Orientation on the ground

What can be added to everything that has already been said and to what else will be said?

Yes, for people who have considered themselves the inhabitants of the modern world, this is a wild and outlandish obscurantism, this explosive mixture of irrational malice with elementary illiteracy and fatal inability to understand how the mechanisms that ensure the very existence of the modern world are not only obvious, but obvious that there is no way to put up with this. This, with permission to say, legislative activity with one click drops the country, its reputation, its civilizational ambitions in a container with waste of the historical process.

This is clear and understandable. And just as clear that something needs to be done with this.

I have and, one might say, a personal motive, shared, as I am sure, by many. I also always realized myself by the representative of the minority. From childhood, I automatically took the side of those who are attacked by an aggressive, stupid and inert majority. In childhood, when I read, for example, the "Uncle Tom’s hut", I was ashamed that I was a white -skinned one. In the same way as these days I am ashamed that I am not gay. To be "like all" almost never seemed to me any tempting. And rather shameful. Or at least boring.

And therefore, when I felt my first literary shocks, it was completely natural and logical to me to join the literary underground and the artistic avant -garde. And therefore, the most common phrase "non -traditional orientation", although in the sense in which it is most often used, I do not adhere to it at all, I easily apply to myself and to everything that I am used to appreciate in art.

No wonder recently such naked and irreconcilable severity has acquired issues of contemporary art and sex issues. Both that, and on the other field, “non -traditional orientations” clashed with a muddy, dark and evil archaic, panickically repelled from modernity and from the history itself.

If the “traditional values”, which are so fond of flaunting not only semi -literate gopniks, calling themselves for some reason Orthodox, but also quite understanding what the fucked and cynical officials and deputies who see their social base in this gopot, if these “values” are in the dramatic contradiction with the norms of the civilized world, the main of which is the main one tolerance, then these are not values, but the most that is dense superstition.

And yet. More or less for the same reason. Although not only.

At the end of any conversation - real or hypothetical - on the topic "Man and the state" I will say this.

It is absolutely obvious to me - and this conviction follows from my social, cultural and existential experience - that a specific living person and his law and freedom prescribed in international legislation are more important than the state. And if the state is not able to ensure these rights and freedoms or, moreover, it itself infringes on or violates them, or if the so -called interests of the state are conflicting with the interests, beliefs, rights and civil freedoms of an individual person, then the very right to exist such a state in the modern world is very problematic.

On this, my participation in any conversation on this topic is automatically completed.