Sacred Speeses for Dough

What is the difference between destructive elites and constructive and what does Russia have to do with it

For the Russian intellectual times of perestroika, the whole world was divided into two halves: countries in which there was private ownership of the means of production, and those in which it did not exist. Actually, this is how the world was shared for the Marxists-Leninists, and for the Russian intellectual he also shared this way: only with the opposite sign.

Since then, many years have flowed, private ownership of the means of production in Russia has appeared, but there was no happiness - it wasn’t. And it became clear that the world is divided by a much large number of methods than it seemed at the dawn of perestroika.

The world is divided, for example, including countries where political opponents are killed and where they are not killed. Where businessmen are put in jail to select their property, or not plant them. Where they fake the election results or do not fake. But - including first of all - the world is divided by the nature of its elites: into destructive and constructive.

A typical destructive elite is, for example, what was in Syria before the opening of a civil war. A swollen state elite with security forces with unlimited business lines. A man with epaulettes in Syria could have everything: hesitate any businessman and pull off any business. About the same as in Syria, the situation is in most African countries. The situation is about the same in Russia. Syria here is instructive because to remind how such destructiveness ends.

Another kind of destructive elite is, for example, Afghanistan. This is a situation when violence is the only social elevator. Violence gives wealth and status, and only violence can be maintained. Somewhere in the United States, a person who personally shot two dozen people will be in a psychiatric hospital or in an electric chair, and success in society will be associated with the ability to invest or invent technology. In Afghanistan, on the contrary, one who shoots people becomes a field commander and respected person, and the one who knows how to invest money becomes a target for shooting. “All mine,” said Zlato, “all mine,” said Bulat.

Actually, the system in Syria/Russia is also based on violence, but in the first case we are talking about violence by the state, even by privatized. In Afghanistan, or in Iraq, the violence is private: who dared, he ate.

With a destructive elite, the ruling layer of the state enjoys its advantage in order to select, and not create.

Actually, destructive elites were formed with any conquest, and since almost all modern states were formed as a result of conquests, all of them once had destructive elites. Self-governing cities-states that were once in the Middle East and India, and then in Greece and Italy, had other shortcomings and did not survive to this day. The United States, by the way,, according to their education, was most like ancient colonies: small self -governing communities that did not have strong enemies and therefore from the very beginning do not have a destructive elite, not counting slave owners in the south.

Violence is a great seducer. If your hand is a sword, it is always wiser to take away than to create. All the ideologies of the world, religion, pyramids, the veneration of the son of the sky, the glory of the caliph, the divine law of kings, the feudal hierarchy - all this, in fact, are supports that determined the inalienable and sacred right of the destructive elites to redistribute dough and the right of the first night.

However, in the XII -XIII centuries. In Europe-first in Italian cities, then in Flanders, England, Germany there was a unique situation: when the elite of society existed not due to the fact that it took something or, in extreme cases, provided something, and when it created something. So a constructive elite appeared in society. This was called capitalism.
Since then, in the long run, destructive elites have always lost constructive.

However, in many places of the world, destructive elites remained. After all, this is very convenient: to take a state resource and with its help in favor of their friends to redistribute the economy of society, thereby creating true supporters from friends, and from their subordinates - a layer that you rely on.

Such a strategy is very beneficial in the short term for the authorities, thinking only of itself. It is always not power to pay for it, but the country - as can be seen in many examples.