This is the base of European (bourgeois-democratic) values
Delivering the speech at the Valdai discussion club, Russian President Vladimir Putin, citing the well-known proverb, what is permitted to Jupiter is not permitted to an ox, has added that the “bear”, i.e. Russia, is not going to ask anyone’s permission. In other words, if it is permitted to the United States, then why it is not permitted to Russia. It’s a classical “Eurasian” approach, if I assume that someone is not playing by the rules, then I should not play either. I recalled the middle-aged woman who recently was dragging her pregnant daughter in the red light, saying, “Are you living in the country of law that you want to cross the street in the green light?”
From the mentality of sniffing a plant bug in Taiga, we should shift to European, or, which is the same in this case, the bourgeois-democratic values. The word “revolution”, as is known, is worn out, an unshaking shifting is right. We say “bourgeois-democratic”, that’s right, but it must be followed by the declaration of the principles, on which the bourgeois-democratic state is supposedly based. These principles should be attractive to certain class of people, and we should move this class to actions.
Unfortunately, many people have not listened to my conversation with cultural anthropologist Aghasi Tadevosyan in the framework of “A1+”‘s «P.S.» transmission, hence, I want to reproduce some of his thoughts.
Read also
The politician aspiring for changes should apply to the class, the layers, the groups, who realize their interests. When he applies to “the entire people”, it means only one thing: he is trying to use the massive discontent of people with some complaints for his own purposes. And the person comprehending his own interest, according to the scientist, should realize what he wants from the native bourgeoisie under our discussed situation. The latter, naturally, must realize his overall interest.
The bourgeois-democratic values suggest, consequently, not that one comes as a savior, as a Lord, who promises a better life for his subjects, but an environment is created, in which everyone is involved in the formation of the common wellbeing. When one says, “I will come and provide wellbeing for you, it is a feudal morality. The struggle against the monarchy, thus, is proceeding with monarchical psychology.
But for the bourgeois-democratic reforms, there should first and foremost be a bourgeoisie. If you’re playing by the rules, and the state has leverage on you to bring you to order, you’re a bourgeois. If you do not obey any rules (saying, “Well, this is a lawless country”), and the state has no leverage on you, particularly because you yourself are a representative of the state system: a minister or n MP, you’re an oligarch. So, as they say, start with yourself, at the minimum, pay taxes. Reformation can be initiated with the bourgeoisie rather than oligarchy. And the fight should be not for the sake of some “justice”, which everyone understands in its own way, but for the sake of the law, in the end, for the sake of freedom and equality. This is how I understand the bourgeois-democratic values.
Should this legal basis be, the remaining issues: fair elections, independent courts, etc., are solvable. How to create this legal basis, it is not only the task of the political circles. Sometimes it is worth listening to smart people and give up the paranoiac complexes that those who 100 percent do not agree with the opposition orators, are “government-servicing people”.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
