Читать книгу A statesman who doesn’t exist yet. Remid - Алмаз Браев - Страница 8

HUMBLE HYPOCRITE

Against loop of remids (loop of remids -struggle remidov between themselves, after what ahead, option, in power it turns out zeref, a wild and strong-willed man)

After Lenin’s death.

Does this mean that if the power is lying on the road or a real candidate is experiencing difficulties, a less talented one will pick it up, as for example happened to the Bolsheviks after Lenin’s death?

For example, we take the attempt of Zinoviev, the Chairman of the Petrosovet, a member of the Politburo and Central Committee, and Kamenev, the Chairman of the Mossovet and head of the STO, to push aside the most talented in the Central Committee Trotsky, the Minister of war. After all, both knew that they would not pull responsibility and that their talents were lower than the LDT. Further, the party apparatus supported the even more inconspicuous and mediocre Stalin. In 1936, Stalin executed Kamenev and Zinoviev – the logical conclusion of the remids loop, when the most gifted come forward in the struggle of the most untalented. Then the most incompetent destroys them.

.

After Stalin’s death.

Beria was the most influential of the Soviet elite. But Malenkov and Khrushchev united against him, supported by Marshal Zhukov. Beria was shot. Malenkov was sure that the post of Chairman of the Council of Ministers was the main one (it was held once in the past by Lenin and Stalin). He recommended Stalin’s buffoon Khrushchev to lead the party. But he was very wrong. Who led the party, he was in charge of all.

Further.

In 1957, Stalin’s associates Molotov, Kaganovich, and Malenkov had already decided to remove Khrushchev. It is unlikely that Khrushchev was the most talented and the remids loop here looks more like a remids farce because all the participants are zeremids and provincials (all were born in the villages and rose thanks to the revolution of 1917 and the counter-revolution of 1937 by Stalin). The most talented of the Bureau of the Presidium of the Central Committee, Marshal Zhukov said: “I will appeal to the people, the people will support me!” (to crush you – Molotov, Kaganovich, Malenkov). For these words four months later Zhukov was accused of Bonapartism and dismissed as Minister of defense of the USSR.

The farce of choice.

When Khrushchev was dismissed no one wanted to come out on top. Everyone was afraid of Khrushchev’s reprisal. However when the support of the security forces was guaranteed, the hardware people agreed on the ridiculous figure of Brezhnev, who in the midst of Khrushchev’s struggle with Molotov, Kaganovich and Malenkov fainted at a meeting of the Bureau (almost like the elderly cardinal Jacques Dues, who was elected Pope in the hope that he would die immediately after the election. Dues during the Conclave portrayed himself all the time sick and dying at the Council of cardinals and they bought into this trick).

Finally, after the death of Andropov, 73-year-old Konstantin Chernenko was elected to the post of General Secretary and head of the USSR, “a diligent performer”, “never eager for power”, who from the very beginning of the Supreme Board was taken from his hospital bed, changed clothes and asked to read the prepared text. Isn’t this clear evidence of degradation and negative selection?!

Youth, not talent.

The most important argument when choosing the new leader of the USSR Gorbachev was not talent but only youth. Mikhail Gorbachev-the last leader of the USSR he is the son of a combine harvester. So much for the dictatorship of the proletariat! Where the most important thing was to be born somewhere in Siberia in the family of some slaughterer, locksmith or village blacksmith. As we can see the slogan of the dictatorship of the proletariat turned into a meme where the best was chosen from the worst. They chose from the majority of those who were more numerous in the country.

What are the conclusions?

Remids loop is a struggle of the elite and the self-destruction of the best rulers in the result of “bad parenting”, hope for the best, using the weakness of most worthy by reason of mandatory modesty. If the most worthy is not modest (for example, Trotsky), they will immediately begin to displace him, reproach him and finally completely exclude him from the list of candidates.

Further, this selection does not end. For in fact, it’s all the fault of tradition. It begins with modesty and ends with a majority vote. Those who are physically bigger are the ones who decide. And where physically more people were in the USSR? In traditional families. Do you remember the saying about a quiet heifer that sucks two cows? Choosing not the kindest leader, but the worst for leadership but modest and hurting the self-esteem of electors begins in the family. Within families. What kind of child do parents love? The sickest, weakest, most needy. Surprisingly, this family phenomenon of love, almost traditional goes from the bottom to the top-in the apparatus of the party and government, where they also love the weakest and sickest (remember the physically ill and infirm Leonid Brezhnev and Konstantin Chernenko, who were “loved” by the people).

How is this remids loop, which is actually an echo of tradition, overcome?

Of course, the choice of the leader of a worthy replacement. If the leader himself does not choose the best of his entourage, then the traditional people will choose the worst,” modest” hypocrite through their elite.