The people deserve the government they choose. Ilyin I.A.

Every nation has the government it deserves.

This phrase belongs to Joseph de Maistre (1754-1821), the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, and was used by him in a letter dated August 27, 1811, in which he reported on the new laws issued by Alexander I.

Each according to his abilities, each according to his needs.

The basis of the relationship between the individual and the collective in the coming classless society. The phrase is attributed to Proudhon (1809-1865), who took it from Saint-Simon.

Every French soldier carries a marshal's baton in his knapsack.

This phrase, from which the Russian phrase “a bad soldier is the one who does not think of being a general,” is attributed to Napoleon I, but in a slightly different form: “we all have a patent in our knapsack for the title of Marshal of France.” In 1819, Louis XVIII addressed the students of the military school in Saint-Cyr with a speech that ended like this: “remember that there is no one among you who does not have in his knapsack the marshal’s baton of the Duke of Reggio” (a title received by Marshal Oudinot after the battle at Wagram, July 6, 1809).

Every step of a real labor movement is more important than a dozen programs.

A phrase of Marx often quoted by Plekhanov (from the Critique of the Gotha Programme, letter to Bracca, May 5, 1875).

Every time in this very place!

A stubbornly distorted quote (in the original simply: “in this place”) from the sketch “At the Post Station at Night” by I. F. Gorbunov, actor, writer and folk storyteller (1831-1895).

Pork barrel.

See Community Pie.

Cain's seal.

Seal of rejection, symbol of rejection. A distorted meaning of the original expression (according to biblical legend, Cain, the murderer of his brother Abel, was marked with a special seal so that no one would kill him, and not for a boycott!).

What wisdom they have in their contracts!
And there, meanwhile, in their native lands
Fleets and guns and gunpowder are being prepared.

From the poem “Island” by V. G. Benediktov (1807-!873).

What a mixture of clothes and faces,
Tribes, dialects, states!

Pushkin, “The Robber Brothers” (1821).

As if on display for centuries.

From Nekrasov’s poem “The Secret” (1846).

How I wish I could not write (not know how to read and write).

The words of Emperor Nero (37-68), famous for his cruelty, spoken when the first order to execute a criminal was brought to him for signature.

Like fast waters flowing into the sea,
So days and years flow into eternity.

Derzhavin (1743-1816), “On the death of the prince. Meshchersky".

Like on stormy days
They were going
Often;
They bent - God forgive them!
From fifty
One hundred...

From the poem by K. F. Ryleev (1795-1826) “Oh, where are those islands” (1823/24).

How sad Russia is.

See God, how sad Russia is.

How did you come to live like this?

Nekrasov, “Wretched and Smart” (1857).

How he knew life, how little he lived.

The inscription on the grave of the poet D.V. Venevitinov (1805-1827) in the Simonov Monastery in Moscow. Taken from his poem “The Poet and the Friend.”

Like a roaring lion (like a lion roaring, in ancient Slavic).

From the 5th chapter of the Epistle of Peter.

How little has been lived, how much has been experienced!

S. Ya. Nadson, from the poem “The Veil Has Been Dropped” (1882).

No matter how expensive it is for the poor to live,
Dying costs him twice as much.

Nekrasov, “About the Weather” (“Morning Walk”, 1858).

No matter how warm the alien sea is,
No matter how red someone else's distance is,
It’s not for her to fix our grief,
Unlock Russian sadness!

N. A. Nekrasov, “Silence”, 1 (1857).

No matter how you sit,
Everyone is not fit to be musicians.

Krylov's fable "Quartet".

Good health to everyone!

I have two feelings. On the one hand, there is joy in the fact that more and more people are beginning to evaluate more critically what is happening in our country, and on the other hand, there is sadness that my fears are coming true. Now I will explain everything in more detail.

On December 24, 2016, in a commentary on an article by one author of “VO” that I respect (“If a fish rots from the head, then they clean it... from the head!”), I already expressed my doubts about the president’s desire to change anything in domestic policy.

Let me remind you the main thing:

“...I sincerely love Russia and its people, and I also don’t want to diminish the merits of V.V. Putin... I myself don’t like my conclusions, and I would really like to be wrong. I have no real hope that Putin will have enough strength and time due to the following.

1. Isn’t this populism? That is, the king is always good, it is the boyars who are bad. One Kremlin tower is good, the other is bad. I do not believe. A year ago, he fully supported (V.V. Putin) the policy of the Central Bank when the ruble “collapsed,” and he supports the government’s actions today in the same way. Yes, just recently he unequivocally called on Russians to vote for United Russia. Therefore, such a system and such a leader of it, the system.

2. The Tsar is really good, but the boyars are bad. Then - another question. About competence. Just imagine, I would tell the investor/customer: we did a bad job because I have a bad foreman/foreman/estimator/head of technical department/chief. engineer, and he/they don’t understand anything about construction, and in general, they carry out my orders every other time, and only when I’m “surprised”! Introduced?

Personally, my conclusion is this: Putin needs not force or time, but desire to change the current state of affairs, as well as the realization that leaving EVERYTHING as it is means creating a threat to our ruling “elite” itself. I have these doubts."

More than a year has passed, and we are still going the same way. I think that there is no point in scolding V.V. Putin. He simply has different views on development, and, by the way, he does not hide them. He never deceived us. We ourselves attribute to him the way of thinking that we think a national leader should have. And he himself directly says: yes, that’s exactly what it is - this is in response to the proposal of foreign journalists to say that he is a liberal. At his speech he says: Russia has a liberal economy, and there will be no return to the past! He supports the Central Bank and calls for voting for United Russia. He also says that he loves Russia and that she can do it without him, but he can’t do it without her. Where is the deception?! And what do we want from him?

In addition to the leader, we have an “elite”, our ruling class. Our government is happy with everything, and only we are still waiting for something. And watching what is happening in the internal life of the country, we are racking our brains, unable to explain inexplicable and embrace the immensity. We cannot understand why, against the backdrop of loud statements about increasing the level of culture, it seems to us to be falling. We are told about the growth of healthcare, education, industry, about rising wages and living standards, but we do not believe. There is an imbalance in our minds between statements about the need to follow traditional, including family, values, and what is happening on screens, in theaters, in schools.

All this resembles a circus tent, some kind of booth.

What's going on? Do you remember from Beaumarchais: “It makes no sense for an intelligent person to listen to everything, he will guess anyway” or from Helvetius: “We judge internal movements, thoughts, actions, and other feelings only by actions”? If we look at the actions of the ruling class, we see that they are contradictory, and the question “what is happening?” No answer. But if you look at the motives that guide the “elite,” then a lot becomes clear. In my opinion, there is only one motivation, and if not one, then the most important one is profit. That is money. Personal gain.

If we look at the Western “sharks of capitalism”, we will see that they are quite strong businessmen, hardened in competition, plus the fact that capitalism has been developing in the West for a long time. Let's look at our ruling class, which grew up on the wave of predatory privatization. The majority of our ruling class is unable to do anything without state budget money. Such representatives of the “elite” do not know how to create, they only know how to redistribute. Maybe this is why they are not respected in the West? After all, they tried to enter the world community in the late 90s, but they were not allowed there (the goose is not a friend to the pig?), therefore, in order not to lose their capital acquired through back-breaking labor, the need arose to create their own state led by a strong leader. By the way, some representatives of the “elite” themselves spoke unambiguously about this at one time, the meaning is this: we wanted to enter the world community, but we were not allowed there. Then it seemed that “we” and “us” were about the people, but in the light of subsequent events there is no longer any doubt about who these representatives of the “elite” actually meant. At this stage, our (popular and “elite”) goals coincided.

And such “businessmen” for the most part make up our ruling class, and only people who are loyal to them, opportunists, can work alongside them. They will not tolerate others, pride gets in the way - they are princes. From rags to riches... I'm sure there are worthy people around them (someone has to work hard), but not in the first roles.

Everything is clear with motivation. Now it’s worth looking at their ideology. Their children study in foreign countries, their money and the country’s money are in foreign countries, and their ideas are either liberal or patriotic, and often an incomprehensible mixture of all this, plus these foreign countries impose sanctions against them. A simple conclusion suggests itself here - the complete absence of any ideology.

What about the culture? What about education? What about history? I don’t even want to repeat it, everything was written before me.

I just want to draw attention to a very important point - the emergence of a bestial attitude towards people in our country.

And now we have a ruling class. Questions arise: what is his ideology? How educated is he? Cultured? How does he relate to our history? To our traditional values?

Personally, I answered these questions for myself. What can one expect from such a ruling class? Who is not cultured, not educated (one-sided education is not such), who does not have a clear ideology, does not honor his history and cannot in any way decide on traditional values. Who has only one goal and desire - the thirst for profit and personal enrichment. So it turns out for us: it’s a disaster if the shoemaker starts baking pies, and the cake maker starts making boots. And we understand that:

It is not for us to judge who is to blame and who is right;
Yes, but things are still there.

Personally, it seems to me that there are no enemies of our country in the ruling class, and if there are, then very few. And why have enemies when you have such friends? Therefore, you should not look for evil intent in their actions, because there may not be any, no evil intent, no meaning. They work as best they can. (They introduce taxes and redistribute.) Don’t shoot the pianist - he plays as best he can. Dot.

I will quote the words of the heroes of F. M. Dostoevsky: “... but I attack Russian liberalism, and again I repeat that, in fact, I attack it because a Russian liberal is not a Russian liberal, but is not a Russian liberal " ("Idiot"). This time. “Gregory is honest, but a fool. Many people are honest because they are fools. ... Gregory is my enemy. It is more profitable to have others among your enemies than your friends” (“The Brothers Karamazov”). What if these people are not honest and not enemies? Any fool would be worse than a traitor. That's two. “I, too, for example, believe that fleeing to America from the fatherland is baseness, worse than baseness is stupidity. Why go to America, when here too you can bring a lot of benefit to humanity? Right now. A whole lot of fruitful activity” (“The Brothers Karamazov” ). That's three.

I would like to draw attention to one more point. I read opinions that our so-called. talk shows are some kind of attempt to push Russophobia. I don't agree. In my opinion, everything is much simpler, amazing things are nearby. Two points of view are assigned, one is “elite”, the other is openly Russophobic, such that in a normal person it causes only negativity. The first is expressed by representatives of the “elite” and TV presenters (small nuances are possible, but not strong), the second – by Kovtuns and others. By default, it is assumed that one of them is necessarily correct. The person, realizing that Kovtun’s point of view is openly anti-Russian, agrees with the opposite point of view as the only correct one. And who said that among these two points of view there is a correct one, since the third point of view is not voiced? Plus, of course, people need to be distracted from internal problems.

Taking into account the above, we can draw some intermediate results. We expect from our ruling class what it is, in principle, unable to give. Within the framework of the system that exists, nothing can be fundamentally changed. That is why we are watching this circus tent and booth. And when representatives of the “elite” go to the premiere of the ballet “Nureyev” directed by Kirill Serebrennikov and applaud, this is no longer a farce, but some kind of demonism.

And you can spend a very long time unraveling some cunning plan, thinking and wondering whether it exists. I’ll say right away that I think there is. I don’t know which one, I’ll find out in the second ten days of March. There are only two options.

The first is a sharp turn in domestic policy with the replacement of a large part of the “elites” and the dropping of the mask of liberalism. Stalin, after all, also “flirted” with the Third Reich, delaying the start of the war, although without destroying education and healthcare and carrying out purges in the upper echelons of power. It would be interesting to see how the gratitude of some of the “elites” will be expressed by those from “United Russia” - they say, thank you for all of you gathered here together and there is no need to look for you all over the country. It would also be interesting to see how the leaders of the largest state. corporations and their deputies will have their salaries recalculated several times downward. And it’s the same with the children of representatives of part of the “elite”. This is all interesting, but for some reason I don’t believe it. And why, in this case, was it necessary to bury education, for example?

The second is to create the appearance of the existence of this cunning plan in its complete absence. Let everyone rack their brains and think that there is some cunning plan and try to figure it out. Let’s not dissuade anyone - let everyone look for a black cat in a dark room, it’s not there anyway. Why not a plan? From the same series - either I go to the polls, or I don’t go. Everyone is guessing! In Russian, this phenomenon has excellent characteristics - casting a shadow on a fence or leading a crayfish behind a stone. Have nothing else to do?

We now have another candidate for the presidency - P.N. Grudinin. I have been following his activities on the Internet for a long time, and his nomination was a pleasant surprise for me. Before his nomination, I and many of my friends had a position: in the elections, due to the absence of the “against all” column, cross out all the proposed candidates and write “I don’t see any worthy ones.” True, a little later K. Sobchak “vulgarized” this idea too.

For me personally, there is no question that P. N. Grudinin is from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, or he is a protege of the Kremlin. I also heard a third version - the United States gave the command “front” to G. A. Zyuganov. You need to decide for yourself whether something needs to be changed or not. Can P. N. Grudinin deceive us? Theoretically, yes, but this would already be a deception, and the current government is not going to deceive: everything is already very good with it. In my opinion, you need to do what you have to do, come what may. Everyone must decide for themselves whether to take advantage of the chance or not.

As for the reproaches for the lack of “direction of movement” among the editors of “VO”: they say, they only criticize... I believe that criticism, of course, if it is constructive, in itself is already the direction of movement. How else to reach the people? We should all do socially useful things. Constructive criticism is one of them, and it does not bother people, but only helps.

Do the elites (or part of them) come from the people or not? If so, then it seems that these are not its best representatives. So why do the people allow their not the best representatives to wipe their feet on them? You can, of course, remain silent in the hope that everything bad will bypass me, but remember what Martin Niemöller said:

When they came for the communists,
I remained silent.
I was not a communist.
When they imprisoned the Social Democrats,
I said nothing.
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the union members,
I didn't protest.
I was not a union member.
When they came for the Jews,
I wasn't outraged.
I was not Jewish.
When they came for me
there was no one left to stand up for me.

I don’t compare anyone with anyone, I mean that all the bad things can’t be avoided.

And let’s not forget what Joseph de Mestre said in his letter: every people has the government it deserves, paraphrasing C. Montesquieu (“Every people deserves its fate”). If we assume that the people deserve everything that happens to them, then they need to humble themselves and not be indignant. If not, then do not boycott the elections, but go to the polling stations and vote according to your conscience and civic position. But for this, the whole society must change and stop being apathetic, apolitical and irresponsible.

Therefore, in my opinion, the editors of VO, by raising pressing issues, are doing a good thing, for which I have my sincere gratitude.

Assessing what is happening around me, I cannot help but cite several phrases that have become popular and proverbs. “Tell me who your friend is, and I will tell you who you are” (taking this into account: it is difficult to judge a person only by his friends, because Judas had friends - it’s better not to find) and “Like the priest, such is the parish”, and also “The ataman is the chieftain according to the gang, and the shepherd is the shepherd according to the sheep.”

In conclusion, I want to say: everything will be fine, Russia will survive. Whether Grudinin Pavel Nikolaevich or Putin Vladimir Vladimirovich, who in fact has done a lot of good for the country, will the former fulfill his promises, will the latter change its internal course, but in any case, even based on the laws of dialectics, Russia will survive. Can't help but resist. It will not be easy, Russia has always been rich in talents: Lomonosov, Pushkin, Kurchatov and many others, but already now there is an insufficient number of competent specialists of the middle and lower levels (taking into account the education system) who will locally solve the tasks assigned from above. It takes several years to train them, and there is less and less time left. I repeat, in any case we will survive, I just want there to be fewer losses.

Best wishes, Stepan.

Every nation deserves its fate

Every nation has the government it deserves

Almost a common phrase. Where is she from? The older generation remembers something similar. During Soviet times, many studied Marxist-Leninist theory and in Marx’s works came across a maxim that sounded something like this: “Everything that is real is reasonable, everything that is reasonable is real.” It seems that K. Marx himself took this from Hegelian dialectics. And dialectics, as they say, is a rather streamlined matter... It’s not for nothing that there were many jokes about dialectics in this era.

G. Hegel, believing that social development is determined by laws, believes that if something real exists, then it is natural, and therefore reasonable. And, conversely, everything reasonable... really.

As for the phrase “every people has the government it deserves,” it is more specific and less abstract. The original phrase is taken from a letter (dated August 27, 1811) from the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, Count Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821). In this letter, the count wrote to his government about the new laws established by Emperor Alexander I. It is possible that the Sardinian envoy paraphrased the famous phrase of the philosopher and educator Charles Louis Montesquieu from his work “The Spirit of Laws” ": "Every people deserves its fate."

And indeed it is so. Those peoples who are more active and speak out in defense of their rights have legitimate governments, a clearly structured civil society capable of controlling the government elected by the people themselves. In such societies there is a feedback loop between the sovereign people and their elected government. Such nations, as a rule, have a fairly developed, vast and prosperous middle class, which “quenches” the selfishness of the rich and the extremism and excesses of very poor people. These people deserve to have democratic governments. This is their fate.

The fate of other peoples who do not clearly understand their goals and live in a passive mode, without showing social activity, their fate is to live either under the yoke of authoritarian ruling elites, tyrannies, satrapies, distributing the national “pie” between their confidants, clans, relatives, oligarchic groups, or live in conditions of anarchic immature forms of democracy without “sails and helms”, where separate groups of politicians constantly fight among themselves for the redistribution of the “pie”, forgetting about the people. Such peoples live in lawlessness and poverty, and it turns out that because of their passivity they deserve such governments and such a fate.

Every nation has the government it deserves
From a letter (dated August 27, 1811) from the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, Count Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821). In this letter, the count wrote to his government about the new laws established by Emperor Alexander 1. It is possible that the Sardinian envoy paraphrased the famous phrase of the philosopher and educator Charles Louis Montesquieu from his work “The Spirit of Laws”: “Every people is worthy of its fate.”
Joseph de Maistre spent 14 years in Russia (from 1803 to 1817), wrote the book “St. Petersburg Evenings,” which, like his other works, had a certain influence on the work of many Russian writers.
The meaning of the expression: if the government is bad, immoral, ineffective, then the citizens of the country themselves are to blame for this, who allow such a government to exist, cannot control it, etc.

• - Each person has his own price. Explanation This word, attributed to Robert Walpole, was not spoken by him in this form...

  (orig. spelling)

• - An expression that Joseph de Maistre, the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, used in a letter dated August 27, 1811, reporting on the new laws issued by Alexander I ...
• - Words of the famous German philosopher, philologist, diplomat and statesman, the great German humanist of Prussia, Wilhelm von Humboldt...

  Dictionary of popular words and expressions

• - From the poem “Good!” Vladimir Vladimirovich Mayakovsky. The phrase is a symbol of social optimism of the first Soviet five-year plans...

  Dictionary of popular words and expressions

• - Words of Ukrainian politician Alexander Alexandrovich Moroz, Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine...

  Dictionary of popular words and expressions

• - Wed. He is a nervous person, easily excited, without any basis under him, and most importantly, without happiness. Even if he is guilty, then in any case he deserves the leniency and participation of all compassionate souls.....

  Mikhelson Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary

• - This word, attributed to Robert Walpole, was not spoken by him in this form...

  Mikhelson Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary

• - One of the jury decisions when introducing a new trial. Wed. The jury made some mysterious verdicts, like: no, not guilty, but does not deserve leniency. Saltykov. Pompadours...

  Mikhelson Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary

• - Guilty, but deserves leniency. Wed. He is a nervous person, easily excited, without any basis under him, and most importantly, without happiness...
• - Not guilty, but deserves leniency. Explanation One of the jury's decisions when introducing a new trial...

  Michelson Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary (orig. orf.)

• - , - this is money that we don’t have, joke. Redistribution proverb “Time is money”...

  Dictionary of Russian argot

• - adverb, number of synonyms: 1 stick is crying...

  Synonym dictionary

• - bad, worthy of blame, worthy of condemnation, worthy of blame,...

  Synonym dictionary

• - adj., number of synonyms: 6 to beat there is no one worthy of condemnation worthy of censure worthy of condemnation bad reprehensible...

  Synonym dictionary

• - adverb, number of synonyms: 1 prison is crying...

  Synonym dictionary

• - adj., number of synonyms: 1 missing...

  Synonym dictionary

"Every nation has the government it deserves" in books

Company research that deserves attention

A Company Study Worth Considering In many ways, Caterpillar is a very simple company: it makes equipment (engines, turbines, bulldozers, mining trucks, excavators, etc.) that it sells through a network of dealers to consumers around the world.

Each conspiracy has its own power!