The left is right

The meaning of the next scandalous cartoons of Charlie Ebdo from an ethical point of view is impeccable. The first shows the hypocrisy of the world of bourgeois well-being that imitates sympathy for trouble, but in fact incapable of providing them with real assistance in a critical situation (either in its stupidity, or because of which is worse, but this is another question). The second caricature shows how disgusting a sense of religious superiority. Anyone.

The form in which the authors of the cartoons expressed their position are designed to sharply focus on the problem. Therefore, she deliberately shocking, repulsive. Allows hypocrites and fools to interpret caricatures directly opposite to their meaning. But these are their problems. Everyone understands to the best of their spoiledness. And these people have no right to impose their perception to the rest. For that, the freedom of statement is needed in both verbal and in any other form.

The public split that arose about caricatures is a continuation of the split caused by the "refugee crisis." In Russia, this crisis caused not only the next exacerbation of the confrontation between the pro -Western part of society and its anti -Western, "rashist" part. The string line passed inside the pro -Western part of the society. And this is also a continuation of a more global fault. After all, the European society itself will be split.

The border passes between the right -conservatory adherents of "traditional values" and the left -barrs "values ​​of emancipation." A real manifesto of the right -conserving camp recently appeared on the website of Echo of Moscow. He predicts European death to Europe due to the loss of the will to struggle for existence. More than ten years ago, its author once called fascism the last attempt to save the Western civilization from the decaying influence of the snotty left-handed liberal-socialist humanists from the Frankfurt school. Because when in society everything is kind, valor disappears from life.

When the right -conserving camp is crying for valor disappearing from life, he does not lie. In contrast to his allegations that today the successful and wealthy minority contains its work by the parasitic majority of dependents, parasites and freebies (these statements simply contradict statistics). The system of checks and restrictions on internal human aggression, intraspecific competition and the struggle for dominance, developed by Western civilization, prevents the right -wing man from the right one than the notorious freel chains and dependents. And now thousands of those dreaming of the exploits and glory of the passionaries are ready to replenish the ranks of non -oathetic movements, which differ only in the shape of the mustache of their idols.

Not a single civilization in history was so realized to realize the left -wing dreams of a "good society", as modern Western civilization managed. Nowhere was such a high degree of freedom and at the same time security - both legal and social - human personality. Nowhere else could you make the hierarchical structure of society so open, permeable. Nowhere else could not so soften the forms of intraspecific struggle and dominance. They could not be eliminated completely. Probably their complete elimination is utopia. But modern Western society is precisely the maximum possible degree of implementation of left utopia today. The same "real socialism".

The historical victory of the left idea in the West was also expressed in the fact that the right ones were forced to recognize many values ​​of the left and even included them in their list of traditional values. And even if their understanding of democracy, freedom, human rights differs from the understanding of the left - today conservatives recognize these things values. In the XX century, a "large democratic consensus" was reached between the main political and ideological directions of the West, outside which only marginals remained both right and left. This historical compromise between traditionalists and freestwounds was based on the predominance of the values ​​of freethinkers. But traditionalism was not completely discarded. Everyone was convinced that attempts to completely destroy the opponent both from one and the other side equally lead to totalitarian blood pressure.

The impressive successes of the Western world at the end of the 20th century proved that this compromise was productive. And they gave rise to euphoria, which allowed some thinkers to talk about the "end of the story." All dreams are realized, there is nothing more to strive for. But the productivity of the compromise did not mean the disappearance of contradictions. The point of maximum success is simultaneously the beginning of decline. The triumph of the western left turned into an increasingly deeper for thirty years of the crisis of the left ideology. Sooner or later, the right ones had to challenge the conditions of the compromise.

Criticism of modern Western society from the right of the right is not sucked out of the finger. And the point is not that too many dependents have divorced, and "Euroborcracy" suffers from all vices of any bureaucracy. This is only superficial particular - there are more fundamental things. The West, which recognized the main value of a person, really provided a person with the possibility of a comfortable existence, largely eliminated discomfort from his life, and turned into a society of universal anesthesia. Today, the right are the alarm: such a society will not be able to endure any real pain with which it may encounter. When valor disappears from life, it is not only boring, but also dangerous. Too good society loses the ability to protect itself from evil people.

“Here will come evil Islamists and arrange such sexy freedom to you that the most right European defender of family values ​​will seem to the left radical,” the conservatives are afraid. Therefore, we must become evil ourselves. Recognize that barbarians are not capable of perceiving the values ​​of civilization (even Aristotle talked about it). And stop repenting the sins of colonialism. But here, immediately the association with our Stalinists and other imperial patriots arises.

What can answer the "Left West" to these challenges? It would be a mistake to convert from the threshold criticism from the right. But not just a mistake, but by a historical collapse, it would be necessary to accept the practical conclusions that the right suggest. Because they offer Western civilization to renounce themselves. It would be foolish to deny that a very significant part of the running to Europe from the war is not going to accept European values, European culture, and European lifestyle. That existence next to them will give rise to problems and danger. And the question today is just like that: do people who are obviously alien to our compassion deserve our compassion, many of whom can become our direct enemies? Should we try to help them despite all the inconvenience and risks related to this? If Europe refuses them to compass and help, this will mean that it renounced itself.

The West really needs internal mobilization, it is necessary to return valor. In order to be able to take risks, make sacrifices, tolerate real pain. To defend and preserve their “values ​​of emancipation”, even letting in the “traditional world”.