Military Review

Liberal Democrats. Ode to you

50
Someone this topic does not seem worth a damn. But I wanted to understand my own understanding of democracy and everything that is preached from screens, on the radio and the world wide web. Forgive in advance for some incoherence and excessive emotionality.


To begin with - some concepts.

Democracy. Demos and Kratos. People and management. This is a state system, which implies the solution of the main issues affecting the interests of the people and the state, the general meeting of the population, discussion and voting.

Liberalism. The political trend, defending personal freedoms (freedom of conscience, speech, the right of self-defense, etc.) of every citizen of the state. This implies minimal government intervention in the economic relations between citizens and organizations.

Have you ever tried to take a sleeping pill with a laxative at the same time? An interesting effect, you know, it turns out!
M. Zhvanetsky


So it seems to me that the analogy from a mixture of liberals and democrats seems to be not without a certain meaning. The first are fighting for absolute freedom: every man for himself and for himself. The second ones are for public priority in any business and the common good (ideally). The combination of two ideologies and gives the situation described by Ivan Andreevich Krylov in stories about bird, arthropod and fish: it seems that there is one goal, but it is impossible to realize. And, summing up all the modern “civilized” ideologies of the enlightened West, we come to the conclusion that they are a mixture of liberalism and democracy, laxative and hypnotic. And the same gentlemen do not stop trying to introduce to us their point of view on society. That is, to bring confusion and confusion into everything, so that we, in the simplicity of our soulfulness, would not notice how we are being turned into animals with blinders before our eyes.

Each of us is full of conceit. Everyone is sure that he knows the answer to any question. And it does not matter how opponents can react: I am always right. This is the consequence of the latest social reform, which proclaims the triumph of individualism. Collectivism and partnership, which were brought up in us by the Soviet authorities, went into oblivion. Many do not even understand that the main traditional value of the peoples of our Motherland was (and is still) the commonality of the interests of a nation and a collective. The main negative factor brought by the wind of “perestroika” changes is the primacy of personal interests over public ones. My car should be cooler than a neighbor. My TV with a meter diagonal in the 12-meter room is inconvenient, inappropriate, but more than that of my brother. I! I! I! I have! .. As it is said in a good Soviet cartoon: “Love yourself, sneeze at all, and success is waiting for you in life!” Everything is taught to us, even, more precisely, not by us, but by the young people who have been abandoned by their parents (someone - just to survive, someone - in pursuit of a new fashionable technical device), from the screens “masterpieces” of the type “house - 10 years”, “become a millionaire”, “become fashionable”, “become yourself a doctor ", Build it yourself." Make it so that no one needs you. Then you yourself will not need anyone. In general, dig your own grave.

The traditional expression of “the whole world” in Russia is sufficiently alien to both Eastern and Western civilizations. After all, we have "one man in the field is not a warrior," and in the West - a lone hero. We have “I am coming for you!”, And in the East a lonely night ninja is a secret samurai killer. It was in our village that houses were built in turn, all together, and not everyone for himself. We even had “friendly” courts, now “world” ones! Who can condemn a person more honest and impartial, sometimes more severe than the people with whom he has lived his whole life? And it does not matter, by and large, whether the law is a secular, religious, or unwritten tradition - the society where the transgressor has a line is fully responsible. Not the abstract “world community” (means progressive humanity, which was referred to during the times of the “cold war”), but the World in which each of us lives. I write the word “Peace” with a capital letter, considering that the place with which the life of an individual is inextricably linked is surrounding people — traditions, nature, climate — everything that the soul aspires when parting from its motherland.

Anti-globalists are right when they want to thwart globalization, but they are wrong in defining cause-effect relationships when they struggle with this process. After all, the basis of globalization is still the same notorious morality of Western civilization, which reads: himself, himself, for himself. This is the main flaw in the model of building the future in a Western way. After all, any of the world religions preaches the cleansing of the bad and the saturation of the good for each individual. One of the Western philosophers, most valued by me, who showed the viciousness of the Christian worldview, Friedrich Nietzsche, has a chapter about three transformations in the legend of Zarathustra. At first the Spirit takes upon itself the burden and becomes the Camel. Constantly increasing the weight of the burden, it accumulates strength, and turns into an independent Leo. Leo is strong, bright, free, but when he gets fed up with his greatness, he becomes a Child. Only a child can be a creator, come up with something new, give impetus to development. There is one more thing: the transformation of the Child into a Man (Nietzsche has a superman, but there, again, purely individual improvement) is a social individual living in a society connected with the environment. And this is nature, and similar creatures, that is, a particle of a complex consisting of the lithosphere, atmosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, and anthroposphere, which are inseparably connected with each other. Only after the fourth transformation can we talk about Man. Receiving the Superhumans, as well as the construction of Happiness in a single state, even if an “exceptional” nation lives there, is impossible, as history has proved.

Perhaps, the desire discussed in recent years under the specious pretext to instill in us an understanding of the normality of perverted sex education is not a concern for discriminated minorities, it is working out the next way to drive certain ideas into the heads. And in fact the most offensive that acts. Suffice it to recall the principle of Herostratus - committed a crime, left a memory of himself in the ages, although contemporaries decided to commit it to oblivion. So here: the main thing is to give more mentions, someone will get stuck in my head, and then there will be followers. In Soviet times, the mention of such a phenomenon with all the desire could be found only in the medical literature and in the Criminal Code.

Accordingly, the adherents of this pastime during the day with fire could not be found. Now, in many very good Western films with the participation of well-known artists this subject is discussed, even our film and television producers and distributors do not shun the use of this topic in circumvention of the federal law banning propaganda. And how many sites on the network devoted to these topics? Is this not one of the evidences of the "victory of world democracy"? How should we be grateful to the gentlemen democrats for the freedom brought to us! By the way, at least twice in the history of Europe, similar “victories” have already taken place: the Greeks over Rome and Rome over the barbarians, and both options are connected with the legalization and chanting of all sexals and phils. Whom have western geypepeytsy and north americans won now? Do not yourself? Where are we going, man?

We are witnessing the development of mankind, but this is not progress. This is an ordinary modernization of a discredited model of the world order. Progress is a calm revolution, it is always a transition to a new level. As materialism says, the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones. And no matter what - technology, medicine, consciousness. But it is impossible, as long as the existence of earthly civilizations is based on the prosperity of some at the expense of others. Indeed, in fact, in our time, nothing has changed since the days of ancient Rome (if someone does not know, then all Western jurisprudence is based on ancient Roman law), free citizens (an exclusive nation and its vassals) and slaves (say, third world countries) continue to exist ), conquerors and subjugated, obliged to fulfill the will of the winners. The first attempt - the Great French Revolution 1789 — 1794 (achieved the overthrow of the absolute monarchy) and the Paris Commune 1871 of the year that followed — ended without reaching their goals completely, revolutionaries were discredited, and the survivors became bourgeois). The second attempt - the 1905-1907 revolution, the February and Great October Socialist 1917 of the year - was more successful. The new state with a truly progressive device existed longer, but surrounded by aggressive players was forced to pursue foreign policy in the traditions of the old world, which led to internal political changes with time, and as a result the state ruined itself. It is logical to assume that the third attempt is just around the corner. It can happen in the Islamic world, in the world of Taoists or elsewhere. But the fact that this will happen - no doubt. At the same time, our goal is not to remain under the horse of the progress horse.

Some lyrics. In my school childhood, the history and social science teacher “embarrassed the mind”, made her thoughts flow in a different direction when she said that the country and the state are two different things, and you need to know the distinct differences between these terms. She explained that a country is a community of people having the same history, the same traditions, the same unwritten laws of morality, morality. And the state is a system of political and economic structure of the country, its laws. At that moment it was absurd for me: the Country of the Soviets suddenly became something else, new. Over time, I realized the whole power of this concept, because it united our country with our own government, made it inseparable. And we really had something to be proud of. Thank you, not indifferent teachers!

Why did I like living in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics? Not because everything was fine. Not because our army and navy were stronger than ever. Not because I did not know the hunger and deprivation, which our fathers and grandfathers more than ate with. And not even because it was the country of Lenin and Pushkin, Kapitsa and Mikhalkov, Lomonosov and Kropotkin, Nevsky and Zhukov, or many other great people, which you can list endlessly. I liked to live in the Soviet Union only because I was always sure that I would come to the rescue in a difficult situation. Not relatives, so friends, not friends, so familiar or simply unknown to me at all, strangers, whom I most likely will never see again in my life. But they are always there! I could never imagine a hopeless situation for myself or for others. Everyone came to help another. But today, with the advent of our "uncouth", "lapotnuyu" education, anyone (without exception) can go missing or become a celebrity, become a beggar or a millionaire. For this I hate the democrats, despise the liberals, am in extreme dislike for modern communists. “I don’t want to be a millionaire, I don’t want to be a drug courier,” but I want our children to also be confident in us, in our society, in their future, as we used to be.
Author:
50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. sashka
    sashka 25 January 2014 07: 26
    +1
    A lot of words. Life was quieter and more fun, whatever one may say or call it. The dollar cost 60 kopecks and nobody needed the fuck. Everything else imposed by the Gorboeltseputinians is not ours. Of all the "new" only computers and fast food. Well, of course, chaos, like without it. Anyone knows how to ruin everything. Here's to build and create a problem.
    What actually in the next month we will soon see. Again calls for construction projects on patriotism about love for Russia. He listed the words that are now forbidden to pronounce, so as not to offend any non-Russians ..
  2. sashka
    sashka 25 January 2014 07: 37
    +1
    It is interesting Moderators, since when did Russian Folk Words become curses? Ivanushka-D, y, r, and, h, oh, to say. But you can’t call a fool a non-Russian moron? Who is filtering the bazaar? Announce the list .. Please ..
    1. vladsolo56
      vladsolo56 25 January 2014 07: 44
      0
      most likely there is a car moderator, it contains words that are deleted automatically. Who chose these words is unclear. I am also often surprised that medical terms and folk expressions are deleted.
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 25 January 2014 08: 02
        +3
        I consider such deletions a great stupidity.
        This is the same as saying dear ANTON IVANOVICH you are a large and outstanding representative of the movement of advocates for the rights of people representing the branch of anal sex.
        No TO just say "homosexual".
  3. makarov
    makarov 25 January 2014 07: 38
    +5
    "Democracy. Demos and kratos. People and government. This is such a state system, which implies the solution of basic issues affecting the interests of the people and the state, by a general meeting of the population, discussion and voting ..."

    It should not be forgotten that in these times a FREE MAN was called a democrat with the right to have (or having) slaves. In simple, Nashensky, - a slave owner.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. vlum
      vlum 25 January 2014 11: 38
      +3
      Now, instead of the literal "slave owner", one can compare the ancient Greek "demos" with the modern concept of "elite". Those. democratic choice is absolutely equal to the choice of the elite.
      When somewhere a modern democratic society of a separate taken state does not experience extreme internal contradictions from the category "the lower classes do not want, but the upper classes cannot," the elite calmly and thoroughly makes decisions, and the society calmly lives on.
      1. sledgehammer102
        sledgehammer102 25 January 2014 13: 42
        0
        Quote: makarov
        "Democracy. Demos and kratos. People and government. This is such a state system, which implies the solution of basic issues affecting the interests of the people and the state, by a general meeting of the population, discussion and voting ..."


        As practice shows, a democratic crowd lives on today and cannot make independent decisions for the future, and yes, it is very easy to manage such a crowd sometimes changing mindset.

        In the USSR, it was only necessary to throw in a few slogans about "justice", so all this resulted in what we know. For in any society the principle "select and divide, and the bourgeois(rich) On stake" will work flawlessly.
        We saw the same thing and see now in Ukraine or in the Russian Federation in 2012.





        or here is Ukraine





        As you can see, the people - like water, where you direct, it will go there, even in the second round. Therefore the slogan "Power to the people" though correct, but rather utopian. And how to implement it in the best way. demonstrated by the USSR, but then again, he ruined everything with his shortsighted domestic and foreign policy.
        1. homosum20
          homosum20 25 January 2014 19: 03
          0
          This is not a people. This is the crowd.
      2. 11111mail.ru
        11111mail.ru 25 January 2014 15: 51
        +1
        Quote: vlum
        When somewhere a modern democratic society of a separate taken state does not experience extreme internal contradictions from the category "the lower classes do not want, but the upper classes cannot," the elite calmly and thoroughly makes decisions, and the society calmly lives on.

        My friend, you have creatively enriched Marxism-Leninism with a new concept: "anti-revolutionary situation", write it down and knock out (urgently !!) from George Soros a grant for historical and sociological research! M. b. throw in a couple of bucks?
    3. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 25 January 2014 15: 44
      -3
      Quote: makarov
      It should not be forgotten that in these times a FREE MAN was called a democrat with the right to have (or having) slaves. In simple, Nashensky, - a slave owner.

      Well, the orphans who do not possess your knowledge of the ancient Greek enlightened us! So what is your attitude to the core of the article, its discussion (condemnation)? You are not a cock, after all, to crow when the sun rises above the horizon of a given area, marking the ascent of the star!
  4. dark_65
    dark_65 25 January 2014 07: 43
    +6
    We were raped by Khrushchev, and Gorbi ... yes, it’s so. But they did it voluntarily. We then went to bed in the bed of wild capitalism ourselves and climbed out ourselves, and God forbid that it will cost you a little blood. As the Indians of the USA, the Russians also have. I want to believe that this will not happen, but ...
    All these Democrats (now Ponomarev is going to run for mayor in Novosibirsk) need to collect about seven thousand signatures. In fact, 80 regions in the Russian Federation, a total of one-third go to the polls. The rest of the houses. Has about 3 with Moscow, and Peter -5 million enemy columns, I will not take Muslims and the Caucasus, and so it is clear.
    That's how I realize my, (still my own country), I am not a retrograde, I don’t wear pink glasses, I understand that it’s impossible to return everything, but it is still possible to fight back for my country.
    To stifle all creeps at least legally, by filing a lawsuit (it’s publicity, and it’s in the hands of the patriots, it makes us think that in case of a win, the liberals are shaking their tails), we can see further.
  5. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 25 January 2014 07: 48
    +6
    I do not regret, do not call, do not cry. But I will never say that I do not expect, that I do not wait when the Soviet power returns, not a copy of what it was, but a new truly popular and fair one. I hope that the people will nevertheless understand that it is not necessary to choose a king, not a president on their own head, but to govern the country themselves, through really elected deputies, and those who crawled out by lying to voters should not only be re-elected, but also punished for lies and punished so that it was disgraceful to others. I DO NOT believe that this will happen, but I still hope.
    1. invisibility
      invisibility 25 January 2014 08: 28
      -1
      And you are a plus. I regret it.
      1. alone
        alone 25 January 2014 10: 42
        +4
        Just power))) Power and justice is most likely utopia than possible, especially in our time.
  6. Gardamir
    Gardamir 25 January 2014 07: 53
    +7
    The difference is visible in many ways. For example, we used to sing a great five and a goalkeeper. We knew this three as verses: Mikhailov, Petrov, Kharlamov. We followed the success of the Soviet team.
    And now the legend number 17. One beat everyone!
    We used to be told man to man, friend, comrade and brother. And among capitalists, man is a wolf to man. They told the truth, but we laughed.
  7. shelva
    shelva 25 January 2014 08: 22
    +1
    The article resembles the Likbezov report when the speaker did not quite understand the material being read. I remembered youth, the army and the young political lieutenant reading to us something about the diamate, and he himself wasn’t in it - then it was ridiculous.
  8. frame5
    frame5 25 January 2014 08: 24
    -12%
    The former are fighting for absolute freedom: each for himself and for himself.

    From it is that, Mikhalych, anarchist-anarchists.
    After all, we have one - not a warrior in the field, but in the west - a lone hero.

    Offhand, a hero as a classic image of a lone hero.
    Who can condemn a person more honestly and impartially, sometimes more severely, than those people whom he lives with all his life?

    Ahaha oh dear They can easily condemn him out of personal hostility or selfish interests. An example of such proceedings is the famous Salem process.

    The article is a heap of eerie nonsense and outright idiocy, fueled by nostalgia for the USSR.
    For what liberalism should be respected and glorified, it is for human rights, separation of church and state, and protection of private property and personal life. But what is there, almost all the freedoms that modern man enjoys are the achievements of liberalism. And the only reason for the animal hatred of the liberals is the fact that under the guise of liberals, outright traitors leaked to 90.
    If the USSR were not concerned about the control of the personal lives of citizens and the permanent tightening of nuts, then it could have formed its own liberal layer that would take care of the rights and freedoms of Soviet citizens while remaining patriots.
    1. invisibility
      invisibility 25 January 2014 08: 31
      +8
      Your comment is a heap of creepy nonsense and outright idiocy. A man cannot and should not live for his own sake. True freedom in self-restraint. It’s a pity you don’t understand this.
      1. frame5
        frame5 25 January 2014 08: 34
        -8
        Rolls his eyes.
        Where do you get this nonsense from? For your own sake, blah blah blah. Finally, understand one simple thing: liberalism and selfishness are two different things, do not confuse the warm and the soft.
        1. invisibility
          invisibility 25 January 2014 08: 48
          +4
          You are engaged in demagogy. No blah. Finally, understand one simple thing: psychology and politics are two different things, do not confuse the warm and the soft.
          1. frame5
            frame5 25 January 2014 09: 00
            -6
            Say something, or will we continue to misinterpret the comments like a parrot?
            In line with your logic, monarchism is for slaves, communism is for cowards who hide behind other people's backs, nationalism is for the inferior, and so on ...
            You, as, presumably, an adult are not ashamed to demonstrate such logic in humans?
            And by the way, for your development, if you really want to link egoism with something, then libertarianism is much better for this. Google it.
            1. invisibility
              invisibility 25 January 2014 09: 22
              +7
              I say. There are no personal freedoms. There is a society in which a person lives. Society imposes certain obligations on a person, which he must (must) fulfill. From the degree to which these duties are fulfilled, the rating of a person as a member of society rises or falls. This is rude and short. Further. I did not understand the meaning of your last comment. If it does not, explain what logic is in line with?
              Мonarchism for slaves, communism for cowards who hide behind other people's backs, nationalism for the inferior, and so on ... Where is the logic here?

              Selfishness (social.)

              Egoism (French égoїsme, from the Latin ego - I), the principle of life orientation, which consists in turning private interests into the main motive of activity and the main evaluation criterion in relation to society and others. It arises in the era of the decomposition of the primitive communal system along with the emergence of private property and reflects the process of atomization of public associations, the allocation of self-sufficient individuals and closed groups (later classes) from them, for which socially useful activity is and is recognized only as a means of establishing and maintaining their special social status. The development of a commodity and especially capitalist mode of production, in which the conversion of private interest into the goal of activity occurs objectively, makes the principle of E. a universal measure of human (entrepreneurial) activity, which is reflected in the philosophical, political, economic, moral doctrines of the Enlightenment (T. Hobbes, B. Mandeville, A. Smith, D. Ricardo, K. Helvetius, P. Holbach, I. Bentham and the ethics of utilitarianism, etc.). In the future, adherence to the principles of E. often takes the form of extreme individualism and amoralism (M. Stirner and others). An ordinary moral consciousness that was not limited to anything by E. was always condemned in one way or another; as an alternative, the principle of altruism was put forward to him. However, only with the elimination of private property under the conditions of socialism does the principle of ethics cease to be the main way of motivating societies. activities and is supplanted by the principle of collectivism. Will graduate. the erasure of E. from the practice of human relations dates back to the era of mature communism.
              TSB.
              Is it really cool?
              1. frame5
                frame5 25 January 2014 09: 29
                -6
                Everything is clear with you.
                It is extremely sad that the peasant communities were liquidated. You would really like it there.
                1. invisibility
                  invisibility 25 January 2014 10: 15
                  +3
                  I can only repeat, where is the logic?
                  What communities are we talking about?
                2. The comment was deleted.
                3. family tree
                  family tree 25 January 2014 16: 44
                  +4
                  Quote: frame5
                  frame5

                  I would have answered before, but they built me ​​all of a sudden, although I'm on vacation, there are situevins when everyone calls, not bosses like me and all personal freedoms, go to hell, you need to work, because trains have to go along I can’t say that I have a vacation, I’m a free person, but you know, I feel like a free condom, well, to whom, what.
                  The extreme liberal system was described by Daniel Defoe in the novel "Robinson Crusoe", and even then it lasted until Friday, and then authoritarianism came. By the way, Alexander Selkirk dumped from liberalism, at the first opportunity. Invisible, just trying to tell you that while living among the same as you, freedoms go nafig, because there are responsibilities, but if you want liberalism, find a desert island, there is a complete "liberty" if you survive.
                  1. family tree
                    family tree 25 January 2014 18: 31
                    +1
                    Quote: perepilka
                    frame5

                    And yes, Liber, to the end. And I will remain the dog of the empire, because I am a warrior, and I do not belong to myself.
                    "For you, I'm damn glad" Denis Davydov
              2. Not hearing
                Not hearing 25 January 2014 11: 38
                +2
                It is absolutely true that a person has certain obligations to society. But if he has responsibilities, then he must have rights. For duties without rights are slavery. And human rights are inextricably linked to his personal freedoms. And from this it turns out that your message that - No personal freedoms exists is incorrect.
                1. invisibility
                  invisibility 25 January 2014 13: 20
                  0
                  Plus sign. Thanks for the addition. I will be corrected. winked
              3. 11111mail.ru
                11111mail.ru 25 January 2014 16: 20
                -2
                Quote: invisible
                Cool truth

                Did you come up with this yourself ??
                "And you do not poke your mind, and do not frighten with your gang: Nietzsche, Fichtel, Hegel with Kant and Ilyich who joined them!"
                Timur Sultanovich Shaov "Philosophy".
                Will you not be "commies" from the priesthood? Or is it a joke?
        2. Poppy
          Poppy 27 January 2014 10: 57
          +1
          these are synonyms, you don’t own a question
      2. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 25 January 2014 10: 30
        -7
        Re-read 1984?
        Peace is in war.
        Freedom is in slavery.
        Power is in ignorance.

        Your phrase about true freedom in self-restraint precisely repeats the thesis, Freedom-in Slavery.
        1. Yuri Y.
          Yuri Y. 25 January 2014 13: 18
          +6
          Collectivism has always been a means of survival. In the Stone Age, expulsion from the tribe was an extreme form of punishment, almost related to the death penalty. The exiled naturally realized individualism in its purest form, i.e. was on the verge of life and death (then more often than death). Russia has always had to survive, not only against external enemies, but also in our natural conditions. Our ancestors could not let it drift, i.e. they must always win (survive). Therefore, collectivism was a natural form of their community, personal freedoms can exist if they do not contradict the basic principles. In our time, the question of the survival of Russia has again arisen, so everyone who promotes individualism in the media works against the country. The rest is verbiage.
          Quote: invisible
          From the degree of fulfillment of these same duties, the rating of a person as a member of society increases or falls.

          Well, yes, that's why politicians (especially liberal ones) have a false norm of life.
          1. invisibility
            invisibility 25 January 2014 13: 30
            +4
            Excellent revealed!
            In our time, the question of the survival of Russia has again arisen, so everyone who promotes individualism in the media works against the country. The rest is verbiage.
            Exactly!
          2. family tree
            family tree 25 January 2014 17: 55
            +1
            Quote: Yuri Ya.
            Collectivism has always been a means of survival. In the Stone Age, expulsion from the tribe was an extreme form of punishment, almost related to the death penalty

            I don’t agree, collectivism is always secondary. Our relatives are more important, what , damn it, my brother Belarus has a wife, and two granddaughters, a daughter, a paramedic ambulance
            This is COLLECTIVIZATION. And I’ll finish trophy, I’ll come, heaven, from a matchbox it will seem, Damn, if this is not my son’s drawing
        2. invisibility
          invisibility 25 January 2014 13: 23
          -1
          No, I have not re-read it, I just remember. In general, this is a lifestyle. Please do not think that I am showing off.
        3. 11111mail.ru
          11111mail.ru 25 January 2014 16: 28
          0
          Quote: BlackMokona
          Freedom is in Slavery

          Do you recommend something? Then to Israel, the so-called. "chosen"!
          1. frame5
            frame5 26 January 2014 08: 01
            -1
            In general, all I want to say is: collectivism suppresses a person in any case, the countries of the sociological bloc all lagged behind their opponents with liberal regimes, these systems suppressed people with idiotic laws to complete lawlessness. The same thing happened with the Russian Federation; we have a huge backwardness in development from the same European countries. We have just begun to rise to the level of a confident power, this is the time when we will either catch up on the lost positions of the USSR or miss the time window for entering new technologies. The fact that all the locomotives of the Western world’s progress are invested in nanotechnology, the study of the quantum world and they already have very, very cool things, they were able to teleport the particle through the room. While only one atom, however, it is very, very interesting. West and Asia are now in a technological race and the Chinese also have something to offer.
            Worse, cultural backwardness, we are now at about the state level at the beginning of their journey, our control over our personal lives simply suppresses our personality.
            Luberalism is a logical step for a power which needs to increase its economic power and the welfare of society. We are pouring a lot of money into colossal projects on modernization and the military industry, although the reforms are mired in corruption, we could spend this money on society, raise medicine or somehow distribute it in technology investment.
            Nobody really wants to fight with us, everyone has problems, their societies have fallen into crisis and for the first time we have the opportunity to overtake them and we have competitive economies in approximately the same current state as we are, this is rapidly developing Argentina and recovering from depression Japan. We have a chance that we can miss for the authoritarian essence and the excess of idiotic rules that prevent us from doing business.
            Ahead is a jump in new technologies and we risk rendering us in a state of yet another backwardness.
            Time makes the right decisions to stop being afraid of the people, it is necessary to provide the right to referenda and protests. The problems are corruption, and corruption can only be eliminated if it is reported.
            Foreign investors love countries with a clear legal system and legal system.
            Social protection is also possible only if people receive certain rights and guarantees, the protection of which they can seek in court.
            That is why I believe that liberalism is much better for Russia for both people and science and business.
            But I have not seen your arguments for suppressing people by totalitarian power, that’s it.
            1. Yuri Y.
              Yuri Y. 26 January 2014 09: 35
              +1
              Quote: frame5
              . We have just begun to rise to the level of confident power.

              At first we were banged to the very bottom and we will rise for a long time and not very confidently, since in our economy we are super liberal. I have already said that everything else is verbiage. Our state is not in a vacuum. And they, beyond the hill, do not need a strong Russia (which it will become, as you say) and the 90s example. They climb not at the door so out the window. Liberalism is that window through which they intermeddle already. For these 20-25 years, anyone you want can be left behind. And where did you see the control over your personal life. We will have a chance only if we remain an independent state and if not, then there’s nothing to talk about. In general verbiage.
            2. invisibility
              invisibility 26 January 2014 10: 02
              -1
              Liberalism in the economy has been reigning for almost 25 years. With what fright did you decide that this is a logical step for the power which needs to increase its economic power and the welfare of society?
              The same thing happened with the Russian Federation, we have a huge developmental backwardness from the same European countries
              This happened solely due to liberalism.
              Forgive me, but your comment is a pile of words and emotions.
              Do you stand for arguments? But here I do not see them.
              Do I need to remind you how the "totalitarian power" acted during the Great Depression? They remembered about Japan, but do you know that the principle of raising labor productivity was copied from the Stalinist USSR? Business? Read about private enterprises during the Stalin era. Corruption? Singapore is fighting it with the methods of the NKVD. Do you know why, for example, in Germany, agricultural producers feel much better than ours? Because they are supported by the state.
              If you need more arguments, write ..
              1. invisibility
                invisibility 26 January 2014 11: 11
                -1
                Nobody really wants to fight with us
                And you are an optimist, to say the least.
                1. Poppy
                  Poppy 27 January 2014 11: 00
                  +1
                  not an optimist, but a liberal
            3. 11111mail.ru
              11111mail.ru 26 January 2014 15: 32
              0
              frame5 / Have you read the printed with your pens before throwing in?
              First:
              Quote: frame5
              sociological bloc countries

              What are these countries?
              Secondly: in sentences it is desirable to separate the directions of speech flows with at least commas ...
              Third: less is better, but better at presenting unrelated thoughts. The ability to knock on the keyboard is not identical to the presence of coherently presented thought forms.
          2. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 26 January 2014 08: 29
            0
            Reread the post.
            1. Yuri Y.
              Yuri Y. 26 January 2014 10: 30
              0
              Similarly.
  9. The comment was deleted.
  10. family tree
    family tree 25 January 2014 08: 56
    +1
    But today, with the advent of our “uncouth”, “bast” enlightenment,

    Education, also in quotation marks, does not interfere
    Quote: Gardamir
    And now the legend number 17. One beat everyone!

    Gardamir, do not touch Borisych, it is sacred, although the Legend had three numbers 13, 16 and 17, in my youth this link was inseparable.
    1. Gardamir
      Gardamir 25 January 2014 11: 11
      +4
      That's the link I’m writing about. Moreover, our entire hockey team was a legend. It’s just now that they are telling us that everything is decided by a loner, not a team.
      1. family tree
        family tree 25 January 2014 16: 14
        +3
        Quote: Gardamir
        That's the link I’m writing about.

        Everything is normal, bro, I'm sorry, hockey, this is my youth, when classes at school were canceled, due to minus forty, we went to chop, with a puck on the ice, my ears froze twice, and after three eighths "A", "B", "C", four ninths and tenths "A" and "B", and who wins, to the district, and the award is one - GLORY. And this three, for us, was the standard.
      2. family tree
        family tree 25 January 2014 17: 16
        +1
        Quote: Gardamir
        from this link I’m writing about that. Moreover, our entire hockey team was a legend. It’s just now that they are telling us that everything is decided by a loner, not a team.

        Vasiliev, Mikhailov "Dynamo"
        Yakushev "Spartak", he was called Yak-15, car
  11. major071
    major071 25 January 2014 09: 11
    +11
    I liked the article. To the author plus. Over the past twenty years, we have been made bright individualists, who are not interested in anything but a narrow circle. If before we lived in the usual five-story building we went out together on a community work day, celebrated holidays together, went to visit our neighbors, even (let me give you an example) they could take a synthesizer out to the street and arrange a holiday just like that, and not for money, but now everything is mine my house is a fortress, closed behind an iron door and do not meddle with me. Previously, code locks did not stand on the drive doors. At the aunt in the village in general, not a single house was locked up, so the hook was thrown and that’s it. People gathered and talked. Now everyone has their own little world, in which everything suits him, but nothing else is needed. The concepts of community, humanity have been replaced by individualism and indifference. Something like that. hi
  12. Al_lexx
    Al_lexx 25 January 2014 09: 17
    0
    Last paragraph ..
    I subscribe to every word.
  13. bairat
    bairat 25 January 2014 09: 25
    +2
    The second attempt - the revolution of 1905-1907, the February and Great October Socialist years of 1917 - was more successful. A new state with a truly progressive structure lasted longer, but surrounded by aggressive players, it was forced to pursue foreign policy in the traditions of the old world, which entailed internal political changes over time, and as a result, the state destroyed itself. It is logical to assume that the third attempt is just around the corner. This can happen in the Islamic world, in the Taoist world or elsewhere. But the fact that this will happen is certain. Our goal in this case is not to remain under the tail of the steed of progress.
    By the way, an interesting parallel: the Bolsheviks came to power promising land to the peasants, and now Zyuganov, losing ground, decided to promise every family a hectare of land. Well, what, the reception is tried, what not to promise that.

    Call this tragic chain of events luck? First, they allowed themselves to be dragged into the meat grinder of the world war, brought the people to the brink of survival on the wave of what the Bolsheviks came to power, civil war, famine, epidemics - is it your luck? Nowadays, such inclinations are called masochism, if you want suffering, do it personally in your free time, you don't have to drag the whole country under the next "horse".
  14. Lyokha79
    Lyokha79 25 January 2014 09: 39
    +8
    "... I liked living in the Soviet Union only because I was always sure that they would come to the rescue in a difficult situation. Not relatives, so friends, not friends, so acquaintances or just completely unknown to me, strangers whom I will most likely never see again in my life. But they are always there! ... "
    Does the author really have no relatives or friends left who could help him in difficult times? Yes, other times have come, but no one has canceled family and friendship ties. As for helping the whole world, our people are ready now, if trouble has come, to help completely unfamiliar people, to recall at least a recent, terrible, flood.
    People, of course, have changed, but there is no need to exaggerate. We have not yet been zombified, therefore, words such as "liberal" and "liberalism" are considered almost abusive in our society.
  15. saved
    saved 25 January 2014 09: 46
    +4
    Today's democracy is a perversion. Democracy, nothing without a national idea, uniting all. And this community in our country at different times was different in strength. Unfortunately, she wakes up mainly after wars and other disasters and troubles.
  16. shark
    shark 25 January 2014 11: 42
    0
    Author Well done, he said everything correctly!
  17. MolGro
    MolGro 25 January 2014 13: 27
    +7
    The 10 Commandments of the Liberal Shit
    1 love only yourself
    2 kill anyone who interferes
    3 always seek benefits
    4 deceive your neighbor and deceive anyone
    5 always betray
    6 debauchery is freedom
    7 steal is not shameful
    8 slander everyone is the norm
    9 try to work at the expense of others
    10 can only be respected for money
    1. Power
      Power 25 January 2014 20: 29
      0
      10 commandments of liberal democrats or how to go to hell guaranteed
  18. Stinger
    Stinger 25 January 2014 13: 44
    +1
    Dungeons will collapse and freedom
    With brass knuckles will meet you at the entrance.
    1. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 25 January 2014 16: 35
      0
      Quote: Stinger
      With brass knuckles will meet you at the entrance.

      Well, with this, to the researcher of A.S. Pushkin's creativity to a certain N. Eidelman, not to us sinners, and the "chosen" people will show us - (I omit what, Where and When) we were wrong.
  19. jjj
    jjj 25 January 2014 13: 48
    +4
    This story was told by one guy who turned up several years ago after graduating from Sakhalin. He is a surveyor. They have a small village of gas workers. Everyone earned a lot. Everyone has housing. In homes - a full bowl. Everyone has Japanese jeeps. But!!! No one closes the door. What to steal, if everyone has everything. In their free time, people are busy with what they like. Do not drink! In fashion - physical education and generally a healthy lifestyle. All are friendly with each other. A person is appreciated for his spiritual qualities. It turns out that the equality of people can be not only on the basis of general poverty, but also on the basis of general prosperity.
    The man swore that this was not fiction. Then satirist Mikhail Zadornov said that there are closed settlements on Sakhalin, where just an ordinary citizen cannot get
  20. demotivator
    demotivator 25 January 2014 16: 23
    +4
    Why did I enjoy living in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics? I liked living in the Soviet Union only because I was always sure that they would come to my aid in a difficult situation. Not relatives, so friends, not friends, so familiar or just completely unknown to me, outsiders whom I most likely will never see again in my life. But they are always there! I could never imagine a hopeless situation for myself or for others. Each came to the aid of the other. But today, with the advent of our “uncouth”, “bast” education, anyone (without exception) can go missing or become a celebrity, become a pauper or a millionaire. For this I hate the democrats, despise the liberals, and have an extreme hostility towards modern communists. “I do not want to be a millionaire, I do not want to be a drug courier,” but I want our children to be as confident in us, in our society, in their future, as we once were.

    From a modern joke:
    - What would you like to receive as a present for your birthday?
    - I would like to wake up in 1972!
  21. sinukvl
    sinukvl 25 January 2014 17: 31
    +6
    In the classroom, a new teacher:
    - My name is Immanuil Moiseevich, I am a liberal. Children, take turns introducing yourself in the same way
    as I...
    - My name is Masha, I am a liberal ...
    - My name is Styopa, I am a liberal ...
    - My name is Little Johnny, I am Stalinist.
    - Little Johnny, why are you a Stalinist? !!
    - My mother is a Stalinist, my dad is a Stalinist, my friends are Stalinist and I, too
    Stalinist.
    - Little Johnny, and if your mother were a prostitute, your dad was a drug addict, sister
    - a whore, and friends - gay, who would you be then ?!
    “Then I would be a liberal.”
  22. tennis
    tennis 25 January 2014 17: 46
    0
    Quote: perepilka
    Vasiliev, Mikhailov "Dynamo"


    You wanted to say - Vasiliev, Maltsev "Dynamo"?
  23. Power
    Power 25 January 2014 20: 26
    0
    The problem raised by the author is much deeper. Does transnational capital have a nationality? And what about national interests? Or only "selfish". Will they be able, if they wish, to play peoples against each other? And why are we going to die for our homeland or a new oil pipeline and Abramovich's yacht?
    1. Cpa
      Cpa 26 January 2014 01: 02
      0
      Quote: Strength
      And why will we die for our homeland or a new oil pipeline and Abramovich’s yacht?

      For a new world order. All models of society that are protected with foam at the mouth are wrappers in the hands of the organizers. And they fit into dictatorship, democracy and communism. The only weapon against this is the development of a stable psyche and morality of society. And a good world can build in any system, modify it based on the new paradigm.
  24. Sergey XXX
    Sergey XXX 25 January 2014 22: 42
    0
    Cool approach of the author of "SPLV" ..., even from just one of the author's eyes, a clear approach you enjoy. It would seem that something special, but when you call everything by its proper names, the liberoid husk suddenly crumbles and only deception remains. In Soviet times, there was enough of both good and bad, who needed to criticize ..., but no sausage can replace the feeling of conciliarity, the consciousness of community and unity. And this unity meant not even the author's "they will help me", but a higher one: "WE CAN."
  25. corn
    corn 25 January 2014 23: 10
    0
    Quote from the article:
    there is safety in numbers

    NOT TRUE
    AND ONE IN THE FIELD A WARRIOR, IF HE IS IN RUSSIAN TILED

    Quote from the article:
    Even our courts were "comradely", now "world"!

    In our country, is this 1917-1992 ?, the rest of Russia did not exist?

    Quote from the article:
    Progress is a calm revolution; it is always a transition to a new level. As materialism says, the transition from quantitative to qualitative changes. And it doesn’t matter what - technology, medicine, consciousness. (My note: pay attention to the conclusion made in the next phrase) But it is impossible, as long as the existence of terrestrial civilizations is based on the prosperity of some at the expense of others.

    WE LIVE IN A STONE AGE ?, AND THE WHOLE HISTORY OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IS NOT PROGRESS?

    Quote from the article:
    I liked living in the Soviet Union only because I was always sure that they would come to my aid in a difficult situation.

    AUTHOR-RAGGER.
    Personally, I like to live, because I can come to the rescue.
  26. makarov
    makarov 26 January 2014 05: 29
    0
    Quote: 11111mail.ru
    Quote: makarov
    It should not be forgotten that in these times a FREE MAN was called a democrat with the right to have (or having) slaves. In simple, Nashensky, - a slave owner.

    Well, the orphans who do not possess your knowledge of the ancient Greek enlightened us! So what is your attitude to the core of the article, its discussion (condemnation)? You are not a cock, after all, to crow when the sun rises above the horizon of a given area, marking the ascent of the star!


    Is it really so important for you my attitude to the semantic understanding of the material ??? After all, you are not a provocateur, after all, to pry "who said what", and then fixing to run as fast as you need to report "where you need to", responding to the incomprehensible glances of the counter with the words "I'm not a sex worker, and I'm not an informer, but just in a hurry fulfill your civic duty. "
    Nothing, it will allow ... over time.
    1. 11111mail.ru
      11111mail.ru 26 January 2014 15: 43
      +1
      Quote: makarov
      Is it really so important to you my attitude to the semantic understanding of the material

      Imagine, yes, YES! Finally, a living person answers, with his own emotions. We learn from each other to some extent, even in verbal battles. Threw in a controversial thought by a colleague-opponent - they tried it out, thought it over and all the benefits. And if you sculpt a comment just to leave your mark on the path ... this is not "good".