Низовцев Юрий Михайлович : другие произведения.

How did the rulers act formerly, and doing now? and how -- people under them?

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
 Ваша оценка:
  • Аннотация:
    How to cope with the people the most effective? Even in ancient times, Plato spoke out very definitely about this. What changed lately both with the people, and with rulers? And what to do to the ordinary person in a situation when he is being robbed and deceived constantly? Neither Plato, nor anyone else, has yet been able to comprehend the reasons for the stability of an unfair state system, that is, the impossibility of a transition to a just state, although there is an answer, and it can be found below.
  
  
  I
  Until now, the question of whether collective or individual leadership is more effective has not been resolved more or less adequately, as well as - how this problem was solved and is being solved at the level of state government, and why the aspiration to the fair state in any way does not lead to sought?
  Still the famous philosopher Plato of Ancient Greece in his work "State" almost 2.5 thousand years ago noted the main types of government with collective and individual management, of which he identified three real, besides his ideal state - under the control of the wise philosophers, and timocracy - the state with warrior-rulers, such as Ancient Sparta, which now does not appear anymore, not counting the relatively short-lived juntas in underdeveloped countries.
  It is oligarchy, democracy and tyranny. The worst of them Plato recognized tyranny.
  Indeed, it is difficult to disagree with him, having familiarized himself with his brief description of the tyrant: "But when he has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader... What a blessed alternative, I said: - to be compelled to dwell only with the many bad, and to be by them hated, or not to live at all!... And the more detestable his actions are to the citizens the more satellites and the greater devotion in them will he require?" [1].
  The reliability of his abusive words, characterizing tyrants, is confirmed by Plato"s attempt to collaborate with the Syracuse (Sicily) tyrant Dionysius Junior for the sake of building an aristocratic, just state under the wise guidance of philosophers, as a result of which he slightly not set off towards the forefathers, but somehow survived. Those interested will be able to learn more about the vicissitudes of Plato's life on Internet.
  Plato ranks democracy a little higher than tyranny, but not by much, believing that it is precisely because of its proximity to the crowd with all its stupidity and abomination that democracy inevitably produces tyrants: "And then democracy comes into being after the poor have conquered their opponents, slaughtering some and banishing some, while to the remainder they give an equal share of freedom and power; and this is the form of government in which the magistrates are commonly elected by lot... This, then, seems likely to be the fairest of States, being an embroidered robe which is spangles with every sort of flower. And just as women and children think a variety of colours to be of all things most charming, so there are many men to whom this State, which is spangled with the manners and characters of mankind, will appear to be the fairest of States... how grandly does she trample all these fine notions of ours under her feet, never giving a thought to the pursuits which make a statesman, and promoting to honour anyone who professes to be the people's friend... I replied, which, as they tell you in a democracy, is the glory of the State - and that therefore in a democracy alone will the freeman of nature deing to dwell... the insatiable desire of this and the neglect of other things introduces the change in democracy, which occasions a demand for tyranny... loyal citizens are insultingly termed by her slaves who hug their chains and men of naught; she would have subjects who are like rulers, and rulers who are like subjects: these are men after her own heart, whom she praises and honours both in private and public. Now, in such a State, can liberty have any limit?... And above all, I said, and as the result of all how sensitive the citizens become, they chafe impatiently at the least touch of authority and at length, as you know, they cease to care even for the laws, written or unwritten; they will have no one over them... Such, my friend, I said, is the fair and glorious beginning out of which springs tyrant... This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears above ground he is a protector... having a mob entirely at his disposal, he is not restrained from shedding the blood of kinsmen?" [1].
  Plato puts an oligarchy over democracy in relation to moral qualities, apparently because of its lack of obvious bloodthirstiness and stupidity, but he despises this system in the same way as democracy and tyranny, since oligarch-rulers are only concerned about the thirst for profit at the expense of the people, and absolutely indifferent to his needs, trying to satisfy only own indestructible greed: "A government resting on a valuation of property, in which the rich have power and the poor man is deprived of it... They next proceed to make a law which fixes a sum of money as the qualification of citizenship; the sum is higher in one place and lower in another, as the oligarchy is more or less exclusive; and they allow no one whose property falls below the amount fixes to have any share in the government. These changes in the constitution they affect by force of arms, if intimidation has not already done their work... First of all, I said, consider the nature of the qualification just think what would happen if pilots were to be chosen according to their property, and a poor man were refused permission to steer, even though he were a better pilot?... The inevitable division: such a State is not one, but two States< the one of poor, the other of rich men; and the are living on the same spot and always conspiring against one another... Well, I said, and how does the change from oligarchy into democracy arise? Is it not on this wise? - The good at which such State alms is to become as rich as possible, a desire which is insatiable?..." [1].
  Judging by the above fragments, over the past thousands years only the external form of government, or rather, its name, has changed, and the essence, noted by Plato, hardly strongly changed.
  Therefore, those in power and all their minions always obscure the essence of power because of its unsightliness.
  Indeed, for all types of government, quite adequately indicated by Plato, in power inevitably find themselves scoundrels, which are distinguished only in the degree of stupidity and bloodlust.
  Indeed, for all types of government, quite adequately indicated by Plato, the rascals inevitably appear in power, which are distinguished only by the degree of stupidity and bloodthirstiness.
  Of course, no power elite can admit this, and for the most part it is quite successfully humbugs the people, because it knows that the working people do not read Plato.
  So it turns out that the people only do that they tolerate these parasites in power. But sometimes his patience comes to an end - power is overthrown, but only so that the nominees from the people again join one form or another of power, which was designated by Plato, becoming at times parasites worse than before.
  The example of this phenomenon is the recent events in Ukraine.
  The overthrown quasi-tyrant Yanukovych was replaced by the rampant democracy led by freely elected parliament. Through short time this revelry somehow was imperceptibly transformed to the real power of the few rich men, who divided among themselves the territory and richness of the country which interested them only as objects for pumping out of profit. The parliament began to represent interests especially of these oligarchs in the person of their representatives bribed or directly entered by them into it. So, the fertile Ukraine became the arena of the direct oligarchical robbery, and a third of its become impoverished population was forced to migrate at the different countries just to somehow feed themselves.
  It is curious that earlier almost all of the current Ukrainian oligarchs were quite law-abiding and seemingly good people, but they quickly lost the positive, having appeared in power and with money.
  Approximately by the same, but more bloodthirsty were in the recent past typical representatives of the people's depths - Stalin and Hitler.
  Democracy brought these ordinary people to a surface that they were greatly muddied by their own weak education and the susceptibility for this reason to a considerable degree to false and bloodthirsty ideas, supposedly pointing the way to a just society. Competitive struggle with similar personalities, possessing a short-sighted but nimble mind, strong will, cunning, insidiousness and good organizational skills, under the circumstances, revealed their advantage in the degree of usefulness for the leadership of these properties, having allowed them to become actually by tyrants. In accordance with the signs of tyrants noted by Plato, they only and did, what they intrigued, waged wars with neighbors and with their own people to maintain power and maximize its spread.
  It is quite curious also the demonstration by history of the fact that democracy from all main three types of government is most unstable.
  In particular, in Russia democracy lasted only a few months of 1917, after the February overthrow of Tsar Nikolai Romanov.
  In Germany, after the First World War, democracy lasted a little longer, but managed to ruin both the economy, and all basic institutions of the state, down to morality, which resulted in the ascent of Hitler"s not quite adequate adventurer to the top of power.
  In the United States and other developed countries of capitalism, which are externally being represented democratic, in fact, at the helm are the few oligarchical clans. They managed to adapt to fool the people around by the presence of typically ostentatious attributes of democracy in the form of allegedly independent parliaments, vessels, the press, and actually they anxious only with thirst of a profit, at the same time creating the illusion of a just and materially secure life among the populace of their countries, not only by the propaganda, but also additional feeding of the population by allocating significant funds, stolen from countries of the Third World, dependent on them, rich with natural resources, such as Russia, The countries of Africa, Latin America, and some countries in Asia.
  These dependent countries are even farther from the power of the people, than the developed countries.
  In effect, they are divided into two categories: some of them copy quasi-democracy of the developed countries, but with rather low cultural and economic level of life (Argentina, India, Brazil), since the population of these countries is captured by the intentional massive low-standard cultural propaganda from the developed countries, and the power elite can rob only own people; another category of dependent countries is slipping into quasi-tyranny, represented to one degree or another by autocratic regimes, not only because of their economic weakness, but also due to the low educational and cultural level of the population (Turkey, Syria, Pakistan).
  In fact, in all these countries oligarchic clans of developed states and transnational corporations are dominated under various showcases, easily controlling the local corrupt power elite - at this, the elite is enriched, and the population grows poor even in countries with rich natural resources, a scandalous example of which is a number of countries in Africa, as well as Russia.
  As for China, this human anthill, which has suspended its development for many hundreds of years, is trying to make up for lost time allegedly under the flag of socialism, being in fact the cruel tyranny of the collective type - the tyranny of bureaucrats of the communist party, which, on the one hand, fools the heads of the population by socialist slogans, interspersing them with maxims on the exclusivity of the Median Empire, and on the other hand, deliberately keeps the vast majority of citizens for greater obedience in an illiterate or semi-literate state. Along with that, like any tyranny, this empire is trying to get through everywhere, using, however, by basically non-military methods to take control of the whole world, having pushed aside the weakening Anglo-Saxons from this control.
  Therefore, as Plato rightly remarked, the scoundrels of the lowest class are everywhere in power.
  Till rather recently, they masked of themselves by their aristocratic origin, that is, a certain chosenness, although in fact they originally came from the yard people who were running with the parcels from the rulers.
  Now they represent of themselves by highly educated intellectuals with doctor's degrees, nevertheless, containing inside the same blood-thirsty essence without which, however, they would not manage to keep in power.
  Plato was unable to explain the inevitable belonging of only scoundrels to those, in power, who, however, are forced willy-nilly to manage their countries, which they do not succeed too well due to concern for other interests.
  Plato was also unable to explain, why it is impossible - to establish management, a fair for all, although he himself has been convinced in practice of the futility of this attempt.
  
  II
  Let's try to make it, the benefit we have for the solution of the given problem certain prerequisites which are as follows: "... in human beings there are two components of consciousness - the lowest, often called unconscious, or subconscious, and the highest consciousness, or self-consciousness. the level of which can differ significantly depending on the degree of development of the person or his communities - take, for example, the person of the Stone Age and the current Nobel laureate, - the level of consciousness and in that and other case significantly other, however self-consciousness is present both here and there, without disappearing anywhere, but the lowest consciousness, which is responsible generally for functioning of an organism (body) to hold it in a live state and to do it by adequate concerning stay of a body in the environment as well as to fix and spread an organism in the environment, remains almost invariable, i.e. does not depend on time.
  Both these components (hypostases) exist and act in the body and through the body in an indissoluble connection, but the highest consciousness is incapable to exist without the lowest, as the last is responsible for preservation of the living being in the environment - it is impossible to do without this, and the first - above all - for conscious and design activity of a being as individually, and in the human communities which are in a certain environment, and other natural beings always do without self-consciousness.
  It is these deep entities in the form of the lowest consciousness and highest consciousness, hidden and intertwined in every human consciousness, and, consequently, in the public consciousness, with all their antagonism because of the need to solve various problems for the most part contradicting each other, really determine development of human communities at any stage....
  If the relationship between people on the basis of self-awareness slowly but steadily develops, then the lowest consciousness in the person remains unchanged.
  Therefore, the ideal persons do not appear, and the lowest consciousness, despite any form of its disguise, acts at any stage of the development of human consciousness, being expressed in deep-rooted egoism (egocentrism) - personal and corporate, hypocrisy (masking), suspiciousness (caution), contempt for people of other circle (mistrust to other communities), animal instincts concerning an opposite sex, etc. [2, Chapter 3].
  As an example, can result in the manifestation of the antagonism of the lowest and highest consciousness is not in the class struggle of the oppressed masses and bloodsuckers-oppressors, - in those and other dominate the lowest consciousness, thereby stimulating mainly the struggle for survival, but not for the development of the community, - and informal intellectual opposition and the ruling elite, that mostly represent the struggle between the highest and lowest consciousness.
  The low level of self-consciousness of the power elite and the structures adjacent to it, which is limited, as a rule, by pragmatism, leads to the dominance of the lower or animal consciousness, for which the main feature is a sense of self-preservation, seeking not to lose anyway consumption of sensations, preferably the most pleasant, at the expense of the rest of the population, on which to representatives of the imperious elite to spit, but, nevertheless, the awareness of their own position points them, that, having lost or having destroyed this miserable, according to them, folk, they will lose a basis of own existence, and this fact force them, creaking heart, somehow to interact with it [3].
  The main characteristics of representatives of the operating elite of the state and the reason of their emergence stated above, exclude long presence of persons at it with the high level of consciousness, that is with self-respect, altruistic, noble, honest, serving with total dedication. If such people fall into the elite, their fate cannot be envied: they either relatively quickly are removed under false pretenses from this highest layer of the state, or descend in their self-consciousness to the level of ordinary scoundrels, hypocrites and rogues, who have a highest form of consciousness, pushed back largely to the role of the subordinate to the lowest consciousness.
  Therefore, the main reason for the low moral quality of the representatives of power elites is the dominance of hypocritical rascals in them instead of normal people, which always happens through the natural selection into power of energetic, communicative, selfish, obsequious and generally sane crooks, who simply, like animals in corresponding niches, is easier to survive and adapt to life in a jar with spiders, what, in essence, is any power elite.
  Similar predominance of animal dominant consciousness over altruistic self-consciousness, giving them a lot of advantages over other categories of the population, means that only such subjects are in power. This phenomenon is confirmed by the fact that after all the upheavals that ended with the annihilation of the former representatives of the authorities, as known from history, exactly the rascals invariably turned out to be power, and its hidden essence was being revealed sooner or later by their further actions, which amounted to deceiving and plundering their own people, as well as wars with neighbors.
  As for the possibility of a fair state, history showed at first glance a strange phenomenon: all the upheavals and revolutions eventually were leading to the same antagonistic system.
  The same supposedly socialism turned out to be the tyranny of officials with all the "charms" of this system - the struggle for dominance with neighboring states, often ending in wars, the poverty of the population, ruthlessly robbed by the ruling elite as for profit as well as - for the maintenance and development of huge -relative to the population - armies and power structures.
  Therefore, the emergence of a just state cannot be expected: the development of society can be carried out only within the framework of antagonistic relations. And these relations are not laid in the struggle of the poor with the rich, who, even having exchanged places, leave everything as before, being only an external factor in the latent activity of human consciousness, i.e. an eternal struggle of his egocentric lowest (animal) consciousness and his altruistic, basically, highest consciousness (self-consciousness).
  It is the struggle of these contradictory beginnings basically ensures the accelerated development of society, which we are observing, despite the abomination of those in power and the passivity of the inhabitants.
  And yet how and due to what the power elite of more or less developed states manages, both earlier, and now to fool own citizens, that even the not-so-stupid German philosopher Hegel recognized modern for him Prussian state as acme of perfection.
  
  III
  Naturally, the designated by Plato, so defective systems of board demanded the improvement for convenience of the authorities: if to deceive and rob the people, then with gloss and grace, that the people did not wish revolution.
  At first - it is Middle Ages - appeared a dual system of board: good tsar (king, sultan) and bad boyars (ministers, viziers).
  However, the system of deceiving the working people can work quite effectively only misleading the dark and cowed people, but it is not suitable for a more or less educated public.
  It was necessary to work further on improvement of the "construction" of the power in order to it was revolts and indignations less, and at the same time it would be possible not only to enjoy the power, but also it is quite good to scam for creation to himself and posterity of the maximum comfort.
  And this "construction" finally turned out in full splendor - people only squint, but not were particularly indignant.
  The proof of this is the absence of revolutions in England for more than three hundred years, and in the USA for about 250 years: in these countries this "construction" was implemented for the first time.
  The essence this, the most effective of the existing systems of the deceit of the population, consists not only in a touching unification of the power, church, law and press with feeding of one copper, however, in the different portions. This is by itself.
  The main thing that was done was the choice of the best, or rather, favorable for power in the eyes of the people of the established systems of government, that is, the one that most effectively disguises the parasitic essence of the power elite, the core of which is always the oligarchs under capitalism, and the bureaucrats under socialism, distributing among themselves the economic and military spheres of influence for their own benefit. It is favorable for power and decent-looking fragments in a slightly modified forms for the introduction in the misconception of the population were chosen from the classical oligarchy, democracy and tyranny with their Association in a single, spinning without interruption, the whole.
  From tyranny there remained a monarch (president or prime minister), whose powers were no longer unlimited, but in places greatly curtailed. Nevertheless, for the people he remained the familiar center of power, which can be appealed to, although, in general, any appeal does not affect the change of the essence of power.
  Democracy as a people's power was represented by a parliament elected from all segments of the population that these layers so as not to be offended, but - at first - with different representation, allegedly because of the greater preparedness of some sections of the population (educated and wealthy) for selecting the most effective and competent deputies in their legislative decisions, although this is only an appearance; besides, it was actually saved the property qualification in favor of representatives of those in power, possessing the considerable capitals, who, having numerous opportunities to bribe voters or cheat them with the help of a corrupt press, do it every time; alon with that the imperious elite reduces by various ways activity of opposition to empty debates, and the most part of opposition to the authorities represents, in fact, the same imperious elite under other banners. The democratic system of government is allegedly confirmed by a periodic change of power through its re-election after a certain period. This replacement does not really change anything - again the "barons" of capitalism remain in power, although, of course, there is a constant struggle between them for those or other advantages that power gives or closeness to power gives.
  The oligarchy also did not disappear, but hid itself under the veil of financial flows in the economy, as well as - the bureaucratic crowd of managers. It is the oligarchs, whatever they are called, control financial flows, extracting money from numerous financial bubbles, exacerbating the problems of the economy and lowering the standard of living of the population. They can also be either deputies or advisers, be in the opposition, or even in the shade, but, nevertheless, they are always secretly at the helm of economic and politic under various pretexts, and all other allegedly rulers, as a rule, do not dare significantly depart from their proposals. The oligarchs themselves are doing what they think is advantageous for themselves, little taking into account the authorities. They actually determining the foreign and domestic policies of the state, no matter how inflated the cheeks of the removable presidents and Prime Ministers in front of, as a rule, irremovable oligarchic clans.
  Thus, similar decoration of power turned out to be beneficial to the richest representatives of society, who by no means lose their influence under any external form of government, be it the constitutional monarchy (Great Britain, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands), the presidential republic (France, USA, Russia), or the parliamentary Republic (Italy, Germany, Australia, Canada).
  Practice "approved" this approach. Its pioneers (England and the United States) have not had revolutions in the past few hundred years.
  Here so effectively it was succeeded to organize management in a number of the countries - and the people there not that it is happy, but also is not indignant especially. Therefore, these parasites-oppressors cannot worry to especially in this regard.
  Moreover, in addition to the new system of governance dispersed over most of the existing states, a shadow transnational power has also emerged, which some conspiracy theorists incorrectly call the backstage that rules the world.
  Of course, nobody rules the world - it somehow in itself is capable to exist and copes though the discontent with this existence is available, but also will be hard to chide this world in absent of a certain pleasantness.
  In particular, there is little joy for the majority in the fact that for the most part the people have been getting poorer recently, unlike the oligarchs, who are getting all richer.
  These crooks still manage to quietly fill their pockets with the help of transnational networks to indecent - trillionth - limits: from the mafia to the financial tycoons, who have risen over the past few decades thanks to financial bubbles.
  But the world does not stand still, and the time of these mostly intelligent scoundrels is already ending not only because of the impossibility to further inflate financial bubbles, not only because of the cessation of growth in consumer demand, but, first of all, due to an increase in the number of erroneous decisions made by managers on the basis of secondary manifestations of reality, while the main turning points remain hidden.
  Similar behavior is characteristic of all complex systems.
  In the concentrated look the researcher of this problem J. Forrester in the framework of large cities estimates it as follows: "In such situation when casual symptoms are accepted as the reasons, the person directs the efforts to elimination of symptoms, but thus the true reasons remain unaffected. Such action is inefficient, or it leads to situation deterioration" [4, p. 118-125].
  In the situation of information collapse, there is no time correctly to determine the causes of deteriorating system behavior, and random symptoms are taken for them.
  And the fact that the information collapse for civilization has already begun is evidenced by the avalanche-like growth of information flows, in connection with this, the number of errors leading to one or another crisis situation began to increase, the number of which also grows with the growing aggravating consequences of their inadequate resolution, and the existence of such complex and multi-level system as civilization in its former form becomes problematic.
  The true causes of the changes, as shown by J. Forrester, are difficult, and often impossible to identify for complex systems, and for such an extremely complex system like civilization, such changes are unlikely to end peacefully due to the real impossibility of an adequate and full processing of the avalanche-like information flow by the human brain, with which the brains of managers can no longer cope physically in the course the accelerating current time of flickering events, especially since the main decisions must be creative, that is, turning-new, to which, alas, arbitrarily powerful artificial intelligence cannot point out, since it is limited by programs of formal-logical content that are introduced into it by the same people.
  Therefore, inevitably there comes a moment when the main centers of civilization cease to cope with the avalanche-like flow of incoming information - the processing speed of information begins to lag behind its receipt.
  Naturally, the number of inadequate decisions is growing sharply, and some of them may well be fatal, that is, lead to an environmental disaster or war that will destroy all the achievements of civilization.
  Is it necessary to look for those responsible for this course of events?
  It is impossible to stop the growth of information flows in the conditions of technological civilization with its inventive itch, as well as to remove the creative component from the human mind that produces such technical innovations, with the consequences of use which the organizing and managing centers of civilization are no longer able to cope.
   Everything is going as it should, and cannot go any other way. Then there will be nothing at all. Does anyone even need this? In addition to the beingness, given to us, which many may not like, and nothingness (unmanifested infinity), from which there is no obvious news, there is nothing more. Beingness is being built on development, but in reality development cannot be continuous. Interruptions and updating of the current events are required, which, incidentally, regularly occurs both in nature and in technology.
  As for the state management, the parasitic nature of power cannot be changed due to the features of the contingent aspiring to power shown above, which, in part, was noted by Plato. Only idealists and socialists hope to change this nature.
  Therefore, it makes sense to go about their business, not forgetting, however, every day about the fight against these parasites. Otherwise, they will finally hook everybody and take all remnant away, because they don"t know the edge and don"t think about the fact that they chop the branch on which they sit.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Plato. Complete works. Republic. Book VIII. Hackett Publishing Company. 1997.
  2. Nizovtsev Y. M. The driving force and source of development of the person and his communities. 2018. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  3. Nizovtsev Y. M. It's the other way around. Answers to tricky questions about interesting things (Collection). What to do to us with the officials? 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  4. Jay Forrester. Dynamics of development of the city. M. "Progress". 1974, p. 118-125.
  
 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список
Сайт - "Художники" .. || .. Доска об'явлений "Книги"