Almaz Braev - Elitism II. Socialist

A large territory requires tough power all the time. Otherwise, the empire will fall apart. But this rigidity is constantly growing when the idea is just not enough, and all the older sons inevitably grow old and become executive bureaucrats. The socialism of the younger sons is always inferior to the traditional discipline of the empire. Socialism is actually a convention – the convention of each historical case. There are different names for the emerging new dictatorship. It will be there again, or the empire will break up into small islands.

Why do political activists, and then the people, choose different versions of the tradition? Some activists select the collective path-socialist ideology; others demand democracy, and then nationalism and fascism replace anarchy. That is why one brother selects socialism; as we found out, the younger brother breaks the queue, while the other, the older one, always supports evolution and observes the order.

No people can support democracy if there is no reason to do so. People who have lived in harsh conditions have always preached the principle of collectivism. One of these people is the Russians. The same peoples live all over Eurasia. They didn't create empires, but they tried. Before the Russian Empire, which after the revolution became the USSR, there was a Mongolian Golden Horde. It cannot be said that the Mongolian Genghis Khan was a socialist or a collectivist. He united the scattered nomadic tribes into one union. His soldiers and bureaucracy maintained a brutal order and discipline. In the Mongolian steppe, it was difficult for one person to survive. And all the Turks could not do without the help of their relatives. There was no socialism in the Horde, but the tasks of the state, the fate of the military empire, depended on general discipline. Here the state and the empire are represented as one collective.

Ordinary people never know where prosperity comes from. With the general wildness, this is not allowed. Any head of a patriarchal family or a simple family feels impossible to relax. Therefore, any empire is supported by disintegration by a cruel tyranny. The central government is the same patriarchal family, but a large one. If there is no respect for the power of all members, the family empire disintegrates. The Horde, the empire, is a large patriarchal corporation. What problems each family had and the tasks of each family in such unfavorable climatic conditions are always the same, the same tasks of the tyrant. If any tyrant decided to distribute a part of his wealth not to his children but all the Horde people, all of them a little, probably someone would think of calling him a socialist. He dismissed the thought immediately. And would have done the right thing. The Zerefs would have eaten this gift. Thanks. They wouldn't have understood. And the khan's entourage would think that the ruler was mad.

But this is all a preface.

We need to understand that socialism or the collective system is caused exclusively by collective values from common tasks. Many may not know where these national riches come from in living conditions. They don't need to because knowing and reasoning are the traditional elite's prerogative. By the way, the presence of hierarchy and traditional discipline, caused, as described above, by the severity of the climate and the general patriarchal savagery, also says that there is a condition here, there is ground only for socialism. And this wild socialism will necessarily be wild, cruel, barbaric concerning the means to achieve the goal, as, indeed, all previous attempts to build an allied horde. This will be the same socialism that was established on the planet in the 20th century and only this practice continues, and there can be no other. Karl Mark was wrong. But all socialists liked his word very much. And it was all the younger sons in strict patriarchal families who liked it. After all, socialism took place precisely in the former empires, just where there was strict discipline, a community, and a central tyranny, that is, such power as the continuation of each petty tyranny in a separate family. In addition, all these younger ones broke the order. They were not supposed to inherit positions from the old government. The children of the feudal elite were to inherit the positions of the old government. But that is why technological progress is taking place, to disrupt the production of goods and the order of inheritance. It is flotagia, and flotagia we called the process of the influence of the new world and modernization on the Zerefs (the traditional world after processing by a new practice). As soon as the traditional people learned about the new system, the new socialism, they literally lost shame, forgot their turn in the queue for material goods, and therefore dropped caste. Only in a world of strict morals and defined order could this happen, only in the world of historical-cultural dictatorship. Karl Marx was not liked in a distributional and law-abiding Europe, but in a wild and moral Asia, where informal laws, including the laws of a hierarchy, are always in force. "The proletariat has nothing to lose but chains, and it will gain the whole world" – and everyone will forget the old queue for the "inheritance". After all, it is the inheritance that interests everyone. Not a literal inheritance, some fathers simply have nothing to give to their sons of any age, but a symbolic inheritance, as part of the general national product. To get your share in the old scheme, you can get nothing at all. Everyone knew that. People of all ages understood this. The lower castes, the humiliated strata, the proletarians, and the peasants appeared as the younger sons. This, first. Secondly, to turn into a new feudal group, into modern oligarchs, in other words, these "younger" ones will need, as the practice has shown, three generations of feudal socialism. Does it turn out that? It turns out that the rebirth of all the younger sons can occur in an ordinary family. If nothing happens, the order is observed. Natural aging makes everyone law-abiding philistines.

This does not exclude all the older heirs sitting at home and growing old quietly during crises. They can go out on the street, appear as nationalist patriots, and march through the squares with torches. This happened in Germany in 1933. ( Nationalist detachments have been marching in modern Ukraine since 2014. All of them are former residents of Ukrainian villages. Former provincials. All these events point to the similarity of processes for all peoples. In Ukraine, fascism matured with a century’s delay). National socialism is the natural “evolutionary” aging of the nation. The march is a natural aging of the nation. But here, all the socialists are the eldest sons de facto and de jure. They are all patriots of their state, and they have nothing to be ashamed of this hatred. They were to receive the inheritance by law. But they didn’t get it. So they became nationalists. They took everything themselves. Then they did not have to grow old and at the same time be ashamed of their arrogance. In Soviet Russia, where the eldest sons also came to power in fact (the entire Stalin faction is the eldest sons), they aged artificially when they took power from the Trotskyist intellectuals (Trotskyists are all the younger sons in their intellectual families). They remained carriers of the inferiority complex until the end of the unnatural cycle under the natural conditions of feudal socialism because they didn’t have the proper wealth. Until 1991, the peasant children wore this complex for three generations to overthrow unnatural socialism and turn into legitimate senior rulers.

Lazar Kaganovich, 1891.