Текст книги "Authority as an obstacle for personal and social development"

Автор книги: (IP of the USSR) Internal Predictor of the USSR

сообщить о нарушении

Текущая страница: 2 (всего у книги 2 страниц)

–

Presently, development of technique, means of communication, the main of which became TV and the Internet, creates an illusion of “a global village”, in which it is possible if not “to touch” everything, but to see at least. However, in this global virtual village it doesn’t met the main condition that provided the efficiency of principle “practice is a criterion of truth” in primitive community at reproduction of professional ruling body: in such global village there is no joint activity with direct dialogue of almost all members of global “community”.

Such virtual globalization is the basis for mass-media to mould “images of authorities” to order. And moreover, development of computer graphics will allow in the nearest future to put fictional characters of “cartoons” in a rank of authorities for crowd: notorious “Masyanya” (flash-cartoon hero, very popular in Russian Internet several years ago – ) according to low level of anthropomorphism, certainly doesn't pull on this status, but technical progress, development of interactive TV and the Internet, together with presence of “social order”, are able to generate not so comic virtual dolls, which will be capable to represent the so-called “real politics” for crowd. In other words, “Masyanya Glebovna Pavlovskaya” – may become a virtual reality, because a crowd is capable to accept even this authority as real leader and inspirer (Gleb Pavlovskiy is one of the most famous PR-specialist in Russia. He is the author of TV-program “Real Politics”).

–

If to correspond with types of psychical structure, then question about the so-called “real elite”, “pseudo-elite”, “counter-elite” appears absolutely in other light, instead of how it is represented nowadays by S. Valtsev (chess grandmaster, known at COB forums in the Internet under the nickname “Kotovskiy” (named after hero of Civil War in Russia 1918-1922)).

All cultures, in which irreversible stable human type of psychical structure is not regarded as the only norm for any adult individual and in which it is not achieved by the overwhelming majority of people up to beginning of their youth, are immature and perverted.

Disputes about who is “real elite” and who is not; whose authority is real and whose one is “artificial” and so on take place only in them, since:

on the basis of human type of psychical structure collectivity develops:

and within the collectivity:

everyone possesses equal human dignity, thus keeping and developing personal originality;

and all deeds of various people in collectivity are mutually necessary and mutually supplement each other in course of God’s of God's Providence.

In such conditions disputes on who is “real elite”; whose authority is valid and whose is false, are simply impossible, as it would be dropout of collectivity, because of loss of human type of psychical structure.

In conditions of crowd-“elitism”, reproduced by purposefully perverted culture in change of generations, system principles of erection of one or another social groups to the rank of “elite” or to the rank of “authority” are such, that bearers of human type of psychical structure can rest inside the “elite” or to be “authorities” in all layers of society, who are respected, supported and whose qualities people try to reproduce in themselves and in their children, only in contrary to these principles.

Bearers of human type of psyche system in crowd-“elitist” cultures are

anti-system elements.

Thereof crowd-“elitism” in whole as a system of social relations is somehow hostile to a real human and to manifestations of humanity by members of society; though also in it bearers of other types of psychical structure (with all their defects) have some human traits indeed.

–

In conditions of crowd-“elitism” the principle works: “Everyone works for himself in a measure of his understanding, and in a measure of his misunderstanding – for one who understands more”. By virtue of that God understands more than any, crowd-“elitism” existing within the limits of God's permission at all gets rid of itself since it generates many insolvable within it problems, which are murderous for a society inflexibly devoted to it. As an example, take the history of Byzantium and the Russian Empire.

–

According to the above-stated, purposeful overcoming of crowd-“elitism” by revealing and solving problems generated by it demands neither creation of some “real elite”, nor revealing of some “positive persons” who would be erected in a rank of authorities for society, but personal self-development of many people with mutual help to each other in this task on the basis that for every human his own conscience is an absolute authority...

However it needs from many to find their conscience and will, to wake them up, to learn to distinguish the conscience and different prejudices and obsessions, and to control the will by the conscience…

–

In a crowd-“elitist” society different “authorities” are not “locomotives” but obstacles for personal development of other people and, as a consequence, for the social development in whole.

It is objective reality, which concerns as “artificial” authorities, exaggerated by

PR-managers from nothing, and also authorities of those who have really made something significant in aspect of profit for society development and thus have deserved recognition as high professionals in certain spheres of activity.

If harm of “artificial”, inherently false, authorities is clear for majority, then harm of real authorities, well-deserved by deeds helpful for society, is much more difficult to understand.

The harm of real authorities consists of that others are so sure in efficiency of their deeds that express it not only in trust to authorities in some tasks, elaborating and making decisions or in more or less readiness to live and work under their control, but also in shifting off their part of responsibility onto real authorities and in conscious (or unconscious) recognition of right for carelessness and irresponsibility for themselves.

There is a widespread expression of this principle: “I’m a little man, it is no concern on mine and nothing depends from me”. But there is no understanding that with such relation to Life nothing will depend from him.

As a matter of fact this means that, erecting somebody in a rank of authority, crowd-“elitist” society dooms him to loneliness, thus refuses him for support.

It seems paradoxical at first sight, but people admiring authority and relying on him in all tasks actually refuse him in support. The reason is that nobody immunes against mistakes; many tasks can't be done by single man, but demand for collective initiative (but not only executive) activity. And having made someone to be an authority, having declined all responsibility and having refused from own initiative in task, coordinated by real authority, people make act of apostasy from him or her, whom they worship at and whom they feel high respect for (as they sincerely convince).

And the most dangerous is that:

near to authority there are many creeping toadies and probably fair but non-initiative executors;

but there are extremely few of those, who can check faultlessness of authority's actions and take the initiative in those aspects of common task, which authority has no time for or which appear outside of sphere of his world-perception, world-understanding and, as a consequence, out of his administrative competence (which is fraught with great troubles for a society).

–

In essence, the told above lets understand, that not only Judas have given up from the Christ, but also other apostles have given up. Though they made it a little differently, instead of how Judas did.

Concerning Joseph Stalin “true Stalinists”, as a matter of fact, behaved in the same way. Peoples of ex-USSR already more than half a century have been disentangling consequences of that. And apparently they will do it for several decades more, in spite of someone has already paid attention to that after 1991.

Muhammad (Mohammed) moved away from his authority during lifetime. But after his death in historically real Islam the worship on prophet's authority changed that doctrine which was opened through the prophet: otherwise the leadership of Muslim culture in global civilization construction would proceed till now.

But to take admirers of authorities down a peg and to compel them to become responsible for themselves and initiative in a common task is not a simple problem, because admirers of authorities in a crowd-“elitist” society are more troublesome than blowflies. Frankly envious persons in comparison to them are less harmful in aspect of common task's damage and distortion, than admirers can be...

However, many former admirers, having disappointed on former idol-authority under influence of their (i.e. admirers) own incapacity, realize their envy to former authorities in becoming their slanderers and active opponents.

–

But also “struggle against authorities” is yet one of specific features of crowd-“elitism”. It can proceed in different forms.

Nihilism expressed in slogan “I’m the enemy of all so-called ‘authorities’”. Finally it leads to groundless refusal of trust to other people on the basis of own biases concerning them and on the basis of circulating through society gossips – i.e. another’s fictions, extended and accepted as true, and also inadequate subjective interpretation of real events. Nihilism as a version of social idiocy[15] – dooms everyone captured by it on fruitlessness in deeds.

Competition with authority for its status possession in society. Inherently the competition is directed to dethrone the authority in minds of associates and to replace it by competitor himself or by those, in whose hands ambitious competitor is a pawn.

If competition is directed to dethrone of exaggerated authority, “artificially” created or arisen due to misunderstanding of someone recognizing somebody’s authority, – then this is inherently aimless work, which, in case of success, reaches following results: former barren is substituted for several time by another barren.

If competition is directed to deprivation of trust and respect of person doing something really socially useful, and reaches success, then society gets harm; if it doesn’t reach success, than “fighters against authority” discredit themselves in opinion of others. In any of two variants someone would regret with time about “swoop” on person making good deeds, if not initiators of “swoop”, then those who hold with initiators.

Actually authorities of crowd-“elitism” disappear in joint initiative creative activity, based on common ethics, uniting both “authorities” and other participants of common action.

Therefore it’s not necessary to find out whose authority is a “blown” and whose is “true” (there can’t be “true” authorities) for dethroning of “blown” authorities and supporting “true” ones.

It is necessary to make relations with people on principles of humanity, accepting people such as they are: with all their merits and demerits (including displayed by an “aggregorial haze”, which activity is caused by characteristics of unconscious levels of human psyche[16]), helping them to release from oppression of peculiar for them problems. Then mutual respect will unite people, and joint actions will be basis for this respect, but not crowd-“elite” relations of trade and conflicts (even unconscious) of self-estimates like “I’m so good and clever – so why I’m not a boss?” and reciprocal: “I’m boss, therefore I'm good and clever, and you are obliged to respect me, to submit me implicitly, to guess for and to embody my thoughts before I shall announce them[17], to care for be and to cherish”.

–

According to the told above, in order to avoid thoughtless subordination to heaven knows how appeared or purposefully created authority of one or another person, to avoid inattention when considering “non-authorities’” opinions, when expressing opinions on problematic of conceptual power and other sociological themes in written form, – we accepted anonymity. In our opinion, anonymity of statements should remove prejudicialness, in order that everyone voluntarily thinking perceived text by his own conscience and could correct mistakes without psychological pressure of names of those, whose opinion he used to perceive as undoubtedly authoritative. For people, for a society of humans it is important the result of a deed but not persons who reach this result: if deed is good, then one doing it loses nothing; if deed is evil, then nobody would escape from God’s retribution, even he or she wants. This caused anonymity for Internal Predictor of USSR – group of developers of Concept of Social Safety (COB)[18].

–

Nevertheless, aspiration to erect somebody in rank of authority by COB or to refuse of that rank to those or other persons have been existing all the time since first COB materials had been announced in society among those who considered themselves as true supporters of COB. All such activity, whether it is realizably-planned or unconsciously-personal (including unconsciously-aggregorial), directed to erection of some persons in rank of authorities and also to dethroning authorities, of which someone have been disappointed, lays outside of COB’s course and outside of its promotion through society algorithmic.

Internal Predictor of the USSR

February 16–18, 2008

Specifications and addictions:

March 1–2[19], 2008

[1]

[2] V. V. Odintsov “Linguistic paradoxes” – Moscow: Prosveshenie, 1988, p.33 (in Russian).

[3]

[4] Look at books by IP USSR “The Dead Water” and “The Sufficiently General Theory of Ruling” (DOTU). These and other works by IP USSR, necessary for understanding of some specific terms of COB and COB as a whole, are published on several sites: , , , etc.

[5] Total function of ruling is the term of The Sufficiently General Theory of Ruling (DOTU). It includes successive sequence of different quality actions: revealing of environmental factor affecting the subject-ruler and causing need for ruling; goals designation concerning this factor and all other further actions necessary for achieving the planned goals.

[6] Conceptual power – the term of Conception of Social Safety (COB):

first meaning – power of people, which are capable to elaborate the concept of society life organization and to introduce it in real process of public self-management;

second meaning – power of concept itself upon society.

[7] Of course, there are certain interrelations between “algorithms” and “mechanism”; however it is not the same phenomenon.

[8] In this case, it is not pertinent to refer to “people”, but it would be better to use the term “crowd”.

[9] The illustration is absent in the quoted publication on site (IP USSR).

[10] WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University

[11] The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

[12] Look at treatment of the question in analytical note by IP USSR “Review of possible variants of events after 1995” (in Russian) (in Information Base of IP USSR).

[13]

[14] Though the term “PR” in Russian society has appeared rather recently, but the following anecdote about the power of PR was popular in the USSR:

Napoleon has been invited from the other world to parade on the Red Square in Moscow. He stands on the Mausoleum tribune, looks at parade and talks to L. I. Brezhnev. Brezhnev tells him: “If you had had such cannons and tanks you precisely would not have lost at Waterloo”.

Napoleon answers: “Certainly, but if I had had such a newspaper as your ‘Pravda’ (‘Truth’), nobody would have ever known that I had lost at Waterloo...”

And in general, Goebbels with his successful in many ways PR of Nazism and Hitlerism outside Germany became the strategic weapon, which allowed Hitler carry out blitzkriegs against states of bourgeois-liberal Europe freely: on January 2, 1939, already after “The Munich Deal” and the liquidation of Czechoslovakia, that became an actual beginning of the World War II the sanction to which had been given by the Great Britain, the editorial of “Time” (American magazine) declared A. Hitler as 1938 “Person of the Year”.

[15] Look at first wording of “The Dead Water” 1992 (in Russian).

[16] In COB-materials this theme is considered more detailed in book by IP USSR “From corporationism under a cover of ideas to collectivity in God’s Ruling” (About psychological underlying reason of person and its purposeful change) (in Russian).

[17] In essence, this is requirement for subordinates to be more clever than the chief, but don't show obviously it to him to save their chief from “inferiority complex” and not to deprive him of his authority.

[18] This paragraph with some changes repeats written in 1994 at the very beginning of book by IP USSR “Questions to Metropolitan of St. Peterburg and Ladoga Ioann and to hierarchy of Russian Orthodox Church”.

[19] March 2, 2008 – President Elections day in Russia.