On the Crisis of Authorities in the Post-Soviet Space

On the Crisis of Authorities in the Post-Soviet Space

5 September, 13:52
Алина Витухновская
The more a person suffers, the less he is capable of sympathy, psychophysiology claims, refuting the sugary conclusions of Russian literature.

Alina Viitukhnovskaya, writer

Religious consciousness, like the profane-humanistic one, which has departed not far from it, considers being as an a priori good. And this shows not only cunning, but also a certain cynicism. And a whole anti-subject management system, when the interests and goals of the individual are considered as secondary, which can be easily sacrificed for the sake of the common good (abstract "being in general", "life in general").

It would be much more correct and even more honest to consider being as a problem, the negative costs of which must be minimized. What does Civilization do. Unlike culture and even philosophy. Moreover, Russian. This is clearly demonstrated by the attempt at conservative revenge, which is being carried out now. When culture and philosophy dressed up as traditional values try to challenge civilization. It is impossible to defeat Civilization. It's like eating time.

To this remark of mine, the poet Lev Kolbachev remarked:

“That moment when your own point was explained better than you.

*Living* tradition is part of civilizational development. Which * contributes to this development *. If she interferes with him, this is not a tradition. This is a carrion dressed in other people's clothes.

There seems to be a paradox here: it seems like civilization is an unrestrained movement forward, and tradition is a rejection of movement. But really no.

Tradition is a flywheel. such a heavy piece, usually cast iron, which spins, either accumulating or releasing kinetic energy. Stabilizing the system.

Only in the penultimate phrase - the key is not "stabilizing", but "work". What the mummers are trying to present to us under “tradition” is the rituals and masses of crazy cargo cultists around a flywheel mounted on a pedestal, removed from the car (the car, of course, rusts in the bushes and does not produce anything). There is stability, there is no work.

But in the role of this very idol, the flywheel, of course, is decorated with feathers, shells, quotations and sayings are hollowed out on it and doused with the blood of sacrificial lambs. That is, they will lead to a completely non-working state.

But since the products of the machine (civilization, and *life itself*) are still needed, it will be launched without a flywheel. Or by tying some clumsy and unbalanced new age cobblestone or futurist-fantasy-stump instead of a flywheel. And it will not work in this mode for long, gradually losing nuts from vibration and plowing furrows on precise surfaces, and then it will fall apart with a stench and a roar.

We saw this at the beginning of the 20th century and at the end of the 20th century. Yes, that's exactly what it was. And to be honest, once again, purely humanly - reluctance.

Idiots, give me the flywheel! It must spin and produce *civilization* and *life*.”

Kolbachev drew attention to the fact that we have already seen all this at the beginning and end of the twentieth century. Therefore, the feeling of deja vu does not leave me. When a sovprostchel (a Soviet common man) feels something that seems inexpressible to him, he begins to quote those who seem to him to have expressed the inexpressible. Therefore, educated people cling to the futurists, like one propagandist - to Khlebnikov. ("Laughers"). In fact, the verse is hysterical. And the propagandist is hysterical. Hence Laughter, replacing Horror. And they cling to either Khlebnikov or Heidegger. Which, in turn, also does not express anything intelligible. Especially when translated into Russian. Especially in the 21st century. Idiots retain a special reverence for names. They think Heidegger is incredibly cool. In fact - so-so. There is nothing particularly interesting there, except for the fact of cooperation with the National Socialists in the bottom line. Book "fascism" has remained the deepest cultural shock of the neo-Soviet zombies.

Interestingly, in a society of broken hierarchies, people always lack solidity, while they call each other by their names, almost petulantly. Either they want to dive into infantilism, or to unite in another narrow circle. Here they do not value distance and alienation - the essence of civilization, which, I repeat, is higher than culture, especially local.

A massive passion to "be good," to look good, especially at the expense of others. Since comparisons with the Germans are in the trend, I never noticed the desire of the Germans to show themselves to be beneficent. They are somehow organic, identical to themselves. In Russia, this organicity is absent in people. Total personality imbalance. Well, the fact that these “good” people either lie or lie is a proven fact a thousand times over. In Germany, on the contrary, you are always sure that no one will ever deceive you even for a penny. Infantile faith in good and evil as a marker of anti-subjectivity. They join “good” en masse, like a party, they hide behind it, while they are absolutely unaware of their subjective interests. In fact, they simply smear themselves in goodness, which is “not theirs”, “not for them”. They realize at the exit, after the lapse of years, they call “good” “evil”, and again in a circle. When they are surprised at the lack of empathy, they do not take into account that the more a person suffers, the less he is capable of sympathy, he simply does not have the strength, all the strength went to self-depleting reflection. This is psychophysiology. Which directly contradicts the sugary conclusions of Russian literature.

Against the backdrop of the crisis of pseudo-humanism, we are witnessing both a crisis of competence and a crisis of authority. From this point of view, the opinions of even such persons as the Pope cease to matter. Is it good or bad? OK good. Learn to think with your head. They often broadcast the opinions of pseudo-authorities who give “advice on survival”. Moreover, neither the status, nor the appearance, nor, moreover, the rhetoric of these people do not impress me. And I certainly would not want to follow their advice. This is an approach to people who are in the Russian Federation, as to forced and resigned preppers, which, in fact, is designed to lower their ambitions and social status in favor of the “newsletter”. In which it is written in black and white - "suffer and humble." As if only socialists are here. This is another game of social hierarchy at someone else's expense. 80 percent of the population do not know that they "survive". Disgusting snobbery veiled as humanism. And a wonderful gift of power.

Found a typo in the text? Select it and press ctrl + enter