Pawaputanon

Полуобразованщина

Readers will forgive me if the material starts with a very “juicy” snippet, but it’s a classic of world literature, “from the song words can not erase”. Svejk, especially once again the Lieutenant Oak, thinking: “Where did I enroll? And the further, the more conscious Schweik had the nickname “polypedon”. In the military lexicon the word “fart” has long enjoyed a special love. This honorary title was related mainly to the colonels or senior captains and majors. “Fart” was the next stage of the nickname “mean old man”...

Without this epithet the word “geezer” was the affectionate designation of the old Colonel or major, who often yelled, but he loved his soldiers…

But if the “old man” seemingly in vain to find fault with the soldiers and NCOs, was invented by dance exercises and similar things, then it became just “old men”, “black old man” or “crappy old man”.

The highest degree of dishonesty, of fault-finding and stupidity is designated by the word “fart”. It was concluded by all… In all these cases it was the older man, and if Svejk mentally called the Lieutenant Oak “by pauperdom”, then acted quite logical, as in age and in rank, and generally all other Oak sub-Lieutenant to the “fart” is not enough still fifty percent“.

And Alexander Solzhenitsyn, as you know, much disliked by the intelligentsia, in the first Soviet, and even invented for her a different definition — “smatterers”. “This word is understood in our country now the whole educated stratum, all who have received education above seven classes of the school“. According to the classics, the old intelligentsia disappeared in the far more numerous new, losing its inherent moral qualities, but at the same time, he noted the shortcomings of the old, pre-revolutionary, which in large measure are those that tend new.

And let not a hundred percent, but it is written as if the current “creative class” that constitutes the main basis of all the “Maidan” protests and the like, which not without reason is the heir of the pre-revolutionary Russian intelligentsia.

Does not apply to them “sectarian artificial selection of national life. The fundamental tense protivopolojnosti the state. (With regard to Soviet times Solzhenitsyn added “the separation of their interests from the state, the joy of all state failures“.) The moral cowardice of individuals to the opinion of “public”, niederdeutsche individual thoughts“.

And unless we do not see now, what kind of persecution they deploy against any representative of the creative, scientific elite who do not share their belief system, are loyal to the current government and support it in what I think is useful? And clearly shows that many simply prefer to remain silent, to keep their citizenship not because they are afraid of “reprisals” from the government (they are just not visible at all, are not experiencing opposition, problems or budgetary funding or access to state media), and for fear of obstruction on the part of his entourage, the usual circle of colleagues.

Love for egalitarian justice, for social good, for people’s material welfare paralyzed in the intelligentsia’s love and interest in the truth; “the temptation of the Grand Inquisitor”: perish the truth, if people would be happier. Hypnosis General intellectual faith, ideological intolerance for any other hatred as a passionate ethical impulse.

Fanaticism, deaf to the voice of life. No words more unpopular in intellectual circles than “humility”. Dreaminess, idealism, lack of sense of reality. Nihilism about work. Useless to practical work“.

Uniting all intense atheism, uncritically accepting that science is competent to solve questions of religion, though — and finally, of course, is negative; the tenets of idolatry before the person and mankind: religion replaced by faith in scientific progress…“.

And didn’t we see this hate towards religion on the part of the representatives of the creative class as a conservative institution that protects society from “great upheaval” and at the same time, though, maybe it’s not as interconnected as in the nineteenth century, the uncritical faith in all imposed by the “trends” type of alternative energy, combat global warming, “the post-industrial economy”, etc.?

To said classic I would add the infamous “servility” to the West, the hot belief that everything is “right, and most importantly, just as there is, rightly, that a blind imitation of all out running, and is the only correct way to prosperity. However, this trend brilliantly revealed Dostoyevsky in the immortal image of Smerdyakov.

Makes them and unwillingness to learn the lessons of history, which was sung even Igor Talkov: “…isn’t it was in front of you the example,” referring to the French revolution. And before the current “creative class” example is much more vivid and as close as time and, most importantly, on what concerns their own country, a past that had to endure their immediate ancestors. And to socialism, the Soviet period of Russian history the vast majority of them are extremely negative.

While Solzhenitsyn was largely opposed to the pre-revolutionary intelligentsia of the Soviet “the smatterers,” but the current “return to basics” looks just like the natural disappeared totalitarian Soviet system that led to the behavior of the formed layer on the conformism, opportunism, hold-down the “figs in a pocket”. Now, as “the historical materialism”, the opposition to power, not only does not lead, but “in the know”, often becoming a sign of good manners.

Only here if it is the current “successor” of the pre-revolutionary intelligentsia, even the term “educationists”? After all, what is what, and insufficient education the representatives of pre-revolutionary intellectuals to reproach difficult — taught in the Royal schools and universities well.

And most importantly, the then education meant not only a necessary set of knowledge in the chosen profession, but also a broad Outlook and deep knowledge in all spheres of culture, science, the ability to use and continuously develop them. And knowledge, a common culture was transformed (not without exceptions, of course) and in the high moral level of their carriers. And then, among the intellectuals was not only hereditary aristocrats, and missing people from the lower classes, but often came across which has achieved considerable career heights, but mental rest “dork”?

And so what you can see today’s “creative class”, which, by analogy with the invented Schweik to Lieutenant Oak “classification”, the best suited definition of “paleobyzantine”?

In vain to ask them about Socrates, Plato, about the classics of world literature, music, etc. all this they have a very vague idea. Real deep knowledge replaces “clip thinking”, the main source of information about the world are social networks and blogs such as ignorant as they are.

Yes, most of them have higher education, often obtained in dubious commercial educational institutions, but most often the main measure of “education” is the passage of various “courses of personal development”, training sessions, and even if they managed to go outside the country, so far, “Spinoza” (although the vast majority about this Dutch philosopher and not heard, and to tell something intelligible about his legacy can and does unit).

However, their professionalism is highly dubious, not for their well-established definition of “office plankton”, and “qualification” is reduced to possession of newfangled terms to overseas origin, designed to emphasize their “prodvinulis” compared to the “old fart” (well, we are worse than Jaroslav Hasek). However, employers and desperate sorrow of young “creatives” are increasingly more give preference to old frames.

But their self esteem is off the charts, we say, “salt of the earth”, “advanced”, and therefore, only we have to decide where and how to move society and the state (although in fact they decide not to, and easily manage skilled puppeteers).

And here is another, maybe the key difference of malwaresbytes from the intelligentsia. Among her against the “people” were different currents, some of its idealized and “the axe called on Russia to” someone took a more common stance “for the people, but without the people”, believed the Decembrists. But the main thing for them all was “for the people”, plight which, and not their own material well-being was the reason for their opposition and revolutionary.

Poluobrazy, of course, not averse to shed a tear over reading in the social history of the grandmother counting pennies in order to buy a single potato for dinner (the critical perception of what is embedded in their worldview, they have no at all), but defining quality — full contempt for the “people” who de loyal to the government, was proud of his country, grieved her setbacks, watching TV (it’s lame) and generally produces a real product.

Their opposition is only care about yourself, loved, which, of course, “give less”, which is worthy because of its uniqueness, much more of life, combining “nishtyaki” indigenous oil principalities and Swiss burghers.

When the Kiev Maidan (a Ukrainian and Russian poluobrazy absolute mental twins) talked about the horrific consequences that the economy of Ukraine may lead Maidan, they felt full and sincere bewilderment: and what to us is the relation, if closed, these nasty, smoky mines and factories. Indeed, in “advanced” economies have a value of only virtual services, and we, as before, will push the paper in offices, to work with “financial instruments”, to conduct trainings, in General, to make money out of thin air.

The fate of the “moles” (the miners) and other workers in the real sector do not care about them, and their own well-being with what and how much produce factories and agricultural fields, to understand them as hard as representatives of a Polynesian tribe causal link between sex and procreation (although the existence of such a tribe can be a legend, unlike malwaresbytes, which, alas, reality).

And even the real results of the Ukrainian Maidan has taught them nothing, because poluobrazy, apparently, unteachable in principle.

Dmitry Slavskogo

Share