 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
"Foundation myths"
or (more correctly)
"State of the world"
The foundation myth, the history... and there should be some ethology as well. For I would repeat that a human being is a biological object, and it has already been proved that the behavior laws of any social animals could be applied to them too. These laws are well applied to a folk, a «herd», a group of individuals. By the way I think it’s perfectly understood by any ‘polite-technologist’ (the most disgusting people I think), publicity agent or a trailer (an advertising films) creator.
The reason of it is many general fears, wishes - the instincts. They were developed in course of the species evolution, and thus they are mainly very archaic, not mind-controlled. Being something «eternal» (in general understanding) they are very strong. Quite often they could be self -introducing and self-deepening. It’s known that one hysteric person would be enough to make all the crowd hysterical too, without any individual differences.
But the evolutionary mainstream is mind developing, developing of any individual, person. So the goal is to combine individual needs with those of society. It’s hard; though it had been tried out for many times it has never been achieved yet. So two main ways exist to do it. Since Middle Ages Russia always was inclined to the overcentralisation as a optimal way to it.
The Russian history has a perfect example of it. In the Middle Ages in the North-West of Russia (that time there were neither Russian Federation, nor even Russian Empire. There were only Kiev Rus first and Moscow empire later) there was a city-republic Novgorod. That was a reach tradesmen’s city.
That ancient time it was very special place. Due to its favourable for the trade activity position (it was on the board of a river network connecting it with both the North and the South - on the so called «way from the Vryags(=Vikings) to the Greeks»), so due to this it was connected with all the Western countries. (it played a role of St. Petersburg, which did not exist that time) Hence most of its inhabitants were various tradesmen. This city was even included into European Hanza.
Development of various trade relations needed people literacy - and - what a miracle for the Middle ages Europe! - about 100% of people was literate. Including women - this was just unique! They was writing each other thousands letters on the birch rind - beresta. These letters avoided decaying and 50 years ago the first one was found. Since that time a lot of these letters were found; some of them were not real letters, but just notes, lists of trades, children drawings even, - and this is especially touching.
But the city social state was republic. Any city citizen could take part in the decision making process. (Well, I’m ready to suppose there were a lot of various «underwater streams» ect. but I know nothing about it. All the most important decisions were accepted on «Veche» - an all-people meeting.... However since the population rate was about 14000 people I can’t imagine it.)
The city was not conquered by the tartar troops - the Golden Horde. It seems to happened due to the city remoteness together with surrounding swamps and forests. So for a while it was the only island of «pure Russia». It experienced no tatar influence. And it was very reach.
After the tatar military occupation had been defeated by the Moskovits and it was over (and that made Moscow heading all the released Russian lands) the Moscow princes (knyazes) started looking to reach and freespirited Novgorod. So finally it was conquered by Ivan the Terrible. Although the battle was cruel, the first republic was weaker than fresh autocratic state.
And i think it’s quite common. Any democratic state is weaker newly-made autocracy. That is because any state consists of its inhabitants. And in an autocratic one they are all united and inspired by an idea (a false idea it’s usually, but in the beginning (in course of 1-2 generations) it’s very strong one). But any republic consists of many individuals - and thus it’s initially weaker an autocracy, because they are never united in a united organism, they are too individual for it. Later on the autocracy starts decaying - at least I suppose so, but I’m still waiting in vain the Oriental countries like the Saudi Arabia would start doing it. May be they have already done - I just know nothing about it.
That should happen because in an autocratic state a SUPERdominant (the leader) introduce a policy of preventing any rivalry to come across its will. Usually it’s done trough military power - and all the people around get too scared to protest.. However this SUPER-dominant would not be able to implement all the state functions himself. Thus he forms around him-self a crowd of by many various subdominants, it’s done by providing the useful subdominates by a lot of privileges. That helps him to keep control over them.
Usually these «first-order subdominants» are not much younger the leader, since he doesn’t want any new young leaders to appear among them. This is a chain process, so almost no new younger people would appear, a younger people from outside. Any of appearing people are of course children and other relatives of the ruling elite, but they are too closely bound by their elite relatives position and benefits. They are scared to loose them and are starting feeling them-selves stronger than «common people».
But the main problem of these people is their age. This is their invincible enemy. Unfortunately in course of one-two generations all the ruling elite is turning into «heronthocracy», able for nothing.
At the same time they are continuing convincing people that this people is great and would win any enemy. That the country is unique and great but it is surrounded by enemies and the head (or some heads, but it’s seldom) is the only person to save it. Thus after all people get convinced and start believing it.
This belief replaces any doubts and problems, that the people has a lot. Usually there is a psychological effect of substitution. The strong belief replaces even the fear. The more people get scared, the more they believe. An ideal way in such a situation is an eternal enemy inventing for he would accept all the crowd fears and aggression - but either an inactive enemy that should be, or the one strong enough to avoid direct battle.
Now it’s going on in Northern Korea. They all are worshiping their «Great Leader». Never the less there are always some news about people escaping to the South Korean embassy.
So all the said above could have only one conclusion. Any quick democracy development is possible only after the state mechanism complete breaking and reconstruction. There is a theory that it could happen in a natural way - but that would take centuries of time, a period that we are not currently possessing.
By the way these hidden and substituted people fears and aggression are often resulting in terrorism as a gesture of despair. «Nobody would hear me! So i’d MAKE you hearing me!»
But the ideas of the «Great Country» are taught to children and thus they would be learned «by hard» since childhood. The most of people would never bother them-selves with any «understanding», «analyzing» of their behavior reasons - and I’m saying nothing about «high policy». They would just act as they were taught, as they are used too.
So unfortunately currently there is only one power that is able to make this «pattern-transfer» - the USA. One may dislike their way of action or Bush personally but unfortunately this is the only power now able to act. I think that the best decision would be (and it has appeared recently, the tsunami helped it to appear) , so the only way is to create a large interstate organization - a council, or so and to unite the world in the whole. The United Nations organization was supposed to become such an organization, but... due to its size it suffered the effect of extraburaucrating and has become almost helpless.
Several Russian philosophers and scientists (I think they were to be Russians because they were talented by no doubts and had no other exit of their capacities except the eternal theories creating. That was actually the main reason of Russian genius appearing - the state pressed them so hard that they could not help being eternal geniuses :-), so such a famous scientist as Vernadsky has developed a theory of noosphere - a human society as an active operating power. That power developed from being earlier almost insignificant to a power of the geology range, the one that influences the whole world.
Vernadsky is no doubt worth reading, as well as Gumilev, Dolnik, Khailov, Berdyaev et al. - and (back to the written above) they all are from Russia.
So i would conclude it again. The democracy is the best way we know for now (ref. Churchill), it is hardly expected to be born from inside (or at least it would take too long). Since the UNO is not able to implement its functions and the USA is the only power that is strong enough now to act - then let it do it. Unfortunately they are rushing in too much, any military way could be avoided if they would pay more attention to the personal people psychology (like in former time the CIS had to act against the USSR - but they just feared to attack it directly. They succeeded but it took 40 years. I think new methods could be developed nowadays). No doubt the military way is awful, but the ruling elite would never give up with no efforts.
Another danger is that the USA, being a single strong power would forget about other people freedom. Any power tends doing it. But the only safety device against this case is a civil society. It seems me that in the USA this device is well-developed. Unlike Russia.
The main contradictions between Europe and the USA are perfectly described in Oscar Wilde’s «the Kentervill ghost». The Ottis family seems very funny, sometimes rude and impossible, but that was an American Ottis girl, who saved the poor old man (the ghost).
I’m far from idealizing Americans, but it seems the only power now.
When speaking about Israel - they do have idea of the Promised Land. That idea was being strong for ages, for thousands years - a lot of time ago they were all pushed away from there homeland. They knocked about all the world and were always everywhere suffering many offenses. After the Second Wold War they have finally got their home back. No wonder they are ready to turn it into garden. By the way some of Israelites don’t like George Bush as well - but that is so because Bush doesn’t allow Sharon to break off with Arabs. Israel was lucky to have such a titanic person as Ben Gurion was as a first prime minister.
And despite the local corruption is rather strong too,- this great idea (together with constant danger probably) helps them to overcome it somehow.