Add new comment

On the political discourse

During the Soviet period was such a tale: that someone managed to call a dead-end (something like alley) Communist. Came the scandal. In the phrase was seditious allusion. And me now and then comes to mind is the name of "liberal impasse" - looking at how to argue our homegrown liberals.

The most difficult to deal with the state Liberals. On the one hand, it is - a-rastakoe - clamps democratic freedoms, carries an inefficient economic policies, and can not compel officials to work well and do not take bribes.On the other hand, it is indispensable - says even the most inveterate liberal. Who will guard the property and we, the rich, against the encroachments of various fringe out there?

Property, as we know, the liberals sacred cow. Can be publicly regretted being evicted for nonpayment of the disabled but to allow the poor to squat empty apartments can not be - that way, and other poor people will be pulled into the apartment better. For nothing!

Maybe they would build ever dear to their heart liberal state, so only way they can not decide how it should look like.For example, they need a strong or weak state. It seems to be strong on the idea - to protect democratic freedoms in order to thoroughly enforce the law - for example, that for every Internet user pristavit experiment, a witness for the legality of its software. But at the same time, there is a logical fear that a strong state of the "subservient to democracy" has become a very self-mourning. And then that same dictatorship.And pull the disgraced oligarch with knapsacks on the Kolyma.

With the revolution is not so simple. If the Orange Revolution, it's good, because it sort of needs more democracy. But if some other, folk, under the slogans of equality, it is no good, you can enter and tanks - to protect this democracy itself. But is democracy is not the power of the people? - Want to ask the gentlemen of the Liberals. And if the majority required to remove a handful of rich people of their privileges and make resource allocation more fair, is not that democracy?

In economic theory, liberals have also observed a complete failure.It would seem that proponents of free trade should allow the market to adjust itself all the problems during the crisis - without government interference. Ineffective owners go bankrupt - and well, thank God. But no: now the majority insists that the state should save the economy - and taxpayers' money roamed in the coffers of banks. And check the commercial firms to pay taxes now, no, no - say the liberals. This is called "Stop scaring business."And in what will go shishi "Soon" and walk systems policemen guarding the property, they did not think.

And our liberal opposition believes that the people in a democratic country should be interested in politics and be an active citizen. Otherwise, how could he make a fateful choice on election day? In this case, I'm afraid the citizens themselves liberals did not try to stand in the pipeline for 8-10 hours, two hours to get to the house, and then another nurse children until the very last post. With such a life (even quite typical) person is not something that is not to big politics, he forces even to protect their rights is often lacking.And if the pre-crisis times, the Liberals still have been easier - grew up living, Russian capitalism (even if unwanted load of imprisonment) to justify its existence, but now the situation is very bad. Losing what little they have, people rightly ask: why do things work this way? What to do and who's to blame?

People come out to block the government road and set fire to police car.In order to realize the infamous "right to life, liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Liberals are the same, forgetting that they, too, "freedom", are ready to support tough measures against "bespredelschik. Own business or cushy job in a corporation are more important than abstract ideals.

Arina Mayhova