Good in the beginning news from one advanced country. The one that is still the reserve home of our elite and the incubator of its offspring.
In this country, all is well. Unemployment fell to a record low - 5,4%. Salaries have increased by 3% compared to last year.
And now the bad news from the advanced country. Approximately 37% of citizens in the survey directly admitted that they consider their job as meaningless “bullshit”. Another 13% - are not sure that there is any benefit from their work. And when, in the spring of last year, only four working days fell in the country for seven weeks in a row - the idea of the constant introduction of a four-day working week was supported by 57% of citizens. 71% - expressed in the sense that "it will make the nation happier."
If you are interested in how this relates to the end of democracy, let's talk about it.
... We have already talked about how in an advanced country (this is Britain, if you didn’t click on the links) "local" degenerate from technical specialists to fitness trainers and stylists, and from scientists to Eychar and team managers. We said why advanced countries require a constant influx of qualified specialists from the so-called. Third World, and at the same time - unskilled carers and housekeepers, so that there was someone to care for these masters of bench press, curling and presentation after they fall into decrepitude.
So: now, for example, many of the owners of “bullshit jobs” object to the influx of migrants in their cozy countries.
But let's put ourselves in the shoes of the owners of these countries. To the place of the conditional "kings of the West" - clans and political and economic dynasties welded together for centuries.
In place of those who forged the sword of the British Empire, then the sword of Nazi Germany, who enriched themselves furiously in her blitzkriegs, and at the same time forged the sword of the United States, and did not even notice Nuremberg and the loss of the British colonies, because he himself was neither punished nor dispossessed.
From the point of view of these true elites, the “root cattle,” serving each other for 12-15 thousand pounds a year, also sits on benefits like migrants. Only local cost more in large numbers.
Those who come in large numbers have the advantage over the locals that their claim to the nurse system is lower. They do not climb into either politics or management, they have no great-grandfathers who were shot in the next street for strikes, or grandfathers who were arrested in this city for trade union activities. They have no one to tell about the dignity of the working person, the need for knowledge, about the release from exploitation and other ideas of the XX century. Therefore, they are quite convenient to replace the obstinate local cattle.
... It is worth noting an important thing. About a hundred years ago, for example, the human mass was still an extremely important resource.
This human mass produced energy in dangerous deep mines, descending there with canaries and rising with anthracite. This human mass created clothing, food and weaponcoughing all over the world with nowadays half-forgotten diseases - silicosis, tuberculosis, by the time he gets thirty, he develops lung cancer for himself. This mass of people, having taken five-shot rifles in their hands, multiplied them by a million and went to conquer other countries.
This mass of people could not help but centralize. She could not but acquire her own - class - consciousness nesting in labor and family cells.
Actually, the whole democracy of the 20th century, if roughly, came from the fact that this mass — armed with a rifle and means of production — in the 20th century took control classes here (in different countries in different ways). Trade unions and workers' parties came along, miners congressmen and foundry senators came. In some places, large owners were eliminated altogether as a category - and the liquidators naively believed that it would not return.
Repeat again. While there were no mass labor (or military) groups, there was no democracy.
While a country the size of modern England could "hold" two or three thousand armored tanksKnights, no one thought about democracy. Democracy owes its birth to a rifle.
But it was a long time ago. In the entire industry of modern Russia, for example, today no more than 15 million people are employed. This is only a tenth of the population - moreover, it is rather seriously localized geographically and more and more diverse internally. The continuous growth of industrial automation and the deepening of labor specialization lead to the fact that the working class is shrinking more and more, less and less representing a “conglomerate of gigantic groups”.
Simply put, the broad laboring masses cease to be the main tool of production (a hundred years ago 150 000 Ford cars were made, conventionally, 15 thousands of workers, now they are 1,500). Moreover, mass production itself today, from the point of view of the owners of the planet, is not such a super-necessary enrichment tool. After the invention of speculative financial capital, the ownership of “zeroes” and “innovations” is far less material than the possession of states, cities, weapons, basic science and technology.
It is worth noting that down below, among the masses, the second “cell of society” is close to dissolution, which is able to accumulate “mass consciousness” and the collective interest - the family. This is a hundred years ago, it was for life and consisted of 4-6 people. The family today is a) not lifelong, b) consists of 2 with a small person, and even then temporarily. The cell of a society from a solid family cell was transformed into something less defined, into the elusive “I-current spouse-friends-colleagues” between the fingers.
And finally, they cease to be massive armies. Instead of the “millions with rifles” of the 20th century, we again, as in the Middle Ages, see thousands, but riding on dragons. The multi-role fighter F-22 costs 300 million dollars, and the cost of an hour for its flight is the same as the annual labor of five British hairdressers. A. Pugacheva, in essence, a poor woman - if a war happens, she will not be able to equip M. Galkin with “Armata”.
Mass armies are not needed - and they shrink. The Russian army suffered a painful reduction a few years ago. The Chinese People’s Liberation Army decided to cut 300 thousand from 2 with a small million employees this year. War is being eliminated - just like industrial production. The soldier and the worker are transformed into operators, into a kind of engineering engineers.
... The most curious thing is that in the 20th century, Serious Thinkers did not admit the idea that democracy is a temporary stage due to the "level of technical development."
Utopians politely assured that “all in the future will turn into creators”, that mass conveyors will turn into equally massive scientific research institutes, and a working man will be a genius to take on the beam (funny, by the way, while they all chose their elite cosmonauts as characters and the leaders of the Council at Efremov, the admiral of the cosmoflot of the Earth at Snegov, the leadership of the world Council at the Strugatsky). The anti-utopians, on the contrary, built their machine societies on the need to unify the “mass people” to the utmost and to exploit them as details.
No one had the idea that advanced societies may simply not really need a large part of society.
Nevertheless, in the 21st century, for the first time, the elites of the planet lack a real need for most citizens.
This, of course, does not mean that the masses will exterminate (they themselves do a good job, wittingly dying out in the name of non-fruit-poverty).
The masses will simply discount. Labor and the life of the masses will simply begin to cost less. The masses will simply begin to take away one by one the privileges that they have knocked out in the short age of their power, but the rights to which are no longer (in the logic of the elites).
As a matter of fact, the rights to power have already been deprived of them everywhere. Do not cite as an example the ridiculous revolution like the Ukrainian, as a result of which the command of the ex-ministers of the ousted tyrant received power.
There is reason to believe that today the masses are also neatly isolated from excessive knowledge - there is a rejection of systematic teaching of knowledge in favor of “thematic” all over the world (this is when studying the principle of ICE operation is replaced by car operating rules).
As for the latter, the right of the masses — the right to private property — is, as it is easy to see, in the advanced countries quite conditional for them. By and large, most of them are tenants of their homes - even if they formally own them.
Under such conditions, talks about the imminent revival of the labor movement and the return of power to the people look quite utopian.
The more advanced a modern country is, the more democracy is degraded in it.
Exceptions only prove the rule.
Most likely, the dismantling of democracy in most advanced countries will take place without much upheaval (which is also aided by the steadily increasing average age. In 1959, the average age in Cuba was 18 years. But 43-year-old Europeans tend to rebel much less).
Problems with elites will begin further.
The thing is that there is no and there can be no elite collusion that would exist forever. Sooner or later, any “golden interest consensus” will be blown up from the inside - by the greed and rivalry of existing characters (see The Game of Thrones, which has received such wild popularity in recent years for good reason).
And just as the European monarchies clinging to each other all a hundred years ago were inevitably clinging to each other, and the elite of the coming caste world. Actually, they have already begun. And already in this very confrontation, new “exploited castes” will be born, who will bear responsibility for what is happening, risk and operate with the main tools - but will not have real power (after all, there will be no direct “return to the Middle Ages” - and no Rothschilds they will not personally control the space-atmospheric fighters of the 21st century, repeating the “baron, he's a knight” scheme).
And in this there will already be a grain of new contradictions. Not to mention that any competition between the powers will return competition within them, and even the most caste states will be forced to raise the “average level of cattle,” so that there is something to remove the cream of the best.
... And finally - how it all ends.
The result of an elite battle of a century ago was the collapse of monarchies across the continent - they were brought down by the mass “man with a gun” who had returned from the war.
All historical the analogies are more or less false, but sometimes they provide a starting point for reflection.