Tradition against communism. Explanation of the defeat

WHERE DID “TAKE AND SHARE” COME FROM”

All traditional families have many children. Orthodox fathers could not pass on the same inheritance to all their sons. In Europe, the father passed the inheritance to the eldest son. This inheritance transfer to the eldest son in the family was called a majorat.

The younger children were forced to find their luck. The younger sons went to the city. They created dynasties of urban artisans. All urban burghers – this is all once deprived of the inheritance of their grandfather’s younger sons. Of course, dynasties were created for more than one year. All people grow up, grow old; the moment comes when the younger sons self must pass on the inheritance as fathers. That is, the moment comes when the fathers of the city burghers themselves became stewards of their property. And again, the inheritance was transferred, as it was once in the native village. But it was not so oppressive in the city, not so abrupt. The bourgeoisie has always had opportunities to soften the old mores. Therefore, in the city, the discontent of the younger sons and indignation occurred gently. Younger sons mixed with older sons, and inheritance became a formal action.

Of course, by tradition, the privileges of the elders were formally preserved. But the older ones might be idiots. However, it was always the younger, frivolous sons. Because their parents spoiled them, it is impossible to transfer the property that was acquired by many works of the father and maybe several generations of ancestors to a stupid heir. This can’t be happening. But no one, no father, ever thought of sharing the inheritance equally. This would violate paternal ethics. For traditional people, hierarchy is important in any form. Otherwise, according to its elite (Zerots) will ensure chaos. But where and in what place could the idea arise-to take and divide all the property?

There are places and societies where no one likes the rights of the eldest sons. Such a mood and resentment were always in the younger sons’ minds! The traditional world itself is rebelling in the face of younger sons, and slaves can also be sons and peasants, pirates, bandits, raiders, and even proletarians. Not all rebellious workers are the youngest in their families, but all” proletarians have nothing to lose but chains.” All the rebellious in the world of tradition and the whole world of mankind lived in a hierarchy, among the injustices and exploitation of the weak by the strong, but all the rebels rose against injustice, against hierarchy, against the order established by the elite. The traditional elite is a common father for all. The comparison of the discontent of the younger son, of all the younger sons, with the despair of all the slaves of the world is somewhat strange. But you can’t start a family without a material base! And for what should all the oppressed in the world rebel?

For human rights, for justice? The poets invented this justice for the philosophers of the New time. All traditional people are outraged if they cannot repeat the path of their ancestors, the path of their fathers. For this, they must break the system if the system does not allow them to have children. For what then should they live? Who needs then it’s a dog’s life? That’s why the “take and share” appeared not in the primitive socialists of the people but within the people themselves, which can not, if deprived of the opportunity, repeat the path of their ancestors. There is no tradition, and there is no popular sense. Take and share appeared in the crater of tradition. It was those people who were deprived of their conditional inheritance who raised their fiery lava of protest. Who is there again before your eyes?

Traditional people are Zerefs. Yes, Sharikov’s new Communist looks as stupid as the former dog at first glance. But weren’t all the world’s slave-like dogs for the exploiting elite? You cannot compare all the poor and deprived of the world with the fool and upstart Sharikov. But all the unfortunate people before Sharikov and after Scharikov thought exactly like a Communist Sharikov-take and divide. And Sharikov is a former dog based on Bulgakov’s novel. Previously, there was no teaching of scientific communism. Karl Marx was neither. There was no one to tell the great Spartacus and his slave companions that their cause was that of the doomed. Slaves could still beat the Romans. They could break out of a Roman prison or a Roman Empire. But no more. Then the slaves would create their state. And this state would be paternal again. That is, there would be their tribal fathers. All the fathers have their own older and younger sons. There would be favorites, but also outcasts.

Hundreds of thousands of slaves of capitalism will begin to storm the proletarian sky in many, many centuries. And what are we going to do with them? Don’t look at all the suffering slaves with perfect eyes. Not all slaves are saints, and not all are unhappy. They will take and divide all the property of the “father”, as they think according to scientific communism, but in fact, as their fathers divided them.

But what will happen in the end? It is necessary to look not only at the source of the mountain river but also at the swamp of the Delta. Like all traditional people before and after them, they will create a society of new paternal ethics where there will be their rulers- the red elite, and they’re oppressed with red faces from indignation. Some will have privileges, and others will work for them. And their grandchildren, that is, the privileged third generation, will receive the inheritance bequeathed by their fathers bosses-the property of the entire state of the USSR. Where there is tradition, there is always repetition. That’s why all the revolutionaries and slaves are disenfranchised in our country as conditional younger sons.

TURGENEV’S FATHERS AND CHILDREN

In the 60s of the XIX century, Turgenev’s novel “Fathers and children” was published in Russia. The novel became popular. It was popular among Russian liberals, and in Soviet times it was included in the school curriculum. This work is well shown the contradiction between generations.

In fact, Russia was expected to reform in 1861. Russia lagged the West and therefore lost the Crimean war. The Tsar abolished serfdom. Young people raised in the spirit of progressivism, nihilism, and socialism began to resist the conservative fathers. Old people always gravitate to the old ways. In the world of the glorious past, it is customary not only for the Zerots (feudal elite) but for all people of middle and above middle age to live comfortably and well.

Young people are not interested in their past life, its rules, and customs. The old morals are like fences for keeping cattle, and the laws are like the enclosure of a circus cage, in which young people walk like wolves from corner to corner. The young must always make themselves known to prove to the old generation that they are better than their fathers. They are not interested in life according to the laws of their fathers. We are not talking about the self-realization of the social bottom. There everything is obvious: home, food, rest, and offspring. Only the rich people can afford to self as “to save the world”. Or destroy it to create a new, better, brighter life. This is how our Remids 2 come into conflict with their fathers. And Remids 3 or the third generation of urbanized citizens just have to do it. Something is not born out of anything but comes out of a dream. They are Zerefs, and the traditional people have no time to dream. The burghers of Zeremids also do not have enough time. They have a lot to do in the stores. They need to buy and sell goods.

Remids against Remids.

The ability to sell or buy has always been popular among the townspeople. The burghers loved money because they were always short of it. It was the bourgeois who later became the most grown rich of the peasants. Burghers, as well as peasants, wish their children a good, rich future. In Russia, small nobles fell ill with liberalism or bourgeois diseases. Small nobles were also ruined. They also became almost bourgeois. Although they always remembered belonging to a noble family. Of course, they also got sick of feudal. It is difficult to live in a feudal society. The noble looks at the rootless man with arrogance. The rich bourgeois despises beggars on the street. Even a poor nobleman knows that he is superior to any bourgeois. That’s why many people have become ill with democracy. This disease was also transmitted to young people. So young people went against their fathers. The liberal currents matured in parallel with the socialist ones. All these contradictions, the struggle of fathers and children or the struggle of generations, will result in the great Russian Revolution in half a century. It is necessary to carefully look here only who will be against whom.

Let’s consider the left-center of the Russian Revolution and its representatives-the cadets (constitutional Democrats)

Milyukov P. N.

His Father was Nikolai Pavlovich Milyukov (1826—1878 / 79), an architect who came from a noble family. The leader of the cadets, P. N. Milyukov, gave private lessons as a student after the death of his father to provide for his family. He was left at the University to prepare for a professorship.

Muromtsev S. A.

Father-Andrey Alekseevich Muromtsev 1818 -1879, Colonel, the officer of the lifeguards of the Moscow regiment, then commander of the 2nd Grenadier reserve regiment, landowner Muromtsev Jr. in 1884 was dismissed from the university for political unreliability. He came from a noble family. He was recorded in the noble genealogical books of the Tula and Vladimir provinces. And why? His contemporaries write about him: “an Honest and morally scrupulous man, Muromtsev always carefully studied the case materials. And if he had any doubts about the authenticity of the documents, he usually refused to defend himself, although he was offered a large reward.” Here is a man who is improving his reflection. (this is a super person for Revcon).

Kokoshkin F. F:

From an ancient noble family, whose ancestor, according to legend, was Duke. His grandfather is a famous playwright. The father, Fyodor, the court counselor, Commissioner for peasant Affairs in the Hilltown of Lublin province, an official for special assignments at the Ministry of national education, a connoisseur of literature and art, and most importantly – a simple genial and warmhearted never display your intellectual superiority, so usually the people of his caliber. Another characteristic of him: “when he was ill with tuberculosis, he endured his illness extremely cheerfully. He could protect his health so that others did not notice it, was always cheerful and worked much more than the average healthy person as if rushing to do as much as possible in the short period of life allotted to him by fate.” These are people who are playing with their fate. A plate of soup is not enough for them. Revcon is sure that such people will not betray their ideals because of sausage. Because only the bourgeoisie loses their ideals for the sausage. They will not indulge in pleasures, gluttony, and perversions. These are great examples for their sons. Therefore, the Remids 3 would be their moral copy. The Apple doesn’t fall far from the tree…

Now consider the radical tilt of the victorious revolutionaries.

Lenin, V. I.

Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov was born in the family of Ilya Nikolaevich Ulyanov, an inspector of public schools in the Simbirsk province, the son of a former serf of the village (Zeremid).

Trotsky LD.

Leyba Bronstein is from the family of a rich landowner-landlord from among the Jewish colonists of the Kherson province.

Stalin I. V.

Father-Vissarion (Beso) came from the peasants of Didi-Lilo village, Tiflis province, by profession – a shoemaker (Zeref). Prone to drunkenness and fits of rage, he severely beat the mother of little Soso. When Soso was eleven years old, Vissarion “died in a drunken brawl – someone stabbed him with a knife.” By then, Soso himself was spending a lot of time in the street company of Gori’s young hooligans.

Of course, it is obvious that Lenin and Trotsky (Remides 2) came into conflict directly and indirectly with their fathers. Stalin (Zeref) did not come into conflict with anyone. In reflection, he remained like a domineering father. Methodology Revcon of remedy 2 – Lenin and Trotsky, along with other revolutionaries’ victory over the liberal democratic current, over Remids in the third generation, then lost the political arena to Zeremids or children of children of the petty bourgeoisie (cooks and cobblers). It should be said that representatives of the people-zerefs-will do not steal in a state of strict control of the Russian community, although their Zeref reflexes are always strongly expressed in their blood. When the community’s morals are strong, thieves, traitors, and rats will be dealt with briefly and harshly. The feudal community severely punishes thieves. But when the Zerefs break away from the community, break away from the people, they first get small and low burghers, then thieving officials, if the revolution raises them to the administration. The heroes of Turgenev’s novel “nihilists” in the person of Bazarov turn into Narodniks, terrorists, and anarchists.

But where did the impudent privatizers, who do not recognize any boundaries of decency, come from in the USSR?

The second “people’s” generation or Remids 2 from the Zeremids (from the” rotten intelligentsia”) blindly copy the experience of their ancestors-to steal and run away, but also hypocritically obey the Charter of the Communists (the Russian community). Peacetime, a time of loosening discipline – a good time to mature from Remids 2 future hypocrites. Remids 2, if there is no war and discipline falls – this is half of today and half of yesterday’s state. Are there any super people among them? Sure. When the community’s morals are alive, reprisals are near and imminent, for example, in the Second World war. The people performed feats. The sons of peoples-Zerefs died as heroes-honor and praise to them! Eternal memory them of all descendants. But at this very time, the people’s officials of the USSR are growing up children pioneers. Later, they will become Komsomol members and want Russian liberalism and democracy.

The Remids all are the real socialists (Remeds 2). They are strong Komsomol members and ardent activists. They are” a worthy change of fathers.” But we already know who comes to take ready-made; these are lying fanatics. These are hypocritical activists. These are hypocritical performers of the Communist rite. These are the Pharisees. This is performing the rite when there is no war and discipline falls and corrupts them. They don’t feel the tension of their fathers’ time. This is a new revolt of sons against fathers. So, they are ready-made liberals and disgusting hypocrites.

The fall of the USSR is not connected with a plot by American intelligence. This is not the result of low world prices for Soviet oil. The USSR raised its reformers, as the Jewish Sanhedrin raised its Pharisees. All young nihilists do not deny the revolution but deny the stifling religious rites, and it is difficult for them to squeeze out postures and screams. Of course, all hypocrites had to go through the school of hypocrisy. Then the whole system becomes corrupt and consists of hypocrites.

Well-off people (Soviet Remids 3) did not break themselves, and they had wanted to live beautifully, openly, and not according to the code of communism. They hated the discipline of the Russian community in any form. All the bourgeois of the world has one face. Traditional fathers Zerefs always will their children and grandchildren a good livelihood. In this sense, the revolutionary discipline also hindered the fathers. But their children did not see the revolution, all Remids 2 and 3 haven’t seen the revolution, but they knew that it was. It is impossible to transfer the tension of the revolution to a full and free repose. They wanted to get rid of even the memory of the revolution. They did not recognize socialism, nor did they recognize revolutionary equality.

Furthermore, they wanted to show their superiority. This superiority was in their blood. Their fathers passed this superiority and humiliation down this superiority and humiliation in the traditional genes.

The new Russian Democrats were not against their fathers, which is not the case with all traditional peoples. It is not customary for people of the people to contradict their fathers. In this case, prosperity and a secure future are more important for all traditional people. Even if they had to turn into revolutionaries and kill nobles, now they were red nobles themselves. They became the red bureaucrats in the Soviet community. Why do they need this revolution and red rites? Zerefs will never mind the luck of their children. They chose the side of the revolution to remove the nobles as competitors. And the children of the Zeremids (collective farmers) of Remid 2, their sons, chose the side of their luck-rites, performed them hypocritically; thus, the grandchildren of the Zerefs refused socialism altogether.

Modern conflict.

Suppose children and grandchildren have become radical bourgeois. The parents of privatizers may still miss the Communist idea. This is the time of their youth. They know what treachery is. Any community does not forgive betrayal. To make pensioners feel less sad, the authorities of Russian democracy create the red party freak. And look at the leader of this party. He is also a freak; he is a provincial and was born in the village of Mymrino. He seemed like a Remid statesman, but he is an elite first generation.

Furthermore, he is the real Zeremid. He had become a freak in the status of a new communist leader. Zeremid, like all parvenu, still likes to break out upward. He grabbed the bird of fortune by the tail. Now he will not give this post of First Secretary of the Communist Party and member of the State Duma of Russia to anyone.

HOW HEROES STARTED STEALING

The second nomenclature tier did not appear anywhere, even if democratic elections were held. According to the rules of social evolution, all elected Democrats or newcomers began to play by the old rules of the game.

Communism, if it was communism, in any case, the new phenomenon of the Russian tradition can be called rather experiments or a return to prehistoric times using modern technology at that time. But in the culture of the people themselves, no communism could change anything. The man hasn’t changed. Russia changed so much that it created a new “communist” evolution of the Russian people, which became a parody of the interrupted evolution of the Russian nobles. Nothing has changed in the reflection of the people.

So, the party of Communists (VKPB, then CPSU) did not choose the best, honest and gifted, except when it was necessary to risk and die. They selected the obedient and disciplined. In the Russian tradition, this is the norm. It was not very profitable to be a Communist during the war if you can say so at all. It was possible not to return from the battle, die. It means to stop the tradition. And according to tradition, they need to build a house and raise their sons. What happened? What in VKPB began to accept not heroes but bulls of producers? Not violent heifers, but calm, easy-going, if you can talk about bulls in general. The heroes of all times could be attributed to the people of the idea. This is indisputable. Because they risk not fulfilling their covenants, they do not perform rites.