In pursuit of power

Why should you be a king or president?

Alexander Podrabinek: “The purpose of power is power,” the English writer George Orwell claimed. “Love for power is a demon of people,” said the German philosopher Frederick Nietzsche. “The power is disgusting like the hands of a brand,” wrote the Russian poet Osip Mandelstam.

But, be that as it may, the power remains such a tempting reward, for which people risk, fight, die; They sacrifice relatives and friends, lose their mind, not to mention conscience, if anyone had it.

If God created people in his image and likeness, then perhaps that is why they love power so much. Where else can you make and destroy and destroy so grandiosely, if not in the highest public office?

Plus, the mass of the most intricate toys. The solemn ceremonies performed by imaginary significance. Oaths on something impressive and beautiful. Equanimity. Responsibility. Greatness.

“The goal of power is power,” said the English writer George Orwell

A variety of trinkets and insignia. After all, the most important person in the country should differ from not the most important, and even more so from everyone else! Personal standards, crows, orders, scepter, thrones.

The latter are now almost gone, but on excursions in some kind of close abroad you can be used and if you do not sit, then at least stand up, imagining yourself by the Byzantine emperor.

Well, who refuses to take such a wonderful place, especially if complete corruption freedom is attached to it, absolute immunity from criminal prosecution and the ability to not count its salary - is it so insignificant compared to other pleasures?

In fact, a man is not alive by the salary of a single! Even if it is a very good salary. Not 50 thousand dollars a year, like the President of Russia, but, say, 400 thousand, like the US President.

Well, for what, what about the candidates for American presidents spend such huge amounts on their election campaigns? After all, not for the sake of a future salary?

The candidate from the Democratic Party Hilary Clinton spent about one billion dollars in the last year’s presidential election. If she won, then for her entire presidential term would earn 1 million 600 thousand dollars, that is, about 600 times less than she spent on the polls.

So, power is not only money. Or let's say this: not only money in the form of a salary. Most of the electoral funds are formed due to donations. Even billionaire Donald Trump invested in his election fund only one tenth of all the funds raised.

Do investors give money without calculating that they will return back in any form? And in which one?

Being in Russia, it is ridiculous to suspect America of corruption. It’s like if the homeless and not for a long time had not been a washed bum indicated a dressed gentleman with a needle to an incorrectly selected tie.

Not a man of a single man is alive! Even if it's a very good salary

However, in the consideration that money and power are always linked to a tight knot, there is nothing new or amazing. In essence, a rather banal consideration. Russian reality demonstrates this surprisingly clearly.

One gets the impression that the Russian power elite is a completely grown courtyard punks, which in childhood had nothing good, including education and education.

There is nothing to compare with their own salary. It is calculated in millions, and not rubles, but dollars. The rate of enrichment of these people is amazing.

Having reached the power and stunned from the opportunities that opened before them, they feverishly buy land and real estate in their homeland and abroad. They build palaces, yachts and personal planes. They buy the most expensive hours, cars and jewelry.

They cannot stop, as if they still do not believe in their luck or anticipate an ambulance. According to Boris Nemtsov and Leonid Myrtynyuk, at the disposal of Putin 20 palaces, villas and residences. Dmitry Medvedev, according to the corruption fund , at least five expensive mansions and estates.

Public organizations and the independent press have repeatedly written about the palaces and mansions of Igor Sechin, Vladimir Yakunin, Pavel Astakhov, Ramzan Kadyrov and many other small officials. For these people, power is not an opportunity to create, but an opportunity to steal from the state budget and taxing all those who produce anything or create something with their own hands.

While in Russia, it is ridiculous to suspect America of corruption

However, not everywhere and not always power. There are exceptions.

From 2010 to 2015, Jose Mukhika was President Uruguay. He was called the most modest president in the world. And it was for what. Says Radio correspondent Freedom Andrei Korolev .

Andrey Korolev: 40th President of Uruguay Jose Alberto Mukhika Kordano, also known as El Pepe, is considered the poorest president in the world. Ascet, a vegetarian, he was a miracle for the motto "I live with what I have." Only one detail: out of almost $ 12,000, Mukhik left only 1200 a monthly salary, giving the rest to charity.

At the end of the term in 2015, the president and the first lady remained to live in the suburbs of Montevideo, in the old house of Lucia. They work together on their site, growing vegetables and chrysanthemums for sale. They have no employees and security. Ex-President himself wears water for household needs from a well in the yard. If necessary, Mukhika visits the usual rural clinic, where, together with the fellow villagers, he awaits the queue to the doctor. After work, he is in his “Volkswagen Beetle” of 1987, output to a local product store.

The three -haired Dog Manuel, exploring the modest courtyard, is unlikely to suspect that next to her is one of the most powerful people of Uruguay, a former left revolutionary who has no accounts in banks, but there is no debts.

Jose Mukhika

At the same time, during the reign, he managed to turn poor Uruguay into an energy -exporting state, significantly raise the economy, significantly reduce public debt and reduce unemployment.

40th President of Uruguay Jose Alberto Mukhika Cordano is considered the poorest president in the world

Mukhika earned the respect of the politicians of many countries for living within the means, rejecting luxury and not looking up from his people, legalized marijuana, for which in 2014 he was nominated for the Nobel Prize of the World, allowed abortion and same -sex marriages.

Mukhik is characterized as a person "who speaks the same language with the people." Despite the fact that more than half of the population of Uruguay-believers, the 80-year-old ex-president has always been an atheist. At the same time, he met with Pope Francis, whom he respects and considers special.

During the reign of Mukhik, he acted with a sharp criticism of “blind obsession” to achieve material goods. However, he admitted that as the president should promote the idea of material expansion.

When Mukhika was elected a deputy in 1994, he came to the parliament building on the scooter, and to the question of the surprised parking player “Have you come for a long time?”, Replied: “I hope that for a long time.”

With his appearance and behavior, he destroyed the idea of how to look like the head of the state. He did not adhere to business etiquette and a diplomatic protocol, he could appear at an official event in a shirt, rolled up pants and trampled sandals. In 2012, the British Daily Mail wrote about him: "Finally, a politician appeared who does not hide his expenses."

Those who call me so poor, ”El Pepe says,“ I am not poor, but surviving, moderate and modest, I am a man with a “light suitcase”.

Most of the political history of mankind, the power was hereditary

Alexander Podrabinek: Most of the political history of mankind was hereditary. This periodically led countries to disasters, since the personal moral and intellectual qualities of the monarch did not always meet the requirements of the norm.

On the other hand, the stable rules of the throne of throne saved the states from the inevitable troubles, which usually accompanied the change of the dynasty or a new way of approving the supreme power.

Nevertheless, such a strict programming of hereditary power extremely narrowed the possibilities of choosing a new monarch. Whatever it is, but let it rule to death. This reduced the effectiveness of the state.

However, the lack of rotation of the leadership in the most critical cases was compensated by the skillful approach of the death of the national leader. Simply put, they were killed from time to time, and by the way, not always - precisely in order to ensure that the state finally signs and take a step forward. Sometimes - just for the sake of seizing power by a competing clan or legal heir.

All this began in ancient times, as ancient Greek mythology testifies.

The first supreme god Uranus, afraid to die from his children who claimed the throne, returned them to the bowels of the Earth again and again. However, Born by the last Kronos, on the advice of his mother, fucked his father, that is, cut off everything so that nothing grew, as one Russian politician recently planned.

The conflict of fathers and children from behind the throne often ended with someone else's death

Having reigned in the place of his father, Kronos became the supreme god. However, healing the prediction that one of his children will deprive him of power, he swallowed them as soon as they were born.

But here the woman intervened again. His wife Raya once instead of another newborn baby gave him a stone wrapped in diamonds. Kronos, oddly enough, did not notice the substitution.

As a result, God Zeus survived, then fought with his father for a long time and, in the end, taking his place. In turn, Zeus himself predicted that his first wife of Metida would give birth to his son, who would take his throne.

Zeus was obviously decisive and far -sighted God. He did not tempt fate and bring the matter to the last line. Instead of, like his divine ancestors, to deal with children, he acted dramatically - he swallowed his pregnant wife.

Since then, it happened: the conflict of fathers and children from behind the throne often ended with someone else's death. Take, for example, Russian history.

Since the formation of a centralized state with Ivan the Terrible, two people from the Rurikovich dynasty, Kasimovsky Khan Simeon Bekbulatovich, three people from the Godunov dynasty, Grigory Otrepyev, Vasily Shuisky and 19 people from the Romanov dynasty at the head of the Kasimovsky Kasimov.

For the sake of the throne, applicants for the supreme power easily went to murders. In the Time of Troubles , at the turn of the XVI - XVII centuries, Tsarevich Dmitry of the Rurikovich clan, Tsar Fedor Godunov, Tsar Dmitry Ivanovich, nicknamed False Dmitry were killed.

For 300 years of the reign of the so -called Romanov dynasty of 19 kings

For the sake of the throne, applicants for the supreme power easily went to murders

Five were killed: Ivan VI, Peter III, Pavel I, Alexander II and Nicholas II. And this is despite the fact that Peter I also canceled the mandatory inheritance of the male line. Moreover, he ordered the Russian monarchs to appoint successors - well, something like this is being done in the Russian Federation now.

In the XVIII century, this allowed to maintain continuity, if not for the reigning dynasty, then at least for the authorities. There were palace coups, but it did not reach the civil war.

By the way, it was then that the Romanov dynasty actually stopped. The last empress from this family was Elizaveta Petrovna, the daughter of Peter I. Dear, she appointed the heir to the throne of her nephew-the Duke of Karl-Pether Ulrich from the famous Prussian dynasty of the Holshtein-Gottoropsky, who ruled the North German land of Golstinium.

Arriving in Russia, Karl-Peter Ulrich became called the Grand Duke Peter Fedorovich and soon married the German Princess Sofia Frederick Augustus Angalt-codes.

Sofia, having come to Russia and, marrying the Duke of Karl-Peter Ulrich, who became Peter III, became called Catherine. Very soon, this German overthrew from the Russian throne of her German husband, just in case, having deprived him of his life, and occupied the throne, becoming Catherine the Great.

Catherine the Great

On that, the reigning dynasty of the Romanovs actually ended, although all subsequent emperors for some reason bore this surname - probably not to embarrass the Russian people with unusual Western European names.

Holstein-Gottorp

Sensitive politicians understand that a foreign professional is better than a domestic amateur

The Golstinsky ruled Russia no worse than the Romanovs, Godunovs or Rurikovich. And perhaps even better. It's not about the dynasty.

In the end, the Rurikovich, who practically created the Old Russian state and reigned in it for almost 600 years, were also not local.

And in our, no longer monarchical time, invitation to foreigners to lead the country is not uncommon. Sensitive politicians understand that a foreign professional is better than a domestic amateur.

Andrey Korolev: In the modern world, invited presidents and ministers are not uncommon.

The current president of Peru Pedro Pablo Kuchinski Godard was born in France, in the family of a doctor, an anthropologist and specialist in tropical diseases of Jewish origin of Max Gans Kuchinsky, who emigrated from Nazi Germany in 1933. Mother-Madeleine Goddar, French descent, aunt of filmmaker Jean-Luka Godard.

But 16 years ago, Alberto Fuhimory was brought to the oath as President Peru. For the first time, a politician of Japanese origin became the head of a foreign state. His father, Nauchi Fuhimory, to break out of poverty, decided to emigrate from his native village Kumamoto. The end point of the immigration was to be Hawaii, but because of strict medical requirements designed to curb Asian immigration, I had to change the route to Peru.

The first Prime Minister of the Union Republic of Yugoslavia in 1992-93 was the American multimillionaire of Serbian descent Milan Panich. Contrary to the disapproving reaction in the United States and the legislative ban on American citizens to occupy positions in foreign states, Panich accepted the proposal to head the government, saying that he continues to consider himself an American.

In the modern world, invited presidents and ministers are frequent

From 2004 to 2009, the President of Lithuania was Valdas Adamkus, who, although he was born in Kaunas, but in July 1944, together with his parents, emigrated to Germany. In 1960 he graduated from the Illinoi Technological Institute, received a diploma of engineer-builder. He returned to his homeland only in 1997 and took up politics.

In the current government of Lithuania there are immigrants from Russia. Finance Minister Vilyus Shapok was born in Barnaul and came to Vilnius only in 1985.

The most famous Russians in the Baltic countries are the mayor of Riga Neil Ushakov. In 2002, he received a master's degree in the specialization of "Economics and European Integration" at the South Data University.

Since 2014, the mayor of Paris has been Ann Idalgo - a native of Spanish Andalusia.

The former Georgian Prime Minister from 2012 to 2013 Bidzina Ivanishvili was simultaneously a France citizen and lost citizenship only after the victory of the Georgian Dream in the parliamentary elections, at the same time receiving a Georgian passport.

In December 2014, the two Party - “Popular Front” and “Petro Poroshenko Bloc” and “Bloc of Petro Poroshenko” - agreed on the division of key ministerial portfolios. The position of Minister of Finance was taken by an American of Ukrainian descent Natalya Yaresko. The head of the Ministry of Economic Development was the representative of Lithuania, a partner of the Swedish investment company Aivaras Abromavichus, and the post of Minister of Health was received by the former head of the Georgian Ministry of Health Alexander Kvitashvili.

Mikhail Saakashvili

Since June 15, 2015, the head of the Supervisory Board of the Reform of State Enterprises of Ukraine, and then the former President of Georgia, Mikhail Saakashvili, became an adviser to the Ukrainian president. From May 30, 2015 to November 9, 2016, he headed the Odessa Regional State Administration.

Alexander Podrabinek: American multimillionaire Milan Panich , who headed the government of post-communist Yugoslavia in 1992, says that American citizenship and experience in America helped him in a new position, although conservative communist forces expressed dissatisfaction with the fact that an American citizen became the prime minister of the country.

The communist government, the old government - of course, they attacked me that I am an “American spy”

Milan Panich: The Communist Government, the old government - of course, they attacked me that I am an “American spy”. More advanced people who wanted changes supported me because I had an American background, they waited for me to bring American democracy to their country.

Alexander Podrabinek: Was it a plus for your work?

Press Conference of the Prime Minister of Yugoslavia Milan Panich after negotiations with the leadership of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Milan Panich: Naturally, from their point of view, it was a plus. From the point of view of the older generation, I was an American spy and Tsereushnik.

Александр Подрабинек: Не удивительно, что люди, выросшие в несвободных, закрытых обществах, вообще с некоторым недоверием относятся к иностранцам, тем более к иностранцам, занимающим в их стране ответственные государственные должности.

Однако эти предрассудки необходимо преодолеть, если страна хочет быть частью современного мира. Милан Панич считает, что опыт приглашения во власть иностранцев пригоден для любой страны.

Что вы вообще думаете об этом, хороша ли такая практика для других стран - например, сейчас: для Украины или для Грузии, Литвы? Применима ли она для России?

В современном мире все возможно

​ Милан Панич: Я думаю, в современном мире все возможно. Важно то, что человек приносит — это другой опыт, другая философия. Если этот человек может помочь другой стране, то почему нет?

Александр Подрабинек: При всем том, что власть стала более прагматичной и перестала обращать внимание на династические предрассудки, тяга к наследственной передаче полномочий удивительным образом сохранилась.

Я не говорю об абсолютистских монархиях типа Саудовской Аравии или Объединенных арабских эмиратов. Я говорю о странах с республиканской формой правления, по крайней мере, формально таковых.

Диктор: В Азербайджане 14 лет безраздельно правит семья Алиевых. От ставшего в 1993 году президентом страны бывшего первого секретаря ЦК компартии Азербайджана и председателя республиканского КГБ Гейдара Алиева власть перешла к его сыну Ильхаму. Он президентствует до сих пор, устраивая время от времени имитацию выборов. Его жена Мехрибан Алиева занимает должность вице-президента страны.

В Азербайджане 14 лет безраздельно правит семья Алиевых

В Сирии 46 лет правит семейство Асадов. С 1971 года страну возглавлял один из руководителей партии Арабского социалистического возрождения Хафез Асад. После его смерти в 2000 году президентские полномочия перешли к его сыну Башару Асаду, такому же социалисту и диктатору, как его отец.

На коммунистической Кубе 58 лет правит семья Кастро. Пришедший к власти в 1959 году Фидель Кастро, когда в начале 2000-х стал совсем немощным, передал бразды правления своему младшему брату Раулю.

Фидель Кастро

В Корейской народно-демократической республике 68 лет правит семья Кимов. Пришедшего к власти в 1949 году Ким Ир Сена сменил в 1994 году его сын Ким Чен Ир. После смерти последнего в 2011 году руководителем страны стал его сын Ким Чен Ын.

Всякий человек, обладающий властью, склонен злоупотреблять ею

​ Александр Подрабинек: Северокорейская коммунистическая диктатура, вероятно, самая жестокая в сегодняшнем мире. И в этом коммунистическом семействе пока не нашлось никого, кто бы взял себе на вооружение методы бога Кроноса.

Да что там коммунистические диктатуры и религиозные монархии! Искушения окружить себя политически лояльными родственниками не избежали и демократии.

Формально демократические процедуры при кумовстве не нарушаются, но результат все-таки напоминает престолонаследие.

В Индии за период с 1947 по 1989 годы премьер-министрами страны были представители трех поколений одной семьи: Джавахарлал Неру, его дочь Индира Ганди и ее сын Раджив Ганди.

В США 41-м президентом был Джордж Буш старший, а 43-м – его сын Джордж Буш младший. Между ними проскользнул Билл Клинтон, жена которого Хилари стала госсекретарем, а в прошлом году тоже пыталась стать президентом США.

На коммунистической Кубе 58 лет правит семья Кастро

Семейство Кеннеди делегировало во власть трех своих представителей: президента США Джона Кеннеди, его братьев – министра юстиции Роберта Кеннеди и сенатора Эдварда Кеннеди.

Конечно, семейственность в политике не есть преступление. Но все же стоит помнить и слова Шарля де Монтескьё : «Всякий человек, обладающий властью, склонен злоупотреблять ею». При разоблачении таких злоупотреблений семейственность может стать большой проблемой.

Жажда власти неутолима. Человеку, который находится во власти продолжительное время, начинает казаться, что он незаменим, что в случае его ухода все рухнет или пойдет не так, как надо.

Отчасти это, конечно, самооправдание, а подлинная причина состоит в удовлетворении собственного властолюбия и возможности безудержного обогащения, которую предоставляет власть. В простые старые времена этого не скрывали.

В Средние века феодальные отношения строились на том, кто кому платит дань, и кто собирает налоги с населения. В этом, собственно, и состоял вопрос о власти: кто крышует территорию и собирает мзду? По сегодняшним представлениям, вполне бандитская логика. Вот что сообщала летопись «Повесть временных лет» о деяниях киевского князя Олега в IX веке:

«Обратился Олег к северянам: «Я враг хазарам, поэтому и вам незачем платить им дань». Обратился к радимичам: «Кому дань даёте?». Те ответили: «Хазарам». И говорит Олег: «Не давайте хазарам, но мне давайте». И владел Олег древлянами, полянами и радимичами…».

За последнюю тысячу лет кардинально изменилась структура государственной власти, но изменились ли мотивы борьбы за нее?

Находящийся у власти с 1994 года президент Белоруссии Александр Лукашенко как-то сказал: «Возле кормушки, имя которой «власть», все хрюкают одинаково: и красные, и белые».

Жажда власти неутолима. Человеку, который находится во власти продолжительное время, начинает казаться, что он незаменим

Квалифицированное мнение. Кому как не белорусскому диктатору знать, как именно хрюкают около государственной кормушки! Он занимается этим уже 23 года.

Между прочим, Лукашенко стал президентом своей страны под флагом борьбы с коррупцией. Он казался непримиримым борцом с ней. Возглавлял временную комиссию Верховного совета Белоруссии по борьбе с коррупцией. Клеймил коррупционеров и обещал навести порядок. Был в оппозиции к правительству.

Народу это нравилось. За него отдали свои голоса 80% избирателей. И многие очень скоро об этом пожалели. Не прошло и полугода, как в стране была усилена цензура. Доклад Верховного Совета о коррупции в окружении президента был запрещен для распространения.

Предвыборные антикоррупционные мотивы Александра Лукашенко оказались фальшивыми. Они нужны ему были только для того, чтобы один раз получить популярность, а затем установить диктаторский режим.

Ради голосов на выборах политики раздают щедрые обещания. Чтобы понравиться возможно большему количеству избирателей, они готовы идти на многие компромиссы и блокироваться бог знает с кем.

Белорусский оппозиционер Анатолий Лебедько, глава Объединённой гражданской партии, в 1994 году помогал Александру Лукашенко получить власть, входил в его избирательный штаб.

Ради голосов на выборах политики раздают щедрые обещания

Некоторые видные российские оппозиционеры в свое время приветствовали приход во власть Владимира Путина, призывали голосовать за него на выборах, иные работали в его команде или занимали должности в правительстве.

Российский оппозиционный политик Алексей Навальный заявил недавно, что ради победы на предстоящих выборах мэра Москвы он готов заключить союз даже с коммунистами.

Это заявление было встречено с осуждением в либерально-демократической среде, но остается вопрос: до каких пределов политической невзыскательности можно идти в борьбе за власть?

Знаменитый британский политик Уинстон Черчилль после нападения Германии на Советский Союз решил поддержать Сталина. На вопрос, как совместить его готовность помогать СССР с его антикоммунизмом, он ответил:

«У меня лишь одна цель — уничтожить Гитлера, и это сильно упрощает мою жизнь. Если бы Гитлер вторгся в ад, я, по меньшей мере, благожелательно отозвался бы о сатане в палате общин».

Благожелательный отзыв о Сатане чуть позже воплотился в Ялтинские соглашения, по условиям которых Восточная Европа была отдана на растерзание Советскому Союзу.

Такова цена договоренностей с Сатаной.

Политики, мечтающие получить власть любой ценой, готовы притворяться, лгать и заключать сделки с дьяволом

Вообще же, способность жертвовать моральными ценностями ради сиюминутных политических выгод присуща большинству политиков. Черчилль – не исключение.

Его идеологический противник из XIX века Карл Маркс говорил, в сущности, то же самое: «В политике ради известной цели можно заключить союз даже с самим чертом — нужно только быть уверенным, что ты проведешь черта, а не черт тебя».

Политики, мечтающие получить власть любой ценой, готовы притворяться, лгать и заключать сделки с дьяволом. Они считают это издержками профессии и находят себе массу оправданий.

Одно из самых распространенных: народ не может понять всей сложности и тонкости их работы, да и вообще не готов разумно распоряжаться своей свободой.

Английский историк и политик XIX века Томас Маколей заметил по этому поводу:

«В наше время многие политики имеют обыкновение с апломбом рассуждать о том, будто народ не заслуживает свободы до тех пор, пока не научится ею пользоваться. Это умозаключение сделало бы честь дураку из старой сказки, который решил не идти в воду, пока не научится плавать».

Все было сказано уже неоднократно – и о политиках, и о власти. И по-прежнему политики, готовые получить власть честным путем и пользоваться ею бескорыстно, – скорее исключение, чем правило.