Ukraine which we will lose

Online: {{ reading || 0 }}Read:{{ views || 1726 }}Comments:{{ comments || 0 }}    Rating:(1035)         

- Bomzhikh!

- From the murderer I hear!

It not street quarrel. It is the correspondence dialogue of two domestic inhabitants of heaven. The persons invested by the power and burdened by responsibility for our destiny.

In any other time the similar format of communication would cause laughter. Today gives rise to fear.

Whether it is necessary to say that the personal conflicts between dignitaries of such rank piece very dangerous. And that roots of mutual hostility of two high-put persons of not so political property, quite obviously. You can burst out laughing in a face to the one who will undertake to claim that race for power is a worthy reason for deadly hostility. Out of place told joke is capable to set by the ears two politicians where is more serious, than an exchange of a lethal compromising evidence. Noticed, with what humility Victor Andreevich how the jealous Christian, forgives the ideological opponents? Paid attention, with what art Yulia Vladimirovna how the true businessman, agrees with yesterday's enemies? But for each other these two made an exception. So their hostility - a subject of researches for psychologists, instead of for political scientists.

Squabble between persons on whom the destiny of people and the state future depends can entail how sad consequences, it is possible to be convinced on the example of the well-known quarrel more than centenary prescription.

In the fall of 1905, shortly before Russko's end - Japanese war, at the Mukden station the general Alexander Samsonov slapped a ringing face to the general Pavel Rennenkampf. Fieriness of the commander of the Cossack division was explainable: the connection headed by Samsonov, was crushed by Japanese from - for Rennenkampf's indecision, not risked to nominate the parts entrusted to it to help to Samsonov's Siberians. Two Russian generals I could and I had to judge a duel. But business fell apart after personal intervention of its imperial majesty. The sovereign Nikolay resolutely forbade duel.

As it became clear later, in vain. Nine years later two military leaders were necessary to be at war again shoulder to shoulder, this time against Germans.In August 1914 near a Prussian small village Tannenberg armies of Gindenburga and Lyudendorf attacked Samsonov's positions which Rennenkampf's army had to cover.

Historians claim that the German colonel Max Hoffman convincing the administration was one of the author of operation that, in case of attack to Samsonov, Rennenkampf for anything won't help it. Important detail: Hoffman was the military attache at a staff of Japanese army during war of 1904-1905 and was informed not only on details of the fiasco caused to Samsonov, but also on features of relationship of two generals, and also on ill-fated skirmish at the station of Mukden.

It happened exactly as the artful German shtabist predicted. During bloody four-day fight of army of Samsonov were totally crushed. By the approximate calculations, about 30? 000 the killed and wounded made, 90 000 were taken prisoner. The general from a cavalry made the decision to be shot. Rennenkampf to the aid of the offender didn't come. Though the German commanders were afraid of it. Hera Tannenberga Lyudendorf I admitted the memoirs: "Rennenkampf's damned ghost hung on North - the East as a menacing thundercloud. It should have pressed, and we would be broken".

Later Germans were accepted and to the second general. Rennenkampf's armies expelled from East Prussia. Losses of Russians made 60 thousand people. Later some historians undertook to claim that the successful coordinated approach of two Russian armies could lead not only to defeat of perfect armies of the Kaiser, but also is serious approach a victory in World War I. Defeat approached the empire end.

Soon after its crash the general Rennenkampf after cruel tortures in ChK was shot under Antonov's personal order - Ovseenko. The emperor worried ex-the citizen for four months.

So vast digression to old, our former general history can be, on my modest understanding, is justified. Our majestic the husband as show events of recent days, possess rich imagination. If correlated the past to the present, have a look to what lead unpardoned offenses as our general enemies can use this. And were frightened.

Otherwise we should be afraid. The eve of elections - time of seasonal fears. Any new parapolitical scandal generates new fear.No, business at all that streets of the domestic cities and rural lands, will captivate, parting forcibly each other, people hunters, pedophiles, Islamists - terrorists and unknown strains of flu. The fear is generated by putridity of system and the insolvency of the power which is baring at each new misfortune.

That costed by the state, not capable to provide itself with gauze bandages and regarding the IMF credits as the main anti-recessionary program? That costed by the power for which any arising problem is unsoluble?

It is possible to argue on character of epidemic and scales of its consequences, but the wretchedness of our medicine is indisputable. It is possible to doubt concerning moral shape of these or those VIP-persons, but that Ukraine turned long ago into real paradise for pedophiles - undoubtedly.

Undoubtedly and that for law enforcement agencies it wasn't news. But indicative fight against them, on surprising combination of circumstances, also has seasonal nature. Struggle with them, as, however, and with dishonest judges, local feudal lords of et cetera, extremely selectively.

That gives the grounds for very sad conclusions. Our leaders are hardly capable to bring an order. They are capable to settle only scores. So, our fears aren't groundless. Because, perhaps, for the first time in the contemporary history the overwhelming mass of voters doesn't wait from new presidential election of changes. Also doesn't pin on their results special hopes. In 1991 - the m the main object of expectations was Kravchuk, in
1994- m - Kuchma, in 1999 - m - the Frost, in 2004 - m - Yushchenko. Today anybody from anybody waits for nothing. Even about a choice smaller from the evils of the speech doesn't go. Everyone will angrily choose more clear. Or more nice.

The most terrible that happened over the last ten years in this country, - total loss of respect for the power. The speech not about love to love the mighty of this world and everything that with them it is connected to anything, and at times and it is simply unsafe. But loss of respect is equivalent to trust disappearance. And without the last any reform is impossible. Whoever tried to carry out it. The form of government and surname of the character here at all at what. Fighting in the parliament, talking smut in the presence of the press, with impunity forcing down the pedestrians, killing people for the sake of the entertainment, forcing the child - here the generalized character of the Ukrainian politician which has taken roots in public consciousness.For quite some time now the inhabitant is ready to believe in any crime, attributed to any politician irrespective of a sex, age, color of a flag, make of the car and accuracy of the submitted declaration. Here - an intermediate result of the wearisome war of extermination which isn't stopping for a minute. It, instead of flu, not Islamic fundamentalism, not hostility of the Kremlin, not a distress of armed forces, is the main threat of our safety.

Therefore the majority of votes, given on these elections, most likely, will appear not appreciation for made (as has to be), not in the advance payment on the future (as was still), and a tired favor.

But in it there is, unevident, at first sight, an advantage. Absence of hopes promises absence of disappointments. At the remained healthy part of the population, at those who didn't run away, I didn't despair, it wasn't reforged and there will be no chance to learn to live separately from the state and contrary to the power. It could happen and five years ago, but the Maidan was too beautiful in the celebration not to believe last time. And once again to give itself to deceive. To give itself to carry away leisure conversations on premature disintegration of team. Which never was. Political travel of frequenters of a Maidan scene, their infinite ретирады - to that the certificate. The Shtangist, the chess player, the gymnast and the boxer won't be able to play a polo by rules of curling. But we allowed to drown ourselves in illusion.

Which nowadays can't be by definition. Because everyone knows that to wait from Tymoshenko, and that from Yanukovych. Though politicians actively convince us of the return. It is one more painful fear introduced by a pre-election fever.

To listen клевретам two candidates - favourites funny. Confidants of leaders frighten journalists same stories. Confidants do terrible eyes: here Tymoshenko (Yanukovych) will come to the power, the information field about a game will seem to you. Will be to you and the squirrel, will be also a dictophone. Curiously, as at those, and others in honor the same horror story: "If Yanyk (Yulya) wins - will fill in the country with concrete". In both camps promise that the first under flood will be pleased by a freedom of speech.

It isn't sure. As it stands it isn't dangerous to bonzes. Especially as that are imparted from a set of strains of a compromising evidence. Nobody argues that without true freedom of speech the democracy in the country is impossible. And here that there is a freedom of speech, it is possible and to argue.Here Yushchenko, for example, absolutely seriously thinks that the freedom of speech appeared only after orange revolution and from his personal permission.

Truly, how many people - are so much delusions. For one freedom of speech - violently and nevozbranno to brand the right similar. For others - opportunity unscrupulously and with impunity to get into others life. The third (and those much) are convinced that this phrase - only the name current - show and anything Bol.

Probably, the author of these lines continues to stay in captivity of own delusions, but your humble servant always tried to distinguish phrase-mongering, glorification and svobodoslovy. Well, there is a difference between the intellectual and the erudite. The last - only careful carrier of mass of knowledge, and the first is capable to melt saved up into ideas. Therefore erudites always in the price, and intellectuals, as a rule, only in honor. And that in the democratic countries. In totalitarian they - in prison.

But we will return to our freedom. As on me, nobody demands the increased tones from it. For its celebration at times it isn't required also excess words. I will illustrate with an example. Forty years ago, in January 1969, on the Moscow Mayakovsky Square two students with the poster on which only two words - "Freedom of Czechoslovakia were traced appeared! ". Young ladies silently staid minutes fifteen beside a monument to the poet, having collected round itself small crowd of gapers and sympathizing. Any of them also didn't utter words. Eventually, maidens it is predictable forwarded where follows, other quickly dispersed. I emphasize: according to stories of eyewitnesses, throughout all transient action any live soul didn't make a sound. For the USSR the sixtieth the similar flashmob was unattainable top of a true freedom of speech. Despite of defiant silence of aktsiant.

Didn't understand? I understand. Alas, utilitarian, I even would tell, household approach to one of the main gains of democracy became norm. It is observed at critical weight writing and broadcasting, and also at the same quantity reading and the vnemlyushchikh. We will be honest before themselves: in this market the minimum of the offer and is even less demand.

Journalists вопиют - the power keeps silence? This thesis is still fair, but in 2009 - m it isn't so actual, as 2008 - m. And in 2008 - m it lost the sharpness in comparison with 2007 - m. And so on in the text and on a calendar. Don't agree? Your right.

IMHO, as the users, one like to express:I am not tired to be convinced that after orange revolution there was more formal liberty, but it is less than real word. The journalists opening a burning issue on a need of the heart, instead of a purse or the administration, became rarities. Very soon become derelicts. Inevitably.

But power change here at all at what. The freedom of speech isn't neither a material value, nor legal category. It is impossible to present with it, and to appoint it it won't turn out. The Maidan was a consequence of a freedom of speech, and not the reverse. Because it began in the heads, instead of in newspapers, was born in a fit of temper, instead of in plots. It arose from requirement to tell. Moods of journalistic mass of a premaidan time can be described the phrase from popular advertizing - "many suffer silently". And so, in this offer the word is key "suffers".

Were afraid and ashamed of the fear. Suffered from requirement to express. Also realized it on - to a miscellaneous. That burned down all the same, found the way out: about the sore wrote under pseudonyms, wrote to a table, wrote on the Internet - forums, wrote SMS and electronic letters, wrote leaflets, wrote on fences, at last.

The Maidan was then. At first there was a word. And this word slowly and inevitably moved apart a narrow framework released over freedom.

Now, seemingly, don't suffer and don't suffer. Impunity of criticism is perceived as a useful option, but the freedom of speech isn't perceived as conscious need. Now don't write, and work. Are capable to support the shared idea. But only for money. Not everything, not always, but more often than earlier. The slaves who have won misters, voluntary returned for a lattice, but to more comfortable cameras. In certain cases it looks quite so.

I reproach? The Lord with you. I grieve. Presently, when it is possible to buy love, pleasure, the justice deprived of a commercial component grief appeared the most honest feeling.

It is worth blaming nobody, time such is simple. And time - it, really, the good doctor, but at this doctor is narrow specialization - the pathologist. It will study everything and everything will explain. But only after opening.

The freedom of speech is born from requirement to tell. There is nothing when to tell, there is nothing and to be afraid to lose such freedom. And hypothetical crackdown can be considered as the benefit. As opportunity again to feel need for freedom. As chance again to win the right for possession it. As an occasion to protect the won.

Such freedom, it isn't terrible to lose, believing in that on its ashes the new will be born.Sacredly the place doesn't happen is empty.

Therefore the elite full, grown far from Pechersky hills has to succeed the phantom of domestic elite. The power in its present state you won't change Poyelika. From all possible ways of existence of ruling class our state chose the worst. It not caste, not award, not club, not military division and at all mafia. It is sect. With all relying multiple expenses, the most terrible them, which - hypocrisy, double morals. This sin the power prederzhashchy is more dangerous than greed, nonsense, stagnancy, lack of principles, nonprofessionalism and even cynicism. Because such power always will be puts personal over the public. To turn personal offense into a banner for national fight. Will always infect the population with illusions and to sow fear.

And therefore such state always will be vulnerable. And it isn't terribly to lose such state. If we want to keep the country given to us by God.

Author: Sergey RAKHMANIN


Комментариев: {{total}}