National idea. What is it all the same for the concept, which is so adored operate modern municipal leaders of our country, putting it into a base of prosperity of the population?
Make a reservation at once, I believe the need for such ideas.
Surprisingly, the concept of the term is given to very few.
Namely, the philosopher Vladimir Solovyov determines its subsequent way: "Thought Civilization there is not what she thinks about themselves in time, but what God thinks about it in eternity. " Perhaps better not say.
It is impossible not to agree with Solzhenitsyn that this idea of the style want to live in the country that owns its population. Although the "Vermont elder" was read this 89 year of age, obviously aware of their own "contribution" to that defeat, which suffered our people in connection with the coming of the "era of democracy and openness." For if one compares the size of Stalinist repression (and in the middle was a lot of repressed those that were obvious enemies not only of Stalin personally, but our country) that created the world since 1987, that Stalin might seem like just an angel.
Well, God be with both of them. Another is the concept of the term "National thought"In the Philosophical Encyclopedia, which says that it defines the meaning of existence of the people, ethnic group or civilization is a systematic generalization of the national consciousness. So maybe it was not so stupid, Leonid Brezhnev, speaking of the "Soviet people"?
What are the ways the appearance of the general want of lifestyle? They are, in my opinion, is not that quite a few. First we see at the moment. As he consolidated people, We also see, and believe that the continuation of the way the division of the people into rich and poor, the deepening chasm between them will lead to the unity of civilization, can only be a very trusting person (not trusting in the power, there are more crooks).
Second — is the one that we were going to first. I think it is only right. In the middle of the readers of "Military Review" not so quite a few liberals, but still they are. Therefore, anticipating the screams and spitting in your own the address, I'll try to prove their position for more sane parts.
I immediately begin to demonstrate your finger across the ocean. Here, he says, where he — quite a way. Let's not forget that the night is, and what will end the current crisis for the country, living in debt, no one can predict. Let's not forget that the economic state of America in almost all the result of its brutal policy of waging wars on foreign terrain and plunder of other countries and peoples. Capable of whether it is our people? Hardly. Mentality of the other South American and he will never be.
None of the half-educated teachers of Marxist-Leninist philosophy, now proudly call themselves political scientists, disproves the theory of social evolution, which appears in the form of social, wonderfully different from the previous one. They do not dispute the theory of progress, according to which the people of the land is developed incrementally and one form of social order gives way to another, more progressive. Means capitalism there is the final stage. Which follow the same political scientists do not give an answer (probably for reasons I've mentioned).
At the same time, on the basis not only of the theory of Marxism-Leninism, and from the expression of the same Solzhenitsyn, it is socialism, which, may be replaced by communism. Yes, in your own initial period of socialism — not a gift. But who can I call at least one formation that at baseline, their development would not differ from their own end-stage? Either all forgotten as hired labor was used in the bastion of democracy — the British? Or the last sepoys were not shot from guns as a penalty? Perhaps the genocide of Native Americans — is in its own good?
Still there is the third way. They say a lot about him, "Russian nationalists" type Belkovskiy. Disconnect the Caucasus, etc. You can, but then it will not be our home, and she thought the state would no longer be needed.