Tale No. 1. Return to the civilized world Myth is the opium of the elite. Before us is the basic myth of the Kremlin ideologists. For a thousand years we have lived differently. In 988 they adopted Christianity. Fenced off from the West by Orthodoxy and socialism. drowned in Lake Peipus dog knights. persecuted

Differences of people according to the degree of humanness

History of Humanity

Civilized man differs from the uncivilized in that distinguishes And recognizes both state and private, And communal(group) forms of ownership. And under property its subject they understand any item(from a piece of bread or a mat to a piece of land, a steel mill or authorship), for which he cannot present the legally enshrined in the law of this state justified the rights of another subject (individual, group, state).

In the field public relations civilized man is guided as his own moral a feeling based on reason, and constitutional right.

Established in states (standing on the threshold of civilization) permission study entrepreneurial activity, that is, the expanded production and sale of things, ideas, services and their equivalents in the form of securities, serves but necessary, But not enough a condition for mature commodity production and the basis of civil society.

Also necessary, But not enough the foundation of a civilized society is confession them at the level of state institutions rights private property for anyone citizen(but not any human).

Barbarian also recognizes communal, state And private forms of ownership. He is even able to understand and accept the principle citizenship("democracy" Ancient Greece or in the US before the North-South War). However, the barbarian, unlike the civilized man identifies as possible property things And of people while civilized man differentiates them, recognizing for any person his legal personality.

In those cases where private property in people is not directly declared by the barbarian, ownership of people can also be carried out in the form state property on them (state slavery under communism, socialism, fascism). Therefore, in order to join the property (including people), within "one's" society with state slavery the barbarian is required, or as deeply as possible, by "making" a career, to infiltrate the appropriate structures, gradually appropriating the opportunity dispose of her, or carry out a coup d'état.

Savage in its claims to someone else's good is limited only community law, mystified physical fear of generic cult prohibitions (equal to thieves' law in a criminal environment), or physical strength other members primitive community(equal to the thieves' clan). He does not understand, A That's why And do not recognize public and especially private rights. He has such a way of life: to hunt down, assign, and, if he is a collectivist, to divide the extracted "justly".

The mentality of the average Russian person

In these notes, we are interested in how a civilized, that is, recognizing and defending the institution of private ownership of objects, man is formed.

In our state, under the rule of the communists, for many years a barbarically understood collectivism was introduced, which does not accept the right of private ownership. Both parents and the state convinced us that we should recognize the priority of state (monarchical or oligarchic) ​​rights over the interests of subjects - family members, and the interests of the family (its adult members) over the interests of their "serfs" - children. It is no coincidence that the opinion was widely held that it was not befitting for children to have a material interest in work and study. In life, however, the neglect of our desire to inherently own something was practiced all the time. Such a desire was qualified as evidence of greed, selfishness, possessive "instincts".

At the same time, the “greedy” turned out to be just the one from whom it was possible to take away his object with virtually impunity, the “egoist” - the one in relation to whom gross arbitrariness was carried out, and the “owner” - the one in relation to whom the champion of the barbaric or savage collectivism, if it pleases, used a rude "ex".

At the same time, no one noticed that the one who took away was thus demonstrating his really the opportunity assigned to them not belonging objects to him.

What has been described does not contradict the fact that parents and the paternalistic state, in their own way, "loved" their "sons and daughters" and could sometimes overcharge them beyond measure.

However, in a fit of "righteous anger", both could deprive their children - subjects everything "given" to them hitherto. In official language, this is called - "confiscation of property."

The reader has probably already lost his patience. “Where is the pedagogy here?” he asks, “everything is only about psychology, sociology, and political science.”

We answer. Since pedagogy is, in essence, technology education, we, before proceeding to the immediate subject of our reasoning, considered it necessary to substantiate their purpose. After all, the pedagogical means that we are looking for must correspond to the goal.

Pedagogical defect of the average Russian person

In this case, the goal worthy of our efforts is chosen formation in a little man respect for property another person. Let's see how it was done in an ordinary Russian Soviet family.

There was an emergency here. An eight-year-old boy stole an excellent toy car from a friend. Parents are horrified: "Is there a thief growing in our family?" they say. Mom - a certified teacher - makes an extraordinary decision worthy of A. Makarenko - removes all the toy cars that her son loves and protects so much, and informs him that from now on he will only play stolen ones. The decision is strict, but is it fair? By no means! What becomes apparent to the child? And the fact that he got the opportunity to make sure that how he showed disrespect for "right" another on property, and his mother shows disrespect for his property, which confirms his innocence. "We are quits," the boy thinks. "The strongest and most cunning wins! The one who has more "rights", strength or cunning is right. Thus, the conclusions that a child inevitably comes to in such a situation are by no means in favor of respect for the other person's right to something. “You can’t take someone else’s simply because they scold, punish and even confiscate my property for it,” the child thinks, “and not because it follows from respect for the interests of another like me.”

Thus, the following moral standard: "Do to another what he does to you", and not like this: "Do not do to another what you would not want him to do to you -" Golden Rule ethics".

I am sure that in this family the fundamental rights of the child in relation to the objects of his games, life and study have been violated more than once before. In spite of his wishes, the "treasures" he had found, broken but still dear to his heart toys, were thrown away, as a punishment it was forbidden to play games that were in his use, to read his own books.

When the parents suddenly discovered that the child is untidy and sloppy with his things, he can, at an opportunity, "slam" the thing he likes or shamelessly dispute it with his brothers, sisters, or friends, the parents become righteously indignant and exclaim: "And to whom Was he born like that? Did we always teach him to be accurate and honest?"

Complete, dear ones! In order to form a civilized person, it is necessary, in any case, to educate him in a civilized relationship. Whoever does not take into account the principle of feedback, the universal law of relationships in the world, acting regardless of whether we know about it or not, that is, objectively, sooner or later gets hit by this very "principle" on the head. That's all pedagogy. By the way, to my shame, I myself was once such a grief - educator, and, probably, I already managed to mess things up. My only consolation is that - glory to reason and conscience - now I do not intend to commit such good vile things.

"The ex"- a term from the time of the Russian revolutions of the early 20th century. From fr. "expropriation" - the forced seizure of someone's property, but in essence - robbery.

This material is an article revised in 2002 from the "Feedback" bulletin (Moscow, body of the group " Feedback", No. 5, 1992, pp. 5-7).

Civilization(from lat. civilis - civil, state).

Civilization - This social form the movement of matter, ensuring its stability and ability for self-development through self-regulation of exchange with the environment (dictionary). The civilizational theory was popular in world science half a century ago, today it is in a state of crisis. How external reflection World Civilization crisis on the planet.

Concept of Civilization - can be interpreted from the position of a philosophical, scientific, cultural, historical, economic definition that affects any moment of our life, but from the point of view of the Wise organization of the House (IDIVO). In general, this is any form of the movement of matter, which is aimed at the realization of the goals of the Father by this Civilization, into the movement of matter (biological) as the development of mankind as a whole. As well as the movement of the environment in which civilization and all of humanity lives, which supports the development of man.
Civilization is constantly in development.Civilization as a form of human development together with the environment.
Environment - this is nature, social public, economic, political (ideology).
Civilization and Civilization assumes a constant evolutionary directed vector of development.
The Task of Civilization - this is the cultivation, development of humanity, to educate humanity similar to the Father, by the standards of the Metagalaxy on this moment eight manifested. To reveal the Truth of the Father as a whole and the Truth of the Father by each person and all mankind. From the point of view of the Father, each person has a promising destiny to become with the Creator with the Father,

What does it mean to be a civilized person?

It means to be a man developed from the point of view of the Father, built into environment developing by himself and together with others this environment.
Before becoming a civilized man, the Father forms us at the beginning as a man rebuilt according to new 256-ary standards. Those people who understand that they will incarnate next time, and with this life they provide the conditions for their next birth, and such a person can be called responsible for his life.

Synthetic definition of what is IDIVO Civilization.

This is a variant of the movement of the matter of mankind in synthesis with the self-regulating Metagalactic matter. Aimed at the implementation of landmark tasks Primarily Superior Father(IVO).
Civilization embraces all mankind and the problem is that large group people of the Employees cannot organize a civilization, but each person can be that small sprout of that future civilization.
Civilization suggests development of a new ideology of man.
Civilization requires professional approach to human life and not only in the profession. It should cover different directions human activities.
Metagalactic Civilization is a completely new manifestation of the Father.
At the heart of the new Civilizations IDIVO Father laid down a new doctrine called . Civilization on the planet is developing by the Metagalaxy of the eighth manifestation and is called Civilization of Truth , Civilization Creators. Truth is read back as the Thread of Synthesis. The Father has the Truth, and we people, as cells of the Father, carry a small part of the Truth, we carry it, we realize it with ourselves and with our lives.
by the most the best option the message of the teachings of Synthesis as new Fundamentals of life, standards, laws, rules, new goals of civilization will be party activity in the direction

The world does not stand still and develops. However, at any time there were certain limits and restrictions that a person simply must comply with. That is why now I want to figure out what it means to be a cultured and civilized person.

A bit about terminology

As you know, you need to start understanding the issue with the definition of basic terms. What is the difference, or is there still a commonality of the concepts of "civilized" and It should be noted that there are several versions.

1. The terms "civilization" and "culture" are considered as synonyms, inseparable concepts from each other. In this context, civilization is determined by the level of development of society, its cultural traditions.
2. The terms "culture" and "civilization" are opposed to each other. He also liked to talk about this. So, according to his opinion, culture is something moral, something that is inherent in a person. And civilization requires from a person only external observance of the generally accepted human rules of coexistence in society.
3. Very interesting is the opinion of O. Spengler about So, he considers culture as something cyclic. And when cultural development society reaches its peak, that is, civilization, there is degradation and extinction. And the culture is changing.
4. N.A. Berdyaev argued that culture is something individual, special, inherent in a certain group of people. But civilization is a ubiquitous and most common phenomenon that can be repeated in many societies.

That is, one can conclude that these terms are exactly related to each other, regardless of the theory that considers them.

About people

A similar situation arises in the event that it is necessary to figure out what it means to be a cultured and civilized person. Again, since there is no consensus about these terms, it is very difficult to determine the designation of a cultural or civilized person. Here much depends on the society in which the individual is integrated. That is, in one social group, some actions and statements may be normal, while in another they are completely unacceptable. This, by the way, is often found when comparing developed countries and African wild tribes.

human culture

But still: what does it mean to be a cultured and civilized person in an ordinary European society? This means - to adhere to those norms and rules that were previously adopted. By the way, some can go into oblivion, others can arise. For example, today no one greets by raising his hat. But, when you see a familiar person, you need to remove the headphones from your ears to say hello.

It should also be noted that the concept of "human culture" is closely related to the term " educated person". That is, a person must be spiritually rich. These are well-read people who try to develop and learn, regardless of the place of work, social class or availability higher education. A person may not have a high school diploma, but be spiritually rich.

Examples of cultured people

If you ask a group of people the question “what does it mean to be a cultured and civilized person?”, In response, you can hear a lot of very different opinions. For one man of culture- This is the one that does not litter on the street. The other puts forward broader and deeper requirements for the individual. But still, you can try to identify and consider examples of a cultured and civilized person.

• They are respectful even to strangers.
• A cultured person should also be moderately erudite.
• Constant learning and learning something new - distinguishing feature cultural person.
• A cultured person adheres to the rules of cohabitation in society. That is, he does not litter on the streets, he maintains order at home and in his native city.

An uncivilized person is called someone who does not follow these rules and is an asocial person.

27.10.08

From the point of view of a theoretically substantiated strategy for the development of Russia and the whole world, it is extremely important to comprehend and solve fundamental, including quite specific, topical problems such as general issues modern civilization as a whole and as special, but precisely the civilizational problems of a particular country.

I will give one example. In the image of a number of influential theorists and in the practical activities of a considerable number of European institutions contemporary issues democracies look like this: there are de centers of modern democracy, where democratic procedures and values ​​have the character of already fully defined, clear patterns, paradigms that only need to be transferred to other countries that have not yet been democratized; the mission of the "civilized" countries, their ruling circles, the relevant international institutions is simply to implement these models.

It is superfluous to prove that this position is purely ideological, stubbornly and not always cleverly defending the interests, views, approaches of completely certain "centers of power" and influence, but in fact - not even of certain countries, but of specific ruling groups. Not to mention the fact that the means, methods, ways of “introducing”, spreading democracy in practice turn out to be far from democratic and civilized, in the light of the civilizational process, the whole thing looks different. For both in the specialized literature and in truly democratic discourse it has already been recognized that democratic practices, forms, procedures are experiencing today, and everywhere, including in the so-called civilized countries, a deep and precisely civilizational crisis.

This means, in particular, that modern civilization no longer resigns itself to simply following the formalisms of democracy, to the very widespread and fairly easy emasculation of democratic forms, and often to their transformation into a cover, a parade sign for an anti-democratic reality.

What has been said, of course, does not imply a rejection of the best traditions and the very forms and procedures of democracy, but only what is on the agenda modern development the question of the essential, paradigm transformation of democracy, its processes, procedures, its values, and, accordingly, the improvement, in accordance with modern demands and requirements, of the theory of democracy, including its general philosophical premises, is inserted.

Or another example, already from domestic social practice. When strategic or tactical, general or specific, topical problems and tasks are formulated and solved in our country, their understanding and solution is almost never translated into the plane of civilizational approaches. And the failures that so often befall in their practical solution and stemming precisely from the civilizational backwardness of the country are almost never comprehended, not evaluated in this plane, all the more so they are not outlined in their system and integrity. Meanwhile, in the event of the nomination of any serious all-Russian or regional program it would be necessary to calculate in advance some "civilization coefficients", both facilitating and, in particular, hindering the implementation, implementation of the planned programs (in the country as a whole, in individual regions or at the local level). For the sum of civilizational prerequisites and factors must be determined, "calculated" even in the first place.

Why, I will explain with the help of a very simple and understandable example. You can - and you really need it! - to put new ambulances in villages or small towns, as, thank God, this is being done in accordance with national program healthcare. But if the new cars cannot drive through rural impassability, if they break down every now and then due to potholes on typical streets of Russian small towns, if they are served by half-drunk drivers driving mainly to patients who have been poisoned by burned vodka, then it is unlikely so desired program achieve their important goals.

In my works, I try to consider in more detail those aspects of the life order, life, consciousness of people, which, in my opinion, should be included in the concept of "civilization coefficient", and we are talking both about its main, core components, and about the “trifles of civilization”, which in fact are not trifles at all, because the most important thing often depends on them. On them - for example, on bad roads (often literally) - the engine of the most significant, hard-won state reforms and transformations stalls.

What kind of person can be called civilized as opposed to uncivilized beings, barbarians?

A civilized person is necessarily a worker and creator. The barbarian, on the other hand, not only neglects creative work, but at any moment is ready to destroy, defile what was created by nature and accumulated by history. Civilized man strives to master the latest means, the achievements of labor, its organization, the most effective labor skills and knowledge, thus adopting the experience of other people. He thinks, designs, predicts, critically reflects and constantly improves his activities. Although he does not own his own scientific and higher technical knowledge, he has an interest and respect for them. The barbarian is at least indifferent to all this: if he works, then in the old fashioned way, at the level of a plow and a sledgehammer.

So, sound, efficient, creative, intelligent, skilled work, respect for work and proud self-respect for oneself as a worker, owner - the first group of features that distinguish a civilized individual. Such an individual cannot afford, in defiance of fundamental civility, to produce goods that no one needs or is harmful to; cannot, organically is not capable of squandering, letting go to the wind what was created not only by his own labor, but also by the efforts of other people. For he respects and preserves the work of others and the property of others no less than the fruits of his labor and his property.

The second group of features that distinguish a civilized person from a barbarian is related to the attitude to freedom, dignity, responsibility - both one's own and other individuals, countries, peoples. Owner is a concept that for a long time used with a negative connotation. But the same experience of history teaches that a civilized person is an owner endowed with freedom, common sense ability to make decisions and take responsibility for them. The civilized individual, especially in modern conditions, tends to be a democratic individual and a member of a democratic, civil society, because his civic activity is an organic continuation, as well as a prerequisite for free and initiative labor activity.

A civilized person is characterized by natural pride in his nation, people, country, the desire to serve them with labor and talent. At the same time, true civilization is incompatible with an uncritical attitude to their history and modern life, with the humiliation of other nations, peoples, with nationalist aggressiveness. A civilized person carefully and responsibly chooses the groups, associations, associations that he enters; he categorically and resolutely opposes bloodshed, violence, destructive conflicts. The barbarian, on the other hand, is quite tolerant of the fact that property, freedom, and responsibility are taken away from him and other people. He feels a constant desire to take something away from other individuals, groups, peoples - in order to eat up, squander, destroy what was taken away; he willingly merges into an aggressive crowd, ready for bloodshed. Dictatorships rely on barbarians, totalitarian regimes, nationalist black-hundred movements.

The third group of features that distinguish a civilized person can be attributed to the conditions in which he works and rests, communicates with other people, as well as to the style of his behavior. He is distinguished from the barbarian, including the modern barbarian mired in savagery, also by the desire and ability to arrange his daily life: cleanliness, convenience, comfort Everyday life He needs it like air. Of course, a civilized individual is a human and nothing human is alien to him, including emotions.

It is no coincidence that even the ancient Greeks so exalted the value of moderation of needs and wisdom of behavior. “Measure is excellent in everything,” said the Golden Verses of the Pythagoreans. There is a kind of paradox here. The needs of a civilized person are developed, rich, subtle, varied. But at least he strives to moderate them, to make them reasonably sufficient. The barbarian, on the other hand, has limited and crude needs. But given him the opportunity to satisfy them, he knows no measure.

Motroshilova Nelli Vasilievna, doctor philosophical sciences, professor, head of department of the Institute

The editorial staff of United Fatherland thanks Artur Kryzhanovsky for providing the material and preparing it for publication