The uprising is against justice

Than the liberals are similar to autocrats. Notes on the speech of the president of Argentina Miley that expressed the idea of ​​a "minimum state"

From various aspects of the political world, things are happening today, which speak of a breakdown of a global historical order. What is conditionally called “liberal democracy” and intends to build the world on the ideas of an “open society”, the equality of opportunities and humanistic progress. Moreover, the will to break, to reject this order goes from the side of the opponents of liberalism - those who are for political autocracy and authoritarianism - and those who are for absolute anarchy, for "pure" liberalism. As they say, the ends converge.

And since it is always important for the human mind to evaluate everything, then two obvious options arise here: either such a global order with its ideas has not become good at all, or, on the contrary, its overthrusters are not at all good. Those overthrows that are from the autocracy - it will not be difficult to record on the “dark side”. They themselves do not determine themselves in the "enlighteners". But those that from the anarchy and liberalism, with them at first glance, are not so simple. After all, they proclaim freedom, and freedom is in order of “liberal democracy” - almost the first value.

To understand why the “pure” liberals against “liberal democracy” and what is related to “pure” authoristers - it is interesting to look at the theses of one of their representatives.

* * *

The president of Argentina Javier Miley became a little more than a year ago. His figure immediately aroused a keen interest: a young charismatic politician, almost an anarchist. Someone saw in this a symbol of some significant changes. After all, who is more for freedom than Libertarians? Updating trends.

Relatively recently, President Miley performed at the forum in Davos and voiced these trends himself.

The initial idea is a “minimum state”. That is, a state that is fundamentally abandoning any significant impact on the life of society.

Reducing their departments and officials, leaving the field of subsidies, benefits, benefits and generally from all protectionism. Until minimizing free medicine and education institutions. Instead of all this: a free market, a deal, competition.

But the main pathos of the presidential speech is not about the “minimum state”, and it is hardly possible to say something fundamentally new here. The main thing is the revealing, irreconcilable and emotional challenge, abandoned by the speaker for the entire system of universal values ​​of Western civilization:

"... Our moral duty and historical responsibility is to expose the ideological building of a patient of progressive ideology ..."

The challenge is primarily addressed to the idea of ​​justice. In it, the president sees a cancer cage, a source of infringement of freedom and damage to what he calls the good "... Greco-Roman heritage and Jewish-Christian values."

"... the ominous, unfair and disgusting idea of ​​social justice, supplemented by theoretical Marxist concepts aimed at the liberation of people from their needs."

The speaker accuses Western civilization of that it is not enough for a formal system of equality of all before the law. That she wants to go further, wants to find and eliminate “hidden systemic injustices” - that is, hidden inequalities and abuse, which have developed from the characteristics of cultural traditions for centuries and continue to take shape from the current practice of capitalist differentiation of individuals. The speaker says that the struggle with injustice serves, in fact, only "gold residential for bureaucrats striving for omnipotence." He connects all this with the dangerous Marxist heritage and generally calls the "socialist agenda."

According to the speaker, the “socialist agenda” in Western civilization creates artificial and completely excessive “positive human rights”. At first it was the right to education and housing, and then completely “absurd” began to arise, like the right to access the Internet, visit the theater or cosmetic procedures.

* * *

Why does all this cause President Miley such hostility in the end? The most likely answer is that the “idea of ​​justice” attemprates his sense of freedom and his concept of freedom. The “idea of ​​justice” imposes freedom of restrictions, creates distribution discourse and censorship, and this, by the deep conviction of the speaker, contradicts the very essence of freedom.

Then what is this “essence of freedom” that the President of the Libertarian is so worried about? In his view, she is quite obvious and repeatedly speaks to him. This is capitalism in its pure form, without moral and utopian restrictions and social counterweights.

This means: the pure element of the market and competition, irrational and changeable, going beyond all human differentiations, for the ideas of high and low, about good and evil.

This element most resembles the early ancient and still Dophilosophical image of fate, fortune, unpredictable and capricious, ruling both over people and over the gods. Perhaps this had in mind Javier Miley, speaking of the Greco-Roman heritage ...

Outraged by the “idea of ​​justice” and rejecting it, the speaker - consciously or not - calls for regression, to return to the Dophilosophical, pre -reflexive state of the world, when the bet is made not on abstract ideas and principles, but for luck and case, due to which some become winners , and others - their subjects; Some become gentlemen, while others become slaves. It is noteworthy that in the Russian criminal slang there is a well -known concept, meaning the property of one who is overly endowed with the gifts of good luck and case, and is a kind of transcription of the name of the ancient Roman goddess - “farm”.

In general, this is called here - freedom. True, such freedom is not completely linked not only with the concept of “justice”, but also by democracy, as well as in general with the concept of political philosophy. Perhaps the first action, which gave the basis the historical matrix of all democracies, namely Athenian democracy, was the converts of the Solon in the VI century BC, when the political will of the reformer rose against the elements of the “pure market”, against the principle of an economic transaction of separation Athenian inhabitants at gentlemen and slaves. Solon cancels the practical slavery for debts, thereby canceling the “power of the transaction” and introducing a ban on such a practice in the future. Already in debt slavery and sold to other people's lands were found and redeemed by the state.

Democracy begins with an act of social justice, which is opposed to natural competition and spontaneous economism. In fact, democracy begins with socialism, which is so convicts, so “Heit” the modern president of the Libertan.

* * *

Does all this mean that Javier Miley against justice as such? No, doesn’t mean. There is justice in his picture of the world, and it occupies far from the last place. In the end, he is at war with the “idea of ​​justice” not in the name of chaos and a rampant of vices - but also in the name of justice, understandable, however, in a completely different way. The protest of the speaker is aimed at the fairness of the abstract, universal, which origins from the world of reflexive consciousness and its ideas. But real justice, as you can understand from the entire context of his speech, is the one that comes from direct action, case, circumstances, from success or failure.

In a word, this is the justice of fate, an ancient fortune, which has no utopian-long, ideological measurement, but there is exclusively the reality of the facts.

What is really true, if Hegel's famous phrase is rephrasing. In the field of international relations, this is referred to as a real-politician.

In relation to human reality, this approach works as follows: it is fair that you have enough strength to implement, i.e. Make possible - valid. In fact, this is justice for the strong. For those who have a resource and successfully use it. The validity of the winners and holders of the control package. But since strength and victory are changeable things, the image of an unpredictable and baseless fortune, a real ruler of the real one, is guessed for all reality. She is power, and fate, and justice, and - anarchy. The magnetic word from which the “Cathedral of the Parisian Mother of God” begins Viktor Hugo: A quarter.

Thus, the understood justice leads at times preceding the fundamental thesis that was put forward by ancient philosophers - everything existing has a high reasonable goal. The world is a movement aimed at a reasonable goal - Entertechia. In contrast to the movement that is aimlessly absorbed by itself, reproduces only itself and characteristic of pre -intelligent matter, - dynamis. All the same Aristotelian dichotomy between physics and metaphysics, chaos and space.

* * *

Returning to the question that he is related by pure liberals with pure autocrats. Their common source matrix is ​​baselessness . Movement for the sake of movement, strength for the sake of strength, success for success. Anarchy, even denying the very attempt to give the existence a universal and reasonable significance. The final significance. And without the ultimate significance - an uninterrupted stream of competition, the same Hobbes "war of all against all." It is unlikely that we can say about it better than the philosopher Nikolai Berdyaev said in due time:

“Anarchy reigns in the despotic states and in the capitalist economic system, it is invariably hidden under the cover of an external violent order, since every violent state and any bourgeois-capital system are based on internal disconnection and expanse.

Such anarchy is slavery and violence ... that completely rests on slave, violent instincts, for centuries developed by the state and economic oppression, that internal anarchy that was hidden behind the external ghostly "order", the favorite conservatives, religious mandatoryness of mankind. "

N. Berdyaev. "New Religious Consciousness and the Public", 1907

* * *

What is generally concerned to criticism, from all sides, now addressed to Western civilization, to her ideas and projects - deserves it in essence? More than. There is practically no place for such a living place on the civilization that would not deserve it. But this is an extremely useful poison - an incentive for evolution, "a medicine against wrinkles." After all, what does not kill, does more - this is a classic Western wisdom.