Posted 17 марта, 09:52
Published 17 марта, 09:52
Modified 17 марта, 10:40
Updated 17 марта, 10:40
During the years of Perestroika, more than thirty years ago, an interesting discussion arose in the Soviet press about the reasons for the long-term slave state of minds in our country.
It was then that a loud, but essentially fascist idea was expressed about the "genetic memory" of the peoples inhabiting vast Russian spaces. The paradox is that so far this idea has enjoyed unwavering success, and, most surprisingly, in both camps, both in the "liberal" and in the "patriotic". Arguing about bad (good) genes continues to this day. An example of this is the post of the famous Russian political scientist Sergei Shelin, who proposed to finally solve this problem:
"About genetic memory. The expression "it's in their genetic memory" is found at every step in all Russian arguments, both official and anti-official. "To love the authorities selflessly is written down in the genetic memory of Russians" - so they say on both sides, only some with praise, and others with reproach. And this is not for nothing. Intuitive denial of the rules of genetics, original Lamarckism and the belief that acquired traits are inherited are an integral part of the Russian spiritual tradition. The belief that the children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of a lackey will be born lackeys. This is how all the great ones looked at reality - Timiryazev and Michurin, Stalin and Lysenko. Anyone who reveals the connection of this belief in "genetic memory" with other basic features of Russian civilization will understand a lot about this civilization..."
It is noteworthy that the audience immediately divided into two camps. Some said that "yes", Russian slavery is inherited genetically, although not directly, but indirectly.
"The fact that some predispositions are transmitted to us by genes is obvious. Genes determine, say, our endocrine system with genetically predetermined hormonal balance regulators, which has a huge impact on brain development. For example, in a family of two academic branches, it is unlikely that an impenetrable bully with a mountain of muscles will appear, who will inspire fear with his aggressive behavior.
But the qualities still need to manifest. Dog breeders know this well. A new breed is created somewhere in 200 years of breeding. During this time, dogs acquire the necessary skills that are transmitted, naturally, genetically, because there is no other way. This does not mean that a shepherd puppy will start herding sheep right from birth, but it will be much easier to cultivate the necessary skills in him than in a dog of, say, a fighting breed. Which are selected, let's say, also in a way that is very far from humane. Society, that is, education, shows these skills. But they are originally laid down genetically, but they may not even manifest themselves once during their lifetime..."
However, most still tend to believe that Russian slavery is simply brought up from the cradle, and even earlier, as, for example, Alexey Chudochkin thinks: "A child already has a brain working at 7 months of pregnancy. He hears. And already learn from his mother. For example, to be afraid when the mother is afraid. That is, at least 2 months before giving birth, the child is "brought up" by his biological mother."
Len Volchek, an American resident, is confident in the work of the psychoanalytic category - the collective unconscious:
"I would not forget about the collective unconscious of Carl Gustav Jung. It works and how else! Fear is inserted into the baby in the womb.
They foolishly call it "genetic memory", and this is a colossal layer of the soul substance of the inhabitants of Russia.
I remember well how after arriving in the USA to work, I was afraid of American cops for a whole year until I realized that they were from a different test..."
The expression "genetic memory", in the opinion of many, is simply often used in a figurative sense, for the sake of a red word. Like, "it's ingrained in our flesh and blood." That is, the concept of "genes" is used here purely poetically, and the tendency to slavery lies in the unconscious sphere. In deep unconscious memory. And this is by no means an eternal curse, it can be changed if you only want to.
Part of the way of life, habits, mentality. A necessary component of rashism, by the way..."
Analyst Pavel Venediktov explains how the mechanism of this "memory" works:
"Firstly, culture is inherited. Not genetically, of course, but transmitted through education from generation to generation. Secondly, the brain and culture (in the broadest sense, as the transmission of patterns of behavior) have evolved together. Successful transfer of experience from generation to generation required brain changes, i.e. mutations in the brain that contributed to the successful transfer of culture to the next generation increased survival. Thus, it was not culture that was inherited, but the ability to assimilate it. And it was the development of this ability that caused the increase in brain volume that occurred about 2 million years ago..."
Pavel Vishnyakov agrees with him:
"Behavioral social memory is also inherited, but not through genes, but through rituals, parenting practices, myth-making, and even through threats to the legal system. "Genes" and "cultural code" are images designed to justify their "scientific nature", and in this case are used to reflect possible generational determinism. Social genes are probably an interesting topic for humanitarian, political science research."
Sergey Filippov described this mechanism using a concrete example:
"Fear is transmitted from father to son not genetically, of course, but by conversations, upbringing, memory. I know it firsthand, but from the history of my own family. All his long life, his father continued to be afraid, although when his grandfather was repressed, he was only 8 years old. And until his death, and he lived almost to 92, it did not go away. I'm not sure that this fear has completely gone away from me..."
Sociologist Olga Krokinskaya summed up the peculiar outcome of this discussion, trying to reconcile the two positions by resorting to new scientific data:
"In essence, we will have to master the concept of genetic and cultural coevolution, which has already been mastered by European culture at the textbook level. Two information streams - biological and socio-cultural heredity, unrelated, but linked to each other, going in correlation. The metaphor "genetic memory" grasps this connection at the level of observations of common sense, but interprets it so simplistically that it results in ignorance and obscurantism such as "fear has entered the genes of Soviet people", and this already means that nothing can be done with us sick people. For "genetic memory"..."