17.10.2023, Aleksandrovskoye.
Even from a pragmatic point of view, the ideology of “consumer paradise” is not suitable for Russia because it does not allow us to raise our citizens as defenders of our Motherland, said political scientist, philosopher, the leader of the Essence of Time movement Sergey Kurginyan on October 3 in the new issue of his author’s program Destiny.
“This life is not for Russia. It’s not made for Russia. This is not for her, not only as an ideal, as a moral, or a spiritual example, although these factors are decisively important. It is not for Russia for purely pragmatic reasons. It is not suitable because that’s where anti-war mentality is ultimately formed,” Kurginyan explained.
A part of the Russian elites in power considers “the cesspool of this petty bourgeois happiness” to be the true way of life that Russia should follow, noted the philosopher. This position of the authorities resonated with Russian citizens in April 1993 and still does.
However, this ideology ultimately led to the demilitarization of the country amid subsequent aggression from the West. According to the philosopher, the philistine idea was acceptable up to a certain point, since Russia was trying to integrate into the Western world, and was not searching for a conflict.
“Since no one is attacking us, we become friends with the US, with Europe. We now totally abandon this disgusting Stalinist military mobilization mentality. We don’t want to raise our next generation this way. We want to raise them in exactly the opposite way. And we will disarm unilaterally,” the philosopher outlined the post-perestroika policy of the Russian government.
The philosopher recalled the large-scale disarmament that took place in Russia, which was carried out after the collapse of the USSR: the entire mobilization deployment base, specialized divisions, large functional training camps, the pedagogical system, military-strategic thought, the place of the army in society, uniforms, equipment, weapons, design bureaus, sovereignty of the military-industrial complex.
“At the most this was said: ‘We will maintain our strategic nuclear forces, and if they hit us hard, we got something to hit them back with,” Kurginyan recalled.
However, the huge strategic nuclear forces of the Soviet Union could not have prevented its defeat, concluded the philosopher.
Source: Rossa Primavera News Agency
