Good fellows from the same box: is the difference between Biden and Trump really so big

While Trump's choice accelerates the ongoing processes of dehumanization, but this acceleration can play the role of a sobering slap in the face for supporters of the world of the individual.

Philosopher Dmitry Luchikhin detail disassembled in its publication interesting collision, the essence of which is that by and large there is no difference, the Americans would choose Trump or Biden - neither one nor the other is not able to radically solve the problems facing humanity:

“Well, the winner of the All-American competition has been identified with a high probability. Most of the stakeholder representatives regained consciousness and their thinking ability returned. Well, except for those who are very deeply entangled in their chosen web.

True, I must admit that the idea of Trump winning in this way, breaking the electoral college over the knee, seems to me bright and inspiring. But the chances are still not high.

The ability to look at the situation with sober eyes has returned to us. Let's do it.

And we will not have two heroes, but three. The contestants themselves and the world in which we live. The context, background and scenery in which the performance is taking place.

So, the world

If, even for a moment, get out of the momentary perception, it becomes clearly visible that for two or three decades, with the naked eye, we have been observing the confident movement of the world into a total fashio. Into the reality of revived collective values, opposed to the left-liberal ideology.

In the surface layer of endless controversy, a variety of, often quite sound arguments are used. But if you look closely and listen to the subtext, the understanding of which is carefully avoided by the preachers of the "new" ideological paradigm: conservatives, right-wing liberals, economic liberals, then the basis of the entire wide spectrum of so-called right-wing beliefs, without which they are concrete, becomes clearly distinguishable, and I repeat - often sensible positions on certain issues are simply impossible. Unrealizable.

Its essence is simple: “The left-liberal, humanistic ideology, which determined the evolution of the Euro-Atlantic world over the last century, has brought the world to a dead end. And the only way out of it is to return to the state of the world and its perception by consciousness, before the beginning of the evolutions of the 20th, and for the core of the Western world - and the 18-19th centuries, and go "the other way." But first, at least come back.

Of course, supporters of this position prefer not to recognize this fact not only in their statements, but also in their own minds. But psychologically they accepted him, they are ready, albeit with regret, to come to terms with the losses that he bears, for the sake of the main thing - to free the world from the "leftist hassle".

In this case, I do not consider this idea meaningfully, I do not evaluate it - I just state a fact.

But it is in this context that the “talent competition” to which our attention is drawn takes place. And in all honesty, none of the contestants is able to significantly influence, significantly slow down or, on the contrary, speed up the process. The meaning of personalities is exaggerated to the extreme in our eyes.

Biden

Biden is a typical Western establishment. In fact, this says everything. But we "that's all", of course, will consider in more detail.

As you, I hope, remember, the idea of a hierarchically organized society, 500 years ago, lost, or rather began to lose its psychological legitimacy. In other words, no matter how much we respect a certain outstanding individual living next to us, no matter how his status is normatively and legislatively approved, deep down we do not think that he can be better than us, and has some objective rights to "volunteering" us. And this is not a consequence of the cultivation of certain ideas, but, on the contrary, is the reason and objective basis, the very possibility of their appearance and attractiveness.

(In this sense, the only way to get rid of leftist ideas, not from certain interpretations and social construction based on such interpretations, but from the generating entity, is the total lobotomy of the entire population of the Earth. Flag in hand, and I'm for popcorn.)

But from that moment, a contradiction arises and begins to grow between the increase in the number and the degree of unwillingness to accept someone's patronage over an individual personality, and a complete inability, lack of skills and abilities for a different type of social organization. Our entire social reality is permeated with compromise options for resolving this conflict. From representative democracy instead of democracy, to the inviolability of state formations, instead of freely self-organizing and self-determining social clusters.

Therefore, after any revolutionary collapse, from the bourgeois revolutions of the 18-19 centuries, to the youth revolution of the 60s of the 20th century, the system of social organization self-organizes into the usual logic of society under the control of the elite.

Yes, every time it is more and more elite light. She does not reproduce herself (at least officially) on the basis of family and ancestry, calls herself servants and attendants. But it inevitably reproduces one of the main features of the elite status - she lives in a special world that is not connected with the reality of life. And no matter what humanistic principles its representatives are guided by, they look at those living in the real world as the inhabitants of the aquarium, or the characters of a virtual game.

And this is a much more important and significant sign of belonging to the ruling elite (establishment) than the presence of direct levers of power and control. That is, it is on this basis that the modern Western elite includes not only politicians and "well-born" families of politicians, but also other groups of social dependents - wealthy youth, representatives of the scientific world and the cultural elite. That is, people who move with their thoughts along ideologically verified routes are not hindered by any terrain.

This property of the elite's consciousness, to live in a special world, freed from the influence of the world of life, all history known to us leads to the same consequences. The ideological picture of the world formed by the elite, which has formed the elite, remains unchanged, regardless of any changes in real life. Including, the changes associated with the impact on the world of life of the ideological paradigm, approved by representatives of the elite itself. Those unpredictable, fundamentally new problems of the world of life that arise as a result of the implementation of the ideological paradigm are perceived as "temporary difficulties" that you just need to try to stop, wait, endure - but, of course, not revise the existing interpretation of ideological attitudes. And the frank inadequacy of the reaction of the establishment to the emerging and aggravating problems of the world of life is the main and, in fact, the only reason, both of the revolutionary catastrophes known to us, and of the current, increasingly negative attitude of the mass person to the liberal-humanistic ideology. In which the rejection of the inadequacy of the decisions of the ruling elite, inextricably merges with the rejection of liberalism in its foundations. It turns into a rejection of the very attitude to the priority of individual rights and freedoms.

Perhaps the most striking example of the inadequacy of the modern Euro-Atlantic establishment is Macron. At the level of grotesque and clownery. It is he - a follower of the most unbridled multiculturalism, which begins powerlessly stomping his feet at the first, completely predictable consequences of his utopian policy. It is he who, after Abkhazia and the Crimea, is promoting the idea of Europe to the Far East, and the most demonstratively shocked by Navalny's poisoning. He, who did not lift a finger (well, except for concern, of course) to stop the Karabakh conflict, and for some hell rushed to recognize its independence in front of Armenia itself. Macron, of course, is a fool. But typically, according to the logic of which all representatives of the Euro-Atlantic establishment are guided, and which, with the presence of an individual mind, can only be given the appearance of sanity, Biden is the same Macron. As, in fact, and Merkel and other Western politicians.

Trump

Trump is actually a representative of the upcoming trend of reviving collective values. American, not Russian, of course, who did not understand. Not so much even convinced as natural, “specific”. This explains all the pros and cons imputed to him. So, not being the bearer of the ideological establishment of the establishment, he sees reality directly. And therefore, he is able to react to problems, regardless of the discrepancy between their obvious way of resolving with ideological ideas. The tap is flowing - you have to close it. And the fact that this is not Feng Shui, and to hell with it.

He is truly a nouveau riche, a close relative of our backyard leaders. But we must not forget that this is not only, and even not so much the image of a gopnik, as the canonized image of a Russian merchant of the 19th century, the image of Lopakhin. Where, on the one hand, there is common sense and knowledge of the realities of life, and on the other - complete, absolute deafness to the specific problems of a person-personality. This is the type of consciousness for which individuality and personality merge indistinctly. For which personality is her specific choice of a tie, and not an open possibility of re-choosing. But let's not go that deep. The main thing I want to say is that the problem of the complex organization of motivations of a modern person is beyond Trump's perception. He simply does not understand and is not able to think of those inner necessities driving the modern human consciousness, which organize the problems of the modern world. Therefore, even locally adequate Trump decisions may (or may not) turn out to be dead-end. As with the same crane. “It flows - you need to weld the supply pipe. And you, bitch, how will you wash your face tomorrow? "

Not to mention that, the more successfully the process of "simplification" of political activity goes, the more problems caused by the disproportionality of "simple solutions" and the complexity of the problems they "solve" will appear among the solutions of the obvious incongruities of the policy of the atavistic form of idealism. The complexities of the motivational sphere of consciousness of the modern individual.

What does each choice give us?

Biden's choice obviously leads to the strengthening of anti-liberal sentiments in society and the acceleration of the fascization of the world. But he also gives us a little respite, another illusory opportunity to have time to think, change liberal logic and rhetoric. Adjust it to the current reality.

Trump - and by this, at least a little, but accelerates the ongoing processes of dehumanization. But this acceleration can play the role of a sobering slap in the face for the supporters of the world of the individual. Sober them up before the ability to resist is completely lost.

Which is the best choice? - We will never know, because in reality we will live only one of them.

P. S.

There are two options to choose from: guaranteed soldering and not guaranteed, but issued in the same place.