Political Peddlers

    After a long period of hibernation and suspended the contemplation of an ugly and destructive of the bureaucratic-oligarchic government and their minions, we once again witnessed an increase in political activity of the people. The political education of Russian citizens today has advanced considerably, most notably by the reaction of notebooks politicians, from the tone of government newspapers, which constantly asserting the economic stability of the government programs that are aimed at addressing the pressing problems of citizens. President, MPs, the Government has consistently claimed that they only engaged in improving the quality of life of the people think only how to raise the living standards of pensioners, doctors, teachers and workers.
Apparently, it was to this end, state-owned Gazprom, and was bought by Roman Abramovich, as many as over 13 billion dollars, 72% of the shares of Sibneft, which in its time, Abramovich has received over $ 100 million.
So, now we only hear that twice two is four, and will be even better. And for this are various government boards, committees, chambers, committees, from the same officials and their relatives in the spirit of citizens. But it seems no matter what there up to reality. Prior to that the mortality in the country far exceeds the birth rate that labor pension below subsistence level, which inflation exceeds 11% of that corrupt officials overstepped all limits and Russia sank to 126 th place, that the utility payments are growing incredible pace that housing become no longer available.
Today we can say that there is a crisis of power and failure of the ruling class is obvious. Confirmation of this by digging up the graves of various figures of the past years, the desire to add to his political weight due to adjacency to one or another political trend in the absence of its explicit political stance. Fall authority of the government forces her because of the desire not to disclose their true purpose, litsedeystvovat and bring even the fact that they are not peculiar and disadvantageous. And at this time, as it was during the period of acute economic crisis, when we saw the emergence of a myriad number of peddlers selling various consumer goods, under the guise of presentation and promotion of the goods, rise to many political figures who are trying to trade policy "consumer goods", hoping to make political capital and, effort to cause rejection of the people of all politics in general. These traders a wide range of political dogma and terminology, as in consumer goods traders: brand, design, technology distribution network of consumers, liberal matrix. Society for them - a cluster of disparate individuals, randomly consuming everything they offer, not a living organism, composed of people with different views, beliefs, interests, and with different positions. Given that understanding of the structure of society, and they rained down on citizens stream of revelations of politicians, academics, political scientists, actors, television presenters, writers very often mentioned the fate of liberalism and democratic movements in Russia. Choose what you prefer and is adjacent to the subject of hysteria. And he'll decide for myself how to use the support of the people, how many earn their fame.
In this regard, especially large scale newspaper "Izvestia", generously offering in each of its large number of printed acreage compositions known and little-known personalities, the "new fangled" political ideas.
Not asking to analyze all of these articles, I will focus only on individual elements of the whole galaxy of publicists, speakers in orderly rows.
A characteristic feature of journalism is the lack of analysis of reality, and alignment with evidence based on statements of individuals who are, in their view, unquestioned authority, and endless attacks on people as lazy, incompetent, unresponsive to democracy. In short, do not they like people who does not want to pull their chestnuts from the fire.
Here's how reasoned, the newspaper Izvestia, a political scientist, member of the Moscow Writers' Union, Igor Kharichev, in his article "Democracy - like a bicycle:" In a book published this summer, "Does democracy take root in Russia," a well-known economist Yevgeny Yasin questioned : do we need democracy? The question is not idle. Especially after so many years of unsuccessful efforts to build rule of law, civilized market economy, civil society. Maybe they are right who say that Russia and democracy are incompatible and our country has its own specific path? "
As you see, sir, political scientist, starting to talk about democracy, he immediately issued a false premise, and tries to convince readers that came to power in Russia built a democratic state, and not to usurp power from a desire for personal enrichment. And the reason for the lack of democratic elections, the turnover of power, freedom of expression and information, freedom of meetings and citizens' associations, are not rooted in the desire of the authorities in every way restrict these freedoms, and lack of understanding of the people, the reluctance people have a democratic country in the inability of citizens to go on " democratic bike. "And all our troubles - explains political scientist - have one root. People do not understand what democracy is and why he needs it. We do not love those who do not like us, we do not respect other people's opinion, and only a minority view - and even more so. We spit on the laws, perceive as their due, corruption. We have no political or legal culture. We are undemocratic in its essence. "
So, no more and no less. Only Kharichev, somehow overlooked that in the present moment, just ignored the opinion and the interests of the majority, not minority. With corruption and thrives because of the lack of democracy that most citizens can not possibly affect the decisions do not have the ability to control the spending of budget money, selling off state assets to participate the development of laws and monitor their execution.
As we see, first by issuing a false premise unsuccessful and the heroic construction of a democratic state officials who seized power in the country, and then tried to convince readers that this was no need to do, as we are "undemocratic in nature, that is we are slaves from nature, and do not want to choose their leaders, do not want to defend their interests, do not want to have freedom of speech, but only forward, who would come to us and we poupravlyal.
And further, in support of its allegations, the author again hits the people by the servility of his superiors, social infantilism, disregard the law, and that the only and main problem of Russia - with its people.
Here are just thinking and knowing his people the reader will see something quite different from that sought to prove Kharichev. He will see that Mr analyst shows an incredible desire prisluzhit power, clean up her boots, and make every effort to curtail the power of democracy and give the destruction of democratic freedoms in Russia for the natural desire of the people who, according to the author of the article "is cattle that are ready to take the cost of the first prodding. You will see that he Kharichev cringing and flattering power by acting as an obsequious waiter, and the people, as recent events with the monetization of social benefits, have long ceased cringing and seems to no longer fear him.
In the next issue of Izvestia Harichevu echoed by another servant of power, a supporter of the rule of the minority interests and a lover of abstract reasoning about justice, about God, about responsibility, Alexander Archangel. "Twenty years ago, minority fabulously lucky. Passive majority, tired of the stench of the corrupt Soviet government, ozverev of queues and the growing mess, tolerated and even supported the breakthrough active minority to democracy, open economy, participation in the global world processes. The minority took advantage of a chance, but having in the 90 years of enormous political power, did not bother to explain to the majority, at least psychologically soften for him numerous blows of fate, and if you do not create an atmosphere of social harmony, then at least reduce the tension of mutual hostility " .
Indeed, the minority fabulously lucky. This minority, in the wake of the struggle of the people with the party nomenklatura, usurped all power in the country, exposing themselves as supporters of the people, way to power, but not for the sake of building a democratic republic, like trying to convince the Archangel, but for personal enrichment. Under the guise of democratic rhetoric of this minority, sitting at the helm, beginning an unprecedented looting of the people, giving its predatory ambitions to enrichment as an economic necessity, as a condition for further development. Today Archangel tries to justify this minority, who, it turns out he had only to explain the passive majority of its goal of robbery, as the inevitability of his fate, the inevitability of being robbed.
But further Archangel makes more Bole insolent and false statements. It turns out that this power belongs just to the majority. "Power has become an absolute and unlimited power of the majority. The power belongs to the majority, but enriched and flourishing, for some reason the minority? But for the Archangel to this problem does not exist. He is not involved in the analysis of reality and myth.
But this strange power of the majority. This is the people, and thinks all the head breaks and can not understand - who is constantly pushing up prices and tariffs for services of natural monopolies, who spins the inflation, who restrains the growth of wages, who cuts back on the possibility of passing in Parliament are independent of the government candidates who accept laws restricting the rights of citizens to hold rallies and pickets? And then there Arkhangelsk and explains - yes it is you yourself are doing, and that the "majority rule - this is not necessarily power, acting in favor of the majority." In general, he tries to prove that you are robbing yourself, whips, humiliation, and we only present at this celebration.
More Bole frankly, in their hatred of the people, is recognized in the "Novaya Gazeta" Leonid Radzikhovsky. "... I do not believe in" people's democracy "to Russia", - explains Radzikhovsky. Well, do not believe, and God is with you - some say, believing in the sincerity speak. Only you, good lord, shouting at each corner of it, and try to prove that popular democracy is impossible and not desirable, inventing various tricks. Maybe Radzikhovsky believes that, from whose hand feeds? But it remains unknown to us.
But then he clarifies his position, his disbelief in the people's democracy. "Because people are not mature enough to at least consciously vote." Vote for all sorts of populists and nationalists like Zhirinovsky and Ragozin. And Radzikhovsky explains to the people for whom to vote, and who should be rejected, and if people do not listen to RADZIKHOVSKYI and has other views, then the freedom he deserves. And so he would not "help, WTO this majority to freely express their will".
Brave politician Radzikhovsky rejected people, because, in his opinion, "the power still a little bit responsible, better, its people", apparently because it regularly pays a political scientist. So that people can only weep, go to Mr. Radzikhovsky and fall at his feet that he would not leave him, let alone do something to him, helped him to freely express their will.
Only the people will hardly be worthy of such. He did not notice another of his haters, have poured out their bile. And the threat RADZIKHOVSKYI that he will not try to help people have freedom of speech on TV, because people lack Pushkova and Karaulov, does not upset people. The people well see what the next look like a bull frog to seek and calmly gives it to reach its logical conclusion independently.
Another cohort of political peddlers, as opposed to outright lackeys of power - they are representatives of different political parties seeking to lure voters in the party-phantoms, to prevent people from going the way of real opportunities to change the existing system of government. They tend to Bole overtures to the people, so they understand that their price depends on their weight and credibility among the people. To this end, they offer the people of different political projects, which invariably see themselves at the head.
One recent project that appeared in cyberspace, is a project member of the Political Council of the SDPR, doctor of historical sciences, the chief scientific officer INION Boris Orlov, who is no more and no less than the Social-democratic project in Russia.
Like any salesman, the doctor in all his strength of intellect, especially started to praise the proposed product. "Social democracy is the next stage in the progressive movement of world civilization. The Social Democrats have substantiated ideologically and practically implemented to exposure to natural market processes, based on private property, in the direction of the humanization of human relations. Borrowing from the main achievements of liberal thought and practice, the Social Democrats were able to implement the basic requirements of humanity at the present stage: the freedom to connect with social justice. " And then many more words of praise to the Social Democrats with the use of purely professorial terminology, such as: the humanization, consensus, expansion of democratic space and so on. What is clear, according to the author, should attract many people, "enlightened" Professor Orlov, the ranks of SDPR.
And most importantly, what a beautiful conclusion: freedom combined with social justice! That is, the doctor wants us to tell stories that freedom rejects social justice, and social justice that previously existed only in captivity (probably means the USSR), but the Social Democrats still managed to connect.
Only then was it really? In the history of human society there are many examples, the doctor of history ought to know them, and just the opposite is that, where a small group or class usurp all power in his hands, as it was during the reign of the CPSU, there's not a social fairness and do not have, and where more freedom, where people have the opportunity to express and defend their interests, there is just more social justice.
And absolutely ridiculous assertion Orlova, that: "In a totalitarian and authoritarian regimes, the rulers set strict order restricting the activities of criminal elements. (In fact, against all who oppose the regime, and even more do not mind crime, but against ideological adversaries - approx. Com.) But with the people deprived of freedom of expression. " We must assume that in a democracy, criminal elements have complete freedom of action, here they are free to express yourself, want - rob, want - raped and murdered. It seems that Orlov does not understand what he was saying.
Praising his project, the professor could not complain that "Russia's reality and its social environment, its society, its economy were not ready to accept the social-democratic experience.
Everyone is good and beautiful, and convenient, but not in demand in Russia. Of course, doctor of historical sciences ought not to stoop to rude expressions thrown by the individual publicists in the nation because of its uselessness and uncertainty, but he probably regrets in his heart that he went to the wrong people. "Unclaimedness experience of social democracy and its mission for several reasons. Do not place the development of the middle class in a mass scale. Employees in companies operating in the gray area of the economy "prefer to accept the established rules for the payment of wages. Also manifest passivity of the thinking part of Russia's intelligentsia, prefers to stay "outside politics". And what, one wonders, should make employees when the existing system of relations was good from the ruling class? People are forced to act as dictate to them the real facts and not based on abstract representations of a professor.
But this fact does not stop the doctor and he continued to heap praise on his project: there, how much merit the Social Democrats to the people, and in European countries, they enjoy well-deserved reputation, and in Russia somehow does not get accustomed European Experience of Social Democracy. At the same time as the professor would not notice or do not want to talk, but perhaps that just wants to deceive the buyer, not mentioning that the name of something identical, but the content is different. The nation remembers those who represented and represents, to be exact - who are trying to ride on the Social-Democracy. You can not compare, for example, former Chancellor of Germany and the well-known Social Democrat Gerhard Schroeder and Mikhail Gorbachev, who, speaking for the social-democratic ideas, for the inviolability of private property, at one time, freezing and devalue the contributions of Soviet citizens who had robbed the whole country, for Except particularly close to the authorities. Koka he social democrat? Where is the justice?
Having experienced difficulties with the sale of the Social Democratic brand, the doctor begins to think about it, and expresses his thoughts: "Supporters of the Social Democrats faced with a dilemma: either to wait until the society is" ripe "to the civilized state in which civil society holds control of the government, or all also try to influence this process, while appreciating all the specifics of the situation.
Yes, that such a situation, and political Peddlers had the choice: either wait until the people will figure out with the current government and establish a democratic state, and then, according to Orlov, will increase demand for their brand, and Mr. Orlov, or already try to build your project in real life. But here it is revealed and their failure, to reveal what was meaningful content and well-adjusted positions in figures calling themselves social democrats, and no. Therefore, they are torn, not knowing what to do: "One of the main issues with this - how to behave in relation to the ruling circles. Or try to influence them still existing means in a mode of consensual political culture, to participate in elections, to support democratic action, or to leave in the dead of the opposition, finding common ground with those groups who are convinced of the necessity and possibility of "overthrowing an unjust regime." Open question, and the Social-Democrats on him to date there is no definitive answer.
They do not know or they are in a mode of compromise to bargain with the authorities or to seek common ground with the opposition-minded population. They think more, where you can get more. But, to date, the government seems unwilling to take them on the content, but with the people because of their "consensual political culture" and stagnant professorial language, they can not find common ground.
Moreover, in order to find common ground with the opposition-minded part of society must be at least honest and not try to delude the people, which often does a doctor Orlov.
Declaring on every page of his political treatise, the Social Democrats to stick to its core principles - social justice in society, Orlov meanwhile eagerly rushed to defend the disgraced oligarch Khodorkovsky, as if not knowing what the oligarchs, in alliance with the bureaucracy, dilute Russia economy that Khodorkovsky, convicted of fraud in large-scale, for tax evasion and illegal capital outflow. And according to Orlov turns out that Khodorkovsky was sentenced to prison not for crimes, but for the fact that Khodorkovsky sought to withdraw their business from the "gray area" that is, make the company completely transparent. Only if this statement Orlova, at least to some extent correspond to reality, that Khodorkovsky was not like now in custody. Such false statements did not Khodorkovsky's lawyers, and journalists involved in protecting the accused.
Speaking on national relations, Orlov does not reveal the existing differences, and tries to conceal. Rather than make clear that in the national republics, national clans seized power with the connivance and support of the center and terrorize fell under their control population, and especially Russian, he says, "that the leaders of individual national republics, in a bid to build national expertise and contribute to their advancement, national and cultural activities, willingly or not willingly, infringes the rights of Russian ".
According to Orlov's ideas about society, capitalism is a perpetual mode of production, and Eduard Bernstein overturned Marxism and proved its failure. Prove that "profit entrepreneur is formed by a number of factors, not only through the exploitation of employees. However, it is obvious only for Orlova, and among European Social Democrats, which we constantly professor presented as an exemplary role models, no one ever thought of Bernstein any significant economist.
Order that the reader can assess the depth of theoretical knowledge of Dr. Orlova, recognize the theory of Marx's old stuff, I will present a few excerpts from his project.
On state: "One of the main problems faced by every civilized society - the role of executive organs of state. Absolutely not clear what kind of state, why this task is only to civilized societies, a criterion in the definition of civilization, whose interests it represents and defends the executive body, and so on. In general, more questions than answers. But a brisk seller, do not even tries to understand the essence of the state, immediately turns to praise your product. "The Social Democrats favor an active role of government in addressing issues affecting society as a whole." Not yet decided what kind of state, lord of empty phrase immediately starts to give the qualitative characteristics of this state, and to issue, what qualitative characteristics of this non-existent state is important for the Social Democrats.
Next Orlov continues to surprise the reader by their incredible passages: "But with this approach there is a risk that officials performing public functions in different areas of life, tend to be guided by purely selfish interests." You only appreciate the depth of thought Professor! It turns out that if an abstract state is active, then a specific official will be guided by purely selfish interests. The doctor showed us how to going on in the minds of some professors, the connection of abstract and concrete, and incidentally made another discovery that officials are not performing public functions. But this is not all the problems that Orlov clicks, like nuts.
"One of the problems in the state action - the efficient and judicious channeling of tax deductions. Officials in the higher state bodies tend to the basic system of tax revenue "pass" through itself ".
Taking the abstract state, which, according to Dr. Orlov, formed on the basis of reason, that is, arises from the head of a particular subject, but does not appear on the balance of power in society and certain interests of the ruling class, he will inevitably get tangled up and forced to his rescue , insert the word mind is everywhere. Assuming the mind of the subject formed the state. In fact, the distribution of tax revenues and the value of own tax based not on the mind of a subject, and based on the balance of certain groups and classes, in order to control the class.
And yet, I would like to understand why this is, if the officials in the higher state authorities suddenly appears this propensity "basic system of tax revenue" pass "through itself". And it is impossible to invent a method of checking people before they appoint to high positions, the existence of such tendencies? To introduce mandatory testing for the presence of such tendencies, you see, ten years later, the officials of such a propensity and will not. But this is not the tendency of some officials seem to Orlov, a feature of the existing system of government where everything is built to implement the rule of the interests of the central bureaucracy and the oligarchy.
So why, one wonders, are fighting Russia's Social Democrats under the leadership of these doctors, as Boris Orlov? In consensus with lawless power, for agreeing to a criminal oligarch, a partnership between the robbers and robbed, seeing his party and himself in the role of the mediator, who receives a dividend, as with that, and on the other hand, hiding it under the defenders of the interests of capital, - the interests of workers. Well, apparently they have such a fate - litsedeystvovat.
But citizens should understand that freedom of the people ensured only when people truly have the freedom to form associations to hold rallies and meetings, have freedom of speech, in fact, pass laws, to choose and succeed at any time, government officials, and to do so directly without any corrupt intermediaries. If people will not have in its hands the entire state government - if it remains in the state some kind of power, not the chosen people, not replaced, by the people is not dependent, then the real solution to existing problems is impossible. It is impossible to build an efficient economy and ensuring social justice, civil society development, the rise of culture and raising the standard of living. All the existing evils of the oligarchs-bureaucratic state will continue and will only continue to poison society poison decaying state.

 
Vitaly Glukhov
28.10.05.