Alina Vituhnovskaya, writer
Someone is already conducting polls - "What can and cannot do" a "good person" during the period of dictatorship. "Lord," why do you need this? To be a "good person", to portray him, as is customary here, is a direct path to become a neurotic. "Mechanical orange" - tough, but that's about it. The subject wants to be identical with himself. It never occurred to me in my life to be good. However, an interesting fact is that “good people” and people who pay for the services of psychologists are often the same people. Is it because they are being treated for neuroses received on the path of striving for the "ideal"?
Adapted Kantianism and other non-resistance to evil by violence and created the basis for a dictatorship. "Good people" with book ideas against unscrupulous security officers and bandits. Who was to lose? Rhetorical. But even now the losers persist, replacing the struggle with ostentatious adherence to principles. I will say seditiously - in a political struggle it is impossible to follow exclusively moral norms, especially those that were outdated a couple of centuries ago.
As for the need for parental love, which they love to talk about here, I often observe how petty psychopaths, domestic tyrants, and infantile evil losers grow out of these "loving" ones. Which, as a rule, is strongly related to each other. Pathologically incapable of social success, they secretly pour their complexes on their relatives, behind closed doors, often until they bring them to the grave, starting, of course, with the “holy” forgiving mothers.
Just as polite people are the most evil people, because they can hardly endure their politeness, they nurture it for a very long time, so "often kind people", constantly emphasizing their morality in public, are distinguished by some kind of bestial cruelty. Which, due to lack of will, weakness of nature, cannot be shown directly. Their weapons are passive aggression or criminal laissez-faire, and they often collude for laissez-faire.
The pseudo-humanistic undermining of the understanding of the desire for power as a form of neurotic disorder is a profanation of psychology itself as a doctrine. Sometimes the desire for power is simply the desire for power. (Spoiler - not sometimes, but always). Exactly also psychology profanes the normal (!) Striving for a resource.
Let us recall this boring false dichotomy “to have or to be”. Fromm's conviction that some archetypal tyrants (spoilers - there are none) are trying to steal someone else's vitality also looks completely comical. But vitality is of no use to anyone. There is enough resource. You need energy. But energy is not equal to vitality.
In the meantime, the UK is formulating! Morgenstern "... promotes a parasitic lifestyle"! What a career they are making to this rapper! These forgotten Soviet formulations mean only one thing - the reds are returning to their roots. Citizens are slaves who have to give rent to the state. Dedicate your life to him.
I have long wanted to write that this is a violent dissolution in society from 8 to 8 (not about actors and singers, but there is a subtle hint that Morgenstern should live "like others") - this is real torture, samsaric hell, legalized by public opinion as a norm.
All things that I started after an hour ended badly (s). Truly. Both the brain and the body need a buildup, which is simply impossible for an ordinary working person. And so this somnambulistic Templar lives for years, having a dubious two-day rest, plunging into the delirium of Friday night.
Such work inevitably leads to dissolution, if not the loss of "I". Not to mention the fact that a person living in a survival mode (and this is how most Russians live) is not able to adequately analyze and respond to political processes. This is largely the answer to where protest activity has disappeared. The social person has shrunk down to the survivalist and has been replaced by him.
Brodsky, accused of parasitism, was also "caught" in "otherness." Be like everyone else! Get down, dissolve - this is the main systemic message. At my trial, the prosecutor also asked me: "Why didn't you work anywhere?" I replied: "I wrote poetry." This is how we unconsciously reproduced the dialogue that sounded in the trial of Brodsky. But then they only laughed at the prosecutor. The media scoffed at both the trial and the FSK-FSB with might and main.
The situation is different with Morgenstern. It is viewed not only as a laundering project, but also as a potential business competitor. After all, he was already unambiguously hinted - "give a share to the cops." Apparently, it seemed a little to the cops.
My book "The Civilization of Chaos" was just published, followed by the book by Anton Myrzin - "The Volume of Chaos", as the chief vizier of the Kremlin and concurrently psychonaut-visionary Vladislav Surkov issued a spell-text to the mountain called "Where did the chaos go? Unpacking stability ”- this crumpled stream of consciousness, written in the hope of wishful thinking.
It should immediately clarify the fact that logos, by its definition, is secondary with respect to chaos. Hence, any attempts to "speak", or to squeeze the phenomenon of chaos into the narrow framework of the observer's gaze from within, to outline them in a pale, crumbling small traditionalist meanings, ends in the same way - the victory of chaos. That is, the victory of the unpredictable, new, progressive.
As for Surkov's article itself. She surprises with careless eclecticism. The impression that it was written by several people under a certain ideological order, abstractedly expressed in the following simple mantras: America is a source of destabilization and chaos, and Russia is a bulwark of stability.
And even about the Third Rome and the Third International - these are all old Eurasian Dugin tales that sound in 2021 as strange and ridiculous as the horror stories of the drunken Alexander Gelich about terrible jungle cats.
In general, if we consider this message to the void as an ideological manifesto, then we can say one thing - a shame, a complete shame! This is a fiasco of the ideology of the "Russian" world. Finita la comedy.