Низовцев Юрий Михайлович : другие произведения.

What does violence hide behind itself?

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
Школа кожевенного мастерства: сумки, ремни своими руками
 Ваша оценка:
  • Аннотация:
    Until now, no explanation has been found for the inefficiency of non-violent methods of struggle of peoples both against oppressors and for their rights to a better life. At the same time, for the entire time of the existence of civilization there has not been a period without wars and bloody conflicts, and within the states various types of the enforcement agencies have raged and rage, striving to brutally suppress any disturbance against the ruling stratum. Where does the ineradicability of violence come from?
  
  As is known, in its structure and functions performed by its body, a person is a highly developed primate, whose genome is 99% identical to the genome of a chimpanzee.
  Therefore, a person cannot but retain a significant number of features of the animal psyche.
  The life of the animal world is built solely on the use of the innate instincts and acquired reflexes, useful for keeping in existence, which boils down to nutrition, reproduction as well as the consumption of sensations, preferably pleasant ones. The very existence of any living being depends primarily on finding by it some food, which, in turn, is determined by its stay in the corresponding section of the hierarchical chain of niches in which all living creatures are located, as a rule, devouring each other in accordance with the niche they occupy in this, in essence, the food chain of the different beings from plants to primates.
  The very access to food in the corresponding niche of the animal world is greatly facilitated if the individual manages to take a dominant position in the community by force, deceit or quick-wittedness, as a result of which he gets the sweetest pieces.
  Naturally, it is impossible to become a leader in a pack without constant manifestation of the corresponding force and aggression against relatives and rivals, which are nothing but a consequence of such properties of his individuality, reflecting of animal consciousness, as dominance, perseverance, decisiveness.
  Even among herbivores, one can see that, as a rule, the largest male is at the head of the herd.
  As for the beings, capable of eating meat, then, with rare exceptions, they not only devour enemies when they defeat them, but in case of chronic hunger they are quite capable of cannibalism.
  In other words, the animal world does not neglect any food if it is not enough, and here the strength determines everything.
  Being the heir of the primates, a person could not but retain in his consciousness, along with a number of instincts and reflexes, the desire to the dominate in the community, which gives him many advantages not only in nutrition, but also in satisfying his own increased needs, often inaccessible to most others.
  To win such an advantageous position in the community, a person could already not only, like animals, with the help of aggression, the degree and success of which depends on brute force, or natural quick-wittedness, or with the help of deception of fellow tribesmen and rivals, but also with the help of associative thinking, contributing to the most adequate planning of his actions, as well as unscrupulousness, guile, cunning, treachery, sycophancy, etc.
  All these methods of violence and deceit are still the most effective methods of gaining power, however, if a person"s aggression is inherited from monkey ancestors, then he acquired many other properties not from nature, but due to his awareness of himself as a person in society.
  Any personality, in addition to a number of negative and positive properties in relation to morality, also carries more or less neutral features in the form of varying degrees of strong-willed attitude, criticality, diligence, responsibility, conviction, curiosity, mental abilities and creativity.
  In addition, during its formation from a hominid to homo sapiens, each person acquired, at least in its infancy, such positive personality traits as kindness, friendliness, empathy, sympathy, mercy, which relate to disinterested care for others, denoted by the term "altruism", in contrast to egoism, which is a consequence of the egocentrism of the animal consciousness, aimed only at its own survival and well-being.
  These altruistic properties, formed in self-consciousness of a person, not only have a significant impact on the effectiveness of the collective actions of any groups of people, but also incline some thinkers to the idea of harmonizing the entire human community by non-violent methods.
  The most famous representatives of this position of non-violent action are Leo Tolstoy and Mahatma Gandhi.
  "Those who have ever experienced the joy of repaying evil with good will never miss a chance to receive this joy," wrote Leo Tolstoy [1].
  In turn, the main idea of Gandhi comes down to the renunciation of violence and the willingness to endure pain and suffering, influencing the prudence and conscience of the enemy [2].
  The intuitive reliance of both thinkers, in essence, only on the altruistic component of self-consciousness, externally expressed in the positive properties of a person's personality, which is always opposed by the selfish component of self-consciousness, externally expressed in the negative properties of a person's personality, is not able to eliminate the selfish part of self-consciousness, and even more so, is unable to remove the egocentricity of the animal component of the human consciousness.
  Therefore, the idea of nonviolent change in the society of both outstanding thinkers towards a more harmonious in practice has been reduced to benevolent wishes and, at best, to short-term victories.
  Similar point of view, of course, has its opponents who claim the opposite, considering violence necessary and even useful for the establishment of a society without violence, which Karl Marx was inclined to, that quite naturally followed from his consideration that violence is the fruit of social causes and its effect manifests itself only in an exploitative society, in the case of the elimination of which violence, as such, will disappear [3].
  In essence, Marx has proposed using the destructive nature of violence to create a society without violence, that is, without exploiters and exploited: first we will destroy, and then we will build. At first glance, this idea seems very tempting, simple, original, quite acceptable and effective. It is for this reason that half of humanity "pecked" at it, the consequences of which are known to everybody.
  However, neither Marx nor his other supporters have taken into account or assumed that violence is completely dependent on both the egocentric animal component of human consciousness and the selfish component of human self-consciousness, as a result of which violence can only be eliminated together with the person himself.
  In addition, this very idea of Marx is nonsense, since the destructive nature of violence, of course, can temporarily subordinate some to others, but violence is not capable of creation, that is, violence cannot be a tool for the complete and voluntary consent of all members of such a heterogeneous society to solve various tasks, and without this the harmonization of society is impossible.
  Be that as it may, both of these ideas gained numerous followers, although for the above reasons they could not find and did not find the confirmation in practice and successfully failed, despite all sacrificial attempts to lead tn antagonistic society with oppressors and oppressed to such a society in which everyone lives peacefully, amicably and prospers in all respects.
  Thus, if we proceed from the fact that violence is a consequence of the action of both components of consciousness, both natural and the corresponding component of self-consciousness, then it becomes clear why a one-sided approach to the phenomenon of violence and a lack of understanding of its roots have led to a legitimate failure.
  However, both of these ideas, despite their obvious incapacity, still own significant masses of the population, which, despite all the logical arguments about their falsity, will never abandon them due to the acquisition by them of a kind of abstract-religious character of faith in a better future.
  The Austrian biologist and philosopher Konrad Lorenz, speaking about the phenomenon of violence, proceeded from the fact that it "has an instinctive character, being a protective reaction of the organism to the environment" [4].
  This kind of reduction of the complex social relations of the human community, reflected in the collective and individual self-consciousness, as well asand the natural collective and individual psyche of various individuals to mere instincts alone, being the antipode of Marx's views on violence, looks just as unconvincing. If Marx forgot about the natural essence of a person, then Lorentz lost sight of his social component.
  Ludwig Gumplovich, a representative of the school of social Darwinism, believed that conflicts in the life of society are unavoidable, since people are mercilessly fighting for influence, survival and domination. Gumplovich argues that society develops in accordance with the law, which consists in "... the desire of each social group to subjugate every other social group encountered on its way, the desire for enslavement, domination" [5, p. 159].
  The same opinion was shared by Eugene During, who has believed the emergence of property, classes and the state as a result of the violence of one part of society over another [6].
  If all this were so simple, that is, on the basis of violence alone, then the flocks of primates, in which there is a rather complex hierarchy and various conflicts are produced - both internal and external, would have property, and classes, and the states.
  The well-known philosopher Erich Fromm, recognizing the internal aggressiveness of a person, also connected it with the social conditions that can contribute to the manifestation of aggressiveness [7].
  Here Fromm went further than Marx and Dühring, trying to connect the "internal aggressiveness of a person" with his features that were formed in the social environment.
  In his opinion, "the human living in two worlds at once" implies his inconsistency. He has also believed that the historical process is characterized by an increase in violence due to the fact that the emerging social conditions contribute to aggressiveness, which he divides into natural - for the sake of protecting vital interests - and malignant - for the sake of enjoyment only for oneself.
  Such considerations look rather primitive for the reason that Fromm does not show where the "internal aggressiveness of a person" came from, what is its role in the development of civilization and how it interacts with the positive features of the human psyche.
  In addition, his thesis about the growth of violence in the course of the historical process looks very doubtful, since the growth of culture in the course of the development of civilization, on the contrary, gradually has made society more humane, at least in relation to the prisoners of war, who were no longer eaten, but they were turned into slaves or serfs, and the degree of the human liberty also increased up to the recognition of the equality of all people already from the time of the bourgeois revolution in France in 1789, although, of course, class and domestic violence, as well as wars, have not disappeared anywhere.
  In fact, as strange as it may seem to many, violence is by no means the primary factor producing all social cataclysms.
  Violence within any community and the corresponding apparatus for this actually arise as a result of a change in the situation with the consumption, production and distribution of various goods.
  For example, violence in conditions of scarcity of resources, which is typical for local primitive communities, can only lead to the loss of the viability of these communities. Therefore, their members had to jointly take care of a more or less even distribution of resources to all its members without any obvious advantage precisely for maintaining the stability of the community. That is, the interests of the survival of the entire team under these conditions prevail over the interests of the personality.
  Therefore, in primitive communities there was no subject for the emergence of antagonism due to the lack of private property, but there was a need to fight for the survival of the whole community due to chronic lack of food, and only forced cooperation and mutual assistance could help the struggle for the survival of the collective, which subsequently served as the basis for the appearance in self-consciousness of all the basic properties of altruism.
  On the other hand, the egocentricity of the animal component of the consciousness of the primitive people has not disappeared anywhere, as a result, due to the chronic lack of food, the defeated rival tribe could be eaten in full, which usually happens in the animal world, demonstrating the similarity of the primitive communities to a pack of predators.
  In other words, the basis for such behavior of primitive people is in the overwhelming dominance in their minds of its animal component, although self-awareness has already come to them, but altruism is limited only to their own community, whereas in relation to competitors it was not observed in the same as in competing animals of packs fighting for survival.
  The emergence of a significant volume of the excess product, which arose due to the changed conditions for the existence of human communities, led to a shift in emphasis from the survival of the collective to ensuring better living conditions for individuals and the resulting power stratum and groups, close to it. This change has led to the need to provide protection of the benefits and position, which were obtained by the allocated interlayers.
  In itself, the excess product did not arise by chance, but as a result of the conscious intervention of individuals and groups of people in the environment.
  In particular, there is no doubt that somehow one of them thought of not only collecting fruits, grains and berries, but also planting plants, caring for them and harvesting. Similarly, one of the hunters could bring the baby artiodactyls to raise them in captivity for meat, skins or milk.
  Similar approach, which is not characteristic of animals, no longer follows from the animal component of consciousness, but is the result of a person's awareness of the environment as an object for transformation into other objects that are more beneficial for his life.
  These examples show that violence is only a secondary factor operating in human communities, and the primary cause that produces both violence and other changes in the life of these communities can only be the human consciousness, more precisely, both of its forms - the animal and self-consciousness.
  The very predominance of violence in society, due to the absence of a creative component in it, slows down its development and destroys the human psyche.
  As the additional example, it can be noted that the state is also not a product of violence, as a number of thinkers believe.
  Violence, not being a creative force, is not capable of serving as a tool for holding together the heterogeneous individuals in order to solve problems that ensure the development of this entire contradictory community in the struggle for the right to existence in the form of a separate state, but it can be a means to fight other states. At the same time, violence is used by the state as a tool to preserve its own foundation, which is always an antagonistic hierarchical framework.
  The state arises only when, with the acquisition of a certain material base, each person realizes the benefits of uniting people into a hierarchical community to ensure its existence on the basis of appropriate legal provisions that facilitate their interaction in order to achieve their goals, which consist mainly in the technological and cultural development, as well as in keeping this community from disintegration and absorption under the onslaught of other communities competing with it.
  At the same time, due to the difference in the aspirations of the bulk of the population engaged in the production of consumer products, which is always dissatisfied with its subordinate position and wants to change it for the better, and the layer exercising power powers, that give a lot of privileges, the latter must ensure the preservation of these powers, and the simplest and most effective way to ensure this is the use of violence for those who disagree with the methods of management, which are carried out by the ruling elite.
  It follows from this definition that resolving the antagonism of various segments of the population within any State requires the use of violence, not persuasion, to maintain the stability of this antagonistic entity, since the disadvantaged side always hates the other - the prosperous one.
  Thus, violence does not create a State, but only tries to keep it from disintegrating, eradication or absorption.
  Therefore, the development of the human communities through the state, which is both a creative force and an organ of violence - internal and external, is actually initiated and supported by the corresponding components of human consciousness - the animal and its self-consciousness, in case raising the latter to a level that makes it possible to comprehend the advantages of this formation in comparison with his shortcomings.
  In other words, the creative power is provided by the initially positive and neutral properties of a person's personality, which are a reflection of one part of his self-consciousness, while conscious violence is provided mainly by negative features of a person's personality, which are a reflection of another part of his self-consciousness.
  Naturally, the epithets "positive", "negative", "neutral" are given in the correlation of the personality traits with morality.
  In addition, violence is supported by the animal component of the human consciousness with its constant aggressiveness. It is this support of conscious violence by the animal component of consciousness that makes it an eternal winner in the dispute between altruism and egocentrism of human consciousness in any periods of the existence of civilization with the States composing it.
  So, to eliminate violence, it would be necessary to do the impossible - to remove the purely egocentric animal consciousness from the human body, but it is responsible for the functioning of every cell of the body and its survival in the whole in the environment, and in particular, for survival in it in the fight against competitors and enemies, which is impossible without violence. It is this circumstance that makes it senseless to carry out a "cleansing" of a person from his animal essence as a primate.
  In the same way, it is impossible to remove from a person the negative properties of his personality, which, together with positive and neutral ones, make him a specific personality, unlike the others.
  All these properties of a human's personality, being an external expression of his self-consciousness, developed during the long development of various forms of society, coexisting with the characteristics of his individuality, which reflects the animal component of the human consciousness.
  Thus, in any collective and individual aliv, the action of two forces is manifested - violence and creation. However, they are only an external expression of human consciousness with its activity and dissatisfaction in both of its forms - animal and self-consciousness.
  Initially, in the manifestation and development of living beings - from bacteria to primates - which lasted for billions of years on the planet, the natural selection acted on the basis of the genome mutations, in which a randomness prevailed, reducing the interaction of living beings to devouring or, at least, living at the expense of each other on the basis of trial and error, the essence of which they could not grasp, since their consciousness was fixing its attention not on the awareness of some process, but only on ensuring the functioning of the organism , its survival and adaptation to the environment.
  Therefore, the random positive changes in the genome, as well as useful skills that arise during life in the form of reflexes, along with the innate instincts, being manifested, consolidated not at once, but over the course of many generations. The consequence of this circumstance was such slow development and complication of organisms, which lasted billions of years in calendar years, until the appearance of hominids.
  And so, somehow - science has not yet found out this - hominids appeared with an additional component to the existing natural (animal) consciousness, the main feature of which was the ability to be aware of themselves through Time, and evaluate their actions not only in the process of adapting to the environment, but also in the course of its purposeful change for their own needs, desires and considerations.
  A result of this addition - the mistakes, made by these beings, who are aware of themselves and their actions, they could already evaluate in the limit at once and correct their actions on this basis in the right direction. That is, the dominance of certain randomness for these creatures has been replaced by a certain degree of freedom of action in striving for their own favorable future in the form of goals.
  The consequence of the emergence of such a process was the multiple acceleration of the development of hominin communities, which ended after several million calendar years with their transformation into homo sapiens, and then the formation of a new shell around them for a more convenient existence and development - civilization.
  The difference between the aspirations of the egocentric component of the human consciousness, focused on the functioning of the organism, its survival and adaptation to the environment, and the new component of consciousness - self-consciousness, focused mainly on changing the environment in its favor, and the desire to explain this environment for its more effective use accompanying this process , that is, the desire for knowledge of the environment, was expressed in a more or less intense struggle of these forces, the external manifestation of which was violence and creation.
  Therefore, it is they that directly change reality - the violence destroys, the creation forms, due to which there is a fairly rapid process of renewal of both the environment and the human self-consciousness, although the reason for manifestation of violence and creation lies in the dissatisfaction of both forms of human consciousness with surrounding.
  By itself, the process of creation contains three in some way propulsors that move both a person and society in their self-consciousness forward in their interaction and mutual influence.
  First of all, it is the struggle of the ruling elite, guided mostly by egoistic considerations of their own benefit, the basis of which is in the animal component of the consciousness of this elite, with intellectuals opposing it, due to their aspiration to improve society, which is based on the altruism of their self-consciousness, prevailing over the selfishness of self-consciousness and egocentrism of the animal component of their consciousness.
  Similar struggle between these strata of society, hating each other, due to the fundamental divergence of their interests and intentions, leads to a gradual change in social relations, since the masses of the people cannot but be involved in this struggle in one way or another, gradually benefiting from it in the form of improving the conditions of own existence.
  In turn, two main creative groups emerge among intellectuals, divided by interests.
  One of them is most attracted by the knowledge of the surrounding world both out of curiosity and for certain applied purposes - scientists and inventors. That is, the people who make it up not only strive to learn new things, but also to apply this new in practice, what ultimately results in the development of technologies, and this development, as you know, occurs most effectively by applying a creative approach to changing reality.
  Therefore, along with the improvement of the social structure, one way or another, a change in the technological equipment of society and, therefore, its economy occurs at one rate or another.
  In other words, these creative persons make the maximum contribution to the technological development of civilization.
  Both of these forces, despite the non-obviousness of the action of the first, which, as a result of this circumstance, and now are being substituted in the eyes of the public by the class struggle of working people and exploiters, although in a number of countries it is already difficult to separate working people and exploiters, produce a process of creation both in social relations and in technologies, significantly influencing each other so that when they intersect, the turns may occur that replace one way of life of a community or state with another - more perfect and convenient for the population in its ever-increasing scope, which, in fact, is the process of development of civilization within the framework of proprietary relations from slave-owing system up to capitalism.
  However, any turns and upheavals in the social order, especially the cardinal ones, occur only at a sufficiently high level of culture, if not of the entire population, then of its leading strata, the main contribution to the achievement of which is made by another group of intellectuals, manifesting itself in the sphere of social development, the closest the inner world of a person, that is, his self-consciousness.
  This group of intellectuals, more interested in the inner world of man and his communities, tries to penetrate it in various ways, correlating some people with others, comparing man with nature and society, and also clarifying the abilities of man to reflect these relationships in certain artificial forms.
  It is these creative people, to varying degrees, but still, that produce the cultural values in various forms, and directly affect the minds and feelings of the population, touching the most sensitive strings of the self-consciousness of each person, due to which both individual and collective self-consciousness is gradually changing: mores are softened, the population's craving for knowledge is growing, the number of intellectually and emotionally developed people is increasing.
  Such cultural development affects the growth of the altruistic component of the self-consciousness of the population, thereby expanding the layer of intellectual opposition to the authorities in its everlasting desire to harmonize social relations.
  The result of this cultural development of society, which seems to be far from political struggle, is, nevertheless, the building-up of the confrontation to the informal intellectual opposition to the ruling elite due to the spread of altruism among the masses. In addition, the growth of culture and education of the population makes it possible to increase the percentage of creative people who are, in fact, the only effective lever to accelerate the technological and cultural development of society.
  It is the actions of the intellectuals in the sphere of culture, ensuring the growth of the altruistic component of self-consciousness, create the conditions for the cardinal upheavals in the life of society, which occur against this background in the case of the overlap of the dissatisfaction with a significant part of society with the existing way of life on successes in the development of science and technology, which can produce a resonant explosive effect in the form of a change of certain relations in society.
  For example, the renaissance in Europe of the Middle Ages created the conditions for the emergence of creativity in the field of science and technology as well, expressed in a number of discoveries and inventions, the most prominent of which were the works of such scientists as Nicolaus Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Giordano Bruno, and the inventors such as Nicholas of Cusa (hygrometer and spectacle lens), Johannes Gutenberg (printing press), Luca Pacioli (double entry accounting), Leonardo da Vinci (scissors, rolling bearing), Peter Henlein (pocket watch), Conrad Gesner (pencil). In addition, at the same time, artillery was improved and muskets were invented, the Gregorian calendar was created, intensive construction of new, more advanced ships began in the Netherlands, which marked the beginning of a wide trade of a number of European countries across the ocean expanses with other countries of the world.
  At the same time, already from the side of religion, Luther has gave the impetus to a change in attitude to labor, having stated that since God created a person to strive for the spiritual and to realize this goal he awarded a person with certain abilities and talents, then the only real way to manifest this divine gift can be be only labor.
  In this way, Luther has presented labor not as a duty, but as grace, removing here the contradiction between the worldly and the spiritual.
  Thus, from the Protestants in the person of Luther and the liberal government of the country of concentration at that time of Protestantism (the Netherlands), a kind of permission appeared to receive any "fruits" of labor and use them for the greater benefit of society, despite possible violations of established traditions, having paved the way for scientific discoveries and innovation, and their application in practice..
  All this happened against the backdrop of dissatisfaction among the population of a number of European countries with the restrictions imposed by feudal relations on the personal initiative of citizens.
  Similar overlap of changes in the field of social relations, culture, including religion, as well as changes in the field of science and technology has created a kind of the resonant effect, which led to a turn from ordinary manufactories and the work of artisans to the creation of the industrial production of goods and services, first in the Netherlands, and then in England, which marked the beginning of the era of capitalism from the XVI-XVII centuries.
  More details of this topic are revealed in the work "Why and when did the industrial revolution begin? and precisely in Europe?" [8].
  Another example of similar resonant overlap of these factors is the anti-feudal revolution in France in 1789.
  Just as in the first example, the revolution in France at the end of the XVIII century was prepared by the flourishing of culture, especially enlightenment.
  Thinkers such as Jean Melier, Charles Louis Montesquieu, Voltaire, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Denis Diderot, Claude Adrian Helvetius, d'Alembert have made a real revolution in their views on the functioning of society, having shown on the one hand, characteristic signs of the collapse of feudal absolutism, and, on the other hand, having suggested some ways to improve social relations.
  Along with that, at the same time, French science was experiencing an unprecedented upsurge.
  Pierre Simon Laplace has proposed the principles of celestial mechanics, putting forward, in particular, the hypothesis of the development of the solar system from the original nebula, has developed the analytical theory of probability and the theory of capillarity; Joseph-Louis Lagrange has laid the foundations for all further development of technology, since he opened extraordinary prospects for it with his analytical mechanics and the theory of analytic functions; Gaspard Monge has developed descriptive geometry; Joseph Jerome Lalande has compiled a catalog of stars; Antoine Laurent Lavoisier has developed the theory of combustion; Claude Louis Berthollet has created the theory of chemical equilibrium and chemical affinity; Adrien Marie Legendre has laid the foundation of the theory of numbers; Lazar Carnot has pointed out new ways of developing geometry; Jean Baptiste Lamarck became the first herald of the evolutionary theory of the origin of living beings.
  To this we can add important technical innovations that appeared at the same time.
  Charles Labeli has invented a caisson for the construction of the bridge supports under water; Louis Sebastian Lenormand has invented a parachute; the Montgolfier brothers have invented a balloon filled with hot air, and Jacques Charles has invented a balloon filled with hydrogen; Nicolas Joseph Cunho has created the first car with a steam-atmospheric engine; Claude Geoffroy d'Abban has designed the first steamer; Claude Chappe has invented the optical telegraph.
  The heyday of culture, science and technology in France at that time was accompanied by a clear decline in the social structure of the French state.
  It was being affected in the crisis of the agrarian sector of the economy and, as a result, in food shortages, poor development of the market relations, pumping the last juices out of the peasants by the feudal lords, the estate restrictions, the decomposition of the ruling elite and the accompanying collapse of the financial system of the monarchy. In addition, the lean years preceding the revolution have made a significant contribution to the excitement of the population against the monarchy.
  As a result of this general crisis, such bright representatives of the informal opposition to the authorities as Mirabeau, Robespierre, Marat, Desmoulins, Babeuf, Danton appeared in the stratum of French intellectuals, who later became the leaders of the revolution.
  It was they who, in parliament, the press and other open speeches, branded the decaying government, calling on the people to oppose it, especially since the dissatisfaction of the peasant masses with ever-increasing exactions grew.
  As a result, the actions of the informal opposition to the ruling elite, supported by the citizens of Paris, marked the beginning of the revolution by storming the Bastille.
  But without the preparatory influence on the population of education and the impact on the informal opposition of the ideas of French thinkers, as well as without a sufficiently high level of development of science and technology in France at that time, such a global event that proclaimed the end of the feudal era could not have had such a response in other nations. , especially since France was able to spread its ideas through wars to other peoples of Europe, since the technical equipment of its troops was the most modern, as a result of which they were lucky for quite a long time.
  Despite certain progressive changes in society, violence at any level of development of civilization in its various forms - often completely wild - does not disappear anywhere, and cannot disappear, being responsible for the destruction of what is, which leads to the liberation of space for the action of the forces of creation, so that the process of renewal of existing within civilization is not stopped.
  The contradictoriness of any society lies in the fact that units-people who make it up, are fighting for the place in it that they themselves consider the most appropriate for themselves, rarely agreeing to the latest, using all available means to eliminate competitors.
  These means can be neutral regarding morality reflecting such properties of the personality as the mind and will of a person, his curiosity and creativity, they can also be positive in the same respect, for example, kindness, friendliness, empathy, sympathy, mercy, but the advantage in this struggle for a favorable place in society, especially for power, is given by other properties of his personality, negative in relation to morality, such as unprincipled, craftiness, cunning, treachery, pleasing, supported by such features of his individuality, reflecting the aggressiveness of the animal component of consciousness, as dominance, perseverance and decisiveness.
  Some of these personality traits were developed on the basis of certain features of the animal consciousness, others arose only due to the conscious transformation of a person's own surrounding, affecting him like a boomerang.
  These additional properties, which are not directly related to the peculiarities of the animal consciousness, have been developed over time within the framework of self-consciousness in the process of productive and cultural activity, which is completely not characteristic of the reflex-instinctive activity of animals.
  These purely human properties in relation to morality can, for example, include such negative personality traits as treachery, unscrupulousness, positive ones - kindness, empathy, mercy, and neutral ones - will, criticism, responsibility and conviction,
  Thus, all personality traits of any person in relation to morality can be divided into negative (selfish) and positive (altruistic), which are adjacent to those who are neutral in relation to morality, and their levels can differ significantly, thereby affecting the behavior of a person in different situations.
  In addition, the selfish properties of a person's personality are supported by similar features of his individuality, the main one of which is dominance, reflecting the purely egocentric character of his animal component of consciousness, and an invariable sign of this character is a tendency to violence as the simplest and most effective way to achieve, at least temporarily, desired.
  An even deeper foundation of the egocentric nature of the animal component of the human consciousness is his dissatisfaction with the existing, which he would always like to improve.
  And the deepest foundation of the enduring aggression of the animal component of consciousness lies in the permanent activity of consciousness in the living.
  Without it, a living being would turn into a lifeless, that is, passive, which is not able to recognize, as well as selectively and constantly with a greater or lesser degree of initiative, arising from the dissatisfaction of a living being, to perceive, process, use and transmit certain information in accordance with the existing sense organs and information processing centers. It is this property of all living beings that distinguishes them from inanimate ones, including artificial intelligence, which is able to do something similar only according to a program entered into it in advance, without showing any initiative.
  Let us note on the basis of what features of individuality, which is an external expression of the animal consciousness, certain properties of a person's personality appeared.
  The main of these properties is the increased mental abilities, if they are compared with the quick-wittedness of animals. The fundamental difference between the human mind and its basis in the form of quick-wittedness, or the natural intellect, is concluded in the associative and abstract thinking, consisting in the connection and generalization of a number of specific concepts with their clothing in the form of the verbal and figurative expressions.
  It is this kind of thinking that is combined with curiosity and concern for improving the state of the social structure, combined with the animal quick-wittedness (natural intellect), the main features of which are speed, the amount of operational memory (RAM), the use of formal logic to create the behavior patterns, as well as dominance, aspiration to pry, perseverance and decisiveness, forcing the a person to strive, in spite of everything, to achieve the new and unusual, provides an opportunity for him to manifest own creative.
  Perseverance and tenacity in solving the problems of survival in a person's have been transformed in his self-consciousness into will, which is a conscious reaction to what is happening both outside and inside a person in the form of a sustainable mental effort to achieve the goal, providing the opportunity to chase the prospect in a competitive environment and supporting the progressive direction of development, accelerating more and more due to the growth of information flows produced by the expanding activities of human communities.
  Aspiration to pry, which is also one of the features of the animal consciousness, has been transformed in self-consciousness a person into curiosity, which is that personality trait, that involves in its development the manifestation of a purposeful interest in the new and unusual, which is the basis for the process of cognition.
  The forced cooperation of animals for the sake of increasing the probability of survival in the wild world of nature suggests, in the course of human development, the appearance in his self-consciousness in the quality his external expression of the friendliness, that is, - the main feature of altruism.
  Cunning as a tendency to deceive in order to obtain the desired result, arose in humans on the basis of the property of the individuality of animals in order to save life or increase the likelihood of capturing prey to distort information about oneself in the form of instinctive deception, for example, disguise, and other tactical tricks, such as an attractive smell, appearance or false sound signals to attract prey.
  Over time, in the course of socialization in order to achieve a higher position in society with the receipt of appropriate benefits, there was a gradual development of such personality traits based on the dominance of the animal consciousness, such as love of power, hypocrisy, servility, which, despite their immorality, help to achieve that or some other tempting goal in the absence of a deep mind and the outstanding abilities.
  Socialization has also led to the emergence of such a negative personality trait as unscrupulousness, which is absent in animals, since it has nothing to do with their adaptive existence within the framework of the instincts and reflexes.
  Thus, in addition to the brute force, a person has acquired a number of the above-mentioned means that contribute to the most effective struggle for power and other vital benefits.
  We also note the following: if a person inherited aggressiveness directly from the monkey ancestors, along with the above features of their individuality, then he acquired the remaining properties that contribute to more subtle use of violence from awareness of oneself as a person, transforming part of the properties of animal consciousness in the form of individuality into such personality traits as lust for power, cunning, hypocrisy, servility, as well as having additionally worked out such immoral personality trait as unscrupulousness.
  Any personality, except for one degree or another of negative properties, if we consider them from the standpoint of morality, also has a number of more or less neutral features that have grown on the basis of the traits of the individuality of an animal in the form of one degree or another of will (perseverance), curiosity (natural aspiration to pry), mental abilities (quick-wittedness of an animal) and creativity (dominance, quick-wittedness and aspiration to pry).
  The neutral can also include such newly emerged personality traits as criticality, diligence, responsibility and conviction, which, nevertheless, can experience significant fluctuations from their average value, being reduced to positive (self-criticism) or negative (laziness, irresponsibility). qualities from the point of view of generally accepted morality.
  In addition, the forced cooperation of animals for their own survival, characterized by instinctive support for each other in a pack or herd, served as the basis for the formation of already conscious friendliness as one of the features of altruism of the human personality.
  In the course of the cultural development of communities, kindness, empathy, mercy and concrete selfless care for completely unfamiliar people were added to this personality trait.
  Therefore, practically, every person has at least in its infancy such positive personality traits as kindness, friendliness, empathy, sympathy, mercy, which relate to disinterested care for others, denoted by the term - "altruism", but the animal egocentrism is also preserved in each person, aimed at their own survival and well-being, and the invariable and natural manifestation of this egocentrism is violence.
  Underestimating the negative properties of individuality and personality leads to an overestimation of the effectiveness of the nonviolent actions, which at best give only a short-term beneficial result, being suppressed by the need for violence in such a diverse society of people, each of whom has such contradictory forms of consciousness as egocentric animal consciousness and self-consciousness, characterized in general by the presence of both altruism and egoism, the interaction of which ultimately ensure the preservation of a positive development trend without falling of both a person and his communities into stagnation.
  Thus, the fundamental factor determining the development of a person and his communities is one or another degree of manifestation and interaction of both forms of the human consciousness, initiated by their dissatisfaction with one or another surrounding and also by oneself, and finding their external expression in the above-mentioned properties of individuality and personality of a person.
  If a person prevails such properties of individuality of the animal component of consciousness as cleverness, dominance, energy, sociability, a tendency to deceive in the form of distortion of information and dexterity in its presentation, acquired professional skills, perseverance and decisiveness, being complemented by such personality traits as irresponsibility, unscrupulousness, deceit, strong enough will, good mind and cunning, then such, in essence, immoral subjects gain an advantage in their desire for power over the rest - more inert members of a communities - in the form of philistines, highly moral intellectuals of various kinds and other representatives of the population who are lethargic or preoccupied with other matters and considerations, who are not able to deftly push back or slander an opponent, and also enjoy the humiliation of the lower ones, and at the same time endure the mockery of the higher ones.
  Such persons, due to the predominance of the negative in the social sense qualities of their animal component of consciousness, as well as in self-consciousness, without much remorse, naturally try to solve their problems by force and the means of deception that contribute to it, especially since the power is in their hands.
  If, however, such properties of individuality, stemming from the animal component of consciousness, as a high degree of sensitivity, impressionability, sociability, an aspiration to pry with a lack of decisiveness and quick-wittedness, which are supplemented by such personality traits, stemming from self-consciousness as confidence in one"s ideas, to which these persons are relate not always critical, and an altruistic mindset, which is characterized by kindness, friendliness, sympathy, mercy, then we will see a ready-made altruist-oppositionist who hates the ruling elite for oppressing and fleecing the common people.
  These non-formal oppositionists are confident in the final triumph of justice in the form of a harmonious society, but their methods of achieving this final earthly happiness are fundamentally various: some (Marx, Lenin) have considered it necessary to use all possible methods to achieve the desired harmony, including violent ones; others (Tolstoy, Gandhi) preferred non-violent ways to achieve justice.
  But both of them failed in their attempts to change the antagonistic society to a benevolent society, because a harmonious society within the framework of states with a population, the principal layers of which are always categorically opposed to each other, and do not want to change this mood, cannot be created by any methods - neither peaceful or violent for an ineradicable reason - the impossibility of eliminating the egocentrism inherent in the animal component of the human consciousness, and egoism, which is certainly present in one way or another in his self-consciousness.
  As for the change in the forms of violence during the development of civilization, the following can be noted in this regard.
  In the course of the slow and smooth humanization of the hominids over the course of 2.5 million years until they formed a civilization, the animal form dominated their consciousness, while self-consciousness was barely noticeable, manifesting itself only in the ability of these creatures, in comparison with animals, to make plans for the future, which could be quite remote, to transform the environment for their own purposes. They had practically no culture.
  But, nevertheless, by changing the environment around them consciously, they also changed their own self-consciousness, which eventually reached a certain limit that allowed them to reorganize their primitive communal community, turning it into a more complex hierarchical community based on the production and redistribution of excess consumer products, which they finally learned to produce rather than only collect.
  Therefore, before the emergence of this set of hierarchical communities, later called civilization, this being, possessing dual of consciousness, due to the overwhelming dominance of animal consciousness, used quite naturally habitually wild methods in order to survive in a natural environment filled with aggression. In particular, having defeated a tribe that competed in terms of obtaining food, which was always in short supply, the winners ate the vanquished without any remorse, which they, like moral standards, did not have then.
  Changes in this wild form of aggression and violence came only with the formation of civilization, within which small associations of tribes began to appear for more efficient foraging, transformed with the complication of their structure into states that possessed certain resources for development, and not just survival in an aggressive environment.
  A completely logical consequence of the changed conditions of existence, the primary cause of which was primarily the growth of the collective self-consciousness, was the transition from eating or killing captives to using them for ever-growing and expanding economic needs as living and speaking tools.
  Thus, with the slave system formed on this basis, whose states continuously fought with each other, as tribes fought among themselves before, the form of violence against the defeated was changed, moving away from its extremely wild expression, but nothing more.
  Nevertheless, the slave-owning system acquired a significant difference from the previous one - the primitive communal one in that, that some part of the community was freed from everyday labor through the use of slaves, and this quickly bore fruit in the form of the emergence of culture - both written and spoken. Painting in the form of frescoes flourished, various architectural and sculptural forms appeared. And this could not but contribute by the boomerang further growth of self-consciousness of wider groups of the population than before, as a result of which the degree of altruistic characteristics of the personalities of the free citizens increased somewhat.
  However, the violence in the form of classifying slaves not as people, but as talking cattle continued until the historical moment when stagnation in the slave-owning management was formed, followed by the decomposition of all social structures due to the cheapness of slave labor, blocking any ways of improving the production.
  The leading slave-owning states, no longer able to develop and resist the changed reality, fell under the onslaught of wild tribes, and in their place gradually formed states in which, instead of using slave labor, already to some extent liberated labor began to be used.
  That is, the understanding came that in order to obtain a greater income, labor had to be freed to a certain extent, and this could be achieved only by motivating workers in the results of their own labor.
  Therefore, the slave owners began gradually to transfer slaves from the position of talking animals to the relatively free status of workers attached to land plots, which, of course, do not belong to them, but, nevertheless, deliver to these workers a certain part of the income depending on the results of their labor.
  Ultimately, the masters of the slaves became landowners who controlled the work of the tillers.
  Over time, a hierarchy of the land owners was formed, on which the peasant worked, who, nevertheless, had a certain independence, being the owner of tools and buildings, but did not have the right to dispose of the land, remaining in this regard, in dependence on his master - the feudal lord.
  Thereby, in comparison with the slave-owning system, under feudalism, not only the circle of people, who began to realize themselves more free, expanded, but their self-consciousness gradually began to move away from its collectivist beginning, acquiring an increasingly the individualistic character not only among feudal lords, but also among the steel population, especially townspeople, merchants and artisans, who had their own specific and separate business and did not always unite in close groups..
  However, the violence on the part of the feudal lords against their peasant-workers, whose full masters they remained, did not disappear with the change in its form, since the feudal lords, in fact, could do anything with them, causing peasant riots from time to time.
  And wars in the era of feudalism continued on no less a scale than before, although the growth of culture and, accordingly, self-consciousness of an increasing circle of the population cannot be denied.
  The increase in the level of culture and education for a fairly wide range of the population and certain improvements in the production of goods, no longer restrained by the cheapness of slave labor, in particular, the emergence of manufactories, further expanded the stratum of people with a high level of self-consciousness, who have demanded in the person of Martin Luther to recognize labor by God grace. In his statement, Luther stated that God predesignates people for this or that type of activity, investing in them various talents and abilities, and thus he fulfills a certain vision.
  As a result of all these events, feudalism lost its support even in the person of the clergy, and the industrial turn in the Netherlands and England provided an increase in the production of the industrial goods due to the mechanization of production and, consequently, higher productivity in workshops, which turned into huge factories, giving the high profit, which was facilitated by the modernization of transport and the improvement of forms of trade.
  In some European countries, a class of controllers-managers of this production rather quickly formed, who became the owners of factories and plants - mainly the former owners of manufactories and the bankers - and a class of the hired workers in production - the former artisans. At this, the production and distribution of the manufactured goods has fell under the market mechanisms.
  Naturally, this process of forming new relations to resources and property was facilitated by the revolution of 1789 in France, which put forward the slogans of legal equality and liberty of the entrepreneurship in all spheres of life on the basis of the private-property relations.
  Since the class of the hired workers in factories with the intensive deployment of production began to be formed mainly from peasants, insofar as they could free themselves from feudal dependence by going to the cities, and a significant part of the land plots passed from the ruined parasites-seigneurs into the hands of the skilled peasant owners.
  Thus, formally, each citizen could become an entrepreneur through the loans, that is, the owner of property from which he could make a profit in one form or another and in volume.
  The gradual increase in the level of self-consciousness based on technological and cultural progress under feudalism has led to a new economy, which established for almost the entire population of the leading European countries other - freer, that is, an open attitude to property, having strengthened the individualistic tendency of self-consciousness of this population and thereby having intensified its self-activity, due to which these countries became world dominants competing with each other, and the countries of the rest of the world remained on the sidelines of history.
  Such open system of production and distribution, in which formal equality and individualism dominated in the conditions of competition between entrepreneurs for the use of available resources in the form of private ownership of them - capitalism, began to take shape from the 17th century and, apparently, is being completed at the present time.
  The era of capitalism, which, it would seem, finally completely freed labor, giving a significant increase in well-being to even larger sections of the population and the flourishing of all types of culture, to which practically the entire population of the developed countries of the world joined, did not at all lead to the abolition of aggression and violence.
  Aggression continued to manifest itself in even larger wars with the use of ever more effective destructive weapons, and violence flourished in all factories and plants, where all the juice was squeezed out of formally free, but in fact disenfranchised numerous workers, in order to obtain high profits, which were been coming onto to the luxurious life of comparatively few bourgeois.
  Thus, it is necessary to state the fact that the struggle against the violence of some groups of people over others from the time of the Spartacus uprising to the struggle of trade unions with the owners of enterprises in all branches of production, as well as the attempt to introduce distributive state socialism in a number of countries to eliminate oppression, has not led to the elimination of aggression and violence, despite the rise culture and a high level of technology.
  This fact can be explained only by the fact that the animal component of consciousness, both in individual and collective form, which cannot be removed from any human and any social organism, still forces every person and all their communities to fight for the most comfortable existence, in spite of everything, in which the selfish component of self-consciousness contributes to it, while the undoubted growth of the altruistic component of self-consciousness over several thousand years of the development of civilization could only affect the change in the forms of violence, having softened some of them.
  Therefore, violence as a product of dissatisfaction with both egocentric components of homo sapiens consciousness can only disappear with their elimination, and this is impossible, since this initial property of consciousness, providing for the activity of a person, is responsible on the part of the natural component of consciousness for the direct functioning and survival of the body in the environment, and its action is reinforced by the selfish component of self-consciousness, which ensures human survival in a social environment, as well as adapting a person to all her realities for the own well-being.
  As a result of the above analysis, a rather paradoxical conclusion is obtained for many: there is no way to do without violence with all efforts. Otherwise, society falls into stagnation, that is, it loses the opportunity to renew reality, since replacing violence with good wishes does not allow it to destroy what is already unfit for development, or something that hinders it.
  Such is the mission of violence, despite its disgusting appearance. Being objectively the reverse side of creation, it actually, together with it, it ensures the movement of humanity, and therefore, of its individual and collective consciousness, forward - to yet unknown changes.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Толстой Л. Н. Царство божие внутри вас. Полное собрание сочинений в 90 томах. М. Художественная литература. 1957. Т. 28, с. 1293.2.
  2. Махатма Ганди. 2. Махатма Ганди. Моя жизнь. Санкт-Петербург. АЗБУКА. 2013.
  3. K. Marx. Manifesto of the Communist Party. Geneva. 1882.
  4. Лоренц К. Агрессия, или так называемое зло. 2021. АСТ.
  5. L. Gumplowicz. Sociology and politics. M., 1895.
  6. Е. Дюринг. Курс национальной и социальной экономии со включением наставления к изучению и критике теории народного хозяйства и социализма. СПб., 1893.
  7. Фромм Э. Здоровое общество. Догмат о Христе. М. АСТ: Транзиткнига, 2005.
  8. Nisovtsev Yu. The collection of the especial and outlandish - for the check with respect to creativity. Part 7. 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.amazon. Yury Nizovtsev.
  
  
  
  
 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список

Кожевенное мастерство | Сайт "Художники" | Доска об'явлений "Книги"