Читать книгу Khan - Алмаз Браев - Страница 19

Chapter 17

Оглавление

Only a socialist Khan can

The trouble is with your officials. They put my funds for modernization, wages, and solving environmental problems in their pockets. The greed of your compatriots killed the miners. Watching their behavior, I was always amazed. How can you hate your people so much?! As long as you have such leaders, the victims will multiply


Lakshmi Mittal

It is not surprising that such officials live according to the feudal principle of the Middle Ages – I will be the first, but I will never be the second. While there is an opportunity, you need to honor yourself with money. And people will respect me not for my principles and honesty but for my money and opportunities.


Democracy is a state, a system, a regime, a society created by migrants.


The more migrants there are, the more democracy there is. It’s a long migration. In this sense, Americans are out of competition. What else could people without roots who fled Europe have built?


If there are half of the migrants and this half is active because of hunger and injustice, these are internal migrants. Thanks to internal migration due to modernization in the 20th century, Europeans gave the world such fresh ideologies of «short migration» – fascism and communism. If you want to look closer, you will find a solid landless peasantry among the migrants. At the very least, the provincials. And the leaders of the Communists and fascists are the children of provincial officials – this is the rule.


Moreover, quite accurately, the Zeremids (short migrants) choose fascism if private property has been cultivated among the people for several centuries and communism if private owners, as people, were not in honor (like Russia). All the countries of Western Europe were ahead of the whole world in democracy and then the inevitable fascism. Right-wing autocratic regimes, not unlike dictatorships, have been established in all countries of Eastern Europe. But these were obviously conservative countries. England and France went through bourgeois revolutions; the populations mixed up with each other so much that the population had only one cult left: money (It turns out that England and France turned out to have an ornate path towards long migration. In addition, the conflict with Russia in the 21st century shows that Germany and France are more like American colonies. This is the result of their defeat in 1945 and the occupation of these countries. Due to the defeat in World War II, Japan was also occupied. Therefore, Japan also has a developed democracy, although the Japanese have not really mixed with their neighbors. This means that the cult of money can be controlled even by deeply traditional peoples if the people no longer have a traditional elite or it is represented purely symbolically).


This means that countries and societies with strong traditions could avoid fascism, at least not march to the beat of drums in their squares.


But what is needed for a modern democracy?


When we know that democracy can be inspired not only by military bases and Soros funds but also by monetary funds can inspire democracy if the local people consist entirely of Philistines where the ancestral aristocracy does not represent the current elite. Suppose the current elite is recruited not for high morals, professionalism, or responsibility but for unscrupulousness. However, in the Asian tradition, silence, servility, and helpfulness were not called evil in any way. It’s just that many conservative nations have not cultivated a sufficient layer of intelligentsia. The intelligentsia, the children of the intelligentsia, have principles. For all others, the substitute for principles is either idealism or greed. Democracy panders to the very bottom in this sense. Democracy is a system of migrants. It creates migrants, literal and mental, who in their hearts want to migrate. In this sense, the lowest try to trade anything just to get into the stream of democracy – to migrate, to leave the village where everyone saw them as poor. They get into the stream so that they get rich unscrupulously, brazenly, and cruelly. Unscrupulously, greedily, cruelly profiting from his people.


Who are their officials?


Asians or intellectuals? Are they moral or ideological? Suppose the entire elite layer of officials is recruited from the very bottom «for help» in creating a dictatorship of money. In that case, all these people will build themselves mansions, buy expensive cars, engage in ostentation, save money offshore, migrate, and buy housing on islands in the ocean. This is what democracy turns out to be, where there are neither morals nor intelligence.


Everyone here is poor. And they want to show everyone how rich they are. All the officials want to show how rich they are! These are primitive instincts. These are not American migrants at all. These are not any «short» European peasants. These are just new nomads. And among the nomads, the Khan, an outstanding leader, was creating the state. Only the khan can stop the bacchanalia of beggars who want to show themselves but cannot anybody convinced. Besides, only if Khan is a socialist. So, the socialist Khan creates principles, an idea, and a new tradition. Without any of the list of concepts, nothing will work.

Khan

Подняться наверх