Conscription is bad for society, but the saving mode. So he will remain and could even be made to the Constitution.
February 23, the male half of the Russian population remembered their dashing and reckless years in gray soldiers ‘ coats, and filled with pride and nostalgia. There is a perception that did not serve in the army — not a man. However, in my experience, this point of view, I usually stick to women, who tend to interpret life to the use of lightweight algorithms — from horoscopes and personal trainings to worship worldly aphorisms.
It is worth mentioning that, even if the story is a collection of myths invented by politicians, it is Feb 23 not a myth, and outright lies. It is not that the feast of his origin is obliged enemy number 1 Leiba Bronstein (Trotsky). And not that February 23 is shameful flight of red sailors, led by Commissar Dybenko. The main thing — it is the most shameful in the history of Russia Brest-Litovsk, the terms of which pushed the USSR to the Second World war and a long echo to posterity.
It is not a holiday, and aching fresh wound. It is easy to stretch a chain from the Brest peace to the Crimea and sanctions against Russia. To celebrate February 23 and remain a patriot is a double bind, “a double bind” and a group of schizophrenia by Gregory Bateson. If you ever have to review a questionable calendar of Russian holidays, the competitors for departures from 23 Feb to find.
On this day, men remember the past and raise a glass, even if the military exploits won. But let’s try to look to the future. First of all, whether the army of the XXI century soldiers ‘ uniforms? What asset is the most important in modern warfare? Translated into practical language, what we need the army — a conscript or contract? Supporters of both points of view have strong arguments.
At the turn of XX—XXI centuries for the first time in human history, the number of casualties in military conflicts efficiently decreased. For several decades in automobile accidents killed twice as many people than wars. Every year from ordinary flu kills more people than combat. Impossible seem to be modern versions of works of art, describing the massive battles. Film by Sergei Bondarchuk “Waterloo”, a painting by Peter Snares “Battle on the White mountain,” a poem by Lermontov “Borodino” — all in the past. Although the films “Platoon” by Oliver stone and “Apocalypse now” by Francis Ford Coppola is quite relevant.
A huge army of cannon fodder and mass casualties — is the story. In the XXI century for the land war only in the third world. (And, unfortunately, Russia was drawn in such wars.) The main asset of the future is information that does not notice the borders. Characteristic symbolic evolution of the Oscar-winning Christoph Waltz from the SS standartenfuehrer in “inglorious bastards” to host the world data Bank, a kind of criminal Zuckerberg in “the Spectrum”.
The war of the future not the possession of land, and control over flows of information. Will be the axiom of the controversial phrase Rothschild, “Who owns the information, owns the world”, uttered after a happy exchange speculation based on insider information around the battle of Waterloo.
Why you need a military coat if the fate of the battle is determined by the engineer in glasses? War becomes desolate, her fate is entrusted with the artificial intelligence. In previous wars technology solves a lot. The Spanish “Great Armada” was killed due to the fact that in England was a breakthrough in the field of gunpowder and marine equipment. But now on the battlefield come is not just the technology but the robots they control remotely officers with the qualification of associate Professor.
Marx and Lenin wrote about industrialization. Admittedly, in the world of scientific thought the belief on the relationship of technical and social progress has come largely thanks to the classics of Marxism-Leninism. But the worst enemy of progress — indoctrination. If the fading environment is less Brezhnev held on to Marx’s industrialization and electrification Lenin, and drew attention to the planned revolution in the field of Informatics and Cybernetics, the fate of the USSR and Russia could, with great probability, be much happier.
Dogma is the most dangerous poison in an era of rapid change. Urgent question: not whether 300 thousand Russian recruits the same indoctrination, a tribute to tradition, which objectively takes resources, and it weakens our army? What can we teach the person for the year, and why a modern army need a soldier, who at best, knows how to March in formation and shoot antiquated weapons? Recruit — financial and resource burden of the army of the XXI century. Note to Syria, where, as in focus, assembled potential of Russian army conscripts does not bring.
On the other hand, the conscript army can be very useful. And if we consider it as a boarding school for Mature Teens, which tightens as the crossbar, flabby youngster for the challenges of life — then the call is necessary. Let not the army itself, but society. Military and athletic tests for a young man of much more than network video games that are able to have in the dark recesses of consciousness. If the army is used as an educational building, it must be disinfected to avoid incidents similar to what happened to ordinary by Shamsutdinova.
And then we come to the Central issue. Why not found a peaceful way to grow up young man? What power imposes on the army functions that burden and hinder her duties? Why invent a law that forbids to take the civil service of those who have not served in the military even caused the proceedings before the constitutional court? Although it is clear — know how to March in formation, then fit in the civil service, which also can not be put out.
The lack of social mobility, the inability to realize the potential and find a decent job, a carcass monopolies and sticky fear of the business life of poverty and hopelessness — that the allies military recruitment and compulsory military service. A conscript army is feudalism and the best indicator of maturity of the society and guidance of the government.
To win, we must prepare for a future war. And generals always fight the last war. This is the Winston Churchill. A conscript army is an anachronism. But it is convenient for the authorities. And therefore the call will continue, it is necessary even in the Constitution to make. May he harmful to society, but the saving mode.
© 2020, paradox. All rights reserved.
