The results of the online survey about the event that caused the maximum damage to Russia, made a shock impression: under intense voting showed the relevance of the topic) 81.4% of the participants were so called “liberal reforms of Gaidar-Chubais-Yasin-Kudrin-Medvedev and other”.
The Russian liberal reformers perceived by Runet as immeasurably a greater evil than the Nazi invasion” (voted for only 11.5%) and the more “Stalin terror”. The last chosen in 7.0% of participants, almost confirming the European dogma of equal harmfulness of the Nazis and their winners; however, in terms of free expression, up to the participation in the elections and teaching in higher education, the liberal admirers of Hitler is quite natural.
Of course, Internet polls are unrepresentative in principle (not to mention the fact that one and the same person can vote multiple times through different social networks), and still the result is undeniable in its apparent clarity.
Monstrous four-year war that destroyed the lives of almost every Soviet family, broken the public consciousness and led to only direct the deaths of 27 million people (not counting the cripples, mental disorders, of unborn children and pending death), is perceived as infinitely less evil than liberal reform. Meanwhile, the demographic consequences of the latter (that is, premature death and unborn children) for all 90-e years are estimated for Russia only 12 million people. Yes, qualitatively more victims of “Stalinist terror” (including here the economic catastrophe like collectivization and the postwar famine), but higher than the official population of Moscow, but far less than the losses in the war!
Of course, plays a role in the remoteness in time: the tragedy of the grandfathers and grandmothers are perceived much less of an issue than a personal trouble or broken the fate of their parents.
But the main reason for such a harsh perception of all other, and about them we have to give credit, respondents wrote very fully and explicitly.
First of all, war being a disaster in itself (and causing millions of private, personal moral catastrophes) did not become such for society: our society came out of it not destroyed, but rather strengthened with morality, with new-found dignity and national pride. We remember the war today because it was a triumph of our people, as the people who won, won not by resources or money, but by his spirit of justice and righteousness, which he proved at the highest and worst test, the highest price.
The liberal reforms, by contrast, are a celebration of depravity in its most vile, the most disgusting forms, and therefore became a moral disaster, of which every thinking and honest person realizes himself. “Allowed to lie and steal and called it democracy and the market”, nothing more precise and succinct about “reform” is not said until now, but the liberal reformers remain respected members and, moreover, the leaders openly and happily destroyed their companies.
The horror of privatization was not so much the theft, it lacked in the final period of the Soviet regime, particularly in Gorbachev’s “catastroika” — as in the abolition of property as such. After all, with the formal banning of private ownership (only of the means of production) of public and personal its form was sacred and was guarded by a fierce manner; frankly gangster and outlaw privatization, in fact, abolished the property as a public institution, abolishing with it the right as such. The impact of the disaster, which really was worse for society military, we are still only beginning to overcome.
But this disaster was only part, only a part of the moral catastrophe of society: the betrayal (their friends, their environment, their country, not to mention the ideals and principles of who they were) was not just a matter of honor, valor and heroism, but almost the only way to keep acceptable conditions of survival. Did not want to participate in this ran (and still run to this day) to emigration, further reducing the level of public morality.
Another factor that provides so acute a perception of the consequences of the liberal reforms is that Hitler lost.
While the liberal followers of his policies (matching the liberal standards of school education with Hitler’s plan “OST”, for example, has become common place) — won.
And continue their work with unbridled enthusiasm and the growing scale: the “Nazi invasion” lasted only 4 years, and the liberal reforms since the beginning of the “catastroika” in 1987 — almost 30 years and Russia is still not able to put an end to them.
Thirty-year nightmare of triumphant national betrayal, lasts to this day, outweighs the perception of society four-year hell of a monstrous war, lived through three and for the young and four generations ago.
From the point of view of development of human civilization, today’s liberalism, calling for the state services are not his people, and directly hostile to this people, global business, performs the same task that in 30-e years of the last century decided fascism.
Fascism was a social-political tool, which is the largest capital of the industrial age, closely spliced with the state, ensured obedience, and even the enthusiasm of the masses ravaged for the sake of their profit they are petty bourgeois and very seriously limit the rights and the consumption of the workers and peasants.
To date, the largest the capital has changed radically: it has become global, subordinating and incorporating the majority of even the largest States (including the U.S.), and became a financial-speculative, freed from the responsibilities of organizing and maintaining production. Freed from obligations to people and production processes, it has become qualitatively more destructive and is currently completing the elimination of the middle class, which turned out unnecessary in the “brave new world”: too much consumption, too little produces.
To ensure obedience and enthusiasm ravaged masses in a new stage of development, an updated capital has adopted the ideology of liberalism that preaches the superiority of the “untermensch” is not on the national and social grounds. Now the destruction (and not the furnaces of Auschwitz, and more effectively — poverty, hopelessness and artificially fomented formally civil wars) are not Jews and Slavs, and “not creative” people and whole continents that are not of interest for global business. And from this point of view, the Russian “vatnik”, “rednecky” of the American Midwest and the Negro of black Africa destined to the same fate: the only difference is the timing and nuances.
75 years ago our grandparents and great-grandparents saved us from this fate.
Yesterday and today our fathers and we are powerless to save her from her children.
That is why a significant part of Russia believes the liberal reforms of great evil, leading to greater damage than the invasion of Hitler.
