Кто владеет информацией,
|4 dec 2016|
Cherny Dmitry 01.12.2009
If you recollect last (Saturday's) program «National Interest», there was one important episode there which already then I decided to continue with the article of a small format like theses, comments. What does the format of talk show allow? One question, jus one question which should include a lot, including both pitfalls and taking down the opponent. I have been making my choice for long enough. Though the colleague Yerofeev was most nice, he said a lot of hogwash about "Stalin's bloody modernization" which causes questions. Madam from the State Duma was also favourable and big enough target, apparently, typical "slink" with a bunch on a head, I didn't remember her name - so, she said an inimitable thing, if you remember - after info about crisis, after appeals to us, spectators, to the workers to tighten belts! It's time to work here as reminder-decoder but after all I'm radical realist.
Corpulent madam was not at lost here also - after recognition of critical theses about stagnation by Medvedev, after habitual mourning nods in relation to degradation (good fellow Remizov, it's a pity he has not gone further), she suddenly lighted up as some Freken Bock and declared: "Well, really we are living in a Golden Age!". Then she was murmuring something as the teacher in a kindergarten - probably, treating us as absolute fat-headed as she considered it possible to pull our legs...
Only this statement on the air, this slip of the tongue, this recognition of bureaucracy - is more expensive then some gold, really. I will stop here for a while - painfully tasty episode.
That is - THEY are living in the Golden Age. It's in crisis, I will remind. That was what should be pointed out from a tribune, questions are not necessary here - the spectator is clever, he could feel himself cognitive conflict. It's like they have just been talking about stagnation, about raw trap, that nothing's done since Yeltsin times at demagogy about modernisation (it was the time when the word appeared in the lexicon of politicians). And suddenly from under this Duma, expensively made bunch of hair we hear: "Golden Age"! YO!. Sorry for bad manners.
After all she was the one who told us the truth. After all they live well with the deputy salary, with their profits. After all they - are that minority for the sake of which the bourgeois state stamps laws, which it protects as the Proprietor, main Subject within the limits of dominating ideology. They continue to get enriched - crisis is hogwash for them. Here Medvedev suddenly started talking about modernisation - well, it is necessary to nod habitually, it's their work. The madam with a bunch didn't see the point - the nodding cancels euphoria, even forbids it, speaking frankly. But she is joyful, life for bureaucracy after counterrevolution became marvellously fine - they have state payment of trips any place they want, Duma's women enjoy also other delights, they receive money for lobbying - live and rejoice... Madam lost control and gave away the show. Crisis is in the world - they have the Golden Age. I would give her award - for class frankness. Well, now return to Valery Fadeev. Gradually.
Well, by the way, the writer Yerofeev felt that falseness the first - and objected, say, Russia as hippopotamus sits in a bog, one should drop the electroshock in this reservoir. But he corrected himself at once: however "Medvedev will help us", as he "started his God way on Gavalry"... Oh, what images! The writer said it weighty, there's nothing to object... Probably, Medvedev was also surprised - that's the way personal contact could work. Or the "remarkable" Surkov's novel "Near to Zero" expanded horizons so? Intelligency will believe in a "thaw" any minute now. But Remizov corrected the writer rightly: the one should go to Gavalry alone, while modernisation - is a collective business. Here is necessary to recollect Stalin modernisation but it's - taboo, millions became the price of it...
However all this sounded inertly and in passing - as if expert establishment presented recognized that the state stayed idle for more than decade in respect of modernisation, abusing the Soviet past but existing due to its reserves. It was pleasant to hear, however, it went somehow aside the theme of liberal repentance.
Suddenly madam "bunch" fell upon radical opposition which obviously threatens prosperity of the bureaucracy presented by her (which easily burnt party membership cards and stores in caskets Komsomol badges, which replaced the CPSU with "EdRu") - say, they call, devils, people on the streets, while we are the only here to worry about modernisation! Here I jumped out like devils from a snuffbox - to the microphone. Well, you saw. However, I will reproduce:
- I have a question to all gradually shifting to mister Fadeev. From radical opposition to continue conversation, (here I looked straight in the spectacles of madam "bunch" already become afraid) - Here you say that "Chinese-Shushenskaya HYDROELECTRIC POWER STATION" supposedly will not belong to us - and what about now - does it belong to us? Don't you think that it's not radical opposition but privatisation divided society into classes?
Valery Fadeev, answered at full tilt - the dear was the speech, due to its unpreparedness!
- No, I don't think so. For 90-s some economy was created, we get wages, we can buy products in the shop, while thanks to you, communists, country has been getting out of a hole for so long...
So, the expert of experts gave out classical trick of the ninetieth years - say, the ruin of the times of privatisation and other everyday life of initial accumulation of the capital - is nothing else but totalitarianism heritage. Factories sold out on scrap metal, whole chains of manufactures closed, vanished domestic goods were instantly filled in the market with foreign competitors - all these, certainly, is the heritage of "communism"! What hole, mister Fadeev? I could not ask such thing on talk show - Kiselev doesn't give microphone to such people as me for the second time - so I will ask now!
What hole, dash you, Fadeev? What are you talking about? You as expert know that your blest RF fails to reach till now the level of gross national product of critical 1991 year, even at oil corpulent gifts of a conjuncture of your recoloured party nomenclature. We are in the hole now - and you recognized it assenting to Medvedev!
It turns out that "expert community" leads some double game (here appeared another person, Frolov - no more, no less "Community of Orthodox Experts' - you can see how consciousness of servants of God grows!) - they recognise that power officials and reformers before them did nothing being at the helm but not to run into professional impropriety they begin to damn the USSR and communists even more loudly! However, good lords, let's put everything into their places.
Speaking about modernisation, you should recollect us communists, Bolsheviks - who raised Russia from a plough and a raw appendage into space (nothing could change history). Privatisation returned Russia which you lost, long-awaited raw status which was taken away by damned Bolsheviks and their industrialisation. "It is the fact, monsier Djuk", that is Fadeev.
What facts do you have? Should I reproduce your arguments again? Let's stress them this time.
«We can buy products in shops». Well, you should speak about yourself, dear businessman. The majority of the population of the Russian Federation buys products in the markets, as well as I, by the way - there are cheaper their. For us your market economy - literally, a bustle mode along the rows of trucks.
«We get wages». While in monocities, such as Tolyatti, I know - people do not get wages (the factory pays only for the rent of the worker, he gets approximately five hundred roubles) and not only there. Besides, they don't receive YOUR, capitalist wage (I know - you want to have monarchic one, the joy is not full for you now), that is they receive it with considerable deduction of a surplus value.
While "YOU" (we, communists) - opened both factories due to which your blest state-making bourgeois squeeze out nowadays profit, built the roads, constructed houses and underground. Therefore the names of Lenin and Stalin are mentioned in the Soviet underground. While You even didn't dig a hole for similar transport with all your demagogy about modernisation, conservatisation and other de-sovetisation. Therefore we in OUR Soviet past - don't have any hole, do you hear me! So, henceforth follow your lexicon.
It's possible to carry out modernisation there where there is degradation, where there is that "hole" into which the Russian Federation has been falling into all years of the Post-Soviet power. It's also the fact - if such huge achievements as shops and salary were indisputable, what's the need for modernisation? What a shame to have such achievements - shops and salary, "native land and grub"! There were also shops and salaries in the USSR: we went then not to the markets, by the way, we bought what's necessary near to the house, queers appeared only at Gorbachev.
The salary was sufficient and the country did not die out. Here you are one more argument - you have not a simple hole, the hole is sepulchral! You can't realise any way out - as for you both socialism and the Soviet power is taboo. You have oligarchs around, that's all your modernisation. And mythical middle class, hoping on which partokrats destroyed the USSR.
Lexicon of near-to-the-Kremlin experts shows - degradation mode has dumped formed in the USSR "highbrowed" not only into capitalism to which they yield ideologically (but also for monetary compensation, certainly) but also into monarchism. It was not sounded in last show but I remember - it darted in the previous one. We will talk about it next time. When you will get out of the "hole" where you- not we as I showed above - cornered yourselves.
© 1998-2016 FORUM.msk