Why recall socialism?

Why recall socialism?It seems to me that the main feature of the Russian matrix and its duality consisted primarily in the fact that Russia is really two in one.

This is a huge India, ruled by small Britain. Or, if you like, the image of the city in the swamp, and the swamp can be called Solaris for convenience, if for some this word is offensive. And the city is a state structure, built on it.

They come into contact in a complex way, just as a stone touches a marsh. They do not control each other. They are completely separate, hence the double morality. And corruption is nothing more than a mechanism of relations between them. The mechanism of buying people from the state. However, why say “corruption” if there is the word “tradition”, as Mikhail Ouspensky said. We pay them so that they do not prevent us from doing our business.

The device of the swamp is absolutely taboo for him; he does not want to think about himself, but thanks to some thinkers who originated in this swamp, we know about its basic structures. It is always horizontal, it does not like verticals. For him, compatriotal, kinship, family ties, “Odnoklassniki.ru”, “Sokamerniki.ru”, friends from school, etc. are important. It is, as a rule, absolutely unchanged, as Olesya Nikolaeva noted, in its principles. It does not evolve, everything is preserved in it. It is always dissatisfied and at the same time does not want any changes. It perfectly solves non-pragmatic tasks and is completely unable to solve specific tasks. It is no accident that in the West there is such a saying: call the Chinese a difficult task, call the Russian an impossible one.

At the same time, there is a city that is degrading quite quickly all this time. Degrades due to corruption, due to the complete inability to take concrete actions, due to negative selection, according to which people are selected to this top. In other words, the Russian matrix is ​​described in most detail and in detail by the Strugatsky story The Snail on the Slope, where there is a forest and an institute separately. The institute degrades faster than forests, because, unlike forests, it does nothing. The forest froze in its homeostatic state, but nevertheless also swamps quite quickly.

This matrix - the forest - an institution, when all the main state functions are somehow delegated to the authorities, and the people are left to serve as raw materials for it, is really effective for feudalism. But the challenges of the twentieth century, as we understand it, did not meet. Therefore, Russian statehood was absolutely dead by the 1914 year.

Starting with 1914, she began to receive more and more powerful galvanic shocks. The most powerful such galvanic blow was the Russian revolution, then three waves of terror. And, finally, the Great Patriotic War. The corpse was getting more and more powerful current. And at this expense went. I went to 1978 – 1979 until I began to decompose before my eyes.
To study the experience of the USSR

Nevertheless, the Soviet government, with all its horrors, gave rise to one very significant phenomenon, to which we, it seems to me, will have to return more than once. This is the phenomenon of intermediaries between the forest and the institute, a kind of third estate of the people, which is not the government or the people, but the so-called intelligentsia.

The main breakthroughs in Russian stories for all the time of Russia's existence - I would venture to say a terrible thing, but it is so - were associated with the Soviet project, and especially with its recent years, starting with the flight of Gagarin, whose 50 anniversary we celebrate, and ending with the powerful flourishing of Russian culture in the 70s . Nothing like what we had in 70, we will not have very long. Then there was a very obscure combination on the board, which in 1985 was simply swept away from that board by a decisive hand movement. Of course, we must revive it, rebuild it and finish it to the end. Since the situation is a new state of the people ... By the way, the author's song also marks him: the people are the ones who write folk songs. So the appearance of the author's song marked the emergence of a new people. This is the emergence of the intelligentsia.

We have only two scenarios in which this intermediary may arise. This is either a person from the people who has achieved something and learned how Mikhail Lomonosov, or a person from the aristocracy who for some reason became interested in the people like Leo Tolstoy. But it is precisely such figures, thirdly speaking, third in this binary confrontation, that can move Russia somewhere ahead.

Russia succeeded most of all at that moment when the intelligentsia, relatively speaking, people with grass roots, but with a large number of essays in bookcases, began to constitute the absolute majority of the masses. When by the 70 year, the percentage of people with higher education in the country for the first time exceeded the 50 number. And this is the way out of the binary, absolutely fruitless, today’s irrelevant confrontation between the masses and the elite. It seems to me that we should be engaged in the formation of this new intelligentsia.

It is clear that Russia, as a rule, is unsuccessful in the production of goods. But very successful in the production of environments. Production of media, it seems to me, should be the main task. I see here only three tasks at the moment that need to be really quickly solved. Since the “Soviet Union” brand is not currently occupied, I’m talking about a magazine, and such a magazine was once successful, we need a magazine, something like a messenger for the study of ancient culture, which would be called “Soviet Union” and studied technologies of the Soviet Union. This Union was good or bad in 60 – 70-s, and it was certainly bad in many ways, it was a breakthrough from the Russian matrix and in this sense its salvation. Therefore, the magazine, which at a good scientific and cultural level would highlight the problems of 60 – 70, is not the way Leonid Parfenov makes it in terms of glamor, but, of course, in the direction that he discovered, it is urgently needed. We have rolled back from this level and in our movement to the future we will definitely pass this phase again.

The second thing to do immediately. Preparing and trying to formulate a national non-pragmatic project that could today be equally interested in the elite to sponsor it and the masses to work in it. I think that there can be only two such projects. Either this is a great cosmic breakthrough, like a flight to Mars, or a model of the best education in the world, for which Russia, of course, has all the reserves and traditions, but there is no state will.

The third thing we must do. This is the creation of the media as they were created in the Soviet Union, which we talked about: active work on creating a new dissident environment that would have its own newsletters, magazines, its network culture (we have a good idea on the Internet), the formation of children's circles , right up to the model ones, to the most primitive ones, because it is from these circles and environments that all of today's elite came out. In general, if today we form a new intelligentsia, in the political sense nothing will be needed anymore, it will arrange everything for itself.

First principle

Now, maybe, I called important milestones, although they are so opposite in their essence. But in general, it seems to me that there are things secondary to the basic fundamentals. For example, there is the Ministry of Education. But what kind of education without culture? The purpose of education is to bring up a person who seems to be likened to the image of God. However, in general, now the aim is to create a certain robot today, a cyborg performing a certain function. And therefore, of course, education is pointless without cultural leadership.

Let us now turn to agriculture. We had such a program "Culture of the village." All suffered: what to bring there? I then had such an idea, a formula was born, even that in agriculture the way of life is more important than the result of labor. The Minister of Agriculture to some extent should be subordinated to the Minister of Culture. Why? Yes, if we want to produce competitive products on earth, we will inevitably and naturally come to intensive production. However, I do not know whether we will get the results we expect everywhere, in conditions of low soil fertility and not very favorable climate in most of the country. I think the probability of this is small.

At the same time, we understand that it is important for us that people live on this large space. And then they suggested: let's approach agriculture as a way of life of a person who has many children who live on earth. This is more important than the result of labor. And we will develop a program according to which the really necessary sufficiency of the peasant's material condition, his well-being, education and everything else would provide him with this image.

Of course, the work of the Ministry of Sport and Tourism without a cultural component is the training of pumped up people, more like animals than homo sapiens. Once, at one of the meetings in Velikie Luki, the mayor of the city asked me: you couldn’t speak with the Minister of Sports to close the Academy of Physical Culture with us. I ask: why? Yes, you know, the mayor is responsible, 90 percent of graduates of this university go then to gangster groups.

In passing, I note: today, the most powerful cultivation of sport as a kind of national idea is a delusion.

And what about the Ministry of Social Development and Health! If we today gave that value to the culture to which it is entitled, we would have less drug addicts, we would have more normal families.

So, the role and importance of culture, in general, the Minister of Culture, I think, should be repeatedly raised.
Collective unconscious

The second thesis, which would like to convey. Once I happened to engage in psychoanalysis, I spent a lot of time studying the works of Freud and Jung. Jung has a division - Jung's basis, where there is logic and ethics. Russia is an ethical country. The way of thinking of the Russian people is ethical. Orthodoxy is an irrational ethical space. All changes, all revolutions in Russia took place on ethical grounds, starting with the revolution of Lenin, where political slogans are not supported by any logic. War communism crumbled, and the NEP was formed on the basis of Stolypin reforms. Then there was the struggle with privileges. Then came a man who, again, was demanded precisely in ethical terms after the aging Yeltsin.

And now a colossal problem has advanced on us, because the people have ceased to believe in their hearts that the authorities are honest, they are thinking about the country. And you know, Europe is logical, rationally logical. Protestant rationally logical. And we are ethical. And in this sense, the cultural matrix in Russia is very important. It is certainly associated with Orthodoxy. Today, none of the great people actually explained the reasons for the great Russian revolution. And if Raskolnikov, who lives with the mistake of the eastern heart, when the most important task is thought up and the person sacrifices himself, then Raskolnikov repented after hard labor. If revolution is a punishment, then after this terrible time of 70 years without repentance, we returned to the image of Luzhin. And today we suffer in this image.

I think we will not be in this state for a long time. And of course, today this question is the most important: to understand what is ethical space in Russia today from the point of view of economic structure. Because, from my point of view, the ethics of capitalism is contrary to the ethics of Orthodoxy. Why do people remember socialism today?

You know, money motivation in capitalism is one side. Motivation with a conscience is the other side. I wondered: is it possible that there was such a system as socialism, so that a person worked and worked to the best of his talent and physical abilities, and received just as much as is necessary for life? So that there is no motivation for money? It seems to me that for Russia this is all ... I reproduce certain strokes of this collective unconscious, this cultural matrix, which, of course, was largely determined two thousand years ago, one thousand years ago, Russia adopted this gene code in itself.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in