i'm changing your eared puppy for your quiet life. i greet you, dear viewers of the russia 24 channel on our author's besogon tv program, today we will talk about liberalism, as soon as they don’t scold liberals, this way and that, but in fact, in general, not

very many people try to figure it out. actually, what's the point? what is the essence of liberalism? and today we will try as much as possible. first, let's define what liberalism is. liberalism - this is free from the latin liberals. this is an ideological trend based on the belief in the need to realize individual values ​​and, first of all, individual freedom, the origins of liberalism date back to the era of bourgeois revolutions of the 17th-18th centuries; the main value of liberalism is the freedom of the individual, other values. democracy , legality, morality, and so on and so forth, is interpreted only as a means of achieving such freedom, at least it has an idea of ​​​​what liberalism is

according to these formulations, we can, and now i want to read a little. our compatriots here listen no there is no doubt that public opinion in russia is decidedly liberal at the present moment. this is not an accidental direction, an unthinking hobby of society, liberal movements. it came from a vital need. it is generated by the power of things. such a phenomenon can not but please those to whom the feeling of freedom has deeply cut into the heart. freedom is the best gift given to drive a person. she elevates him above the rest of creation. she makes a rational being out of him; it imposes a moral seal on him for inner freedom.

people died, christian martyrs and human thought flows from the unknown depths of the free mind, deep misfortune in that which the heart in youth never fought for freedom, then did not feel ready to even die for it with joy. we long-time liberals are fed on the love of freedom, we rejoice in the new liberal movement in russia, but we are far from sympathizing with everything. what is said and done in the name of freedom, sometimes you don’t recognize it in the face of its most zealous admirers too often violence , intolerance and madness are covered with a name charming with an idea, like underground forces that put on the armor of the olympic goddess

, liberalism appears in the most diverse forms, and the one who cherishes true freedom retreats with horror and disgust from those ugly phenomena that are put forward under her knowledge. let us designate the main directions of liberalism, which are expressed in public opinion. the lowest level is occupied by street liberalism. it is rather a perversion. rather than street manifestations of freedom, the liberal does not want to know anything but his own will. street liberal, he loves above all noise, he needs excitement for excitement and burin. why does he call it life, and tranquility and order. it seems to him like death, where furious cries are heard, unintelligible and impenetrable curses. there, probably, street liberals are swaying and indignant. he

greedily guards, every riot, he slams every lawlessness, for the very word. he hates the law. he goes into a frenzy of rapture when he learns that a liberal scandal has taken place somewhere. what happened street fight. let's say in madrid or outside, but it doesn't matter, you know ours. he thinks but tolerance respect for thought respect for other people's opinions for the human personality of everything that constitutes the essence of true freedom, and the decoration of life from it. don't expect. he is ready to wipe out anyone who does not share his unbridled impulses. he does not even suggest that someone else's opinion could be the fruit of free thought of noble feeling, a hallmark of the street

liberal. the one that he considers all his opponents to be policemen. everything is spinning. abuse is used in deeds, shameless interpretation, poisonous hints, lies and slander tries not to prove it, but he blamed him to hurt or spit, and crazy he is a street liberal who grabs at everything, throws it with anything , forgetting all shame, having lost all sense of decency, the street liberal has an implacable hatred for everything that rises above the crowd for any authority he never didn't come to mind. that respect for authority is respect for free thought , for labor, for talent, for everything that gives the highest value to a person? or maybe it is precisely for this

reason that he does not tolerate authority, because he sees in there those educated forces that constitute the pride of the people and the ornaments of mankind, the street liberals raise their serpentine heads, twirl their tongues and, in impotent fury, try to pour out their poison on everything that does not belong to their envious family. this is an important phrase, the second kind of liberalism can be called oppositional liberalism, but my god, what seems to me here, a motley mixture of people. how many heterogeneous motives, how many diverse types, but who is not familiar with this critical mood of russian society, which is in so many different forms. well, for example, in the form of a presiding irony of

poisonous laughter, which show that the critic stands somewhere far ahead, infinitely higher than the world around him, or in the form of mockery of nobodies, exposing the dark machinations of bureaucrats or visions of violent attacks, in which at the same time with the same fury requires quite the opposite thing. in the form of poetic love for the elective principle, for the self-government of glasnost, or in the form of a restless desire to speak and fuss, in which one can see the grieved pride of the desire to betray importance to oneself either in the form of gloating in every bad measure in every evil that befalls the fatherland, or in the form of love of freedom, always ready for despotism and

independence, always ready to crawl and worship, you can’t list those countless shades of opposition with which russian astonishes us earth. their whole business is to pipe, to agitate to lead the opposition to make demonstrations and demonstrations, to throw out liberal tricks, to arrange some kind of trick for someone. squeeze an article in defiance let's say with mysterious allusions and liberal effects, or even better , print some kind of abuse abroad to gather around you all sorts of discontented people from the most opposite camps and with them take the soul away in innocent fury, especially to protest and protest at the slightest pretext and even without any pretext . in general, i will stand to eat. i will

go against again, and i will achieve, and we will all achieve, only slavery and chaos sets in, but it is incomparably convenient and more pleasant to criticize than to understand you, there is no need for tense the work of thought does not even need to act, it is enough to speak with enthusiasm and pose with some thief effect. further than to cancel to allow to destroy gained does not go. yes, there is no need to go on horseback, well-being seems to be freed from all laws and from all restraints, many and many oppositional liberals sit in warm places, make excellent careers, and nevertheless consider it a duty at every opportunity to scold the government

they serve and here is the order they enjoy, but in order for the independent man he dared to say a word in favor of the authorities or god, that such a hubbub would rise up that you would not even recognize your own. this is low worship ambition venality. it is known that every decent person must stand by all means. in opposition to power and cursing 152 years ago in 1862, just think about it. it was written by a historian. publicist professor of the department of state law of moscow

university boris nikolai chicherin, by the way , this is the uncle of another chicherin georgy vasilievich who for a long time was the people's commissar for foreign affairs in the russian federation and in the soviet union and what a couple was in the same 1862, the wonderful writer we all know nikolai semyonovich leskov writes the following, if you are not with us, then you ballet, adhering to this principle of our liberals , order russian society to renounce everything at once. what did it believe? and what has become of his nature? reject authority. do not strive for no ideals, have no religion, except for notebooks, ferbach and brücher, do not hesitate to have any moral obligations, laugh at sympathy over spiritual purity, otherwise you

scoundrel, if you take offense at being called a scoundrel, then you are, in addition, a stupid fool and a trashy vulgar. a few years later, in 1867, a brilliant russian poet. fedor tyutchev writes, it would be possible to give an analysis of the modern phenomenon, which is acquiring an increasingly pathological character. this is the russophobia of some russian people, they used to tell us and they really believed that in russia they hate the lack of freedom of the press without rules, and so on and so forth. what exactly is the indisputable presence of all this in it that they like europe and now what you saw as far as russia sought greater freedom, it is not love that asserts itself more and more. in to her these gentlemen only intensifies. they never

hated the old institutions so much as they hate the modern trends of social thought in russia. as for her europe, as we see, no violations in the field of moral justice and even civilization did not in the least reduce their disposition towards her in a word in the phenomena about which i i'm talking about principles, as such, there can be no question and only instincts act. he just think about it, it was said in 1867, moreover, it was said by a difficult person, but by a great man, a brilliant russian poet. a year later, in 1868, fyodor mikhailovich dostoevsky in his novel the idiot speaks through the mouth of the hero yevgeny pavlovich roddomsky.

this is what he says russian liberalism is not an attack on the existing order of things, but an attack on the very essence of our things, on things themselves, and not on the order alone, not on the russian order. she herself is her russia, my liberal has reached the point that she denies my russia, that is, she hates and beats his mother, every unfortunate unfortunate russian fact excites death in him and almost delight he hates folk customs and russian history. everything, if there is an excuse for it. so is it that he does not understand what he is doing and takes his hatred of russia for the most fruitful liberals. and just a few years later. dostoevsky writes in his novel demons

a continuation of this idea, but it becomes more voluminous. clear convex, and most importantly, a poignant point of view. with point of view of what awaits russia watch an excerpt from the film by vladimir khotinenko demons watch the dialogue between verkhovensky and stavronin. think about it, listen to these words. you don't offend anyone and everyone hates you. you keep with everyone equal in everyone is afraid. it's good, terrible aristocrat an aristocrat, when he goes to democracy to charm you, does not mean sacrificing anything in life, not one's own or someone else's. you are exactly what you need to be the leader.

ours are not only those that cut agut, complete classic shots or i bite without discipline, do not understand anything teacher laughing with children. we need their god and we need their cradle already, our lawyer defending the educated rich, the murderer already. she is schoolchildren who kills a peasant in order to experience the sensation of our administrators, our writers have a

lot of terribly many of them, and they themselves do not know that every mind is not their russian. god saved before the cheap peoples of the mother drunk children drunk. let a generation grow up one or two generations of debauchery, which is necessary petty, when a person turns into a vile coward. cruel to yourself beloved, scum. here what do you want? listen, who are you who i 'll tell you now. the same way i’m leading no more than kissing you on the hand. we will lower the fires, we will proclaim destruction, such a buildup will go, which the world has not yet seen, become clouded. rus' will cry the earth for the old gods. that's when we let in whom whom tsarevich whom ivan

tsarevich and what about the intelligentsia? that same liberal intelligentsia, which, with such inspiration, with such with such enthusiasm, listened with bated breath to verkhovensky such verkhovensky, whose philosophy was based on quintessence, destructive on the catachism of the revolutionary nechaev, when everything was subjected to, and the destruction of confusion from the face of the earth of any laws of any

rules of everything that in one way or another determines or should determine some system, the order of some structure of statehood, family does not matter, does not matter. well, some kind of construction, in which there is a basis for the basis of order, what happens? with this intelligentsia, who put on red bows, and with such enthusiasm awaited a happy future. vasily vasilyevich rozanov writes about this wonderfully in 1918. this is a wonderful union of writers. maybe he writes, having enjoyed to the fullest extent the magnificent spectacle of the revolution, our intelligentsia prepared to put on their fur-lined fur coats and return back to their cozy mansions and estates, but the fur coats turned out to be stolen, and the mansions and estates were burned. what does it consist of and what does

it lead to? where does this denial lead to? behind which is nothing but denial. nothing is built there, it is only denied and used, as we have already heard, personal interests, something that one way or another can benefit from that power or from that structure or from that state for which one has to work, and a liberal who, in his spare time from work, hides this power with his last words. this is a connection. blindness and deafness alone is fair, is it true? and the intolerance and envy of others is at this connection that the tsunami of the revolution, the tsunami of the

civil war, arises. the most terrible that can be a war is a civil war of law, a wonderful natalyan political scientist and historians say that only between brothers can there be such a terrible brutal annihilating bloody battle. which is a civil war for good reason. she gives an example and is right that the first fratricide occurred out of envy, when cain knew how to abel , incredible distortions of human consciousness and human essence arise on this wave, remember at least one character. the red fury, this inspirer of the red terror in the crimea

, rosalia zalkin, nicknamed zemlyachka, who saves cartridges of the red army gave orders of those who have already surrendered, who have surrendered their weapons, and the white officers should be drowned in the black sea. watch a short excerpt from our sunstroke picture where she argues. and by the way, speaking very logically argues what she devotes her life to. equality brotherhood or is it a

sad delusion comrade georgy harmful, comrade lenin to teach that this is opium? it's not the first time i've heard this fight in a white corolla of roses. jesus christ is ahead for hundreds of years and centuries.

there is logic in what the countrywoman says. definitely yes definitely but only methods achievements, and not quite different, so i say that the revolution and the civil war. does it spark when they connect? blindness and deafness and the indifference of some power, holding and impatience and envy of others, but that 's the whole point. what about those who are unjustly offended? who wants to change, who does not want to put up with poverty, disease, injustice, bureaucracy, and so on . there are many of them, and they have the right to vote, and they have the right to fight. but this is a struggle for creation, not for destruction, which, as a

rule, is the basis of the life of a liberal society, because on those barricades on which these people are destitute and rightly wanting improvements in technology. they push them they pull them they provoke them they excite these masses. but they do not go ahead with an open chest, they are already in a different place. they continue elsewhere . i think about how tenacious this type of russian liberal is. as he mimics in time, so he adapts. how does he change the task? i just remain

a character anyway. oh, which chicherina also writes leskov and tyutchev and dostoevsky 150 years ago. i hope we'll talk on our next broadcast. i thank you for your attention. and i look forward to seeing you at ours.

the highest point in japan, height 3776 meters the provocations of the ukrainian coast recall the events that unfolded at the beginning of the 19th century, dear viewers of the channel, russia 24. i look forward to seeing you.

and now the shots from the government house. we are very important for strengthening the technological sovereignty of russia, the search for new breakthrough solutions in very different directions, registration of rights to intellectual property in absolutely different industries is a very important component, especially at a time when sanctions pressure on our country is very strong, the president has repeatedly paid attention to what he is trying to close in our country.