is that it should be reduced to a multitude of short slogans that are easily remembered by a simple man in the street. It is very important that the busy Oleg Ordnevich, who can be found on the street, understand these slogans and put them into practice. And yes ... please do not forget that I interpret many Russian expressions much narrower than the root ones do.

In addition, the word "cult", which will often appear in the text, is a metaphor. I would never support the creation of a cult in the direct sense of the word, as revolutionary France did.

New ideology №1 - Russia is sacred (developing the cult of Russia)

Although the computer tells me that the expression “God is in heaven, on earth is Russia” is popular in Serbia, I heard it from many Russians. And it should be the key idea for a new ideology. Instead of trying to explain myself why I think so, I will give the floor to Dostoevsky, he will do better:

“Without a higher idea, neither man nor nation can exist. And the highest idea on earth is only one, and that is the idea of ​​the immortality of the human soul, for all the other "higher" ideas of life that a person can live with come only from one. "

Dostoevsky is absolutely right. Belief in a higher power, in something more significant than our frailty, is necessary to create a strong society. As I already wrote before, the modern cult of the one-man, which is so actively inspired by liberal propaganda, was and is extremely destructive for Russia. The idea that you can build a community of individual farmers who live only for themselves, like the little gods in their own little worlds, is insane and should be thrown into the trash.

God exists or not, religion exists. And our task is to make people relate to Russia in the same spirit as to God. Now I will explain what I mean. If the Orthodox see a completely neglected church in his district, he does not lose faith in God, he believes that this particular place is not worthy of the Lord. At the same time, when today we see the ugly buildings from the 90's, we say: “Russia to **”, and not “these buildings disgrace the greatness of Russia” or “are not good enough for great Russia” (and should be rebuilt ).

When an imam or a priest behaves in an inappropriate way and a scandal erupts, believers are not disappointed in the greatness of the Lord. They only say: “these people are not real Christians / Muslims”. But today, for some reason, the dregs of the government manage to blacken and defame Russia itself.

We need to bring Russia closer to this infallible standard, to return her sacredness. Dostoevsky was also right in speaking of the need for a higher power and the idea of ​​the immortality of the soul. Well, isn't Russia the ultimate power? If we recognize that Russia is much bigger than ourselves (and I say this to every foreigner I meet), then the idea that each of us is the master of our own micro universe, where we can do anything, will go away. Is not Russia immortal? It may seem strange to you, but I like to realize myself as part of Russia, where my Slavic ancestors have lived since the beginning of time, where I live, and where my descendants will fight for a better future for their descendants. In a certain sense, Russia can give a sense of immortality, because each of us can become a small part of a great, never-ending stories. Russia also imposes on us the burden of the past. So much had to shed blood, die and suffer for Russia, that we are all born with a debt to it. Very much in the spirit of the Christian faith, which says that the death of Christ on the cross for the sins of mankind has imposed on each of us a great duty that will be difficult to repay, but we need to try to do it.

Not everyone in Russia believes in God, I myself am very skeptical about the possibility of the existence of God, however, both Russian atheist communists and Orthodox nationalists, being patriots, realize that Russia itself is a supreme force and should be considered sacred. It follows that if there is something sacred, then there is blasphemy. And now I think it is important to talk about it.

Certain people will try to parasitize the sanctity of Russia, some others will say that this is heresy or will scream that Russia has bad roads. There is a big risk of misunderstanding, which will result in the idea of ​​"ethnic" holiness. It should be clear that only immortal Russia together with the land and the people are sacred as a single whole. But let me draw your attention: the mortal members of a famous party with a bear on the logo are not sacred, like their projects. I am afraid that among us there will be those who do not understand this obvious nuance.

Add: we must remember the difference between criticism (we need to expand the road network in the country) and insult (to hell with it! Stupid drunks can't even make a damn good road).

New ideology №2 - not for export

Former ideologies and religions have always declared themselves the only correct, the only possible way. And it provided an excuse for those believers and ideologized people who walked the globe and killed anyone they want to “help them.” “It doesn’t matter how many people die as long as we carry them democracy / our god / capitalism / whatever; this is done in the name of greater good ”- such words have been spoken too often throughout history.

This phenomenon is called "universalism", and it should not be present in the new Russian ideology. The key difference between the new ideology / national idea / political theory being created today and those that have sunk into the past is its internal orientation: it should work only for Russia / Eurasia. One of the components of the discussion about the multipolarity of the world is the popular thesis, which says that different civilizations should choose their own path of development, and not be at all integrated into Western liberalism under the gun of "Tomahawk." In short, any idea that is born in the depths of the Eurasian Union is only suitable for him and will never work anywhere else, and besides, it will cause hatred for those who try to impose it by force.

New ideology №3 - rejection of liberalism and how to fill the void. "Freedom to do"

Liberalism - as the idea of ​​a society built around the individual and his rights, an individual freed from all frameworks, including traditions, religion and even gender - must be discarded because he is completely alien to Russia and has shown himself to be extremely destructive to her society.

“Liberty” (freedom from) —this independence from any framework on which a liberal utopia is based — is interpreted by many people smarter than me as something detrimental to Russia. Alexander Dugin explains that Russians understand freedom as “freedom FOR” or “freedom to DO”.

We see around us that when we remove all bans and give the Russian people the opportunity to create a society of individualists, nothing happens. It may seem that in the West such tactics would work, but in Russia there is definitely no. For Russians, liberal freedom becomes freedom from heritage and purpose, and on such a basis a welfare society is not built - on the contrary, it fades and dies away because of the meaninglessness of existence.

The idea that individualists, living and working only for their own sake, can somehow create a strong society, is insane; its time is up.

But the idea of ​​“freedom for” and “freedom to do” sounds interesting, but how does it work?

The government, instead of simply “being close”, creating a favorable environment for the economic prosperity of individuals, must and simply must create goals for society, and it has the rights and means to achieve these goals; in response, the masses should be able to support or reject these macro-tasks through a referendum.

You see, the people, the masses, will just bear (and have more than once borne) the burden of translating the ideas of their leaders into life, so they should be able to take part in creating such an idea.

If Russia is to create a large-scale or even a grand project that will be moved by the government, then such a project should have a confirmation stamp from the people in order to gain legitimacy. When it is known that 80% of the population voted and chose from three to five public goals for a certain time (a person cannot pay attention to many issues at once; therefore, there should be only a few basic public goals at a time to choose), then the people implementing the project will motivated to a large extent and, moreover, to feel its legitimacy. One of the omissions of the Soviet era was the practice of dictation by the party of its “five-year plans” without receiving intelligible feedback or approval from the bottom.

(And again: I just want to state my thoughts on ideology, a detailed study of how “freedom to do” could work in practice is very laborious. But personally, I agree to work).

Liberalism empowers only the individual, and at least from the end of 70, American corporations as well. If we take away all rights from corporations and give them to society, the game will go differently. In liberalism, no one can say no to McDonald's opening a restaurant to squeeze out local businessmen. All of them have the right to private property and can open their restaurants if they have enough money. But if society had rights, people would simply say: “we don’t want your nasty food and your presence in our country”. There are conditions when individual rights must be omitted, since they are used to assert all sorts of absurdities, exploitation and the strongest inequality.

Liberalism is not only a systemic or structural problem in Russia, but also a social one. If Putin had dressed in a simple shirt and went to work, he would have been ridiculed, moreover, both at home and abroad. It is very important to note: Russian traditions are understood as absurd in Russia! How can you talk about a great nation when your own culture is regarded as backward and worthless? Look at the Russian television and media that are well funded by the government - there is nothing Russian in them, they are a pathetic copy of the miserable modern Western “media”; they push a destructive virus of liberalism into society: consumerism, arrogance, pride, self-love.

New ideology №4 - rejection of the West (and a little bit of approval)

"We are called to create our own and, in our own way, Russian in Russian."
IA Il'in


When I was at Seliger this summer, I saw images of successful people who had visited the forum before. Each "successful" guest in the photo was wearing a jacket and tie and worked in something like an office. It seemed to me very offensive. Why on earth at the forum about Russia we have to evaluate the success according to the western criteria of “jacket / tie, big heads at the office” ?! Why is a woman with four children not considered successful? Why is a plumber who works well and honestly treats his clients is not considered successful? Yes, all because Russia has not yet abandoned the West and its values.

To protect your eyes from reading a few pages of my ardent indignation about this, I can only say that since Peter the Great told the Russians that they are lagging behind the Europeans, Russia has never been able to get rid of the prejudice that Western Europe is for it universal benchmark. A new national idea should reject Western culture to the same extent that Peter implanted it. Rejection should go beyond rhetoric, clear all areas of society — from the government itself, right down to the food we eat. Ilina's statement above is the DIRECT GUIDE TO ACTION.

We will never be smart with someone else's mind and glorious with someone else's glory ...
N.M. Karamzin


I have spoken an infinite number of times both in Russian and in English, that as long as Russia tries to copy the West, the copy turns out to be shitty. Karamzin's statement brilliantly reveals my thesis. If we look at Russia as if through the eyes of people who hate it both in their gut and mind, how can we see something good in it? The status of the West as an example to follow has lost its reputation and should be forgotten.

Recently, I was on a television program where, at the very end, an educated Russian man who showed himself to be a patriot throughout the program, exclaimed: “Oh, if we lived in a NORMAL country!”. This Russian self-humiliation sits very deeply and amazes even patriots. This infection should be removed.

“What is good for a Russian is death for a German” (and sometimes vice versa!)


This adage is incredibly important. Why? Because Russian patriots are inclined to regard the West as one big gay parade of pedophiles and soulless consumers, pathetic pigs. I have said for years that Russians need to regain pride, and in this proverb we can see a way: to magnify what Russia has and what Europe does not have. Russia is something natural and primeval, while the West is completely false and plastic; the sincerity of the smile of a Russian face is better than a hundred fake Western smiles. We also clearly see from the experience of the 90s that unrestrained liberalism and Western tendencies do not work in Russia and are much more destructive for it than even vodka.

This thought (the Russians are following the difficult path, because they themselves are harder) should spread through the Internet and grow into a powerful current. If it seems impossible to drop and forget hundreds of years of worshiping the West in one generation, then at least we can look at examples of other cultures.

Arabs use Nokia cell phones, ride BMWs, but they can wear ethnic clothes, and these Western devices and cars do not make them less Arabs or Muslims. Let's take a closer look: our neighbors friends Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan may wear Russian-European costumes with a hat or a cap without the slightest embarrassment. Why Russians can not have an iPhone, but it does not feel lower than the West?

I want to be brief, but add again. At the deepest cultural level, from television and the manner of dressing and up to how we write SMS messages - everywhere there must be a strong rejection of the West and that vile part of the Russian elite that bows to the West and declares that there is no other way than the western sample for Russia. This denial is the key maxim and perhaps the MOST IMPORTANT COMPONENT of the new national idea.

It will be impossible to ward off the West without a powerful cultural campaign, on the scale as huge and even more effective than Soviet propaganda in the Stalin period. Changing (or healing) the mentality of the people is a difficult thing, but paradoxically, barely noticeable, it happens all the time. It will not be possible to break the dominance of Western culture without proposing an alternative; one cannot simply forbid anything Western without offering anything in return. In fact, the prohibition of something does not work, but the proposed alternative works. Rejection of the status quo, boring liberal pop culture requires an explosion of new ideas and new alternatives in the media with the involvement of other people who complete the job.

If we say no to the MTV culture, which, like a virus, has hit Russia, such a step will create a vacuum that will be filled with new ideas. Rejecting the West as a national idea means that we will have to create a new generation of films, TV shows, books, video games and all forms of entertainment. Damn, why not invent a "Russian football"?

Some say that Russia does not have its own ideas, and therefore we cannot abandon the West. But I think that the lack of ideas takes place for the very reason that we have not abandoned the West. You can’t think of anything new when you just follow the western path, your media is filled with those who follow the western pattern. This cultural rejection of the West and the absolute, full recognition of Eurasia not as the West or the East, but as a special, unique community should be part of a national idea.

“Hold the horses!” (“Hold your horses!”)
Famous American saying


But to deny every little thing that comes from liberalism or the West would be foolish. There are things worth saving. In the “pre-liberalism” world, you could be accused of crimes according to rumors and gossip of your neighbors, which you haven’t even seen, or you could have been killed by the will of a king who was born to become a king, and never worked in his life, until you unbend in the field until death. Liberalism arose for a certain reason, and to discard all its aspects would mean throwing out useful moments, such as a fair and independent court. Cultural rejection should be strong, but certain legal elements and rights can be allowed, for example, the right to remain silent (enshrined in the fifth article of the US Constitution). If you give up this right, then the government will have the opportunity (in theory) to torture before receiving the desired words from the victim. Do not go this route.

New Ideology №5 - the creation of the cult of masculinity, femininity and hero

Fighters are not born. There is a predisposition in the character, but I think that they still become fighters.
F. Emelianenko


In Russia, and especially on the RuNet, we can observe the shock and horror that people experience in relation to asexual and transgender European Union, where young children hold artificial penises in some sex education classes, where the highest court in Sweden defended the right of an elderly person men masturbate in public. And all this awakens in many people pride in their lives “from the opposite” - simply because we don’t have that. I think in this sense, many feel a real superiority over Europe (for the first time since the collapse of the Union).

The more Russia rejects that which belongs to Sodom, the better it will be for her. Russia should not just say “Fuu, this is bad” about Europe, but strengthen the focus on gender roles. We can be proud of the fact that we do not live in asexual Europe, but in Russia there are many problems of gender.

I spoke with many people, and came to the conclusion that we, men living in Russia, have lost a substantial share of character. How many divorces are due to the fact that the husband simply sits at home and is hacked into computer games, or even got married just for the sake of his wife’s apartment, and so on. I think in the modern world, although we have gender differences in Russia, the roles should be more strictly and clearly defined. Patience to weak men in the state are not engaged.

Since Europe sees the future as transgender, we must revive the cult of masculinity and femininity in Russia, we need a future with clear sexual roles, which, however, will fit into the modern situation. We cannot hope for the emergence of new Russian heroes while we are playing only computer games (although it is so cool to play them) or as if little children demand a car with heated seats, because our buns can die. We also have no right to expect strong families, while men are lazy and do what they like or behave in accordance with the worst stereotypes.

Despite the fact that we all think about freedom, people need structure and strict roles of the sexes. We need to get them back, but only in the spirit of the 21 century. Someone reading these lines will certainly say that they have a secret thirst to enslave women, although in fact the opposite is true. Women in the Western world have been inspired for a long time that they should not rely on men, become men themselves. So, on the whole, women there have to work all their life, not having the support from a man, and at the same time also having children. And we still wonder why such a low birth rate in Europe! This essence of feminism does not give a woman a choice, but takes away from her the opportunity to be a mother, to show the ultimate form of femininity.

On the topic of feminism: why do feminists in the west not protect the rights of women to become mothers? Why is it absurd if a girl wants to become a professional mother and wife? Why is it bad and impossible, and why in the new national idea we should not allow women the freedom to be professional moms?

I apologize if this seems pretentious, but I believe that my thesis on strengthening gender will lead to a bright future and should be part of a national idea.

Finally, it is obvious that heroism is an important component of Russia, and heroic figures with their words and deeds, as an example to us, should also become part of a new national idea.

Synopsis of the national idea

1. Russia is sacred;

2. Replacing “freedom from” with “freedom for”;

3. The Russian national idea is not for export;

4. The government must engage in great missions approved or chosen by the people;

5. Total rejection of the West, creating a vacuum of ideas and cultures, which should be filled with new ideas or elements of cultures;

6. Respect and promotion of the forces of Russia and Russians in comparison with the weak, fragile, genderless population of the EU;

7. Creating a cult of courage, femininity and hero, which gives a new image of those who we are and who we can become, and a motive for why to do it.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.russia.ru/news/politics/2013/12/2/19425.html
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. 10kAzAk01
    10kAzAk01 3 December 2013 07: 53
    +6
    “God in heaven, Russia on earth” is popular in Serbia, I heard it from many Russians. And it should be the key idea for a new ideology.

    asymmetrical response to your "exclusiveness"
  2. domokl
    domokl 3 December 2013 07: 59
    +7
    A typical article for a foreigner who in a few years will speak the words of the classic-Mind Russia does not understand.
    It’s a very clever attempt to put the current situation on the shelves, but with one significant no. What the author sees is not Russia, not even a section of Russia, this is Moscow, and Little Peter. Russia is different. She is in the outback. It is there that the soul was preserved.
    Once in 41, it was this Russia that rose up and threw the Nazis off Russian soil. And the ideology here is almost no different from the rest of the world. More precisely, it differs in one, but radically changing everything, in our country, unlike the West, I am not at the forefront and WE. And we live, not I. We live together, we win together, and we die, if necessary, together.
    1. Sunjar
      Sunjar 3 December 2013 08: 13
      +5
      It's okay, the main thing is that the author is trying to understand Russia as something more than a state. If he decides to take a long journey through the whole of Russia, not just galloping, but to live in its different parts, then his understanding of Russia and the Russian soul will deepen. In his soul will appear Russian scope, corresponding to our territory. Then he will look much wider and his opinion will change more than once.
      1. domokl
        domokl 3 December 2013 08: 21
        +3
        Quote: Sunjar
        It's okay, the main thing is that the author is trying to understand Russia as something more than a state.

        Of course there is nothing to worry about. He is not the first, he is not the last. They are trying to understand the second millennium lol .Yes and the tone of the article is just such my vision of the country. The main thing is that the author does not decide that he understands the Russian soul. And now, reading Western analysts, you understand that for the majority of Russia it is still the same with pre-revolutionary popular news ...
      2. Pinochet000
        Pinochet000 3 December 2013 17: 30
        0
        Quote: Sunjar
        It's okay, the main thing is that the author is trying to understand Russia

        And it seems to me, if you do not go into details, he understands Russia better than many people living in the country. And he is a Slav, as I understand it.
    2. ReifA
      ReifA 3 December 2013 09: 14
      +3
      Quote: domokl
      this is Moscow, and Little Peter. Russia is different. It is in the outback. It is there that the soul was preserved.

      Considering that the hinterland is shrinking (villages are dying out, cities are growing), the "soul" may not survive, at least in its initial form. Hope I'm wrong.
    3. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 3 December 2013 10: 04
      +4
      Nevertheless, for pendos, he expressed his idea very soundly and reasonably. And I also agree with the postulate options, although the list can be supplemented. hi
      1. Hort
        Hort 3 December 2013 13: 09
        +2
        given that Tim Kirby has been living in the CIS for quite some time (he worked in Kazakhstan, sort of like, then moved to Moscow), he is already more Russian than)))
    4. starshina78
      starshina78 3 December 2013 11: 56
      0
      I agree that Moscow and St. Petersburg are not Russia, but the outback is not the same either. Moscow and St. Petersburg are the lost pieces of Russia. The cult of the West flourishes there, worship of the West (to a lesser extent in St. Petersburg), but the outback is already looking in the same direction. While looking closely, understanding a little, but the moment will come and that's it, Russia may lose its identity. By the way, the statement that in 1941 it was the hinterland that saved the situation is not entirely true. Moscow was defended by the divisions of the Moscow militia until the arrival of the Siberian divisions, of which 12 divisions were created, each with an average of 12000-13000 fighters, 9 divisions were completely destroyed. But we will not count who and how much and what defended. All the republics of the USSR, all the autonomies of the RSFSR took part in the war, and all showed themselves worthily. Then there was an idea, there was an ideology. The task was to defend the Motherland, to free it. Ideology was about building a bright future - communism. Now we do not know how we live. We have no idea, no ideology. We go to church, and many go there because it has become fashionable, on Victory Day we tie the "St. George's ribbon" with a bow, and then throw it into the trash can, we wave the tricolor flag at the "Deep Purple" concert, show our patriotism and immediately we can not give up a seat on the bus to the veteran. We, Russia, need a national idea (let it be called that, but this is essentially an ideology), without it the country does not see landmarks, and it turns out some semblance of patriotism and love for the Motherland, and maybe this is why we are in a fever, because - we go from one extreme to another.
      1. corn
        corn 3 December 2013 22: 04
        0
        Sorry, but the militia divisions of the Moscow militia did not defend Moscow, but Russia, by the way, like all other divisions. Of course, you can consider the battle of Smolensk as the battle of Moscow, but historians think differently.
        "By the way, the statement that in 1941 it was the outback that saved the situation is not entirely true." (Your words) is wrong to the same extent as "Moscow was defended by the divisions of the Moscow militia ..." (Your words), but everything that you write after - curtsies.
    5. Mikhail3
      Mikhail3 3 December 2013 13: 04
      +3
      The author does not so much try to "decompose" as performs the function of a translator. He tries to translate the remnants of the Russian ideology "mir" into the language of a Russian-speaking (and in many respects no longer Russian) city. Because our cities have been destroying the Russian since those very times of Peter the Great, using it as fuel to create "success." To abandon the Russian look with a "jacket and office" - this Kirby noticed fantastically right!
      As for "ideology is no different from the rest of the world" ... Well, at least cry at least jump! Russian people, well, how is that ... Understand, the world ideology PROVINES almost the same as we do! And therefore, with bewilderment, dumbfounded, and then with furious hatred, he looks at the wild and dumb Russians, who again took completely seriously the words that do not oblige this very world to anything! The whole world enthusiastically talks about chivalry. At the same time, keeping in mind - you need to look prettier and more impressive. Since the knights were dirty, the most vile bandits and nothing more, they simply robbed enough to pay the minnesngers and other minstrels of the so-called. "gallant poetry".
      This is actually Western chivalry! Be sure to kill, rob, force, burn, humiliate. But certainly in a beautiful pose, in shiny clothes and with the right words on her lips. For the right words - hire a professional, a poet, do not go mad at all! And here we are ...
      The Russians take gallant poetry itself and say - how correctly all this is said! Almost ours! And they are beginning to demand from the West that it is precisely these moral standards that are being followed ... yes, the people there did not even dream of this in the wildest nightmares! So they argue about the mysteries of our soul, unable to understand how it would be possible to be so naive with such power. Oh people ....
  3. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 3 December 2013 08: 10
    +5
    It’s hard not to agree, however, provided that everyone who has read this article is thinking people. Often, only an imitation of certain ideals that do not always meet common sense is manifested.
  4. Gardamir
    Gardamir 3 December 2013 08: 23
    +1
    I liked the article. But the ideas of my homeland will be stated even shorter. ORDER. JUSTICE. TRADITIONS.
    1. washi
      washi 3 December 2013 09: 46
      +4
      Quote: Gardamir
      I liked the article. But the ideas of my homeland will be stated even shorter. ORDER. JUSTICE. TRADITIONS.

      I will add. Society (collective), and not clan (tribe) as in Central Asia and the Caucasus. It was the society (community) that evaluated its members, if necessary, rejected or accepted them, took care of the elderly and children, supported traditions.
      The last communities were dispersed in 1991, now we are made of individualists, and one in the field is not a warrior
  5. Volkhov
    Volkhov 3 December 2013 08: 23
    0
    Russia is a large and ancient country and its national idea cannot be invented by a visiting journalist - it has always been and needs only to be remembered.
    Russia is the heir to Biarmia, Tartaria and other ancient countries and it was not accidentally called the throne of the Lord - the real gods sat in the north, and the population around (for example in Barmia) served as a buffer and protection from visiting savages and journalists. The idea has always been development - the gods taught the sages, and those young people, as elsewhere in the world, civilization grew. When the gods died, there was a decline, but it can be overcome if you learn and develop yourself, which is hampered by the current authorities as agents of civilization - the aggressor.
    Two pipes, like in a pool, are the creation of civilization by people and its destruction by agents of the Venusians and gray people like Lenin, Gorbachev and many others. Where the pressure is stronger there and we go - to creation or destruction.
  6. Mikhail m
    Mikhail m 3 December 2013 08: 58
    +6
    I enter Lenin Avenue, and I do not immediately understand which country I am in. In Russian, about 10% of signage. While marketers believe that the non-Russian name is more attractive, we should not be a great people. I propose to organize a movement to ignore stores with import names. Ruble and dollar them, you bastards, you have to push!
  7. Archikah
    Archikah 3 December 2013 09: 04
    +4
    Gold words. But this needs to be done now - because then it may no longer be. Take a look around and look at our youth. Many of them are well done but enough are completely decomposed. And drug addiction is instilled by organs called to fight it. No time for sentiment and negotiation. It's time to act. and all that the author brought here is suitable for a start. Here are the braces that our President was looking for. angry
  8. Stiletto
    Stiletto 3 December 2013 09: 09
    -4
    Eh, author, would you go further reading Karamzin with Dostoevsky. And it would be better for you, dear Tim Kerby, to develop a national idea first for your mattress kingdom. Decent than the one that is. And we ourselves will somehow live.
  9. Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 3 December 2013 09: 30
    +1
    Quote: domokl
    .Main thing is that the author does not decide that he understood the Russian soul
    How much was, is, and will be sure of those who are confident in understanding Russia, the Russian soul, how they were wrong and wrong; but give advice ...


    Russia took its national mission a thousand years ago from Christianity: to realize its national earthly culture, imbued with the Christian spirit of love and contemplation, freedom and objectivity. The coming Russia will be true to this idea. ''


    I.A. Ilyin
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 3 December 2013 10: 09
      +2
      Quote: Valery Neonov
      Russia took its national mission a thousand years ago from Christianity:

      I also like Ilyin, but I would not limit myself only to Christianity in explaining the Russian mentality. hi
  10. washi
    washi 3 December 2013 09: 48
    +2
    They used to say that Russia is God's chosen country (as opposed to God's chosen people)
  11. Deniska
    Deniska 3 December 2013 11: 10
    +4
    Article + Author well done. The main thing is that he soul for Russia, and the rest comes with time.
  12. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 3 December 2013 11: 21
    -4
    Has anyone ever wondered why in America, whose citizens are "strangers" gathered from all over the world, there are practically no interethnic conflicts? Unfortunately, in Russia, which is more than a thousand years old, there are conflicts. DI think that the civil power of America is firmly on the respect and even love of the state and population of this country. It turns out the strength of society depends on love ...
    Unfortunately, in Russia it’s a little wrong. Russian bureaucrats, who thieves seized state functions, turned our people into slaves. And what is the demand from a slave? Therefore, the main national idea of ​​Russia should be the creation of a society in which the people respect and protect the state, and it, in turn, loves and respects its people to the last person. If that happens, Russia will be a superstate!
    1. Sunjar
      Sunjar 3 December 2013 11: 38
      0
      I put you a minus and here's why:
      You are mistaken that in the USA there are no interethnic conflicts. Just as it is. If in what quarter they start importing Latinos and Negroes for permanent residence, then the white population will immediately begin to dump out of personal dislike for the colored ones. This happened in Detroit, where White once or twice got counted, the same can be said about the Negro neighborhoods, from where White immediately ran away. And Latinos and blacks begin to plunder the white population for joy. Or will you begin to argue that this is not there, and the criminals are criminals in Africa too? Only now, if white in which black quarter is taxied, then he will probably be robbed, and the point here is precisely in skin color. Also in the United States there are a huge number of groups grouped together primarily on a national basis.
      1. Peaceful military
        Peaceful military 3 December 2013 15: 24
        0
        Quote: Sunjar
        I put you a minus and here's why:
        You are mistaken that in the USA there are no interethnic conflicts. Just as it is.

        Eva as you famously minus, being essentially wrong. You minus ... That's it.
        There are no ethnic conflicts in the states, since there is not a single national territory there. But racial conflicts, as much as you want, which is completely different. Slavery, loss of rights, segregation after liberalization have borne fruit in the form of what you are talking about.
        To this is added the latent Naglo-Saxon genetic racism of whites to color ones. hi
    2. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 3 December 2013 11: 44
      +2
      Quote: Ivanovich47
      in America, whose citizens are "strangers" gathered from all over the world, there are practically no interethnic conflicts?

      This is you tell the inhabitants of New Orleans. There niggas and latinos proved the opposite. hi
      1. SHILO
        3 December 2013 12: 10
        +4
        Quote: Ingvar 72
        Quote: Ivanovich47
        in America, whose citizens are "strangers" gathered from all over the world, there are practically no interethnic conflicts?

        This is you tell the inhabitants of New Orleans. There niggas and latinos proved the opposite. hi


        Still easier! Interethnic conflict with the indigenous population was resolved simply and not wisely - through destruction.
    3. Gardamir
      Gardamir 3 December 2013 12: 42
      +2
      I agree with one amendment not America but the Soviet Union should be taken as an example. In America, there was slavery, and now the "popular" negro game of knocking out the white. So America, with its supposedly melting pot, is definitely not an example for us.
  13. Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 3 December 2013 11: 40
    +5
    Quote: Ivanovich47
    in America, whose citizens are "strangers" gathered from all over the world, there are practically no interethnic conflicts?
    The thing is probably that there is no such nationality as an American, there are most of the "strangers", except for the Indians, the rest .... rabble to put it mildly, and brought negros ... OH, I beg your pardon, African-American ... winked
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 3 December 2013 11: 46
      +3
      Quote: Valery Neonov
      Oh, sorry African-Americans ..

      As in the song of Trofim, Afromo ... wassat
  14. lukke
    lukke 3 December 2013 12: 37
    +2
    I liked the article. A foreigner has done a great job of studying this issue. Question: would he do the same if his ancestors were from Zimbabwe.
    Although history knows many cases when a foreigner by birth, became more a patriot of Russia than some of our compatriots. Not every Russian probably boasts knowledge of the classics, quotes of which were cited by Tim Kerby (even the statement of our greatest athlete did not go unnoticed.
    Mr. Kirby good luck with all my heart! Just not disappointed in Russia
  15. Hort
    Hort 3 December 2013 13: 07
    +1
    Russia is sacred;
    it is not even discussed. At least in Siberia. Moreover, both the Orthodox and the Gentiles.

    2. Replacing “freedom from” with “freedom for”;
    an interesting point, but for this to work, the government must create and improve conditions for "freedom for". So far it is not very good at it, since "freedom for" is most often obtained by those close to various kinds of feeders. Everyone else has "freedom blya"))

    3. The Russian national idea is not for export;
    moot point. If by export we mean the American version of spreading democracy in TNT equivalent or the idea of ​​the Comintern, then it is clear that we do not need it. But the popularization and cultural expansion, relatively speaking, of the Russian way of life (in a good sense, and not vodka-bear-reactor-balalaika-felt boots) should be.

    4. The government must engage in great missions approved or chosen by the people;
    the question must be, how to make him do it? :)

    5. Total rejection of the West, creating a vacuum of ideas and cultures, which should be filled with new ideas or elements of cultures;
    I wouldn’t directly totally reject ideas from the West. You just need to approach this wisely - something really useful and useful can be applied, but discarded. An example is air legislation, some technologies in industry, etc. Under Stalin, for example, they did not hesitate to buy Christie's tanks and make their own on their basis.

    6
    . Respect and advancement of the forces of Russia and Russians in comparison with the weak, fragile, genderless population of the EU;

    7. Creating a cult of courage, femininity and hero, which gives a new image of those who we are and who we can become, and a motive for why to do it.
    it can be combined into one item. Although for the cult of masculinity, femininity and the hero, the ESovtsy immediately accuse us of fascism, recalling the "Triumph of the Will" by Riefenstahl and the Fuhrer, it's like giving it to drink)) although the dog barks, the caravan goes
  16. saygon66
    saygon66 3 December 2013 14: 32
    +3
    -It is always interesting to look at ourselves from the side ... The author is plus, the man tried to amiably, briefly, on the case ... although it would seem: what is Russia to him?
  17. Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 3 December 2013 15: 13
    +2
    It's funny when an American becomes a Russian, the opposite is much more often the case. Although the German Catherine the Great was more Russian than many Russians; Georgian Stalin was more Russian than many Great Russians and had the nickname "Great Russian Derzhimorda" and so on. Here the person is not of such a scale, but quite ours, as this article of his speaks eloquently.
  18. Sour
    Sour 3 December 2013 15: 27
    0
    Quote: Gardamir
    ORDER. JUSTICE. TRADITIONS.

    The problem is that everyone has their own concept of justice. And everyone seeks to impose it on others.
    Therefore, you need to build on LAW and ORDER, and when they find out what is fairer, then this leads to a civil war.
    For some, justice is when they give an opportunity to work and earn money.
    And for some, this is when, on the contrary, they do not allow anyone to stick out above a certain bar. After all, we have plenty of those who are ready to kill with their own hands not only a thief and a bribe-taker, but anyone who lives better than him. Moreover, those who earned millions under the law arouses more hatred in them than those who stole a hundred rubles. The first attitude is irreconcilable. To the second, condescending - "well, he stole a trifle, he is not a deputy or a minister."
    And they do not like corrupt officials here, not because they steal, but because they live richly.
    So do not talk about justice.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 3 December 2013 21: 52
      0
      I'm ready to argue. But justice is the same for everyone. For example "do not steal, do not kill" ... Or from another "Conscientious work for the good of society: who does not work, he does not eat. Collectivism and comradely mutual assistance: each for all, all for one."
      Just have to comply. When these principles are not respected, it is no longer fair.
  19. The comment was deleted.
  20. Jurkovs
    Jurkovs 3 December 2013 15: 29
    0
    There are many civilizations in the world: Chinese, Arab and so on. But while Western European has fully reached the heights of its development, it is also an Anglo-Saxon civilization. Russian (Slavic) civilization several times approached its final stage, but each time fell into chaos. Building your civilization is the national idea, because it will automatically lead to pride in the country, give it self-sufficiency, and stop looking for the prophets on the side. In short, this will solve all the problems. All proposed formulations of the national idea are absorbed by the idea of ​​completing the construction of the Russian House, of its civilization.
  21. smoliackow
    smoliackow 3 December 2013 15: 32
    0
    Russia doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel, and listen to degenerates, the ideology hasn’t gone anywhere, although to this very day very many are working hard to pervert this ideology, if only to distort it, and the ideology in our symbols is a flag, a coat of arms, the anthem is written on pre-revolutionary orders; for faith, the tsar and the fatherland, faith and the fatherland are preserved, there is no missing link, the Tsar of the Orthodox, that’s our whole Russian ideology!
  22. smoliackow
    smoliackow 3 December 2013 15: 32
    0
    Russia doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel, and listen to degenerates, the ideology hasn’t gone anywhere, although to this very day very many are working hard to pervert this ideology, if only to distort it, and the ideology in our symbols is a flag, a coat of arms, the anthem is written on pre-revolutionary orders; for faith, the tsar and the fatherland, faith and the fatherland are preserved, there is no missing link, the Tsar of the Orthodox, that’s our whole Russian ideology!
  23. Ross
    Ross 3 December 2013 16: 21
    +1
    Quote: domokl
    A typical article for a foreigner who in a few years will speak the words of the classic-Mind Russia does not understand.
    It’s a very clever attempt to put the current situation on the shelves, but with one significant no. What the author sees is not Russia, not even a section of Russia, this is Moscow, and Little Peter. Russia is different. She is in the outback. It is there that the soul was preserved.
    Once in 41, it was this Russia that rose up and threw the Nazis off Russian soil. And the ideology here is almost no different from the rest of the world. More precisely, it differs in one, but radically changing everything, in our country, unlike the West, I am not at the forefront and WE. And we live, not I. We live together, we win together, and we die, if necessary, together.

    Amazingly wise and deep article. And the matter is not in the outback, St. Petersburg or Moscow. The author correctly noted that under the long-term press of the Western propaganda-minded minds of propaganda, without our deep-seated response to the anti-propaganda of the Russian virtues, from the very beginning of the formation of man, in all his spheres of life, there is no way for young generations to lay down a new program. And without this, what is our future?
    1. Pinochet000
      Pinochet000 3 December 2013 17: 58
      0
      Quote: Ross
      And without this, what is our future?

      Not only with us. Recently, a "comment" on YouTube read something like: Everyone is waiting for you (Russians) to start acting ...
  24. The comment was deleted.
  25. alone
    alone 3 December 2013 19: 43
    0
    The national idea should arise in the soul of every citizen of the country. The national idea is not pants to buy it and put on. This is not 1 kg of potatoes. To buy it on the market. What national idea is it when they steal everything and are held in high esteem and this is all in front of the eyes of the entire people? Who will develop this idea to the masses, Mikhalkov with his "weary suns" or those cultural and scientific figures who are up to the elbows connected with corruption? It is difficult of course. But the fact is that without national it is impossible to develop and raise ideas not the people, nor the state.
  26. Patriot_1
    Patriot_1 4 December 2013 01: 03
    +1
    And I like the article, as if I had read my mind and clearly stated it on paper!