Every nation has the power it deserves. Aphorisms about the people. Every nation deserves its own government

Every nation has a government
which he deserves

Almost a common phrase. Where is she from? The older generation remembers something similar. During Soviet times, many studied Marxist-Leninist theory and in Marx’s works came across a maxim that sounded something like this: “Everything that is real is reasonable, everything that is reasonable is real.” It seems that K. Marx himself took this from Hegelian dialectics. And dialectics, as they say, is a rather streamlined matter... It’s not for nothing that in Soviet times there were many jokes about dialectics.
G. Hegel, believing that social development is determined by laws, believes that if something real exists, then it is natural, and therefore reasonable. And, conversely, everything reasonable... really.

As for the phrase “every people has the government it deserves,” it is more specific and less abstract. The original phrase is taken from a letter (dated August 27, 1811) from the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, Count Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821). In this letter, the count wrote to his government about the new laws established by Emperor Alexander I. It is possible that the Sardinian envoy paraphrased the famous phrase of the philosopher and educator Charles Louis Montesquieu from his work “The Spirit of Laws”: “Every people deserves its fate.”

And indeed it is so. Those peoples who are more active and speak out in defense of their rights have legitimate governments, a clearly structured civil society capable of controlling the government elected by the people themselves. In such societies there is a feedback loop between the sovereign people and their elected government. Such nations, as a rule, have a fairly developed, vast and prosperous middle class, which “quenches” the selfishness of the rich and the extremism and excesses of very poor people. These people deserve to have democratic governments. This is their fate.

The fate of other peoples who do not clearly understand their goals and live in a passive mode, without showing social activity, their fate is to live either under the yoke of authoritarian ruling elites, tyrannies, satrapies, distributing the national “pie” between their confidants, clans, relatives, oligarchic groups, or live in conditions of anarchic, immature forms of democracy without “sails and helms,” where separate groups of politicians constantly fight among themselves to redistribute the “pie,” forgetting about the people. Such peoples live in lawlessness and poverty, and it turns out that because of their passivity they deserve such governments and such a fate.

And then it turns out that the quatrain of the great Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin, “our everything” is true:

"Graze peaceful peoples,
The cry of honor will not wake you up!
Why do the herds need the gifts of freedom?
They must be cut or sheared;
Their inheritance from generation to generation
A yoke with rattles and a whip!"

This is true because another great man, the great German Johann Wolfgang von Goethe said in his Faust:
“The only one worthy of happiness and freedom is the one who goes to battle for them every day!”

The daily audience of the Proza.ru portal is about 100 thousand visitors, who in total view more than half a million pages according to the traffic counter, which is located to the right of this text. Each column contains two numbers: the number of views and the number of visitors.

Every nation has the government it deserves
From a letter (dated August 27, 1811) from the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, Count Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821). In this letter, the count wrote to his government about the new laws established by Emperor Alexander 1. It is possible that the Sardinian envoy paraphrased the famous phrase of the philosopher and educator Charles Louis Montesquieu from his work “The Spirit of Laws”: “Every people is worthy of its fate.”
Joseph de Maistre spent 14 years in Russia (from 1803 to 1817), wrote the book “St. Petersburg Evenings,” which, like his other works, had a certain influence on the work of many Russian writers.
The meaning of the expression: if the government is bad, immoral, ineffective, then the citizens of the country themselves are to blame for this, who allow such a government to exist, cannot control it, etc.

Encyclopedic Dictionary of winged words and expressions. - M.: “Locked-Press”. Vadim Serov. 2003.

See what “Every nation has the government it deserves” in other dictionaries:

An expression that Joseph de Maistre (1754 1821), the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, used in a letter dated August 27, 1811, reporting on the new laws issued by Alexander I (Joseph de Maistre & Lettres et opuscules inedits. P., ... ...

Every nation has the government it deserves- wing. sl. An expression that Joseph de Maistre (1754 1821), the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, used in a letter dated August 27, 1811, reporting on the new laws issued by Alexander I (Joseph de Maistre& Lettres et opuscules... ... Universal additional practical explanatory dictionary by I. Mostitsky

This is a great fiction, thanks to which everyone tries to live at the expense of others. Frédéric Bastiat An ideal government is impossible because men are endowed with passions; and if they were not endowed with passions, there would be no need for government. Voltaire... ... Consolidated encyclopedia of aphorisms

Coordinates: 46°48′00″ N. w. 8°14′00″ E. d. / 46.8° n. w. 8.233333° E. d. ... Wikipedia

From French: Grattez le russe, et vous trouverez le tartare. Wrongly attributed to Napoleon. The author of the phrase is the envoy of Sardinia in St. Petersburg at the court of Alexander I, Count Joseph de Mes/pr (1753 1821). Count de Maistre spent 14 years in Russia... ... Dictionary of popular words and expressions

Master Joseph Marie, de- (1753 1821) count, in 1802 17 he was the envoy of the Sardinian king to Petersburg. A Jesuit who actively developed the idea of creating a Catholic federation. monarchies of Europe under the auspices of the Pope, one of the ideologists of the Holy. union. In 1817 he was recalled from Russia at the request of the Russians. right... Russian humanitarian encyclopedic dictionary

Guide- The guide consists of ten articles summarizing Lem’s views on those issues that he repeatedly addressed in his texts and which he approached as problems. Frequency of circulation in itself cannot be an argument, Lem has... ... Lem's World - Dictionary and Guide

Contents: I. Physical essay. II. Population. III. Economic review. IV. Finance. V. Administration and judicial system. VI. Finnish troops and conscription. VII. Education. VIII. Science, art, printing and social life. IX. Church. X...

I Contents [For the history of Finland, the history of literature, language and mythology, see respectively. sections.]. I. Physical sketch. II. Population. III. Economic review. IV. Finance. V. Administration and judicial system. VI. Finnish troops and conscription. VII.… … Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron

- (France, Frankreich). Location, boundaries, space. From the north, France is washed by the German Sea and the English Channel, from the west by the Atlantic Ocean, and from the southeast by the Mediterranean Sea; in the northeast it borders with Belgium, Luxembourg and Germany, in the east... ... Encyclopedic Dictionary F.A. Brockhaus and I.A. Ephron

How many times have we had to listen to this stupid, frivolous and callous saying from foreigners!* Usually people pronounce it with importance and disdain, in the tone of historical revelation. “After all, we have wonderful peoples in the West, and, as a result, they have cultural and humane governments. And you, in Russia, have always had the kind of government that your insignificant people deserved...".

And, unfortunately, such an interpretation of Russia, its magnificent history and its modern tragedy is not limited to salon chatter. There is still, and now continues to be replenished, a whole literature that hammers into people this understanding of Russia. There is also a special publishing tradition in Europe: to translate from Russian literature everything that the Russian pen has created in the form of self-exposure and self-flagellation, and to silence, not to translate, what the true Face of Russia reveals. One experienced Russian writer even told us that when Europeans translated Bunin’s “Village” for such purposes and asked him to write about this book, two influential European newspapers returned his article to him because it did not say “precisely because of this kind of vileness and consists of all Russia,” and it indicated that Bunin generally understands in man only one life of dark and depraved instinct and paints it with similar features among all peoples.

Now the Europeans, obeying the same behind-the-scenes directives, are repeating the same mistake [this is a vicious practice, not a mistake]: they are doing everything possible so as not to see the real Russia, in order to bind it, confuse it and identify it with the Bolsheviks and to convince themselves, as if the Russian people “deserve” that oppressive, destroying and exterminating “government” that is now terrorizing them.

Let us accept this stupid and false saying for a moment and think it through to the end.

Well, we ask, did the Dutch in 1560-1584 “deserve” the then-ruling dictatorship of Cardinal Granvela and Count Egmond, or did they “deserve” the reign of the brilliant William the Silent, or the “inquisitorial” terror of the Duke of Alba? Is it worth asking such ridiculous and dead questions?

Well, the English in the 11th century, from 1625 to 1643, “deserved” Catholic executions from Charles the First, Stuart, then until 1649 they “deserved” a civil war, from 1649 to 1660 they “deserved” Protestant terror from Cromwell, and with In 1660, did they “deserve” again Catholic terror from Charles the Second, Stuart? What fool would agree to listen to such an interpretation of history?

What did the French “deserve” during the era of their long revolution, from 1789 to 1815 - the royal power of Louis XVI, or the talkative Constituent, or the ferocious Convention, or the vile Directory, or the militant despotism of Napoleon, or the Bourbon restoration?..

Is it possible to come up with some less superficial and less absurd historical and political standards?

Yes, the people are responsible for their government if they themselves are “of sound mind and memory” and if they freely chose it. And there is no doubt that since the people are organically connected with their government - not in the order of conquest, invasion, occupation, unscrupulous political deception, anti-national suppression, international domination and revolutionary terror, but in the order of peaceful, long, national development, in so far as between the legal consciousness of the people and the legal consciousness government there is an organic interaction and similarity. The veche, which freely elected a prince or mayor, was responsible for them. But who would dare say that the Russian people were responsible for Biron, who rose to power through base servility and anti-national suppression? There is no doubt that the Russian people would have to answer for their shameful “constituent assembly” of 1917 - if ... if they were then “of sound mind and strong memory”; but one can be absolutely sure that in his right state of health he would not have chosen such a “constituent.” Historically, the fact is undeniable: then the people were unsettled by the initial failures of the great war, they were unleashed by the extinguishing of the monarchical oath and were distraught - both by the revolutionary rule of the Februaryists and by the Bolshevik agitation.

But how could the Russian people “deserve” to be subjugated by international deception and domination, by a totalitarian system of investigation and terror unprecedented in history, by revolutionary conquest, invasion and suppression? What brutal inclinations, what villainous soul, what hellish vices would he have to have in order to “deserve” all this? Who should this people be to “deserve” such treatment, such humiliation, such management?..

We will never understand or forgive such words from the lips of a person with a Russian surname and a Russian pen. It is unforgivable for a Russian person who knows the Soviet system to say that the Russian people are responsible for their communist government... For a Russian person who claims to be a “historian” it is unforgivable to say that “Russian ethics is egalitarian, collectivist and totalitarian”; this is ignorant nonsense - she was always Christian-hearted, heart-fair and freedom-loving to the point of anarchy.

It is unforgivable for a Russian person who considers himself educated to say that the Russian “monarchy has long ceased its educational mission,” that the Russian “bureaucracy has made politics a matter of personal gain,” that the Orthodox “Church has thrown social ethics out of its practice and only knew how to defend power and wealth " All this is not true, all this is a temptation, all this is the corruption of emigration from the rear and propaganda against Russia, so useful to our foreign enemies and communists. And all this untruth (and many others!) did not need to be piled up in order to finally say that the Russian people need repentance.

“Every people deserves its government”... No, on the contrary: every people deserves, both morally and politically, a better government than the one it has, because it is the best government that will make it the best. Every government is called upon to act in accordance with the instinct of self-preservation inherent in its people; each is called to see further than his people, to be wiser than them and to suggest to them the right paths of life.

It’s time to understand this and not repeat the political vulgarity overheard abroad from the enemies and despisers of the Russian people.

from the book I. A. Ilyin. "Our tasks", abbr.
____________________
* Initially- a phrase from a letter (dated August 27, 1811) from the envoy of the Sardinian kingdom to the Russian court, Count Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821). In this letter, the count wrote to his government about the new laws established by Emperor Alexander I. It is possible that the Sardinian envoy paraphrased the famous phrase of the philosopher and educator Charles Louis Montesquieu from his work “The Spirit of Laws”: “Every people is worthy of its fate.” The meaning of the expression: if the government is bad, immoral, ineffective, then the citizens of the country themselves are to blame for this, who allow such a government to exist and cannot control it.

Every nation deserves its fate

Every nation has the government it deserves

Almost a common phrase. Where is she from? The older generation remembers something similar. During Soviet times, many studied Marxist-Leninist theory and in Marx’s works came across a maxim that sounded something like this: “Everything that is real is reasonable, everything that is reasonable is real.” It seems that K. Marx himself took this from Hegelian dialectics. And dialectics, as they say, is a rather streamlined matter... It’s not for nothing that there were many jokes about dialectics in this era.

G. Hegel, believing that social development is determined by laws, believes that if something real exists, then it is natural, and therefore reasonable. And, conversely, everything reasonable... really.

The fate of other peoples who do not clearly understand their goals and live in a passive mode, without showing social activity, their fate is to live either under the yoke of authoritarian ruling elites, tyrannies, satrapies, distributing the national “pie” between their confidants, clans, relatives, oligarchic groups, or live in conditions of anarchic immature forms of democracy without “sails and helms”, where separate groups of politicians constantly fight among themselves for the redistribution of the “pie”, forgetting about the people. Such peoples live in lawlessness and poverty, and it turns out that because of their passivity they deserve such governments and such a fate.

Well, gentlemen, patriots on the one hand and liberals on the other, minus as much as you like, but I won’t change my opinion:

Yes, the people of Russia (and I, as an integral part of this people) deserve (and I deserve) the power that I brought into the country in 1991 (though I could not choose then due to my age), re-elected in 2000 (and then I didn’t have time to start choosing) and continues to re-elect (and here’s my problem). Oh yes. We don't go to elections anymore. Before each new presidential election, the Central Election Commission adjusts the election law so that the expected turnout does not disrupt it. Since “the people” do not want to make their conscious choice, it is made for them. The army votes by order, party structures - predictably, structures dependent on the current government - by force. What remains? What was designated in the question as “the people”: the depressed working class, the eternally busy representatives of the artificially created middle class, and the snickering bourgeoisie, who don’t care who will be in power.

I agree that in the presidential elections the people are not given any options at all - against the backdrop of Zyuganov, Mironov and Zhirinovsky, Putin is the only normal candidate. Why don't people rebel? Why don’t they organize a Maidan like in Ukraine or storm the White House like in 1991? Yes, because among the opposition there is no one who, in the event of such a storm, can be pushed onto an armored car, as was the case with Yeltsin.

The people are divided and humiliated in their poverty. In 1986, 1991, 1993, 1998, we (the people) were already shown the place, and using the example of all the “Berezovskys” and “Khodorkovskys” they showed that there are no untouchables. A frightened, amorphous gray mass, incapable of coordinated action, in which everyone is for himself, and who only cares that their children’s crackers have new tastes - yes, such a people deserve to have people like Yeltsin and Putin in power and Medvedev, so that the Central Election Commission announces the election results to the whole country with a total of 147% of votes, so that the retirement age is raised, and the pension fund is reformed three times in three years, as a result of which the “young” generation is left with nothing (we/they - depending on who Where will it take me - we still don’t know how to count our pension and don’t think about it - after all, it’s still so far away). Such a people deserves Nabiullina, who openly promotes the degradation of the ruble, Novak, who is incapable of regulating the NDK and forcing them to obey at least basic rules of law (not to mention conscience), until recently the Minister of Defense Serdyukov, who drank several billion with his mistress, and got away unscathed (resignation? no problem - I’ll go to work at Russian Helicopters)

Well, in conclusion... do something. So far, hardly anyone has gone further than talk. Everyone (including me) limits themselves to gatherings in the kitchen and lamenting “there’s still 1000 rubles left until salary - how can I live?” To start doing something, you need to have a leader in sight, whom 50%+1 Russians can follow. True, all 150 million people think so, and no one wants to be either the one who leads the people, or the one +1 who makes the final decision. There is one more aspect: even if two such people appear, it is not a fact that they will not share Nemtsov’s fate or become clowns like our St. Petersburg Milonov.

Doesn't deserve it. The authorities in modern Russia have enormous opportunities to centrally influence the minds of people, and it was the current leadership that faced the choice - to divide the population and corrupt their minds, or to change the situation for the better, promoting education and cultural enrichment. In conditions where no prerequisites for the latter are created, and often, on the contrary, they are suppressed, no people are able to avoid degradation. Thus, the main enemy of our country has become not some Western countries and the “fifth column”, but that organized crime group that has actually usurped power in the country, is wasting the resources that belong to each of us with impunity and continues to tighten measures of protection against potential unrest that violate the Constitution.

The phrase is absolutely correct, but the point is not “deserves/doesn’t deserve”, but that everything in the country happens according to the “norms” of society.
The norm of society is the reaction of society to events, based on the totality and experience of all its layers - conventionally lower, middle, higher (in terms of income and standard of living).
Experience is what a member of society has experienced in his entire life up to the present moment.
Based on this, he draws conclusions and makes judgments about events, and also chooses how to act.

We do not consider the upper layer - their income allows them not to depend on the actions of any government, just like a new palace in a new country.

About the sad:
1. We do not have a wide "middle layer". In my understanding, these are people who have fully covered their basic needs, solved the housing problem without compromising the rest of their lives, have a car, or even two per family, and travel at least 4 times a year to different countries.
It is this layer that is the engine of society, since people who know how to earn money and have seen the world are the people from whom feedback about the situation in the country is the most valuable.
According to statistics, 23% of Russians, including children, have international passports.
I think that a good half of passport holders have not traveled further than Egypt or Turkey with all-inclusive.

2. A country where 15% of the population (at best) have seen how life in the country can be arranged, using the example of European countries (for example), can simply not pay attention to the opinions of these people - even according to the results of the most honest voting - this is a minority. There are certainly problems in Europe, but we still need to grow up to these problems.
Simultaneously destroying sanctioned products and collecting funds on Channel One to help the elderly is....

3. What about the rest? After all, it is their opinion that forms the basis of that very norm.
And this is where the saddest part begins. For the most part, these are people whose income allows them to cover basic needs and partially solve housing problems. Not everyone has a car and trips, they are inexpensive and not far away.
For the most part, these are people who either themselves or whose parents were unable to rebuild after the fall of the USSR.
Therefore, for them there is a clear division: “in the USSR it was good, in Russia it was bad.”
They don’t want to think about how it could be that they didn’t pay taxes in the USSR, but everything was free, so the inscription, as a rule, pulsates in the brain: “Everything was free in the USSR, we want it back.”
Hint: The situation with taxes suggests that people were simply given the money that the government considered necessary, and the difference to their real cost of labor was taken for itself. This is what “free” is.
They remember that the USSR was big, everyone was afraid of them. And they want a return to those feelings.
And now they are trying to give them some of those same sensations. Naturally, this part of the population supports such changes and the government, which works in this direction.