Creators of the Libyan Revolution Bashny.Net

A year ago I wrote a little pamphlet about democracy, which brought the simple idea that the most democratic country in the world - it is Libya. In a strictly formal sense of the word democracy (from the Greek. Demos + kratos the power of the people) it is embodied in the most perfect form called Jamahiriya. In connection with the Libyan revolution once my article cited in the blog writer Yuri Mukhin, and from there she went to walk on open spaces of the network. However, Mukhin quoted her distorted and not the primary source, but such is Yuri Ignatievich - suffers from some inexplicable hatred to the sources, preferring to refer not to the author, but on the side tsitatora.
The whole month I was head over heels swamped with work, and during that time with the PM and the comments have accumulated a dozen requests to express their views on Libyan turmoil. Some urged on saying that if life in the Socialist Arab Jamahiriya really so happy as I describe it, then there is a hangover the people are rioting without any apparent objective reason? Well, well, just ask - answer.
I recently published a book "Will the revolution in Russia", where I have ten times in different variations echoed the same idea - the objective reasons never caused a revolution (the mutiny, coup, uprising) by themselves. Objective reasons creating a potential of it, but if no one will take this opportunity, spontaneously, by itself does not start a riot. Here is a good example: the English in XVIII-XIX centuries purposefully vymorili hunger millions of Indians, but in this situation, the local population has not risen. But because of the seemingly insignificant insults religious feelings, bloody riots broke out. The biggest uprising - sipayskoe, was provoked by the fact that the British were forced to clean the gun sepoys beef fat. Here you have an occasion to reflect on the role of objective reasons and subjective factors in such a delicate matter, as a revolution.
Were there are objective reasons for the revolution in Libya? Yes they were. The main mover of all revolutions - the conflict between the elite and the masses. In Libya, the masses were living in clover. Why do not they live well? The country's population - six million souls, and production of oil and gas provides a per capita GDP of more than 10 thousand. Dollars - the same as in Russia. But unlike the Russian Federation, in Libya there is hundreds of billionaire oligarchs and there is no uncontrolled leakage from the capital. Actually, under the planned economy, and this can not be. Consequently, the national income for the most part remained in the country and is distributed relatively fairly. So it is true that, for example, an ordinary nurse gets paid about $ 1,000 a month (really socialist scale distribution through public funds and broad social guarantees - isolated issue). We even doctors do not always earn as much in the fact that life in Russia is much more expensive, and public funds are incomparably ACS.
So who is in Libya will feel slighted? That's right - the elite. The elite in Libya is keenly aware of his inferiority - of course it's better to live demos, but the socialist Jamahiriya is not the master of life. You can compare it to the current situation with that of the Soviet nomenklatura beginning of the 80s: at every Regional Secretary has unique house, but it is a state; there spetspayki with black caviar and a bunch of all privileges, but they are attached to the posts and the position is not hereditary and is not even a lifetime; the director of the plant have enormous power and a good salary, but he can not behave as the owner of the company. Perestroika - a typical revolution from above, a revolt of the elite, which has exchanged the great superpower to guarantee their personal privilege, because we want to be the elite of Western standards, that is, uncontrolled disposal of property and transfer it inherited, thus consolidating its privileged position.
Something similar is happening in Libya - this is not an uprising of the oppressed masses of the poor and that is kindled the desire for freedom and the values ​​of European civilization, this is a classic elitist uprising against the supreme ruler who does not give them fatten. Let's look at the situation figuratively. Imagine yourself in the place of the Libyan General. You are in the service of the state and get a salary, say, 20 thousand dollars a month. By our standards, big money, but it's just money. You can not send their soldiers to rent owners, you can not even get them to build himself a cottage, can not uncontrollably stealing military equipment can not live it to the posh foreign resorts, and even on fairly earned can not buy into private ownership Oil zavodik (in Libya is dominated by state ownership of the means of production). In general, any time for any offense stern ruler can oust you from office and put on trial. How can you not zagoryuesh?
And suddenly appear respectable gentlemen from the American Embassy (or other embassies, or just people in civilian clothes, but the oh-ry solid) and the first hints, and then into an open offer to take part in the rebellion against Gaddafi, promising political power and, most most importantly, the ability to dispose of the country's national income as is accepted in the West. On the one hand it is terrible, but on the other - it is possible at one stroke not only be a very rich and influential person at home, to ensure a privileged position for their children and grandchildren, but also enter into the world elite, who will accept you with open arms as a hero fight democracy and the winner of a terrible tyranny. Would you personally agreed to take the risk?
Now imagine yourself mullah. It seems that when Arab Jamahiriya clergy takes a prominent place in society, as the control is not so much on the written law, but on the basis of national traditions and the Koran, and mullahs - are professional interpreters of the Koran. But the horror that Libya - a secular state, and the clergy can not have such an impact, both in Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries. But I want to! Again we see respectable gentlemen in civilian clothes who sympathize with you in every way, and hinted that it would be nice to do away with the secular power and install a regime, like the Saudis. In short, these guys promise you neither more nor less, and make a reality of your most cherished dreams.
Well, about the intelligentsia will not speak - this breed is fairly simple. They even the most promise nothing, they nafantaziruyut. What happens next? And then the generals are beginning to quietly handle their subordinate officers (every major, of course, wants to become a general, and in case of victory rebellion successful career is guaranteed), the mullahs zombiruyut townsfolk its casuistic sermons, and the intelligentsia begins to demand freedom, pluralism, political rights and other imported garbage .
Why is being a Libyan man in the street on the wiring, if he lives happily ever after? Yes, for the same reason and shovels in the 80s enthusiastically broke the USSR. Sovbydlo desired to have the freedom, democracy and wages, as in the West, despite the fact that even the thought no one had that with free housing, health, education and social security under capitalism would have to leave. The masses seemed capitalism as socialism, in which is full of all sorts of freedoms, money and stuff, blunt shovels had no idea about unemployment, the oligarchs, lawlessness, total crime and corruption, economic crisis, social insecurity, and other side effects of the capitalist paradise.
Here as many Libyans do not understand that as good as they live today, they live only by the Gaddafi regime, which does not allow the West to plunder the wealth of the country and does not fatten the elite at the expense of the people. From the well-fed and carefree life of people quickly tupeyut their minds detached from reality (in the Soviet Union this happened in spite of the world's best education system). And in case of the Arabs there is another subjective, but very important thing - their minds ... how to put it mildly - a very infantile. And if you say in truth, the Arab peoples backward - they have neither the science nor developed secular culture, nor any technical achievements in the field, they are not able to fight at all, and the state system have appeared only in the XX century. To all other Arabs are very lazy and work, including intellectual, never was in their favor. Dependency, on the contrary, is not considered something shameful. See how Kuwaitis live - they stupidly prozhirayut oil rent, sit back and work in the country are almost exclusively migrant workers. Aborigines just in leadership positions.
In Libya, the situation, though in a much milder form, but still present. It would seem that the regime of Gaddafi Libyans gives unprecedented opportunities for professional fulfillment, creativity, education. But Libyans themselves on this subject do not feel very enthusiastic. Many highly skilled (and the same nurse) - a migrant workers, including those from Eastern Europe. And in unskilled jobs are utilized refugees from Central Africa, the benefit that they are allowed visa-free entry into the country.
So as not to take advantage of this situation? Here the West and provoked a civil war in Libya. Of course, the hand of the insidious agents of the State Department, the CIA and MI5 hard to catch, but the fact that the West is interested in the fall of the Gaddafi regime, no doubt. In Bahrain, the government tanks disperse a peaceful demonstration - the international community keeps mum. A Libyan regime suppress armed rebellion, and on this basis to declare criminal, threatening sanctions and almost military invasion. The thing is that the regime of Bahrain polumarionetochny completely satisfied with Washington (it is the largest in the Middle East, the US military base), but the Gaddafi to amerikosov - matter vrazhina. Not only that, he drove out of Libya, US and British troops, who under King Idris had their bases there, so even the most outrageous, 40 years does not give Western corporations to plunder the natural resources of the country. That is the most subjective, but the decisive factor in determining the country in which the world will happen next color or a bloody revolution.
How will the Libyan zavarushka? Most likely, Gaddafi regain control over the country. But if he is killed or West decides to forceful intervention, the pro-Western opposition win. What is beneficial for Russia? Of course, the preservation of the Gaddafi regime, because that in exchange for writing off debt in 4, 5 billion dollars signed with Russian companies lucrative contracts. In case of victory of the opposition will control the economy of Libya, the Americans and our hunt out filthy broom. But because in the modern world a place of Russia in the bucket, KREMLYADI forced between his teeth, but to play along West.

KUNGUROV





Source: http: //