Military Review

Bacillus pluralism

61
Human values ​​- a favorite topic of cannibals


The total tolerance of tolerance and pluralism as an end in itself is not a methodical error. This is a purposeful activity oriented towards the destruction of society, followed by its destruction.

The concepts of tolerance and pluralism became the most important elements of the mental system, which, under the name of universal human values, was introduced in the countries of Western civilization and was imposed by it on other peoples. With respect to some countries, by means of information influence, others, less pliable, by economic pressure, and to some by brute military force. The very fact that this system of values ​​is far from being always accepted by the peoples shows: it is not universal. And references to the backwardness of one or another ethnos, which they use to impose, are incorrect. What is the reason for the rejection of these values?

Behind the screen of beautiful words


First of all, I recall the double standards of the West, when universal values ​​are used as an ideological cover for banal military aggression with an obvious mercantile interest: the seizure of resources and territory. There are plenty of examples - from Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan to Libya, Syria and Ukraine. However, not only the facts of using these values ​​as an informational screen of aggression make them unacceptable for many countries. There are more weighty reasons. They underlie the mechanisms for managing society and its self-organization, often even survival itself. After all, in the countries of Western civilization, where these values ​​are being introduced for real, and not as a screen, they are not perceived by a significant part of the population. Moreover, their large-scale and widespread distribution leads to the spiritual degradation of the peoples of these countries, as well as to the inevitably following crises in the economy.

“Information about children's bodies found in southeastern Ukraine with organs seized no longer causes any special reaction in the world”
What is the matter? To answer the question, it is necessary to analyze the mechanisms of the functioning of society, more precisely, its management system at all levels of the organization - from state to group - and the impact of these values ​​on social development.

The concept of "universal values" includes a fairly wide range of certain moral norms. One of the most important are tolerance and pluralism of opinions.

In sociology, tolerance refers to tolerance for a different world view, lifestyle, behavior and customs. Pluralism is closely associated with it, which presupposes the coexistence of many independent substances that compete in the development process, in particular, knowledge and positions that differ in form and content. With regard to the social sphere, this diversity and competition of political platforms and organizations (parties, movements).

The Western liberal ideological school defines these values ​​as self-sufficient, necessary in themselves for the development of society. Is it so? Does tolerance or pluralism ensure the existence of a society and its progressive development? Or more precisely: can they be an independent goal?

In relation to social construction, the goal is usually understood as a kind of collective state, to which members of society consciously or subconsciously strive. It can be stability, conflict-free, developmental perspective. Such a state is achieved by the formation in society of a certain system of relations between individuals and their social groups. In her tolerance and pluralism are only one aspect. At the same time there are many others that may conflict with the two mentioned. If such competitive relations play a key role, ensuring the welfare of society, the introduction of tolerance and pluralism (sometimes violent) has a negative impact. Up to destruction. Thus, by themselves, tolerance and pluralism cannot be the goal, they only contribute to the achievement of prosperity, and even then not always, as even Western civilization shows, not to mention others. It is clear that tolerance and pluralism are far from universal values. Nevertheless, they continue to spread.

Infestation by spiritlessness


Equal coexistence and competition in the society of many different ideological and religious systems are consolidated. However, they may differ ideas about the purpose of life. Carriers of one of the systems, being in unfavorable conditions, will be suppressed by ideological competitors. So, for example, if in one belief system, the maximum enrichment is declared as the meaning of existence (as in Protestantism, where wealth is considered a sign of God's good will, regardless of how it is received, or in a system of liberal values), and in the other — labor and creativity (in Orthodoxy, Islam, the communist concept), then in more favorable conditions it will be the carrier of the first ideology (or religion), which will not limit itself to moral standards in pursuit of wealth. Similarly, it is possible to say about the possibility of coexistence of groups, differently understanding what is more important: the general or the particular. The “community members” coexisting with the “individualists” will always be the losers. Tolerant attitude towards people oriented towards appropriation of other social technologies created by others (the so-called people who know how to live, people with a “social” type of mind) puts losing conditions inadequate for this, who see their social role in creating material or other product ("creative" type of mind). Tolerance begins to act as a spiritual tool for creating competitive advantages for one of the social groups, and, as a rule, far from being the most useful for the development of society. Building a stable, prosperous and equitable society becomes impossible. Moreover, conflict is provoked.

A different understanding of good and evil also inevitably leads to the erosion of concepts, and society is made susceptible to the most anti-human ideas. That is, tolerance and pluralism are the destroyers of the spiritual immunity of society, a kind of HIV, affecting the mass consciousness. And when the protective mechanisms of society are weakened, other technologies can be applied, already leading to its destruction.

Windows for perverts


Bacillus pluralismAbsolutization of tolerance and pluralism as a self-sufficient goal makes it possible to make legal those manifestations of human nature that were considered unacceptable in previous times of the epoch of civilized development. This mechanism was substantiated by the American sociologist Joseph Overton. Any concept is accepted by society if it falls into the “window of opportunity”, within which it is widely discussed, openly supported, promoted, and won recognition: initially public, then legislative. And these windows can be moved in one direction or another. A chain is built up: “how boldly it is” - “why not” - “it should be” - “in a good sense” - “we are the authorities”. That is how the most anti-human ideas are being introduced as the norm.

Initially, a paradoxical assumption is put forward, which essentially rejects the generally accepted rules of behavior and moral principles. Tolerance and pluralism of opinions require that authors should not be persecuted for such originality. They are still regarded as marginalized, but no longer criminals. The “window of opportunity” for the idea has moved in a direction that is favorable to it. It is the turn of the ethical justification: "why not?" Yes, say apologists, the idea does not meet existing standards. But after all, they are not a dogma. We live in a tolerant society that involves pluralism. At the same time, mostly young people are suggested that being a supporter is “very cool”, even if “backward old people” call the idea anti-human. This is the true "freedom of expression." As a result, a certain legal social group of open carriers of the idea and its subculture are formed. The next step is demarginalization: “this is the way to live”, such principles are permissible. At this stage, the antihuman idea gains public acceptance. And again, the key role is played by tolerance and pluralism. It is argued that once a certain social group adheres to the idea, then let it live that way. Previously, she was considered marginalized, but in a tolerant society they are the same as everyone else, just sticking to several different views, and very interesting ones, you should look and try. By the end of this stage, in certain, sometimes very broad and influential layers, which are already far from marginal, it seems that this is the way to live. This is not yet considered a sign of good tone. But then comes the recognition of following this idea. Being a supporter becomes evidence of the involvement of something advanced, rising above the "simple and backward" supporters of the tradition. The last step remains - legislative consolidation of the idea as generally accepted, encroachment on which is unacceptable. And the carriers, connected by an anti-human concept into a cohesive group, begin to dictate their will to society: “we are the authorities here”.

According to such a scheme, homosexuality was legalized in Europe, the USA and other countries of Western civilization, whose supporters today actually dictate the rules of behavior to its peoples. Any attempts to limit its distribution, including among children, meet with fierce resistance from apologists, as well as tough opposition from the authorities. The key role in this is played by all the same tolerance and pluralism. Protesters against imposing such relationships are reminded: in our society, we cannot forbid people to live as they like, if they do not violate the laws. It is ignored that the supporters of perversion already have a dominant influence on the power, infringing the rights of normal people. In Germany, a mother was sentenced to prison because her teenage daughter refused to attend a lesson that promoted pornography. In the same non-tolerant Western elites relate to countries seeking to protect their citizens from the spread of homophilia, imposing various sanctions against them.

Cannibals live


Under the banner of tolerance and pluralism, the propaganda of pedophilia continues. Judging by the materials of the media and social networks, this perversion is going through a stage of demarginalization. Similarly, euthanasia is legalized in Europe and the USA. The criminal trade in human organs is gradually becoming the norm. A few years ago, such facts revealed in Kosovo shocked most people around the world, but today the information about the bodies of young women and children with organs removed in the south-eastern Ukraine does not cause such a violent reaction. Got used to.

The introduction of the so-called juvenile justice, which involves the removal of children from families under the most contrived pretexts, continues. In Europe, this perversion has entered the final phase of the consolidation phase: “we are the power here”. Mass withdrawals of children from normal families have become a tradition.

The same logic underlay the legalization of Nazism in Ukraine. Today it is almost the official ideology. The result - the ruins of the Donbass and Luhansk region.

The tolerance underlying the concept of multiculturalism led to a demographic catastrophe in Western Europe.

You can further give examples of the results of the destructive power of tolerance and pluralism. Overton windows are open. Continuing the consistent introduction of new anti-human ideas, more terrible than those mentioned. In particular, the process of legalizing cannibalism began. The idea of ​​“isn’t it time?” Is actively discussed on social networks and in some forums it finds support up to 77 percent. On Swedish television, the two hosts ate a piece of meat each other on the air. Cannibalism is going through a “how bold” stage. Another 15 – 20 years, and it will become the norm for a certain circle of people.

The introduction of antisocial, anti-human ideas into society leads to its destruction. History replete with such examples. The brightest is the fall of the greatest empire of the world, the Roman one. Today, humanity as a whole is under threat. In the state of Georgia (USA) there are tablets, where principles of the future world are set out in ten languages ​​(including Russian). In accordance with one of them, the population should be reduced to 500 million people. Today we are about seven billion. That is, more than 90 percent of the population should be destroyed.

Tolerance and pluralism in its current quality is a dangerous informational weaponthat needs to be effectively confronted.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/29099
61 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 10 February 2016 05: 57
    +2
    Where are we going. Probably if we resist, then other candy wrappers will be offered.
    1. Mavrikiy
      Mavrikiy 10 February 2016 06: 02
      +5
      It’s good that I threw the TV away. Where is the book of Tolstoy on the shelf?
      1. Andrey Yuryevich
        Andrey Yuryevich 10 February 2016 06: 31
        +3
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        It’s good that I threw the TV away. Where is the book of Tolstoy on the shelf?

        "mu-mu" Turgenev is better! (can be imagined as drowning liberoids)laughing
        1. Tatyana
          Tatyana 10 February 2016 07: 08
          +8
          Great article! I fully share the opinion of the author.
          Violence of the Russian population with deviant Western tolerance and pluralism has been observed in the Russian Federation for a long time. We see and hear their propaganda in the media, in school education, and even hear on Radio Russia. At the same time, I am constantly surprised by some HIGHLY professional journalists with their sincere personal misunderstanding of the asocial nature of this problem - they are even surprised when you point out to them the mistakes they made in the programs on this issue and the grave negative consequences of the propaganda of their tolerant pluralistic points of view for the fate of Russia and its peoples.

          To author +
        2. nimboris
          nimboris 10 February 2016 08: 08
          +2
          But Mu-Mu is not a liberoid, but an animal devoted to Gerasim, his only joy
        3. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 10 February 2016 11: 08
          0
          Quote: Andrey Yurievich
          "mu-mu" Turgenev is better

          Tolerance and pluralism in its current quality is a dangerous information weapon that must be effectively countered.

          Only one opinion should be correct - the Kremlin ..
          something similar I heard all my youth ...
          We caricaturely repeat the last years of Soviet power ...
          So many letters exhausted for the sake of one paragraph ..
      2. nils
        nils 10 February 2016 06: 37
        +1
        Quote: Mavrikiy
        It’s good that I threw the TV away. Where is the book of Tolstoy on the shelf?


        Have our children thrown out the TV and mobile phones? Picked up books?
        Within the framework of this system, the guarantor of which is Putin, in the grip of spiritless tolerance it is not necessary to console oneself with utopian ideas.
        Russia integrated into European multiparasitism is no exception.
        What is characteristic of the small peoples of Russia is not concerned.
      3. nekot
        nekot 10 February 2016 08: 56
        +2
        Only not the "late" L.N. Tolstoy, there is such a mixture of anarchism with "universal human values" of that time, which is even worse than today's TV))
    2. Pig
      Pig 10 February 2016 08: 29
      0
      we don't need any "tolerance" at all ... it's not just that 50 years ago there was racial segregation and discrimination ...
      it is for the former slaveholders and colonialists that we need and not for us ...
      here is the mistake - they also want to force us to "repent for the sins of whites" like in America, but we have nothing to repent for
      this "tolerance" will lead the slave-owners-geldings to racial war, the European colonialists, too
      and we just forget this is not a decent word
    3. SveTok
      SveTok 10 February 2016 09: 50
      0
      It’s not for us and not for money.
  2. dmi.pris
    dmi.pris 10 February 2016 06: 00
    +7
    Impenetrable curtains must be hung on these "windows for perverts" .. They should be in a prison cell ..
  3. Same lech
    Same lech 10 February 2016 06: 03
    11
    this system of values ​​is far from always accepted by peoples, testifies: it is not universal.


    I can’t have a pluralism of opinions with those who set as their goal the destruction of my country, both inside and out.

    It is possible and necessary to confront this evil spirits on their own information field ... going to their websites, blogs, forums ... they should not feel like winners on our land which our fathers and grandfathers defended with great sacrifices.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. EvgNik
      EvgNik 10 February 2016 06: 30
      +8
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      It is possible and necessary to confront this evil spirits on their own information field ... by going to their websites, blogs, forums.

      Tried it several times. Never missed a single comment. Now everywhere in the "black lists" of these sites, which, in general, I do not regret. This is their "freedom of speech" - to hear only themselves, to give the floor only to their own (and of course the West).
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 10 February 2016 06: 36
        +4
        I tried several times.

        You EVGENY NIKOLAEVICH are not alone in this ... smile

        They kick me out too as soon as I start to crush with facts and historical chronology ...
        liberal comrades really do not like fights face to face with people who have something to tell them.

        hi
    3. Mikhail Krapivin
      Mikhail Krapivin 10 February 2016 10: 20
      +1
      Quote: The same Lech
      this system of values ​​is far from always accepted by peoples, testifies: it is not universal.


      I can’t have a pluralism of opinions with those who set as their goal the destruction of my country, both inside and out.

      It is possible and necessary to confront this evil spirits on their own information field ... going to their websites, blogs, forums ... they should not feel like winners on our land which our fathers and grandfathers defended with great sacrifices.


      I wanted to write - some women .., and then I realized that it was pluralistic and not politically correct! Therefore, I write - some Jews!
  4. Bayonet
    Bayonet 10 February 2016 06: 06
    -3
    The meaning of the word Pluralism according to Ephraim:
    One of the fundamental principles of the structure of a legal society, affirming the need for a variety of subjects of economic, political and cultural life of a society.
    The plurality of opinions, judgments, views, etc. as one of the principles of social structure.
    What is "bacterial" here? request
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 10 February 2016 06: 14
      +9
      What is "bacterial" here?


      An example of EUROPE is not enough ...
      before the eyes of children began to kill and butcher the bodies of animals ...
      teachers conduct pornography classes ... undressing in front of students, Muslim patrols in the streets of LONDON ...
      sex gatherings of migrants in the central streets of KELNA ....
      there are a lot of bacilli that can be found, the list is much larger.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 10 February 2016 09: 33
        -2
        Quote: The same LYOKHA

        An example of EUROPE is not enough ...

        And you can not attract all sorts of perversions to completely normal definitions? Do you think that perversions and pluralism are one and the same?
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 11 February 2016 08: 46
          0
          [quote = Bayonet] Do you think that distortion and pluralism are the same thing? [/ Shaw
          Judging by the minuses, someone believes that the same thing, Well, stupid people also have the right to their own opinion, this is the pluralism of opinions. hi
    2. Blondy
      Blondy 10 February 2016 06: 21
      +5
      And if the subject is pedophile, is it suitable for pluralism? If suitable, then what for such a pluralism is needed. And if not, then this is no longer pluralism.
      1. Stanislas
        Stanislas 10 February 2016 07: 46
        +5
        Quote: Blondy
        if the subject is pedophile - does it fit pluralism?
        The main thing is not to break the laws. The Minister of Culture of France solved the issue easily: he travels to Thailand, uses the services of the local child prostitution industry, returns to France and calmly "gives culture". Associations of pedophiles in many countries (USA, Holland, etc.), not prohibited by law, declare "support for the rights of children and adults to choose partners with whom they would like to enjoy each other's bodies together" (NAMBLA and others). And next in line for the "rights" are "animal lovers", carrion and other "lovers" of unconventional sex. Boldly? And then, eptt!
      2. oxana_iv
        oxana_iv 10 February 2016 09: 12
        +2
        Quote: Blondy
        And if the subject is pedophile, is it suitable for pluralism? If suitable, then what for such a pluralism is needed. And if not, then this is no longer pluralism.


        I, too, often wonder, where are the boundaries of tolerance? For example, same-sex marriages were legalized, but there are also other traditional orientations! Some people like goats or dogs. Perhaps they should also say a resolute "NO" to any discrimination and start fighting for their rights? lol
      3. Bayonet
        Bayonet 10 February 2016 09: 36
        -2
        Quote: Blondy
        And if the subject is pedophile, is it suitable for pluralism?

        No, it does not fit! Pedophile fits the definition - a sexual pervert. Before using unfamiliar words, it is better to ask about their semantic meaning!
        1. Ingvar 72
          Ingvar 72 10 February 2016 10: 26
          0
          Quote: Bayonet
          Pedophile fits the definition - a sexual pervert.

          A few years ago, homosexuality was considered a mental illness, and now it is officially equated to normal marriage. There was a group of 20 pedophiles in the British Parliament, and another 50 knew about it.
          http://kolokolrussia.ru/vlast/vestminsterskie-orki-pedofily-na-sluzhbe-britanii
          With a continuing trend, pedophilia will also be legalized. About pedophiles in our government - Mamontov at 1.55 min, Mizulin at 3.25 min.
    3. sa-ag
      sa-ag 10 February 2016 08: 21
      +1
      Quote: Bayonet
      What is "bacterial" here?

      "There is my opinion and stupid" (C)
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 10 February 2016 10: 18
        0
        Quote: sa-ag
        "There is my opinion and stupid" (

        This is Khrushchev’s pearl. smile
    4. nekot
      nekot 10 February 2016 09: 03
      0
      Quote: Bayonet
      One of the fundamental principles of the structure of a legal society, affirming the need for a variety of subjects of economic, political and cultural life of a society

      "Bacillism" is here in the words "fundamental principle" "affirming necessity" and also in how this principle is implanted and used.
      1. Bayonet
        Bayonet 10 February 2016 10: 25
        0
        Quote: nekot
        "Bacillism" is here in the words "fundamental principle" "affirming necessity" and also in how this principle is implanted and used.
        Tatyana Fedorovna Efremova - Russian linguist, lexicographer, specialist in the field of Russian derivatology, author and editor of modern dictionaries of the Russian language. Candidate of Philological Sciences, senior researcher at the Research Institute of Russian Language Teaching at the National School of the USSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences.
        You offer to brand, and works in a fire? Without any pluralism. wink
        1. nekot
          nekot 10 February 2016 11: 14
          0
          Quote: Bayonet
          Tatyana Fedorovna Efremova - Russian linguist,

          Quote: Bayonet
          Offer to stigmatize, and labor in a fire

          And what about Efremova? She gave a linguistic definition of the concept, in fact, an extended translation with an additional definition and how can I brand it if I do not agree with the method of introducing "pluralism" and because it is vital (I will make a reservation - in the form in which it is used) for a legal society? )))
          1. Bayonet
            Bayonet 10 February 2016 11: 29
            -1
            Quote: nekot
            And what does Efremova have to do with it?

            And what have eggs and pluralism nailed to the pavement? Read the comments. "The same Lech" considers this to be pluralism. Another considers it pluralism to fuck a goat. Just cockroaches in their headshi
  5. Aleksandr72
    Aleksandr72 10 February 2016 06: 13
    17
    It is hushed up that supporters of perversion already exert a dominant influence on the authorities, infringing on the rights of normal people. In Germany, a mother was sentenced to prison because her teenage daughter refused to attend a lesson where pornography was promoted.

    In the same Germany, a "Russian" German, a former classmate of my wife, was arrested for forbidding his son to attend lessons where children were "explained" that same-sex love is just one form of family, that there is nothing in it reprehensible that homosexuals are the same members of society as everyone else, and their rights must be PROTECTED.
    Regarding the topic raised in the article, perhaps I am a dense goblin, but during the Soviet era I did not hear anything and did not know about homosexuality, having learned about it only in the senior grades of the US, and even then we all thought that this perversion was possible only on decaying West, but not ours. And now, for people like me, a special term "straight" has been introduced, as a reflection of our position in life on the gender issue, and also homophobic - as an attitude towards rear-wheel drive. who, judging by the term, consider themselves the only real people (homo - or homo - a person in Latin), and if I and other homophobes like me, then we are enemies of humanity. This is such a substitution of concepts.
    At the same time, in the 80s of the unkind memory of M.S. Gorbachev. for the first time declared the need to observe "pluralism of opinions". I believe that it was from that time that the introduction of "common human values" gradually began in our Soviet and then post-Soviet society. if you want the introduction of this infection into our ethnic culture. From that very moment, the moral degradation of a certain part of our society began (and most likely just took an open form and intensified).
    Who else, but I categorically do not accept the above "universal human values" and in this matter I am in solidarity with the Lord, who once destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. By the way, Islam as a religion, as a set of social moral norms, also categorically denies the "values ​​of common people."
    Taking into account that everyone has their own scale of moral values, I believe that this thread will be "srach" today.
    I have the honor.
    1. EvgNik
      EvgNik 10 February 2016 06: 38
      +7
      Quote: Aleksandr72
      and even then we all believed that this perversion is possible only in the decaying West, but not with us

      In our country it was connected with the prison and the zone. Therefore, an aversion to this phenomenon has remained with the people so far.
    2. Tra-ta-ta
      Tra-ta-ta 10 February 2016 06: 46
      +3
      I believe that it was from that time that the introduction of "universal values" began gradually ..
      In many companies in Europe now it is impossible even to stay at work if you do not show "your tolerance" at the next corporate party ..
  6. Tjeck
    Tjeck 10 February 2016 06: 15
    0
    In general, so, but you don't need to interfere with everything in a heap .. First of all, I would not interfere with spirituality and religion. I've been annoyed by (the goblin) for 2-3 years, but just yesterday I bothered to watch his release of an intelligence survey with Dmitry Yulin about pagans and in my opinion a fairly correct phrase sounded there: `` religion cannot replace ideology, it just complements it '' - In Europe, the problem is not in spirituality or religion, the problem is in ideology. Two world wars have completely destroyed their ideology, turning them into sick pacifists.

    Secondly, the values ​​in European countries are radically different from each other, I will not list the details, but if you are interested, look at the Germans or Swedes, and then compare them with Poles, Hungarians, or even Western European Irish - they are different people.
    1. Mera joota
      Mera joota 10 February 2016 06: 37
      0
      Quote: Tjeck
      Two world wars completely destroyed their ideology, turning them into patients on the head of pacifists.

      Is pacifism an ideology? I have always considered this from religion, the Bible says “Thou shalt not kill!”, Murder is a grave sin and any religious person must be a pacifist a priori.
      1. Same lech
        Same lech 10 February 2016 06: 43
        0
        killing a serious sin
        said the crusader killing another heretic ... but the Lord GOD will forgive my sins for my faith in him.

        A religious person is very vulnerable due to the sincerity of his faith and provocateurs often take advantage of this by pushing people to commit this sin on a plausible pretext.
        There is a flip side to this when a religious person does not oppose evil for fear of committing this sin ... in general, a double-edged sword.
      2. Tjeck
        Tjeck 10 February 2016 06: 58
        -1
        The problem is that they have no ideology left and they have replaced it with pacifism, and this comes to obscurity. They have no concept of a weak and strong sex, or let’s say we stand up for a comrade. Ps: of course there are different people everywhere, but I say in general.

        For some reason, my word pacifism is associated with something extremely negative, if I may say so with (do not care). Well, for that matter, everyone should try to be a humanist.
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 10 February 2016 12: 00
          -1
          Quote: Tjeck
          For some reason, my word pacifism is associated with something extremely negative,

          Pacifism (from lat. Pacificus - peacemaking, pacifying) is an antiwar peacemaking movement whose representatives advocate ending the practice of military resolution of political conflicts.
          This is, as you say, a negative thing. What about militarism? hi
  7. Nikolay71
    Nikolay71 10 February 2016 06: 20
    +2
    I, too, when I hear about pluralism and universal values, I immediately recall Gorbachev.
  8. Zomanus
    Zomanus 10 February 2016 06: 20
    +4
    Tolerance and pluralism can only be good in one case -
    when they benefit and increase the welfare of your country.
    And if they work against your country, then you need to study and block.
    And if, as with us, then until the juveniles and collectors you start shooting,
    and microcredit organizations will not start to burn, the state will not even come to its senses.
    We still don’t have self-defense, everyone pulls up to lynching.
  9. Same lech
    Same lech 10 February 2016 06: 27
    +3
    Secondly, values ​​in European countries are fundamentally different from each other,


    Oh? ...
    What full house and furor this creature made in European countries even PAN-GI MUN deigned to take a picture of it (I don’t even know what to call this abortion victim).
    Europe is united by breaking through the knee the main unit of society, the family (the union of man and woman) granted to us by nature and GOD.
    It is clear that violating the laws of nature, humanity will be doomed to extinction.
  10. Hooks
    Hooks 10 February 2016 06: 28
    +1
    "Tolerance" and "pluralism" are not weapons. These are words whose meanings are very important for the development of a normal society. But already various kinds of perverts shuller substitute these concepts, which over time acquire a purely negative image. Deception and lies are real weapons.
    1. EvgNik
      EvgNik 10 February 2016 07: 29
      +4
      Quote: Hooks
      "Tolerance" and "pluralism" are not weapons. These are words whose meanings are very important for the development of a normal society.

      Mistake - everything that is used as a weapon can become a weapon. A specialist can kill with a pencil. But a pencil is not a weapon. And here there is a place to be the application of these terms in the form of weapons.
      1. Stanislas
        Stanislas 10 February 2016 08: 52
        0
        Quote: EvgNik
        the use of these terms in the form of weapons
        They must somehow "tolerate" get rid of the extra 90% of the population, free up "living space" for themselves, until a more reliable and quick way to stop the reproduction of "unnecessary" human material is found in bacteriological and other laboratories.
  11. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 10 February 2016 06: 32
    +2
    The worst thing for a person is the deformation of moral concepts. It’s like schizophrenics. They are usually extremely intelligent and perfectly logical people, but there is one idea ... which hopelessly distorts the perception of the world and behavior. One wrong idea. And here - pluralism is preached, tolerance (by the way, tolerance is a medical term meaning the absence or suppression of immunity!). Consequently, society must lose its immunity, and perish, because one or another bacillus can be found. And it doesn’t matter who it is - migrants with the Black Banner or homosexuals taking children from normal families. Society cannot but have immunity - it will inevitably die!
  12. Mera joota
    Mera joota 10 February 2016 06: 35
    0
    Let's miss copyright delights. Suppose pluralism and tolerance is bad, what does the author offer in return?
    If the difference of views is a bacillus that causes a disease, then it is necessary to treat with some kind of antibiotic to achieve consensus in society. We are striving for like-mindedness, but who should set the standards for this like-mindedness? Who will control? Church, party, "lads"?
    The same with tolerance, that is, tolerance. If tolerance is bad, then intolerance must be shown, otherwise otherwise. Again, someone must establish the norms and rules of intolerance, a system of punishments ...
    The author sees himself as this "someone"?
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 10 February 2016 07: 53
      +1
      is it bad what the author offers in return?

      I offer values ​​that are typical of a normal family with children ..
      they are known to all and without them it is impossible to grow a normal person.
      1. Mera joota
        Mera joota 10 February 2016 08: 04
        -2
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        I offer values ​​that are typical of a normal family with children ..
        they are known to all and without them it is impossible to grow a normal person.

        These are all vague phrases, while pluralism and tolerance are quite definite terms. In your family, everyone thinks how "dad" and "dad" suppresses all other opinions different from his? Can a normal person grow up in such conditions?
        1. Same lech
          Same lech 10 February 2016 08: 22
          +4
          In your family, everyone thinks how "dad" and "dad" suppresses all other opinions different from his?


          A normal family ... where they listen and respect each other ...
          this is precisely what I emphasize.

          Just
          pluralism and tolerance
          blurring the concepts of good and evil, as well as love for one’s neighbor .... sometimes a good slap instead of tolerant exhortations quickly sets the brains of the bully.

          A person saturated with tolerance is not able to distinguish a bastard from a normal person .... such is the reality.
          1. sa-ag
            sa-ag 10 February 2016 08: 31
            0
            Quote: The same LYOKHA
            A normal family ... where they listen and respect each other ...

            Well, this is this very tolerance - that is, respect for the opinion of another, and the right of this opinion to exist, I don’t understand that the people were up against this word like parmesan cheese :-)
            1. Same lech
              Same lech 10 February 2016 08: 58
              +2
              Well, this is this very tolerance - that is, respect for the opinion of another, and the right of this opinion to exist, I don’t understand that the people were up against this word like parmesan cheese :-)

              I am among them ... I will explain why.
              Some part of society perceives tolerance as permissiveness in the expression of their actions and thoughts ...
              Well, for example, can this be called tolerant of this person who nailed his scrotum to the cobblestones and set fire to the doors in the reception hehe hes of the FSB ...
              or is he expressing his thoughts tolerantly .... what should I call it ???
              1. Bayonet
                Bayonet 10 February 2016 10: 37
                -1
                Quote: The same LYOKHA
                Well, for example, can this be called tolerant of this person who nailed his scrotum to the cobblestones and set fire to the doors in the reception hehe hes of the FSB

                No you can not. What is tolerance here? This is not a mentally healthy person in need of treatment. And how to treat such - there are options. smile
        2. nekot
          nekot 10 February 2016 09: 15
          +2
          Quote: Mera Joota
          Does "papa" suppress all other opinions different from his? Can a normal person grow up in such conditions?

          You will probably be surprised, but parenting needs an authoritative opinion of parents and it is better if it is unified, otherwise there will be complete "pluralism" in their heads. Unfortunately, many do not have their own formed views and are ready to drift for any "fashionable" idea, which is what all and sundry use.
      2. Bayonet
        Bayonet 10 February 2016 09: 59
        -2
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        I offer values ​​that are typical of a normal family with children ..

        And how do they differ from the biblical commandments, which are also universal values?
        Well, for example, “Honor your father and your mother, that you may be well and that your days may be long on the land which the Lord your God gives you.
        Thou shalt not kill.
        Do not commit adultery.
        Do not steal.
        1. Bayonet
          Bayonet 10 February 2016 12: 20
          0
          Quote: Bayonet
          Thou shalt not kill.
          Do not commit adultery.
          Do not steal.

          Here for quoting these commandments, received a minus. What can be said about the person who has a negative attitude to this? request
    2. Stanislas
      Stanislas 10 February 2016 15: 00
      +1
      Quote: Mera Joota
      treat with a certain antibiotic to achieve consensus in society
      Do you want laws that prohibit propaganda, such as Nazism, to be abolished in the name of pluralism? In the West they do not want, but they find no contradiction with the principle of pluralism in this. Any person thinks as he wants and can, but openly express any point of view is not allowed in any society. Would you allow, in the name of pluralism advocated here, to openly express to the drunk guy who has lounged on a bench any of his opinions about your wife or daughter? And about your appearance or faith, can any opinions be expressed or is it better to limit these opinions to something in advance so that there are no unnecessary conflicts? Nowhere is it about achieving consensus. This is your tricky twist. In principle, the plurality of opinions and views there is no obligation to allow any dirt to open expression.
  13. ava09
    ava09 10 February 2016 06: 38
    -1
    Quote: swag
    What is common between these individuals? Descent from one ethnos. Which is always persecuted, always crying, always dissatisfied.


    Jewish "authorities" consider it not a nationality, but a religious interest club: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S7cNjMv2Glg
  14. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 10 February 2016 06: 39
    +1
    Tolerance and pluralism in its current quality is a dangerous information weapon that must be effectively countered.

    We ate our fill of pluralism in the late 80s and 90s. For some reason it doesn't fit anymore. And the West was actively urging us to tolerance after the blasphemous performances of "Pusi" in the temple, after the adoption of the law banning the promotion of homosexuality, etc. No, live yourself with such pluralism and tolerance, if you survive thanks to the environment you yourself have created.
  15. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 10 February 2016 07: 12
    0
    Great article; he was thinking of writing something similar.

    Of the minuses:
    1. The connection between tolerance and lack of spirituality is poorly shown. In the absence of ideology, only faith can non-violently limit the antisocial movements of people who, by their nature, are prone to them.
    2. Feminism, as an integral part of modern tolerance, is not mentioned at all. Meanwhile, not only homosexuals lead to physical degeneration and extinction, but also feminism, elevated to the absolute. Childfree, or at least late childbirth, is bad. But when this is also accompanied by the transfer of the child to "education"To third parties, that is, elimination from the upbringing process is nowhere at all. As well as the reverse hypostasis of feminism - tolerant"closing eyes"for early childbirth. Every thing has its own time under the sun.
    3. Legal addiction, as a symbol of Tolerastism, is also not mentioned. Meanwhile, soon hemp will not only be used, but also something heavier.

    PS In general, the theory of liberalism and pluralism (as they are now interpreted) is sharply anti-Christian and even atheistic; probably satanic.
  16. Neophyte
    Neophyte 10 February 2016 07: 13
    0
    All "values" of Europeans are in trousers! (Klimov "The Prince of this World").
  17. oxana_iv
    oxana_iv 10 February 2016 09: 05
    +3
    The author is a fat plus, the topic is very sore.
    A small remark:
    The main goal of the ideology of "pluralism" is to prevent a person from forming a consistent worldview. After ingestion of a sufficient dose of tolerance and universal values, the "patient" becomes blurred with the concepts of good and evil. One's own opinion either disappears or seems insignificant. And bydlomass is easier to manage)))
    Another example from modern Russia is school "inclusion". If someone is not in the subject, then we are talking about the inclusion of children with disabilities, including those with mental disabilities, in the general educational process, with the aim of their more successful socialization. Sounds humanistic, doesn't it? But the main goal of this procedure is to destroy the entire system of correctional education, which has been very strong in our country since Soviet times. Well, at the same time, all the rest of education will receive "bonuses".
  18. sharp-lad
    sharp-lad 10 February 2016 09: 58
    0
    Please do not confuse pluralism with the imposition of a consensus! And tolerance with indiscriminate surrender of the rights and freedoms of the local population in favor of the newcomer!
    Pluralism (from lat. Pluralis - plural) - a position according to which there are several or many independent and irreducible to each other principles or types of being, foundations and forms of knowledge, behaviors, etc.

    Tolerance in sociology and psychology is tolerance, the ability to calmly, without hostility to perceive someone else's lifestyle, behavior, customs, feelings, opinions, ideas, beliefs, recognize the right to existence of other cultures and coexist in a multicultural, multi-ethnic society.
    1. oxana_iv
      oxana_iv 10 February 2016 10: 29
      +1
      Quote: sharp-lad
      Please do not confuse ...


      That's the whole trouble, that Western ideologists confuse this. No one objects to tolerance of other people's opinions, beliefs and traditions, only tolerance should not turn into omnivorousness, licentiousness and indifference.
    2. nekot
      nekot 10 February 2016 11: 24
      +2
      Quote: sharp-lad
      Tolerance in sociology and psychology - tolerance, the ability to calmly, without hostility to perceive someone else's lifestyle, behavior, customs, feelings, opinions, ideas

      Now this concept is used to suppress resistance to the alien, precisely as a mental and ideological AIDS. Maybe you can explain to me why I should accept, without hostility, the ideas of some, for example, Dzhemal (Islamic Committee), who expresses the idea that there should be a revolution in Russia and an Islamic "Zaporizhzhya Sich" should be built, or some comrade from ISIS, who thinks that the Russians should be destroyed, or some gopnik from the gateway who thinks that I should give him my wallet?
  19. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 10 February 2016 10: 24
    -1
    As the Ukrainians wrote on the posters of Boris Moiseyev - fagots are not our friends! If even unicellular Ukrainians understand this, then we should not have any additional questions.
  20. Begemot
    Begemot 10 February 2016 11: 13
    0
    Any postulate, any norm ultimately contradicts other norms and postulates. The main thing is to abandon obsolete dogmas in time. Those who don’t do this are doomed and it doesn’t matter how they leave: at the same time as the USSR left, unlike China, which failed to abandon dogmatism in economic policy, or as a result of a long decline, as was the case with the Roman Empire. Blind following one or another doctrine ultimately leads to a dead end, regardless of the initial successes achieved along this path. Only those who are able to discern in time the dangers and change the vector of development, and most importantly, there is enough determination, courage and strength for this, can count on the future. The rest there is no room left. The West has fallen into the trap of obsolete, long-unchanged dogmas and is now paying the price by the invasion of buggers, cannibals, pedophiles. The migration crisis has the same roots.
    At these moments, the most important is the answer to the question: Who am I?
    In science, this is called self-identification. Your future will depend on the answer to this question. If a German decides that he is a man of the world, a citizen of a united Europe, accepting and professing all the values ​​that are proclaimed - he is no longer German and Germany has very big problems - she dies and soon (in the historical sense) the "German" will wake up in one bed with the same "German", only for some reason very dark, and not German, under the call of the muezzin and perform namaz 5 times a day.
    The West hates us for what we say: We, Russians, Tatars, Bashkirs, Mordva, Udmurts, Dagestanis, Chechens and all, everything, we will all live as we decide, and not as written in your cannibal tablets.
  21. ava09
    ava09 10 February 2016 18: 59
    +1
    Quote: Begemot
    The main thing is to abandon obsolete dogmas in time.


    Well, then progress, at least you urge you to abandon obsolete ones. And then what? Indeed, the consciousness of those accustomed to live by dogma will require new ...
    1. Begemot
      Begemot 11 February 2016 10: 10
      0
      After all, the consciousness of those accustomed to live by dogma will require new ones ..
      There was never a question behind this, it was important only to separate the deadlocks from the progressive ones. Any dogma at the beginning of its path was a beautiful and exciting idea, an engine of progress, until it became outdated and came into conflict with reality. The 10 commandments can be considered an exception, but they also began to develop them and brought matters to the point of absurdity.