The Other Russia

Lecture 3

You are walking on the street. Cops in gray armyaks. A rumpled crowd of cops. They press you in the chest with a club. “Do you have a registration?” “Where is your registration?” “Do you have a ticket?” “When did you arrive?” “What are you doing here?” “Where is the registration stamp?” “Why aren’t you in the army?” Raids on newcomers, on draftees, on anybody from the Caucasians to the blond Vasilisa from Vologda. And on you – you are betrayed by your young face. Search. “To the wall! Put your hands behind your head! Get down, bitch!” the complete program of humiliations. The motive: your youth! With your young physiognomy you are shining far like a red-skinned Aztec among the olive and white Spaniards. Young men are unreliable. Young and extremist are synonyms. Young men are fascists, communists, deserters, draftees. A citizen should be old, worn out, crackled, rippled, a grandma or a child. Then he is reliable. Then the eyes of the Law organs employees don’t stop on him. It would be handy for the government if all citizens were old men and functional invalids but in such a way that one would be left with arms – to work on the machines, another with eyes to read out the texts needed to the government, another category would have only legs – to run with the commissions of the functionaries. What, is it too grotesque? Yes, it is grotesque but it answers the spirit of the Russian god damned State in the first year of the XXI century. It does not need healthy and young people. They are hastily been thrown in prisons and in the army. The RF is an aggressively anti-youth State.

In the bureaucratic, priestly, National-security -cop State of the RF the youth is superfluous. Moreover it is the next after the Chechens category of citizens, which is regarded cautiously, with suspicion and disbelief. It is the internal enemy when the Chechens are the external one. The proof – the Lefortovo castle is filled with Chechens and the next ones in quantity of cons are the members of the largest youth organization of Russia – the National-Bolshevik Party. What is this, chance? No, this is normal.

It is impossible to deny that the life of a particular man is divided on specific and even strictly defined biological ages. Here they are:

Child: from 1 day to 7 years

Adolescent: from 7 to 14 years

Young person: from 14 to 35 years

Middle age: from 35 to 56 years

Over 65 years – elderly people, commonly called seniors.

Obviously the genetically lucky persons age later, as we say, their biological age does not correspond to the calendar years, however these are few. For the predominant majority of human beings the above stated scale is correct. Let us remember the common belief that all human cells renew themselves completely each seven years.

Children and adolescents up to 14 years are supported in life, clothed and fed by the family. Pensioners (in a normal country in the West like in the East) have some savings, property or pension. These age groups: children, adolescents and pensioners are not yet or anymore working groups of the society (nation), However, if children and adolescents, still not paying any contribution to the money-box of society do not have electoral rights then the pensioners, elderly age, keep their electoral rights until their death. The fact that the elderly age over 60 receive compensation for them having worked once, is quit just. However it is unsound that today it is precisely they, as an active electoral group, in a significant degree force to the country a parliament, a president and all the electoral power. Still, in reality they are people of the past, when they were forming as individuals. This is why today they are automatically electing us leaders according to the tastes of their time when they were able to work. Further more, the developing physical illnesses make them timid and obedient. It seems sound to give to the citizen who goes on pension together with the pension booklet, a notification about the ending of his right to participate in the elections. Other civil rights should be kept for pensioners.

Actually, it can be seen with the naked eye that the governmental official scale of ages that exists here in Russia was displaced in a powerful manner, does not correspond to the biological scale. And was displaced in favor of the elderly ages. This displacement has for result the fact that civil rights just as material values are denied to young people. Why is childhood unjustly prolonged by the jurisdiction? Why is a part of civil rights, more precisely: the right to participate in the elections is given only after 18 years old, and the right to be elected only at 21 years old, still only in the lowest echelons of the electoral power? Is not the right to be killed in war received by the young man at the moment he reaches the recruitment age? Why do we have an absolutely unjust situation when a nineteen years old person can be totally legitimately sent to Chechnya where he will have his life taken from him or he will lose limbs, for that, he is mature, and to be elected in the City Council, say, he should wait until he has reached 21.

But the most dramatic shift, displacement happens precisely in the fact that the childhood is artificially extended. Until the call-up in the army. Why is it done? There is no need to school for so long a young person, common sense tells that from 5 to 14 years, for nine years he can be taught everything that he will need in life. Moreover, in these nine years can be fitted (if the school program is to be freed from the dead disciplines) the higher education as well. Nine years of study are largely enough. For the whole education it is enough. But the government does not want to free the young person from its control, from its claws until the call-up in the army, this is why the middle education has been artificially extended even to three-four years. It has to be said that its scale of ages was imitatively licked by Russia from the “civilized” western countries a long time ago. While in these “civilized’ countries all this cycle: education in school and army was specifically adjusted in such a way so they could send cannon-fodder to the Verduns in a continuous rhythm. In Verdun, for those who do not know, about 80 thousand people were dying daily in the 1916-1917, counting from both sides. This is why here too in Russia, in this aspect nothing essentially (apart form the peculiar ethnical population, a large displacement of peoples) did not differ from other militaristic States, the age scale was adjusted and is adjusted to the military service, for the needs of the general military duty. It does not in any way correspond to the biological reality of the human organism. To this should be added, that during the last XX century diet and the possibilities of nutrition were considerably improved (it is an undeniable fact, notwithstanding the whining of the Russian pacifists about soldiers-anorexics, it is nonetheless a phenomenon of a few years of the beginning of the 90s) and so in its majority young people are physically sufficiently developed already at 14 years old. And if one is to talk about the social development, then even the most backward in the world Russian television gives a complete idea about society in which we live.

Like the automobile increased speed in space, television dramatically sharply increased the speed of world-knowledge so the age when the civil rights are given could be very normally moved to 14 years. I already called for this in 1996 in the legislative proposition of the National-Bolshevik Party. Civil rights at 14 years old! At 14-15 years old the adolescent has to totally stop studying including the higher education. (It does not mean that we want to send him right away to the assembly line, we have another task.) Again, going back to television, it could be said that because of it and other mass-media in lesser degree and all the civilization technology surrounding us today there is no need to school as long and as hard young men and women. The amount of knowledge about the world of which the XIX century man never even dreamed about, or of the beginning of the XX century is literally suggested from the screen of the television daily. Television here is, I repeat, disgusting: clumsy, subordinated to the State, but even like this it is essentially over-informative. The period of the middle education should be tightened in two, maximum five years. To lazily let rot the youth on school banks, giving their spirit away for slaughter to the teachers-philistines is a crime. Education should be clever, clear, joyful. This was already discussed in the last chapter.

So what age should be considered as valuable to the nation, the preferable one?

The age from 14 to 35 years old is without doubt the most productive, the most precious age for the nation. It is the age of the draftees, warriors, men, the blooming of the physical strength of the individual, usually the peak of health, beauty, joy. The age of the outmost creation, sowing, production of children. Modern sexology affirms that man is in his best sexual form at the age of 28. It is not without reason that after 35 the individual usually retires from sport. The physical strength is not increasing anymore but just conserving. Take notice of job announcements: the work is offered, people are called, as a rule “healthy men up to 35 years old” are needed. The sly employers consequently consider that after 35 years old the strength is not the same as before 35 and the acquiring of working skills is harder.

The average age from 35 to 56 years old is a smooth plateau on which the individual already walks limping and stopping to rest. Of course at 35 years old there is already a certain life experience acquired, however essentially this experience is negative – the experience of caution, the experience of cowardice. At 35 years old the individual having burned himself several times is not even breathing on the hot milk anymore, he tips it out.

Form 35 to 56 it is the time of the harvest of life and what was sawn (if was sawn) bears fruits. Yes, harvest time if compared to nature and its cycles. So they – the middle age is ripping all the harvest. To them belong (often only by right of age, by right of duration of their professional career, by right of years of service) key posts in the State, in politics, in economy, in trade, in administration. They head all aspects of life: mass media, army, school, medicine. They are the possessors of a large part of property in the country. The middle age is capable of evenly pulling but is not capable, as a rule, of brilliance, heroism and achievements.

The problem of fathers and children becomes a problem just after the child gets 14 (well, a bit earlier, a bit later, not everybody, as it was already mentioned, has an exact biological age). To that time the child is mature: that has been a while that the girls are menstruating, the boys look manly, their voice is deep and they feel a direct urge for a girlfriend, the sexual maturing has taken place, the parents have before them a formed individual – a man, a woman. And the parents, by order of the government have to still consider them children. Notice that up until this age there is no father and children problem, everything is more or less perfect – the child needs protection until he has not grown up. But here he is grown up – no need to keep him as a child. One should begin life earlier and instantly throw the youth in a vigorous rhythm – To hurry to live!

In each separately taken moment two principal generations are competing with each other: the youth and the middle age. The fight for the best lands, wealth, women. By standing as on the belt of the inexorable conveyor of life, behind them their children, before the elderly and the conveyor is heading at death. The elders usually the first but in times of war the youth leaves first.

Summing up the above mentioned I repeat: power and ownership in Russia (and the rest of the world) are unequally distributed among the generations. Not only between classes or social types of society (which is the same thing as “class”). But between generations. More precisely between the two principal productive manly classes of society: between the youth of 14-35 years of age and the middle age of 35-56, power is distributed flagrantly unequally. Notice the similarity of the terms “middle class” and “middle age” and you will see here more than a vulgar coincidence. Outside of the limits of the middle age there are very few wealthy people. It is the same in the whole world. If during 1988-1995 in Russia it was possible to meet young wealthy “new Russians”, then today you will not find them with a lamp. Only in middle age the individual gathers the necessary contacts, relations, solidly makes his way in some, as they used to say in the end of the 80s, “mafias”, and then come the power and the wealth. Young people, though, with the fact that they are thrown into war and that it is physically the most powerful group of society, has very little power and property, almost the same amount as children and less then pensioners. It is an unjust, it is a very unjust distortion that did not exist in traditional societies. There the warrior precisely from 14 to 35 years of age – the best warrior age was the most important part of society. And received his worth.

(Youth is the present tense of society. Children are its future. Pensioners, elderly – its past. There is nothing offending in these cycles because everybody passes them.) A thought comes to mind that with the help of demagogy, tricks, using the fact that the young do not have the time yet to create their groups (“mafias”) – the middle age simple stole, is stealing daily from the youth its share of power and property. The argument in favor of “experience” and “savoir-faire” of the middle age, the experience supposedly gives them an advantage before the youth, does not work here. In many areas of life the experience is acquired very fast. And the basic experience that the majority gets is the experience of cowardice and caution. It is better not to have it at all.

If only power and property were shared among the two principal classes equally. But no, the young person has many less than even a pensioner, the pensioner has a pension, an apartment. The young man, the young woman in our society does not have even some meters of roof over his head. As for the student’s allowance it cannot be even from far being compared to the salary of middle age. (Well, it is clear that there are middle age bums, alcoholics, sick people, retarded people of middle age, but that’s not what we are talking about!)

In short, you, dear boys, (I remind that all the work was planned in the form of a cycle of lectures for NBP members), partygenosse, are getting ripped off for generations. Stinking vodka, cigarette and old age, with dandruffs on his uniform, the military commander very easily sends you to the army and to Chechnya and there you will be dismembered from grenade throwers of the freedom-liking Chechens. And if you lose a limb, comrade, your Country will give you 500 rubles for an artificial one. And the government will never condescend to answer your question: if I put my own body and spirit of divine origin under bullets and shell-splinters, then why does not the government equals this death smelling labor of mine to this and that quantity of actions of a petroleum company or hectares of land? Of course in the State, especially the Russian, with the traditions of an autocratic insolent State, only the State asks the questions, it has appropriated itself this right by its own will. Then let us get clear with the State! If it is so insolently unjust, let us get clear with it.

Some may argue that it was always. No, and again no, and no. In the past, States waged uninterrupted wars (like in our time, actually. The atomic peace has shortly reconciliated the principal blocks of States: the western and the eastern one, that’s all.) and warriors were on particular demand. The price for youth, for men in the age of warriors was high. Only the creation of slave-using monarchist States in XVI-XVIII centuries has created possibilities of a general military duty and the peasants serfs of some Gessen could be sold to fight against the American colonizers. But this state of things exists since a short time. And during the entire length of human kind’s history the warrior was valued. From the times of the Neanderthals or from the creation of the world, whatever one prefers.

In epochs of revolution the biological, natural order of things, even for a short time, even in the limits of a single generation, triumphed and the youth came out in the first roles in the State and society. It had power and often property. A classic example Napoleon Bonaparte – emperor at 31 and his marshals, coming from the lowest estates – the children of the French Revolution. Another classic example: the Bolsheviks. Molotov, Trotsky, Dzerzhinsky, Stalin, entered the party at 16, 17, 18, 19 years old and finding themselves on the key posts in the State already at thirty and something. Blumkin, the very same which killed the German imperial ambassador after Mirbach, celebrated by Gumilev, Blumkin, who has arrived from his native Odessa in Moscow at 18 was instantly appointed chief of the counter-intelligence VChK. At 18 years old! One can recall the cult of youth among the national socialist of Germany and fascists of Italy, and these were revolutionary movements. Around Hitler and Mussolini and Lenin were then gathered in the beginning of the XX century young and very young people. Studying the experience of the revolutions near to us in time: The Russian of 1917, the German – national-socialist, the Italian fascist, but also more distant – the Great French of 1789, one can ascertain that they were not a proletarian revolution, a fascist or a bourgeois Great French Revolution. But they were also, in essence, revolutions of the youth against the middle class and the elderly. A revolution is always carried out by the young people, the reaction is the work of the middle age and the elderly.

As far as I know, historians did not study revolutions as a phenomenon of war between generations, contenting myself with only facts, without their analysis; Yes, Bolsheviks or national-socialists were very young people, only Lenin (47) and Hitler (44) were far more older then their comrades.

I will try to generalize and I ascertain: all the revolutions that have won – they are victories of children over their fathers, the youth over the middle age.