“The disunity of mankind threatens it with death. In the face of danger, any action that increases the disunity of mankind, any preaching of the incompatibility of world ideologies and nations is madness, a crime.” Sakharov wrote. It was in this work that the deep and very important idea for Sakharov was first formulated that for the sake of the future of mankind, the socialist and capitalist systems should converge with each other and this process should be accompanied by the democratization and demilitarization of society.
“To move away from the edge of the abyss of a global catastrophe, to preserve civilization and life itself on the planet is an urgent need modern stage world history. This, as I am convinced, is possible only as a result of deep geopolitical, socio-economic and ideological changes in the direction of rapprochement (convergence) of the capitalist and socialist systems and the openness of society ... We need a new way of thinking for humanity!” - wrote A.D. Sakharov.
In the Soviet Union, Sakharov's work was distributed illegally as "samizdat". Abroad, it was translated into several languages, published in a huge circulation and caused a flood of responses in the press of many countries. The Soviet leadership reacted very painfully to this speech by Sakharov. Although there was nothing anti-Soviet in his book, the very fact that he allowed himself to "intervene" and tell the party leadership about his mistakes in managing the economy, about miscalculations in his internal and foreign policy caused great irritation. In the same year, Sakharov was removed from secret work.
Third of June coup
Taking into account the inferiority of the resulting electoral legislation, the limited rights of the Russian parliament and the contradictions within the liberals, it can be stated that their strong positions in the Dumas could not fully compensate for the narrowness of their mass base and the relative weakness of their influence in society as a whole. Russia never st...
The Eastern Crisis and the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-1878
In the 70s. 19th century the eastern question escalated again. The collapse of the feudal system Ottoman Empire accompanied by an increase in its dependence on Western European countries. The penetration of capitalist relations was accompanied by the intensification of crude forms of feudal exploitation, combined with the harsh national and religious oppression of the Balkans...
The beginning of the reign of Alexander II and the prerequisites for reform activities. Biography of Alexander II
Alexander II Nikolaevich Romanov was born on April 17, 1818 in the Moscow Kremlin and died of wounds on March 1, 1881 in the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg. On March 15, his body was buried in the imperial tomb of the Peter and Paul Cathedral. He entered the history of Russia as a great reformer and liberator of the serfs. Officially Alex...
In this statement, the outstanding scientist A. D. Sakharov raises the problem of the importance of international cooperation in solving global problems. The author says that if countries do not cooperate with each other and maintain peaceful international relations, this can lead to inevitable consequences. I agree with the opinion of the author, because in today's society there are many global problems that cannot be resolved without mutual assistance and efforts from all countries of the world.
Our experts can check your essay according to the USE criteria
Site experts Kritika24.ru
Teachers of leading schools and current experts of the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation.
At least two aspects can be distinguished in this problem: the essence and types of global problems and ways to solve them.
Consider the first theoretical aspect. Global problems are a set of problems that began to manifest themselves in the 20th century, characterized by global manifestations and devastating consequences. All these problems are interconnected and require the efforts of all countries to resolve them. For example, there is a clear connection between the environmental problem and the North-South problem: developed countries export their products to developing industries, which spoils the ecology of the latter countries. In addition, there are a number of equally important global problems: demographic, the problem of international terrorism, the problem of epidemics, drug trafficking. Also, with the invention of nuclear weapons, we faced the problem of a third world war.
Let me give you an example from history that proves how devastating the consequences of one such problem, which is associated with the use of nuclear weapons, can be. In August 1945, the United States dropped two bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. As a result, many people died. Even the descendants of those people who were close to the explosion are now suffering from radiation sickness. This proves that if you do not try to prevent the problem, the consequences will be terrible.
Consider the second aspect from a theoretical point of view. Each global problem has its own solutions. To resolve the ecological one, it is necessary to minimize the harm to nature, to solve the North-South problem, economic mutual assistance of countries is needed. To resolve the problems of international terrorism and the third world war, it is necessary to sign international agreements that would be aimed at the peaceful development of society, as well as following them.
I will give an example from modern life, which shows how countries cooperate in the modern world. Today, many countries follow the rules of the Geneva and Hague conventions, which prohibit the use of chemical and nuclear weapons in war. Thus, this shows one of the ways to solve global problems.
It can be concluded that the solution of global problems is very important for modern world and this requires international cooperation.
Updated: 2018-11-23
Attention!
Thank you for your attention.
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.
Thus, you will provide invaluable benefit to the project and other readers.
1. Appeal to the virtual 2nd International Sakharov Congress "Peace, Progress, Human Rights", 2001
Why don't we remember the man in whose name this Congress is made? What did Andrei Dmitrievich himself say about many of the topics raised here? What is his position on the problem of interaction, cooperation, partnership, if you like, between human rights activists themselves, and not just between society and the authorities.
Unfortunately or fortunately, I did not find in the works of A.D. assessment of the internal problems of the human rights movement. It wasn't the time then.
But you can try to remember the lifestyle of A.D., his public speeches, books and articles.
I never publicly recalled the case of his instantaneous reaction to direct everyday evil.
In 1988 I complained bitterlyElena Georgievnathat one of the prominent human rights activists, a former political prisoner, opened a “public reception room” right in the apartment of another political prisoner (we were all just freed then). The reception of the population was on the first floor of a residential five-story building. There was a crowd in two rooms and on the stairs from morning till night, and there were drinking parties in the evening. Neighbors filed a lawsuit against the unrequited owner of the apartment. The case quickly moved towards eviction. All my persuasion and begging of the organizer to stop all this disgrace, to save the apartment, ran into his bewildered: we must help people!
I told all this in the kitchen, in Sakharov's apartment, when A.D. and heard a snippet of our conversation. And, suddenly, it boiled up and dispersed so much that I was frightened. It was not enough for me to load him with such problems, I thought longingly. Yes, and E.G. cast lightning eyes. But it was too late. HELL. He took this, in general, everyday story about people practically unknown to him as if it was a gross violation of the balance of strategic weapons or the revival of totalitarianism in the USSR. His assessments were not only accurate, as usual, but extremely emotional, which I did not expect at all.
The next day, I called the organizer of the reception and gave him, as accurately as I could, the assessment of A.D. The comrade human rights activist understood everything and pretty soon moved his "reception" to a more suitable place. The apartment was saved! We won the trial.
Here is a clear example of a direct, forehead, work by A.D. on specific people, on the individual, and not on “human rights” in general. Here is an example of his adequate (I emphasize this word!) reaction, now lost by many.
We do not currently have such a person, influential enough to not only hear, but immediately understand the problem and be able to correct it just as quickly. No S.V. Kalistratova, no G.S. Podyapolsky, no P.G. Grigorenko - relatives of A.D. people whose opinion could pacify, calm down the insane actions and reasoning of the so-called. "heirs" of A.D., people engaged in, as it were, the continuation and development of his deeds and ideas. Former political prisoners can be sent away and for a long time both in the Memorial and in the Museum and the Sakharov Center. From the Sakharov Congress they can make a completely obscene garbage heap (see the "guest" book on the very first page of the Congress website). In the MHG, in front of and with the tacit approval of their member, an Orthodox priest, for a bundle of money they can agree with Hubbard Scientologists to publish a book on freedom of conscience (!). Etc. etc.
“Wonderful are your works, Lord!” Much evil is going on, and the author himself, of course, is not without sin.
Only from memory can I cite another case when, in one of my dying interviews, A.D. answered a question about the possible future of the human rights movement (I don’t know the exact quote, but I vouch for the meaning): “Probably,” Sakharov said, “some form of unification is needed.”
I thought about these words for almost a year. And in 1992, with the approval of the MHG, he created a "collective farm" - he pulled our first human rights organizations out of the kitchens (the Committee of Soldiers' Mothers, "Prison Reform", the Association of the Disabled, etc., in total - 15). I planted them all in the premises of the former Central Committee of the All-Union Leninist Young Communist League, called them the Center for Human Rights, looked and thought that it was good ... It seemed to me that I had found some form of unification.
It was difficult to stand against the nearby presidential administration, against the owners of the building - former Komsomol members. But the most terrible blow followed, as always, in the back - I did not expect at all the furious and cruel attack that fell on me and on the Center from a completely unexpected side - from fellow human rights activists (see the chapter "Center" on this site).
Why did it happen so?
Maybe this article will shed some light on it?
4. I have long been convinced that both democrats and human rights activists, and indeed everyone normal people need to unite. For evil is strength, and alone we are weak.
With bitterness I observe the growing separation of human rights organizations, and human rights defenders themselves, from each other. With longing we see the speculations of human rights demagogues on the theme of "society-power". Whether grants-money is to blame, or ambitions: they say, I'm cooler than others, I'm an elite - it doesn't matter.
Moreover, it is necessary to unite or, as they say in the West, to partner. In the study of all our external and internal problems (at least the same advisers, commissions and commissioners for human rights) it is necessary to involve public organizations that know these newly-minted commissioners and commissioners well. For these latter, no matter how they pretend, are the flesh of the very Soviet state that killed human rights activists.
They did not repent, because we did not have repentance akin to the post-war German or Japanese. Old sins linger.
And to cope with them, to teach them something sensible - it is possible only together, together, without sucking up, without applying to their wishes and terminology.
I say this to everyone, but they are in no hurry to partner.
A kind of persistent early perestroika individualism.
Or is it a calculation?
I run the risk of involving Andrey Dmitrievich in theoretical disputes about the problems of the human rights movement.
So what did Sakharov say about HOW we should act?
It is extremely important to remind many of our human rights defenders (especially new, post-perestroika ones) what AD said about human rights, it is important to try to apply its approaches and considerations to the present.
The main thing that I understood for myself from his works, in this context, is that not only the whole world needs to overcome disunity, but also us, human rights activists.
In addition, our human rights cause - no politics and moral values should be in our work in the first place.
In words, no one is against it, but who reads and remembers Sakharov now? ...
It remains to find the original sources.
The best is on the Internet. This makes it easier to choose quotes.
I looked all over the Internet in search of the works of A.D.
The strange thing is that there are almost none! I went to the website of Memorial (maybe they saved the memory?), I visited the website of the Samodurov House-Museum, I went to the American Sakharov Foundation...
Nowhere! Only this one foreign fund I found a link to the site ... "Yabloko", where there were several articles of AD. I left a bewildered review, but what's the point, they still won't answer, they won't react - Sakharov's style has been lost.
Took books, began to retype by hand
Read, envy… Everything that A.D. Sakharov writes about humanity and the dangers in its development, which is also applicable to our society. Including, for that social phenomenon which is called "human rights movement". It is also part of humanity.
Let us apply Sakharov's reflections to the current moment, to ourselves:
1. Reflections on progress, peaceful coexistence
and intellectual freedom
“... The disunity of humanity threatens it with death ...
In the face of danger, any action that increases the disunity of mankind, any preaching of the incompatibility of world ideologies and nations is madness, a crime. Only worldwide cooperation in the conditions of intellectual freedom, high moral ideals of socialism and labor, with the elimination of factors of dogmatism and the pressure of the hidden interests of the ruling classes, meets the interests of preserving civilization ...
(* The reader understands that this does not mean an ideological peace with those fanatical, sectarian and extremist ideologies that deny any possibility of rapprochement with them, discussion and compromise, for example, with the ideologies of fascist, racist, militaristic or Maoist, demagoguery) .. .
…For humanity to move away from the edge of the abyss means to overcome disunity.
A necessary step along this path is a revision of the traditional method in international politics, which can be called "empirical-opportunistic". Simply put, it is a method of maximizing one's position wherever possible, and at the same time a method of maximum trouble for the opposing forces without regard to the common good and common interests.
If politics is a game of two players, then this is the only possible method. But what does such a method lead to in today's unprecedented environment? ..
... International politics should be completely saturated with scientific methodology and a democratic spirit, with a desire to fearlessly take into account all facts, views and theories, with the maximum publicity of precisely formulated main and intermediate goals, with principled consistency ... "
2. The world in half a century
“... I consider it especially important to overcome the disintegration of the world into antagonistic groups of states, the process of rapprochement ...
... The role should be very big international organizations– UN, UNESCO, etc….
… the “super task” of human institutions… is not only to protect all born people from unnecessary suffering and premature death, but also to preserve everything human in humanity…
... And in any case, progress that saves people from hunger and disease cannot contradict the preservation of the principle of active goodness, which is the most humane thing in man .. "
3. About the country and the world
“... The world needs demilitarization, national altruism and internationalism, freedom of information exchange and movement of people, publicity, international protection of social and civil rights person. The countries of the "third world" should receive comprehensive assistance and, for their part, fully assume their share of responsibility for the future of the world, pay more attention to the development of material production, stop oil speculation ...
... All these are indispensable conditions for overcoming the disunity of mankind, saving it from the danger of thermonuclear death, hunger, ecological catastrophe, dehumanization”
One of the international dangers of existing trends is the loss of the unity of the West and a clear understanding of the persistent global threat from totalitarian countries. The West must under no circumstances allow its position to weaken in the face of totalitarianism. The internal (for each country) danger is a “sliding” towards state capitalist totalitarian socialism..”
4. Nobel lecture "Peace, progress, human rights"
“...I am convinced that international trust, mutual understanding, disarmament and international security are inconceivable without an open society, freedom of information, freedom of opinion, publicity, freedom of travel and choice of country of residence. I am also convinced that freedom of opinion, along with other civil liberties, is the basis of scientific and technological progress and a guarantee against the use of its achievements to the detriment of humanity, thus the basis of economic and social progress, and is also a political guarantee of the possibility of effective protection of social rights. Thus, I defend the thesis about the primary, determining significance of civil and political rights in shaping the fate of mankind….
... The final act of the Helsinki meeting in particular attracts our attention because it officially reflects for the first time that comprehensive approach to solving problems of international security, which seems to be the only possible one; the act contains profound language on the connection of international security with the protection of human rights...
… the protection of human rights is proclaimed by the UN Universal Declaration as an international, not a domestic matter. For the sake of this great goal, no effort can be spared, no matter how long the path may be ...
... In an effort to protect the rights of people, we must act, in my opinion, first of all as defenders of the innocent victims of the existing different countries regimes, without demanding the crushing and total condemnation of these regimes. We need reforms, not revolutions. We need a flexible, pluralistic and tolerant society that embodies the spirit of search, discussion and free, non-dogmatic use of the achievements of all social systems. What is discharge? convergence? - it's not about words, but about our determination to create a better, kinder society, a better world order.
5. Anxiety and hope
“... The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Human Rights Covenants, which now have the force of international law, the Helsinki Final Act are the legal and political basis for combating intolerable violations
I welcome... the position of US President D. Carter. Carter, with all the strength of his authority, based on the will of the American people, proclaimed that the protection of human rights throughout the world is based on the highest moral obligations ...
I am convinced that it is possible and necessary to go further and accept the work for human rights throughout the world as an essential component of all international relations, a guarantee of their moral strength and practical, lasting success ...
… The protection of human rights is not of a political nature. It comes entirely from moral principles and its connection with the protective peace of the earth. Therefore, all people of good will, regardless of their "right" or "left" political convictions, can and should take part in it...
... The concept of active international protection of human rights, which is the basis of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ... and many other international documents ..., is now acquiring the significance of an international ideology ... "
6. Anxious time
“... The unification of all forces is one of the advantages of totalitarianism in its global offensive ...
... The lack of unity of Western countries is the flip side of democratic pluralism ...
... Decades of total terror, old and new prejudices .. - all this has deeply disfigured the consciousness of the broadest masses of the population. The ideology of the Soviet tradesman ... consists of several simple ideas
1. The cult of the state ...
2. Selfish desire to ensure one’s and one’s family’s well-being, “living like everyone else”, with the help of blat, theft .. and obligatory hypocrisy
3. The idea of national superiority..
…People in the country, of course, are disoriented and intimidated to some extent, but conscious self-deception and selfish self-elimination from difficult problems are also very significant.
... But from the same people came out the defenders of human rights, standing up against deceit, hypocrisy and dumbness, armed only with fountain pens, with a readiness for sacrifice and without facilitating faith in a quick and effective success. And they said their word, it will not be forgotten, they have moral strength and logic historical development... Their activities will continue in one form or another, in one volume or another. The point here is not in arithmetic, but in the qualitative fact of breaking through the psychological barrier of silence.
7. Responsibility of scientists
“... What I am writing about... is not a struggle for power and therefore not politics. This is a struggle for the preservation of peace and moral values developed by the entire development of civilization ... "
8. The danger of thermonuclear war. Open letter Dr. Sydney Drell.
“... I emphasize once again how important it is for the general understanding of the absolute inadmissibility of nuclear war - the collective suicide of mankind. A nuclear war cannot be won. It is necessary to systematically - albeit cautiously - strive for complete nuclear disarmament on the basis of a strategic balance of conventional weapons. As long as the world exists nuclear weapon, what is needed is a strategic balance of nuclear forces in which neither side can decide on a limited or regional nuclear war. Genuine security is possible only on the basis of the stabilization of international relations, the rejection of the policy of expansion, the strengthening of international confidence, openness and pluralization ..., respect for human rights throughout the world, ... "
9. Election platform
“…Openness of salary data. Mandatory regular (at least once a year) publication of financial statements of all public funds, including salaries of employees, hospitality, travel ... "
A.D. SAKHAROV
REFLECTIONS ON PROGRESS, PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE AND
INTELLECTUAL FREEDOM
A SMALL FOREWORD
In 1967 I wrote a futurological article about the future role of science in the life of society and about the future of science itself for a collection of official distribution. In the same year, the journalist E. Henry and I wrote an article for Literaturnaya Gazeta on the role of the intelligentsia and the danger of thermonuclear war. The Central Committee of the CPSU did not give permission for the publication of this article, but by some unknown means it ended up in the "Political Diary" - a mysterious publication, supposedly a kind of "samizdat" for top officials. Both of these little-known articles formed the basis of a work that was destined to play a central role in my social activities a year later.
Early in 1968 I began work on a book I called Reflections on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom. In it, I wanted to reflect my thoughts on the most important issues facing humanity - about war and peace, about dictatorship, about the taboo subject of Stalinist terror and freedom of thought, about demographic problems and environmental pollution, about the role that science can play and scientific and technological progress. On the general mood The work was affected by the time of its writing - the height of the "Prague Spring". The main ideas that I have tried to develop in "Reflections" are not very new and original. It is basically a compilation of liberal, humanistic and "science-cratic" ideas, based on the information available to me and personal experience. I now evaluate this work as eclectic and sometimes pretentious, imperfect ("raw") in form. Nevertheless, his main ideas are dear to me. The paper clearly articulates the thesis that seems very important to me about the convergence of the socialist and capitalist systems, accompanied by democratization, demilitarization, social and scientific and technological progress as the only alternative to the death of mankind. Starting from May-June 1968, "Reflections" were widely distributed in the USSR. This is my first work, which became the property of "samizdat". July and August are the first foreign reports of my performance; Subsequently, "Reflections" were repeatedly published abroad in large numbers, and caused a huge flow of responses in the press of many countries. Along with the content of the work, this undoubtedly played important role the fact that it was one of the first works of a socio-political nature that broke through to the West, moreover, the author was a representative of the “mysterious” and “terrible” specialty of the atomic physicist (this sensationalism, unfortunately, still surrounds me , especially on the pages of mass Western press).
Only he is worthy of life and freedom,
Who goes to battle for them every day.
Goethe
The views of the author were formed among the scientific and scientific-technical intelligentsia, which is very concerned about the fundamental and specific issues of foreign and domestic policy, in matters of the future of mankind. In particular, this concern is fueled by the realization that the scientific method of guiding politics, the economy, the arts, education, and military affairs has not yet become a reality. We consider "scientific" a method based on a deep study of facts, theories and views, involving an unbiased, dispassionate in its conclusions, open discussion. At the same time, the complexity and diversity of all phenomena of modern life, the enormous opportunities and dangers associated with the scientific and technological revolution and a number of social and social trends urgently require just such an approach, which is also recognized in a number of official statements.
In the pamphlet submitted for discussion by readers, the author has set himself the goal, with the greatest persuasiveness and frankness available to him, to state two theses that are shared by very many people around the world. These theses are:
1. The disunity of humanity threatens it with death. Civilization is threatened by: general thermonuclear war; catastrophic famine for most of humanity; stupidity in the dope of "mass culture" and in the grip of bureaucratized dogmatism; the spread of mass myths, throwing entire peoples and continents into the power of cruel and insidious demagogues; death and degeneration from the unforeseen results of rapid changes in the conditions of existence on the planet.
In the face of danger, any action that increases the disunity of mankind, any preaching of the incompatibility of world ideologies* and nations is madness, a crime. Only worldwide cooperation under conditions of intellectual freedom, high moral ideals of socialism and labor, with the elimination of factors of dogmatism and the pressure of the hidden interests of the ruling classes, is in the interests of preserving civilization.
* The reader understands that this is not about an ideological peace with those fanatical, sectarian and extremist ideologies that deny any possibility of rapprochement with them, discussion and compromise, for example, with the ideologies of fascist, racist, militaristic or Maoist, demagogy. (Hereinafter, the footnotes marked with an asterisk are made by the author when writing these works. - Note ed.)
Millions of people around the world strive to end poverty, hate oppression, dogmatism and demagoguery (and their extreme expression - racism, fascism, Stalinism and Maoism), believe in progress based on the use of all the positive experience accumulated by mankind in conditions of social justice and intellectual freedom .
2. The second main thesis: human society needs intellectual freedom - freedom to receive and disseminate information, freedom of unbiased and fearless discussion, freedom from the pressure of authority and prejudice. This triple freedom of thought is the only guarantee against the infection of the people with mass myths, which in the hands of insidious hypocrites-demagogues easily turn into a bloody dictatorship. This is the only guarantee of the feasibility of a scientific-democratic approach to politics, economics and culture.
But freedom of thought modern society is under a triple threat: from the calculated opium of "mass culture", from the cowardly and selfish petty-bourgeois ideology, from the ossified dogmatism of the bureaucratic oligarchy and its weapon of choice, ideological censorship. Therefore, freedom of thought needs the protection of all thinking and honest people. This is the task not only of the intelligentsia, but of all strata of society, and especially of its most active and organized stratum, the working class. The world dangers of war, famine, cult, bureaucracy are dangers for all mankind.
The realization by the working class and the intelligentsia of the commonality of their interests is a remarkable phenomenon of our time. It can be said that the most progressive, internationalist and self-sacrificing part of the intelligentsia is essentially part of the working class, while the advanced, educated and international part of the working class, which is the furthest away from philistinism, is at the same time part of the intelligentsia*.
* Such a position of the intelligentsia in society makes vociferous demands on the intelligentsia to subordinate their aspirations to the will and interests of the working class (in the USSR, Poland and other socialist countries). In fact, such appeals imply submission to the will of the party or, more specifically, its central apparatus, its officials. But where is the guarantee that these officials always express the true interests of the working class as a whole, the true interests of progress, and not their own caste interests?
We have divided this brochure into two parts. Let's call the first "Dangers", the second - "The Basis of Hope".
The brochure is debatable, controversial in many respects and calls for discussion and debate.
DANGERS
The threat of thermonuclear war
Three technical aspects of thermonuclear weapons have made thermonuclear war a threat to the very existence of civilization. These are the enormous destructive power of a thermonuclear explosion, the relative cheapness of thermonuclear missile weapons, and the practical impossibility of effective defense against a massive nuclear missile attack.
Today, three megatons can be considered a "typical" thermonuclear charge (this is something between the charge of the Minuteman rocket and the Titan II rocket). The area of the fire zone during the explosion of such a charge is 150 times larger, and the area of the destruction zone is 30 times larger than that of the Hiroshima bomb. With the explosion of one such charge over the city on an area of 100 square meters. km, a zone of continuous destruction and fire appears, tens of millions of square meters of living space are destroyed, at least 1 million people die under the rubble of buildings, from fire and radiation, suffocate in brick dust and smoke, die in littered shelters. In the event of a ground explosion, the fallout of radioactive dust creates a danger of lethal exposure over an area of tens of thousands of square kilometers.
Now about the cost and the possible number of explosions.
After the search and research stage has been passed, the mass production of thermonuclear weapons and launch vehicles turns out to be no more difficult and expensive than, for example, the production of military aircraft, which were produced during the war in tens of thousands.
Now the annual production of plutonium in the whole world amounts to tens of thousands of tons. If we assume that half of this production goes to military purposes and that several kilograms of plutonium are used on average in one charge, it becomes obvious that enough charges have already been accumulated to repeatedly destroy all of humanity.
The third technical aspect of the thermonuclear danger (along with the power and cheapness of charges) we call the practical irresistibility of a massive missile attack. This circumstance is well known to specialists; in the popular science literature, see, for example, Bethe and Garvin's recent article in Scientific American (No. 3, 1968).
Now the technology and tactics of attack have far outstripped the technology of defense, despite the creation of very maneuverable and powerful anti-missiles with nuclear charges, despite other technical ideas (such as using a laser beam, etc.).
Increasing the resistance of charges to the effects of a shock wave, to the radiation effects of neutron and X-ray irradiation, the possibility of widely using relatively light and cheap "false targets" that are almost indistinguishable from live charges and depleting the enemy's anti-missile defense equipment, improving the tactics of massive, concentrated in time and in the space of missile-thermonuclear attacks exceeding the capacity of detection and guidance and calculation stations, the use of orbital and flat attack trajectories, active and passive interference, and a number of other techniques that have not yet been covered in the press - all this has put technical and economic obstacles before the creation of an effective missile defense which are currently practically insurmountable*.
* The experience of past wars has given many examples of the fact that the first application of a new technical or tactical method of attack usually proved to be very effective, even if a simple antidote was soon found. But in the case of a thermonuclear war, the very first application may turn out to be decisive and nullify many years of work and multibillion-dollar expenditures on the creation of missile defense (anti-missile defense).
An exception is the case of a very large difference in the technical and economic potentials of two opposing opponents. In this case, the stronger party, having created a missile defense system with a multiple margin of safety, is tempted to try to permanently get rid of the dangerous unstable balance- go on a preventive adventure, spending part of your attack potential on destroying most of the enemy’s missile launch sites and counting on impunity at the last stage of escalation, that is, when destroying enemy cities and industry.
Fortunately for the stability of the world, the difference in the technical and economic potentials of the USSR and the USA is not so great that for one of these parties such "preventive aggression" would not be associated with an almost inevitable risk of a crushing retaliatory strike, and this situation will not change with the expansion of the arms race. for the construction of missile defense systems. In the opinion of many, shared by the author, the diplomatic formalization of this mutually understandable situation (for example, in the form of an agreement on a moratorium on the construction of missile defense systems) would be a useful demonstration of the desire of the United States and the USSR to maintain the status quo and not expand the arms race for insanely expensive anti-missile systems, a demonstration of the desire to cooperate, not to fight.
Thermonuclear war cannot be regarded as a continuation of politics by military means (according to the Clausewitz formula), but is a means of worldwide suicide*.
* There are two directions of attempts to return thermonuclear war in the eyes of public opinion"usual" political character. This is, firstly, the "paper tiger" concept, the concept of irresponsible Maoist adventurers. Secondly, it is the strategic doctrine of escalation worked out by the scientific and militaristic circles of the United States. Without underestimating the seriousness of the challenge embodied in this doctrine, we confine ourselves here to remarking that the real counterbalance to this doctrine is the political strategy of peaceful coexistence.
The complete destruction of cities, industry, transport, the education system, the poisoning of fields, water and air with radioactivity, the physical destruction of most of humanity, poverty, barbarism, savagery and genetic degeneration under the influence of radiation of the rest, the destruction of the material and information base of civilization - this is the measure of danger, before which the world is confronted by the disunity of the two world superpowers.
Every rational being, finding itself on the edge of the abyss, first tries to move away from this edge, and only then thinks about satisfying all other needs. For humanity to move away from the edge of the abyss means to overcome disunity.
A necessary step along this path is a revision of the traditional method in international politics, which can be called "empirical-opportunistic". Simply put, it is a method of maximizing one's position wherever possible, and at the same time a method of maximum trouble for the opposing forces without regard to the common good and common interests.
If politics is a game of two players, then this is the only possible method. But what does such a method lead to in today's unprecedented environment?
In Vietnam, the forces of reaction do not hope for the desired outcome of the people's will, they use the force of military pressure, violate all legal and moral norms, and commit egregious crimes against humanity. An entire nation is being sacrificed for the supposed task of stopping the "communist flood".
They are trying to hide from the American people the role of considerations of personal and party prestige, cynicism and cruelty, the futility and inefficiency of the anti-communist objectives of American policy in Vietnam, the damage this war has to the true goals of the American people, which coincide with the universal tasks of strengthening peaceful coexistence.
Ending the war in Vietnam is primarily a matter of saving the people who are dying there. But it is also a matter of saving world peace. Nothing undermines the possibility of peaceful coexistence more than the continuation of the Vietnam War.
Another tragic example is the Middle East. If in Vietnam the most direct responsibility lies with the United States, then in this case indirect responsibility lies with both the United States and the USSR (and in 1948 and 1956, also with Britain). On the one hand, there was an irresponsible encouragement of the so-called Arab unity (which was by no means socialist in nature - suffice it to recall Jordan - but was purely nationalist, anti-Israeli); it was argued that the struggle of the Arabs was fundamentally anti-imperialist. On the other hand, there has been an equally irresponsible encouragement of Israeli extremists.
We cannot here analyze the whole contradictory, tragic history of the events of the last 20 years, during which both the Arabs and Israel, along with historically justified actions, committed very reprehensible actions, often due to the actions of external forces. Thus, in 1948, Israel waged a defensive war, but in 1956, Israel's actions seem reprehensible. The preventive war of "six days" in the face of the threat of annihilation by the ruthless, vastly superior forces of the Arab coalition must be justified; but cruelty to refugees and prisoners of war, as well as the unlawful desire to settle territorial disputes by military means, must be condemned. Despite this condemnation, the severing of relations with Israel appears to be a mistake, hindering a peaceful settlement in the area, hindering the necessary diplomatic recognition of Israel by the Arab states.
Of a similar nature is the origin of the difficulties and international tensions in the German question and elsewhere.
In our opinion, it is necessary to make certain changes in the very principles of conducting international politics, consistently subordinating all specific goals and local tasks to the main task active warning aggravation of the international situation, actively pursue and deepen the policy of peaceful coexistence to the level of cooperation, plan the policy in such a way that its immediate and long-term consequences do not aggravate the international situation, do not cause any side to such difficulties that may cause the strengthening of the forces of reaction, militarism, nationalism, fascism, revanchism.
International politics must be completely imbued with scientific methodology and democratic spirit, with a striving for fearless consideration of all facts, views and theories, with maximum transparency of precisely formulated main and intermediate goals, with principled consistency.
The international policy of the two leading world superpowers (the USA and the USSR) should be based on the universal application of common general principles, which, as a first approximation, we would formulate as follows:
1) All peoples have the right to decide their own destiny by free will. This right is guaranteed by international control over the observance by all governments of the Declaration of Human Rights. International control involves both the application of economic sanctions and the use of UN military forces to protect human rights.
2) All military and military-economic forms of exporting counter-revolution and revolution are illegal and are equated with aggression.
3) All countries strive for mutual assistance in economic, cultural and organizational problems in order to painlessly eliminate internal and international difficulties, to prevent an aggravation of international tension and to strengthen the forces of reaction.
4) International politics does not pursue the goals of using local specific conditions to expand the zone of influence and to create difficulties for another country. The goal of international politics is to ensure the universal implementation of the Declaration of Human Rights, to prevent the aggravation of the international situation, the strengthening of the tendency of militarism and nationalism.
Such a policy is by no means a betrayal of the revolutionary and national liberation struggle, the struggle against reaction and counter-revolution. On the contrary, when all doubtful cases are eliminated, the possibility of decisive action increases in those extreme cases of reaction, racism and militarism, when there are no other means than armed struggle; the deepening of peaceful coexistence would make it possible to prevent such tragic events as in Greece and Indonesia.
Such a policy sets before the Soviet armed forces clearly defined defensive tasks, the tasks of defending our country and our allies from aggression. As history shows, in the defense of the Motherland, its great social and cultural achievements, our people and its armed forces are united and invincible.
The threat of starvation
Specialists draw attention to the growing threat of general hunger in the "poorer" half the globe. While globally, a 50% increase in population over the past 30 years has been accompanied by a 70% increase in food production, the balance was unfavorable in the poor half. The real situation in India, Indonesia, in a number of Latin American countries and in a huge number of other underdeveloped countries is the lack of technical and economic reserves, business personnel and cultural skills, social backwardness, high level fertility; all this systematically worsens the nutritional balance and will undoubtedly continue to worsen it in the coming years. Salvation would be the widespread use of fertilizers, the improvement of the irrigation system, the improvement of agricultural technology, the wider use of ocean resources, the gradual development of technically quite possible methods for the production of synthetic food (primarily amino acids). However, this is all good for the "rich". In the more backward countries, as is evident from a real analysis of the current situation and current trends, improvement cannot be achieved in the near future, before the expected date of the tragedy (1975-1980).
It's about about such an exacerbation of the "average" food balance predicted from the analysis of existing trends, in which local, localized in space and time, food crises merge into a continuous sea of hunger, unbearable suffering and despair, grief, death and rage of hundreds of millions of people. This is a tragic threat to all mankind. A catastrophe of this magnitude cannot but have the most profound consequences throughout the world, for every person, it will cause waves of wars and bitterness, a general decline in living standards throughout the world, and will leave a tragic, cynical and anti-communist imprint on the life of subsequent generations.
The first reaction of an inhabitant, when he learns about the existence of a problem: “they” are to blame, why do “they” multiply so much? Undoubtedly, the control of excess fertility is very important, and the public, for example in India, is taking a number of measures in this direction; but these measures still remain almost ineffective in conditions of social and economic backwardness, in the presence of stable traditions of having many children, as a result of the lack of insurance against old age, high infant mortality in the very recent past and the continuous threat of starvation in the future and other reasons. Obviously useless only call on the more backward countries to limit the birth rate - it is necessary first of all to help them economically and technically, and this assistance must be of such a scale, such unselfishness and breadth that are completely impossible until the world disunity, the selfish, petty-bourgeois approach to the relationship between nations and races is eliminated while the two great world superpowers - the USSR and the USA - oppose each other as rivals or even opponents.
Social factors play an important role in the tragic situation and even more tragic future of "poor" areas. But it must be clearly understood that if the threat of famine is, along with the desire for national liberation, the main cause of the "agrarian" revolution, then the "agrarian" revolution in itself does not eliminate the threat of famine (at least in the near future). In the current situation, the threat of famine cannot be eliminated quickly enough without the help of developed countries, and this will require a significant change in their foreign and domestic policies.
Now "white" US citizens are not willing to make minimal sacrifices to eliminate the unequal economic and cultural position of "black" US citizens, who make up a little more than 10% of the population. But it is necessary to change the psychology of US citizens in such a way that they voluntarily and disinterestedly, in the name of only higher and distant goals, in the name of preserving civilization and humanity on our planet, support their government and global efforts in changing the economy, technology and living standards of millions of people (which , of course, will require a serious slowdown in the pace of economic development in the United States).
A similar change in the psychology of the people and the practical activities of governments must be achieved in the USSR and in other developed countries.
According to the author, a kind of "tax" on developed countries in the amount of about 20% of their national income for about 15 years is needed. The introduction of such a "tax" will automatically lead to a significant reduction in military spending. The influence of such joint assistance on stabilizing and improving the situation in the most underdeveloped countries and on limiting the influence of extremists of all types is very significant.
With a change in the economic situation of the underdeveloped countries, the problem of excess fertility will be resolved relatively painlessly, without barbaric methods of sterilization, as the experience of developed countries shows. Nevertheless, certain changes in politics, ideas and traditions in this "delicate" issue are inevitable in developed countries as well. Humanity can develop painlessly only by viewing itself in the demographic sense as a single whole, as one family, without division into nations in any other sense than history and tradition.
Therefore, in government policy, in legislation on family and marriage, in propaganda, it is impossible to encourage an increase in the birth rate in developed countries and at the same time demand its reduction in less developed countries that receive assistance. Nothing but bitterness and nationalism, such a double game will not cause.
In conclusion, I want to emphasize that the issue of birth control is very "multifaceted", and its standard, dogmatic solution "for all times and peoples" would be wrong. In particular, all of the above should be taken with reservations, as some kind of simplification.
The problem of geohygiene
We live in a rapidly changing world. Industrial and hydrotechnical construction, logging, plowing of virgin lands, the use of pesticides - all this in an uncontrolled, spontaneous way changes the face of the Earth, our "habitat". The scientific study of all relationships in nature and the consequences of our intervention clearly lags behind the pace of change. A huge amount of hazardous industrial and transport waste, including carcinogenic waste, is thrown into the air and water. Will the "safety limit" be crossed everywhere, as is already the case in a number of places? Carbon dioxide from burning coal changes the heat-reflecting properties of the atmosphere. Sooner or later it will take dangerous proportions. But we don't know when. pesticides used in agriculture for pest control, penetrate into the body of humans and animals both directly and in the form of a number of modified, even more dangerous compounds, have a very harmful effect on the brain, nervous system, hematopoietic organs, liver and other organs. Here, too, it is not difficult to cross the limit, but the issue has not been studied, and it is very difficult to manage all these processes.
The use of antibiotics in the poultry industry contributes to the development of new forms of pathogenic microbes that are resistant to antibiotics.
I could mention the problem of disposal of detergents and radioactive waste, erosion and salinization of the soil, flooding of meadows, deforestation on mountain slopes and water conservation forests, the death of birds and useful animals such as toads and frogs, and many others. examples of unreasonable predation caused by the primacy of local, temporary, departmental and selfish interests, and sometimes simply by questions of departmental prestige, as was the case in the infamous problem of Baikal. The problems of geohygiene are very complex and diverse, very closely intertwined with economic and social problems. Their complete solution on a national and even more so local scale is therefore impossible. Salvation of our external environment habitation urgently requires overcoming the disunity and pressure of temporary, local interest. Otherwise, the USSR will poison the USA with its waste, and the USA will poison the USSR with its own. So far, this is a hyperbole, but with an increase in the amount of waste by 10% annually over 100 years, the total increase will reach 20 thousand times.
The threat of racism, nationalism, militarism and dictatorial regimes
The extreme expression of the dangers of modern social development is the development of racism, nationalism and militarism, and in particular the emergence of demagogic, hypocritical and monstrously brutal police and dictatorial regimes. First of all, this is the regime of Stalin, Hitler and Mao Zedong, as well as a number of extremely reactionary regimes in smaller countries (Spain, Portugal, South Africa, Greece, Albania, Haiti and a number of Latin American countries).
The origins of all these tragic phenomena have always been the struggle of selfish group interests, the struggle for unlimited power, the suppression of intellectual freedom, the spread among the people of mass emotional and intellectually simplified myths convenient for the bourgeois (the myth of race, land and blood, the myth of the Jewish danger, anti-intellectualism, the concept of "living space" in Germany, the myth of the intensification of the class struggle and proletarian infallibility, supplemented by the cult of Stalin and the exaggeration of contradictions with the capitalist countries in the USSR, the myth of Mao Zedong, extreme Chinese nationalism and the resurrection of the concept of "living space", anti-intellectualism, extreme anti-humanism, certain prejudices of peasant socialism in China).
The usual practice is the predominant use of the demagogy of storm troopers and hungweipings at the first stage and the terrorist bureaucracy of reliable "cadres" like Eichmann, Himmler, Yezhov and Beria at the top of the deification of unlimited power. The world will never forget the bonfires from books on the squares of German cities, the hysterical, cannibalistic speeches of the fascist "leaders" and their even more cannibalistic secret plans for the destruction and enslavement of entire peoples, including the Russian. Fascism began a partial implementation of these plans during the war it unleashed, destroying prisoners of war and hostages, burning villages, carrying out the most criminal policy of genocide (during the war, the central blow of genocide was directed at the Jews, which, apparently, also had a certain provocative meaning, in particular Ukraine and Poland).
We will never forget kilometers-long ditches filled with corpses, gas chambers and gas chambers, SS shepherd dogs and savage doctors, pressed bales of women's hair, suitcases with gold teeth and fertilizers as "products" of death factories.
Analyzing the reasons for Hitler's coming to power, we do not forget about the role of German and international monopoly capital, we also do not forget about the criminal-sectarian, dogmatic, limited policy of Stalin and his comrades-in-arms, who set socialists and communists against each other (this is well described in the well-known letter E. Henry I. Ehrenburg).
Fascism lasted 12 years in Germany, Stalinism in the USSR twice as long. While there are many similarities, there are some differences. This is a much more sophisticated charge of hypocrisy and demagoguery, relying not on an openly cannibalistic program, like Hitler’s, but on a progressive, scientific and popular socialist ideology among the working people, which was a very convenient screen for deceiving the working class, for lulling the vigilance of the intelligentsia and rivals in struggle for power, with the insidious and sudden use of the mechanism of a chain reaction of torture, executions and denunciations, with the intimidation and brainwashing of millions of people, most of them not at all cowards and not fools. One of the consequences of this "specificity" of Stalinism was that the most terrible blow was dealt against the Soviet people, their most active, capable and honest representatives. At least 10-15 million Soviet people died in the dungeons of the NKVD from torture and executions, in camps for exiled kulaks and the so-called "sub-kulakists" and their families, in camps "without the right to correspond" (these were actually prototypes of fascist death camps, where, for example, mass executions of thousands of prisoners from machine guns were practiced when the camps were "overcrowded" or received "special instructions"), in the cold mines of Norilsk and Vorkuta from cold, hunger and overwork at countless construction sites, logging, canals *, simply on transportation to boarded up wagons and flooded holds of the "ships of death" of the Sea of Okhotsk, when sending entire peoples - Crimean Tatars, Volga Germans, Kalmyks, and many other peoples.
* Recently, our reader had the opportunity to get acquainted with the description of the construction of the "road of death" Norilsk - Igarka in the magazine "New World". - 1964. - No. 8.
Assistants were replaced (Yagoda, Molotov, Yezhov, Zhdanov, Malenkov, Beria), but Stalin's anti-people regime remained just as ferocious and at the same time dogmatically limited, blind in its cruelty. The destruction of military and engineering personnel before the war, blind faith in the reasonableness of a brother-in-crime - Hitler and other sources of the national tragedy of 1941, well covered in the book Nekrich 1 , in the notes of Major General Grigorenko 2 and in a number of other publications - this is far from the only an example of this combination crimes and criminal narrow-mindedness, short-sightedness.
1 Nekrich A. 1941. June 22
2 General P. G. Grigorenko, by the decision of the Tashkent court, was sent to compulsory treatment to a special prison hospital of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR in the city of Chernyakhovsk. The reason for this was Grigorenko's repeated open speeches in defense of political prisoners and in defense of the rights of the Crimean Tatars, who in 1941 were evicted from Crimea with great cruelty by Stalin's arbitrariness, and now cannot return to their homeland.
Stalinist dogmatism and separation from real life especially manifested itself in the countryside - in the policy of unrestrained exploitation of the countryside - by predatory procurements at "symbolic" prices, with almost serf enslavement of the peasantry, with the deprivation of collective farmers of the right to own the main means of mechanization, with the appointment of collective farm chairmen on the basis of obsequiousness and resourcefulness. The result is obvious - the deepest and most difficult to repair destruction of the economy and the entire way of life in the countryside, which, according to the "law of communicating vessels," also undermined industry.
The anti-national character of Stalinism was clearly manifested in the repressions of prisoners of war who survived the fascist captivity and ended up in Stalin's camps, in anti-worker "decrees", in the criminal resettlement of entire peoples, dooming them to slow extinction, in the bourgeois bureaucracy and the NKVD (and Stalin personally) zoological anti-Semitism, in draconian laws for the protection of socialist property (five years for "spikelets", etc.), which in fact served mainly as one of the means of satisfying the demand for "slave markets", in Stalin's characteristic Ukrainophobia, etc.
A deep analysis of the genesis and manifestations of Stalinism contains a fundamental (thousand pages) monograph by R. Medvedev. This outstanding work written from a socialist, Marxist position, unfortunately, has not yet seen the light of day. Probably, the author will not expect the same compliments from comrade R. Medvedev, who will find elements of "Westernism" in his views. Well, well, an argument is an argument! But in essence the author's views are profoundly socialist, and he hopes that the attentive reader will understand this.
1 Medvedev R. Before the Court of History.
The author understands very well what ugly phenomena in the field of human and international relations are born by the egoistic principle of capital when it is not under the pressure of socialist, progressive forces; he thinks, however, that progressive people in the West understand this better than he does and are fighting against these manifestations. The author focuses on what is before his eyes and what, from his point of view, hinders the global tasks of overcoming disunity, the struggle for democracy, social progress and intellectual freedom.
Now our country has embarked on the path of self-cleansing from the filth of "Stalinism". We “squeeze a slave out of ourselves drop by drop” (an expression by A.P. Chekhov), we learn to express our opinion without looking into the mouth of the authorities and without fear for our own lives.
The beginning of this difficult and far from straightforward path, apparently, should be dated to the report of N. S. Khrushchev at the 20th Congress of the CPSU; this bold speech, unexpected for Stalin's former accomplices in crimes, and a number of accompanying events - the release of hundreds of thousands of political prisoners and their rehabilitation, steps to restore the principles of peaceful coexistence, steps to restore democracy - all this makes us highly appreciate the historical role of N. S. Khrushchev , despite a number of unfortunate mistakes of a voluntarist nature made by him in subsequent years and despite the fact that during the life of Stalin, Khrushchev, of course, was one of the accomplices in his crimes, occupying a number of fairly large posts.
The exposure of Stalinism in our country is far from over. Of course, it is absolutely necessary to publish all available reliable materials (including the archives of the NKVD), to conduct a nationwide investigation. For the international prestige of the CPSU and the ideas of socialism, the symbolic exclusion from the CPSU of Stalin, the murderer of millions of its members*, and the political rehabilitation of the victims of Stalinism, which was planned in 1964, but "for some reason" canceled, would have been very expedient.
* Only in 1936-1939 more than 1.2 million members of the CPSU (b) were arrested - half of the entire party. Only 50,000 were released; the rest were tortured during interrogations, shot (600,000) or died in camps. Only a few of the rehabilitated were allowed to work in responsible positions, even fewer were able to take part in the investigation of crimes, witnesses and victims of which they were. AT recent times calls are often made to "don't rub salt in the wounds". Such calls usually come from those who have not had any wounds. In fact, only a thorough analysis of the past and its consequences in the present will make it possible to wash away all the immeasurable blood and dirt that have soiled our banner. In discussions and literature, the idea is sometimes made that the political manifestations of Stalinism are a "superstructure" over the economic basis of anti-Leninist "neo-socialism", which led to the formation in our country of a special class - a bureaucratic "nomenklatura" elite, appropriating the fruits of social labor with the help of a complex chain of obvious and secret privileges. I cannot deny that there is some (incomprehensible, in my opinion) element of truth in such an approach and, in particular, explains the vitality of neo-Stalinism, but a full analysis of this circle of ideas is beyond the scope of this article, which focuses on the other side of the problem.
It is necessary to limit in every possible way the influence of the neo-Stalinists on our political life. Here we are forced to touch on one personal issue. One of the most influential representatives of neo-Stalinism today is the current head of the department of science of the NK CPSU SP Trapeznikov 1 . The leadership of our country and our people should know that the position of this undoubtedly smart, cunning and very consistent person in his views and principles is fundamentally Stalinist (that is, from our point of view, expressing the interests of the bureaucratic elite), is fundamentally at odds with the aspirations and aspirations of the largest and most active part of our intelligentsia (which, from our point of view, expresses the true interests of Total our people and progressive humanity). The leadership of our country must understand that as long as such a person (if I am not mistaken in characterizing his views) enjoys influence, one cannot hope for strengthening the position of the party leadership among the scientific and artistic intelligentsia. The hint was given at the last elections to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, when S.P. Trapeznikov was voted out by a noticeable majority of votes, but was not "understood" by the leadership. This is not about the business or personal qualities of comrade. S. P. Trapeznikov, about which I know little, we are talking about the political line. I am basing the above on oral information, so I cannot rule out in principle (although I think it is unlikely) that in reality everything is just the opposite, in this more pleasant case I would apologize and take everything written above back.
1 I overestimated the role of S. Trapeznikov. If this work were being written now, I would exclude these lines.
In recent years, the elements of demagogy, violence, cruelty and meanness have again taken possession of the great country, which has embarked on the path of socialist development. I'm talking, of course, about China. It is impossible to read without horror and pain about the mass contagion of anti-humanism spread by the "great helmsman" and his associates, about the Red Guards who, according to Chinese radio, "jumped for joy" during the public execution of the "enemies of ideas" of Chairman Mao. The idiocy of the cult of personality has assumed monstrous, grotesque-tragicomic forms in China, with many traits of Stalinism and Hitlerism brought to the point of absurdity. But this absurdity turned out to be an effective means for fooling tens of millions of people, for destroying and humiliating millions of more honest and more intelligent people. The full picture of the tragedy that has befallen China is not clear. But in any case, it cannot be considered in isolation from China's internal economic difficulties after the failure of the great leap adventure; from the struggle for power of various groups and in isolation from the foreign policy situation - the war in Vietnam, disunity in the world, the incompleteness and belated nature of the struggle against Stalinism in the USSR.
The split in the world communist movement is often cited as the main damage from Maoism. This, of course, is not true. A split is a consequence of a "disease" and, to some extent, a way to overcome it. In the presence of "disease", formal unity would be a dangerous, unprincipled compromise that would finally lead the world communist movement to a dead end. In fact, the crimes of the Maoists against human rights have gone too far, and the Chinese people are more in need of the unity of the world democratic forces to defend their rights than the unity of the world communist forces with their communist in the Maoist sense of the masters to fight the so-called imperialist danger somewhere in Africa. or Latin America, or the Middle East.
Threat to intellectual freedom
A threat to the independence and value of the human person, a threat to the meaning of human life.
Nothing threatens the freedom of the individual and the meaning of life as much as war, poverty, terror. However, there are also very serious indirect, only slightly more distant dangers. One of these dangers is the brainwashing of a person ("gray mass", according to the cynical definition of bourgeois futurology) by "mass culture" with the intention or commercially conditioned decrease in intellectual level and problematic™, with an emphasis on entertainment or utilitarianism, with carefully guarded censorship.
Another example is connected with the problems of education. The state-controlled education system, the separation of the school from the church, free education for all - all this is the greatest achievement of social progress. But everything has its downside: in this case, it is an excessive unification that extends to both the teaching itself and the programs, especially in such subjects as literature, history, social studies, geography, and the examination system. It is impossible not to see the danger in excessive appeal to authorities, in a certain narrowing of the scope of discussions and intellectual boldness of conclusions at the age when beliefs are formed. In old China, the system of examinations for positions led to mental stagnation, to the canonization of the reactionary aspects of Confucianism. It is highly undesirable to have something like this in today's society.
Modern technology and mass psychology provide ever new opportunities to control the attitudes, behavior, aspirations and beliefs of the masses. This is not only management through information, taking into account the theory of advertising and mass psychology, but also more technical methods, which are widely written about in the foreign press. Examples - systematic birth control, biochemical control of mental processes, electronic control mental processes. From my point of view, we cannot completely abandon new methods, we cannot impose a fundamental ban on the development of science and technology, but we must clearly understand the terrible danger to basic human values, the very meaning of life, which is hidden in the abuse of technical and biochemical methods and methods of mass production. psychology. A person should not turn into a chicken or a rat in certain experiments, experiencing electronic pleasure from electrodes embedded in the brain. Related to this is the question of the increasing use of sedatives and amusements, legal and illegal drugs, and the like.
We must also not forget about the very real danger that Wiener writes about in his book "Cybernetics" - about the lack of stable human installation criteria in cybernetic technology. The seductive unprecedented power that gives humanity (or, even worse, this or that group of divided humanity) the use of wise advice from future intellectual assistants - artificial "thinking" automata, can turn into, as Viner emphasizes, a fatal trap: advice can turn out to be incomprehensibly insidious, persecuting not human goals, but the goals of solving abstract problems that have been unintentionally transformed in the artificial brain. Such a danger will become quite real in a few decades if human values, and above all freedom of thought, are not reinforced during this period, if disunity is not eliminated.
Let us return to the dangers and demands of today, to the need for intellectual freedom, which gives the people and the intelligentsia the opportunity to control and publicly examine all the actions, intentions and decisions of the ruling group.
As Marx wrote, "the authorities know everything better," "only higher spheres that have knowledge of the official nature of things can judge. This illusion is shared by state officials, who identify public interest with the authority of state power."
Both Marx and Lenin always emphasized the viciousness of the bureaucratic system of government as the antipode of the democratic system. Lenin says that every cook must learn to govern the state. Now the diversity, the complexity of social phenomena, the dangers facing humanity have increased immeasurably, and it is all the more important to protect humanity from the danger of dogmatic and voluntaristic mistakes that are inevitable when solving problems by the “armchair method” with the secret advisers of the “shadow cabinets”.
It is no coincidence that the problem of censorship (in the broad sense of the word) is one of the central ones in the ideological struggle. recent years. Here is a quote from the progressive researcher L. Koser:
“It would be absurd to attribute the alienation of many avant-garde authors solely to the battle with the censors, but it can be argued that these battles contributed to this alienation to no small extent. For these authors, the censor became the main symbol of philistinism, hypocrisy and meanness of bourgeois society. to the American political left, because the left was at the forefront of the fight against censorship.The close alliance between the artistic avant-garde and the vanguard of political and social radicalism is due, at least in part, to the fact that, in the minds of many people, they eventually merged in a single battle for freedom against all oppression. (I quote from an article by I. Kohn in the first issue of the Novy Mir magazine for 1968).
We all know the passionate, deeply reasoned appeal on this issue by the outstanding Soviet writer A. Solzhenitsyn. A. Solzhenitsyn, G. Vladimov, G. Svirsky and other writers who spoke on the same topic vividly showed how incompetent censorship kills in the bud the living soul of Soviet literature; but the same applies to all other manifestations of social thought, causing stagnation, dullness, a complete absence of any fresh and deep thoughts. After all, deep thoughts appear only in the discussion, in the presence of objections, only with the potential opportunity to express not only true, but also dubious ideas. It was clear even to philosophers Ancient Greece and hardly anyone doubts it now. But after 50 years of undivided dominance over the minds of an entire country, our leadership seems to be afraid of even the hint of such a discussion. Here we are compelled to touch on the shameful tendencies that have emerged in recent years.
We will give only scattered examples, without trying to create a whole picture. The censorship slingshots, crippling Soviet artistic and political literature, intensified again. Dozens of deep, brilliant works cannot see the light, including the best works of A. Solzhenitsyn, filled with very great artistic and moral power, containing profound artistic and philosophical generalizations. Isn't all this a disgrace? Great indignation is caused by the law adopted by the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR with additions to the Criminal Code, which directly contradict the civil liberties proclaimed by our Constitution.
Condemned by the progressive public at home and abroad (from Louis Aragon to G. Green), the trial of Daniel and Sinyavsky, which compromises the communist system, has not yet been revised, they themselves languish in a strict regime camp and are subjected (especially Daniel) to severe mockeries and trials *.
* At present, the majority of political prisoners are kept in the Dubrovlag group of camps on the territory of Mordovia (together with criminals - about 30,000 prisoners). According to available information, since 1961, the regime in this camp has been continuously tightened, the cadres left over from Stalin's times have acquired an ever greater role. (It is fair to say that a certain improvement has been noticed of late. It is hoped that this turn will be stable.) Undoubtedly, the restoration of Leninist principles of social control over places of detention would be very expedient. No less important would be a complete amnesty for political prisoners (and not the "scarce" amnesty that, due to a temporary victory right tendencies in our leadership was announced for the 50th anniversary of October), as well as a revision of political trials that are questionable among the progressive public.
Isn't it a disgrace to arrest, 12-month imprisonment without trial and sentence for 5-7 years of Ginzburg, Galanskov and others for activities, the real content of which was the protection of civil liberties and personally (partly as an example) Daniel and Sinyavsky? On February 11, 1967, the author of these lines turned to the Central Committee of the CPSU with a request to stop the case of Ginzburg and Galanskov. However, he received no response to his appeal, no explanation on the merits of the case. Only much later did he become aware that an attempt had been made (apparently on the initiative of the former chairman of the KGB Semichastny) to slander him and a number of other persons with the help of inspired false testimony of one of the accused in the Galanskov case - Ginzburg (subsequently the testimony of this particular accused - Dobrovolsky -were used by the prosecution at the Ginzburg-Galanskov trial to prove the connection of these defendants with a foreign anti-Soviet organization, which raises unwitting doubts).
Isn't it a disgrace to have Khaustov and Bukovsky 1 sentenced (to 3 years in the camps) for taking part in a rally in defense of their comrades? Isn't it a shame to persecute in the best witch hunter style dozens of Soviet intellectuals who spoke out against the arbitrariness of the judicial and psychiatric authorities, to force honest people to sign false, hypocritical "denials", to be fired from jobs with blacklisting, to deprive young writers, editors and other intellectuals of all means of life?
1 V. Bukovsky was arrested in 1972 and exchanged for L. Corvalan. Currently lives in England. Leonid Khaustov was convicted several times, most recently in 1973. After his release, he became a clergyman in the Krasnoyarsk Territory.
Here is a typical example of this activity. Woman, editor of literature on cinematography comrade. V., is summoned to the district committee. First question: who gave you to sign a letter in defense of Ginzburg? - Allow me not to answer this question. - Okay, come out, we'll consult. - Decision: expel from the party, recommend to remove from work with a ban on working in the field of culture.
A party with such methods of persuasion and education can hardly claim to be the spiritual leader of mankind.
Isn't it a shame to speak at the Moscow Party Conference of the President of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR - obviously, either too intimidated or too dogmatic in his views? Isn't it a shame for yet another relapse of anti-Semitism in personnel politics (however, in the highest bureaucratic elite of our state, the spirit of petty-bourgeois anti-Semitism has never completely eroded after the 1930s)? Isn't it a shame the continuing restrictions on the rights of the people of the Crimean Tatars, who lost about 46% of the population (mainly children and the elderly) from Stalinist repressions? its politics, its pseudo-socialism, terrorist bureaucracy, socialism of hypocrisy and ostentatious growth - at best, quantitative and one-sided growth with the loss of many qualitative characteristics?**
* National problems will long serve as a cause of unrest and discontent unless all deviations from Leninist principles that have taken place are recognized and analyzed and a firm course is not taken to correct all mistakes.
** We are talking about the main trends and consequences of Stalinist policy, Stalinism, and not about a comprehensive description of the entire multifaceted situation of a vast country with a population of 200 million.
Although all these shameful phenomena are still far from the monstrous scale of the crimes of Stalinism and are rather approaching in scale the infamous McCarthyism of the era " cold war", but the Soviet public cannot but be extremely worried and indignant, and is vigilant in the face of even insignificant manifestations of the possibility of neo-Stalinism appearing in our country.
We are sure that the world communist public also has a negative attitude towards all attempts to revive Stalinism in our country - after all, this would be a terrible blow to the attractive force of communist ideas throughout the world.
For today, the key to progressive restructuring state system in the interest of mankind lies in intellectual freedom. This was understood, in particular, in Czechoslovakia, and we, without a doubt, must support their bold and very valuable initiative for the fate of socialism and all mankind (both politically and, at first, by strengthening economic assistance).
The situation with censorship (Glavlit) in our country is such that it can hardly be permanently corrected for a long time with the help of various "liberal" instructions. Very serious organizational and legislative measures are needed, for example, the adoption of a special law on the press and information, which would clearly define the - what is possible and what is not, and would place the responsibility for this on competent and publicly controlled persons. It is very important to strengthen the exchange of information on an international scale in every possible way (press, tourism, etc.), it is very important to know ourselves better, to spare no money for sociological, general political, economic research and surveys, including not only under state-controlled programs ( in the latter case, we may be tempted to avoid "unpleasant" topics and questions).
E.G. Bonner
Articles by A. D. Sakharov are published with the kind permission