It can hardly be a secret that the modern civilization has createв a vast amount of different problems connected not only with ecology and biospherical crises – in the social life one can see no kind of well-being. And the matter is not only in somebody’s personal activities on depressing the biosphere and other people – the matter is in passivity, inactivity of others! And moreover, aims announced by a government often differ greatly from ones that the government really has. However, such a ruling (when the aims being achieved really differ from those, which a state power pretend to work for; and the aims achieved remain unknown even after their achievement; in the same time the aims declared are called “temporarily unachieved” because of some problemsWell, but “a problem preventing from achievement of some goal” from another point of view can be an aim of ruling realized by other subjects. ) cannot have place save in the society of people completely ignorant in politics and ruling. And such phrases as “But what can I done being alone?” which are told by the millions, or “Let the guys from the White House make people’s life better” cannot help to solve the problems. They just shows one’s agreement with the situation existing – they shows that one is agree to be ruled; that he or she is agree that some “elite” lives better than others even without any reasons for this; that he or she is agree not to understand how the society lives as if his or her own life were independent from the life of the humankind in whole. But things don’t go such way.

Every society is managed in one way or another, and therefore the global historical process may be perceived as a global process of ruling which, at the first place, comprises many processes of regional ruling (policies of regional states and international policies, forces which are not institutionalised within state: mafias, Jewish diaspora); secondly, it proceeds within life processes of the Earth and Space, standing higher than it in the hierarchy.
The theoretical basis of the Conception of Social Security (COBCOB - is the transliteration of the Russian abbreviation for the Conception of Social Security. ) is the Sufficiently Universal Theory of Ruling (DOTU) (one can generalize forever, but is there a reason for doing it? DOTU is sufficiently universal for describing any process of ruling or self-ruling with its terms). Accordingly to the Sufficiently Universal Theory of Ruling all means of ruling can be divided into general groups which are hierarchically displaced from the most effective to the less one. Such instruments of influence on society, whose reasonable use allows controlling its life and death, are:
1. Information of worldview nature, or methodology, which, once adopted, allows men to project – individually and socially – their "standard automations" of identification with regard to particular processes within the completeness and integrity of the World, and to define in their individual perception the hierarchic order of these processes in their mutual interconnection. This information lays foundation for the culture of thinking and for the completeness of ruling activities including also intra-social absolute power both on regional and global levels.
2. Information of annalistic, chronological nature, in all do-mains of Culture and all domains of Knowledge. It allows seeing, in which direction the processes are developing, and to correlate particular domains of Culture as a whole and of branches of Knowledge. To those, whose worldview is based on the sense of proportion and is conformable to the World, this information allows identifying particular processes while sieving the "chaotic" flow of facts and phenomena through the worldview "sieve" – subjective human measure of identification. (Within the present context the culture means all information, which is not transferred genetically in the succession of generations).
3. Information of fact-descriptive nature: description of particular processes and their interconnections constitutes the substance of information of the third priority, which includes the faith-teachings of religious cults, secular ideologies, technologies and facts of all domains of science.
4. Economic processes, as an instrument of influence subordinated to purely informational instruments of influence through finances (money), which embody a totally generalized type of information of economic nature.
5. Genocide practices, affecting not only those who live today but also the generations to come, eliminating the genetically determined potential for learning and for development by them of the cultural heredity of ancestors: nuclear blackmail-threat of use; alcohol, tobacco and other kinds of narcotic drugs genocide, food additives, all ecological pollutants, some medicines-real use; "gene engineering" and "biotechnologies" – potential danger.
6. Other instruments of influence mainly by force – weapons in traditional sense of this word; killing and crippling human beings; destructing and exterminating material and technical objects of civilization, cultural monuments and bearers of their spirit.
Although there are no evident distinctions between the instruments of influence because many of them, by their capacities, could be related to different priorities, their classification in hierarchical order, as presented above, allows nonetheless to identify the dominating factors of influence that may be used as instruments of ruling, and in particular, as instruments of suppression and elimination of those phenomena in the social life that are conceptually inadequate in the sense of ruling.
When used within one social system this set is tantamount to generalized means of ruling this system. But when applied by one social system (social group) to others, which have different internal concepts of ruling, it is tantamount to generalized weapons, i.e. means of warfare, in most general sense of this word, or – instruments of support for self-ruling within another social system, when there is no conceptual incompatibility of ruling in both systems.
This approach determines the priority order of the above classes of instruments of influence on the society because the changes in society's state under the impact of the instruments of supreme priorities, entail much more significant consequences than those incurred by the instruments of minor priorities, al-though such changes proceed more slowly, without "noisy effects". In other words, within the historically long intervals the level of effectiveness is increasing from the first point to the sixth, while the level of irreversible results of their application, which by and large determine how efficiently problems of the social life are solved in ‘now and forever’ terms, is falling.
For making the full ruling of the society one needs not just know about the highest ruling means priorities, but to act within them as well. And accordingly it is impossible to avoid the influence of the informational means of ruling. One can run away from the war, he or she can choose not to use drugs (including even alcohol and tobacco); theoretically a farmer can even live without trading with other world – so to be independent economically. But no one is able to replace the whole mankind with his own person. That’s why one living in the society will need to take it and those, who rule it, into consideration. The position of COB is that real true democracy is able only when everyone understands and knows HOW the society in the whole is ruled and WHAT FOR is it ruled. It means that everyone must master all means of ruling, and consciously supports with his activity the aims standing before him as the member of society and before the society in a whole. But for getting the unity of aims of the whole society the achievement of the certain culture of world-understanding by every member of the society is necessary.
If to remember the school course of Biology and to look deep inside your own psyche you can discover that the informational and algorithmic provision of man’s behaviour includes
1) basic instincts and unconditioned reflexes (of intracellular and cellular levels, and also of levels of tissues, organs, systems and organism), as well as their cultural veneers; 2) cultural traditions that are above instincts; 3) his or her own limited understanding; 4) «intuition on the whole» — things emerging from the subconscious level of an individual’s psyche, coming from collective psyche, external delusions and from being possessed as this term was interpreted by the Holy inquisition; 5) God’s guidance on the basis of the previously named things except for external delusions and possessions that are direct intrusions into another person’s psyche against the will of its bearer.
These are things, which are possibly or actually contained in every individual’s psyche. But there is something that puts a mankind away from the other biosphere, though neither biology, nor psychology and sociology don’t notice it and one cannot read it in any learn book. The matter of this reticence is:
Every specimen of Homo Sapiens can have one of the next types of psychical structure more or less stable during his or her adult life.
· Animal type of psychical structure – when the whole behaviour obey instincts, and becomes a satisfaction of instinctive needs without considering the circumstances;
· Biorobotical-zombie type of psychical structure – when culture-defined automatisms comes as the basis of behaviour, and the inner conflict between instincts and culture-defined automatisms is solved for the last in the majority of cases. But if changing social and historical circumstances demand to reject the traditional norms of behaviour and to work out new ones, “zombie” declines the creation and continue following the already-formed customs;
· Under the demonic type of psychical structure one understands that its representatives are able to create and using their will can overpass the dictation of instinct and historically formed culture. They can work out new lines of behaviour and of solving problems appearing before them and the society. Whether it will be a good or evil, as others understands them, depends on “demon’s” real morality. Getting any power in the society demonism demands an unconditional service to it, creating the most cruel and subtle forms of depressing the people;
· Human type of psychical structure is characterised like this: every its bearer realises the mission of a human – to be the God’s representative on the Earth. Consequently he or she makes his relations with the God during his or her life, and consciously, with his or her own ill, sincerely contribute to the God’s Providence in the way he or she understands it. The feedback (showing one’s mistakes) is closed from Above in a way that he (or she) founds himself (or herself) in the certain circumstances correlating to the sense of his (or her) prays and intentions. In other words: the God speaks to people using the language of life’s cirqumstances.
Moreover people gave birth to the fifth type of psychical structure themselves:
· The dropped into unnaturalness type of psychical structure – when a subject belonging to the specie “Homo Sapiens” intoxicates himself with different psychotropic substances: alcohol, tobacco or more strong drugs of nowadays. It leads to the unnatural distortion of the organism physiology character in the aspect of metabolism and in the aspect of biofield physiology as well. And its effect is: plural different errors of psychical activity in all its kinds (from sense organs work to the intellect and will), which are typical to the types of psychical structure of animal, zombie or demon (since bearers of human type of psychical structure don’t intoxicate themselves). Thus the anthropoid person becomes a bearer of psychic structure that has no natural place in the biosphere. And by the kind of his behaviour not corresponding to the circumstances he appears to be the worst of all animals. And for this breach of the status in the Earth biosphere predetermined for him (or her) such person inevitably gets the punishment from Above.
In the same time if a person became an addict for any fuddle he gets the stable distortion of his biofield, and consequently according to the parameters of his spirit he doesn’t belong to the specie Homo Sapiens any more. Moreover the most fuddles are genetic poisons, i.e. they break the work of chromosomal system and destroy chromosomal structures of those, who takes these poisons. Then defective chromosomes are inherited by the descendants and it undermines their health and potential for individual development and creative activity. It has even harder effect if the conception is made before recovering the chromosomal structures by systems acting in the organism. However if the genetic poisons come to the organism too often and in the huge portions systems of chromosomal recovering have no chance to repair all damages – in such case the descendants are doomed to degeneracy.
And this fact allows calling this type of psychical structure – created by men themselves and reproduced by the social culture – dropped into unnaturalness.
For the human psychical structure the non-formal, non-dogmatic and non-ritual belief to God His Providence has not yet been known because one believes in Him, but nobody believes Him. (An unknown Russian author )
So, don’t mix to believe in God (which is usually understood as the belief in the simple existence of God) and to believe God (to believe God – is to believe what God says to be true).during the Life and activity in course of God’s Guidance of his or her own choice are normal.
A type of psychical structure is determined by the upbringing and education. Thus if one doesn’t achieve human’s type of psychical structure by his youth it is because of social culture’s viciousness and also because of unrighteous bringing up by his parents. However being adult and understanding this fact one is able to change his psychical structure from any to a human one. This is a basis for a following individual development.
Depending on the statistics of distribution of people by types of psychical structure the society forms its social organisation, develops its culture; either supporting the conservation of the state achieved and slave-holding system recurrence attempts; or supporting the recognition of the human type of psychical structure as the norm in the society, and its reproducing during the change of generations as a basis for a following individual and social development of nations and the whole mankind.
And it is impossible for the people to get the power and to solve the problems standing before the Homo Sapiens in the beginning of the 21st century without achievement of the human type of psychical structure by the majority of people.
What is the Conception of social security?
Conception – n. 1. conceiving or being conceived. 2. idea, plan. 3. understanding (has no conception). conceptional adj. [French from Latin: related to CONCEPTThe Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Rev. Sec. Edition. Edited by Della Thompson. – Oxford Univ. Press, 1996 – 1080 pp.]
Conception [Latin: conceptio] – 1) a system of views, a certain understanding of phenomena and processes; 2) a single, defining plot, a main idea of a literary or scientific work The Dictionary of Foreign Words – 12th edition, stereotypic – Moscow: C48 Rus. yaz., 1985 – 608 pp. .
The conception of social security is the idea of building the society that will be worthy of the name of a Human, and at once is the world-understanding allowing to put this idea to life.
Among the information of COB there are economical studies and a theory; there are analyses of ideologies and historical works (the large section of the main book of COB “Dead Water” is called “Decapsulation” and is mainly historical); and what is the most important there is the information on the cognition methodology that allows coming to harmony with yourself and with the God, achieving the human type of psychical structure, learning to cognise the world around us. These and other materials one can find on the sites Mera.com.ru. There are works translated into English as well base in section In English.
The conception of social security in its modern variant (2005) has being developed since 1987 by the initiative group consisting of common people, that took the name of “the Internal Predictor of the USSR” (IPUSSR). From those times the USSR as a state has disappeared but the social initiative continues its work under the same name. And it’s not only because it has become a special brand but because we don’t admit (in the juridical sense) the liquidation of the USSR made for execution of directives of the “world backstage”, different mason lodges, CIA and the National Security Council of the USA.

Internal Predictor of the USSR: explanation of the terminology used
The term “predictor-corrector” originates from calculus mathematics, where it names the whole group of methods. In them the solution is found with successive approximations. The algorithm represents a cycle with two consequent operations executed: the first one is the solution prediction and the second is checking if the predicted solution satisfies the problem accuracy requirement. The algorithm comes to its end when the prediction satisfies the accuracy requirement.
Moreover, the scheme of ruling, in which the ruling signal is formed using the prognosis of the future system behaviour as well as the information of its present state, is also sometimes called “predictor-corrector” (though it is possibly more right to call it “predirector-corrector” – it directs the way in advance). With the scheme of “predictor-corrector” the highest quality of ruling is provided since the part of information circuits is completed through the predicted future but not through the accomplished past. This fact allows to reduce the lateness of ruling relative to the perturbation action to zero; and to use the forestalling ruling, (where the ruling action forestalls the cause that forces ruling), if it is needed. Considering different conflicts, from the view of the theory of ruling the scheme of predictor corrector often excludes even a possibility to strive with the system using it in advance.
So, the term “predictor-corrector” is widely known among mathematicians and technicians in the West.
As it follows from the history, the predictor-corrector scheme was used for ruling the social systems even in the ancient times. The superior zhrechestvoRead a bit forward of the ancient Egypt was called “hierophants”, which meant their ability to read the fate (i.e. the matrix of possible states), to foresee the future. The last one is the basis of any ruling, since to rule a system (here: a society) is to lead it to the chosen certain variant from many possible ones on the basis of knowing these possible states. It’s naturally that choosing the variant depends on the real morality and will of those, who have achieved the foresight and ruling on its base.
The Russian word “жрец” (“zhrets”) is a composed word as many other ancient Russian words. The letter Ж (Zh – is read as French ‘j’) means the word ЖИЗНЬ (Life); and the word РЕЦ means “the one who speaks”. “Жречество” (“zhrechestvo”) means something like a community of zhretses; the suffix ‘-stvo’ refers to the English suffix ‘-hood’ like in “brotherhood”, or to ‘-ship’ as in “friendship”; and the stem variation is widely used in Russian, so ‘ts’ (is read as German ‘z’) in zhrets turns to ‘ch’ in zhrechestvo with adding a suffix. Thus zhrets can be understood as he who speaks about the Life (the Life in its whole sense, about the Life of men, of the mankind and the Humanity, of Cosmos the whole Universe, and of God), and zhrechestvo speaks about the Life for the Good of the society.
In English there is a word “a priest” which is usually translated into Russian as “zhrets”, but it is not right, since “a priest” is an adherent of a certain confession, church or pagan beliefs, a pope, a clergyman etc. We will use it in such sense. The nearest analogue to the word “zhrets” in English is the word “soothsayer”, but understood not as “a foreteller” or “a fortune-teller”, but as “he who tells (and speaks) the sooth (the truth) [ about the Life]”. We will use the word zhrets using this Latin transliteration.

Жречество занято жизнеречением The suffix ‘-ен’ refers to English ‘-ing’ meaning an action named with the previous verb. So “речь” (verb is “рекать” though today it is used not without different prefixes) – turns into “речение” and in English can be found as “speaking” (but not in its modern usual meaning) like an action when one speaks. во благо общества.
Zhrechestvo speaks about the Life for the Good of the society.
The phonetics, the lexical and conceptual systems of Russian language are rather special. This phrase cannot be translated into other languages without loosing many sides of sense and many associative relations. So the term “predictor-corrector” was introduced for better understanding of this and for using in English. However, today we introduce the word zhrets to English and will use it.
It is useful for an English speaking reader to learn Russian language to understand many particular features of its root, lexical, conceptual systems. We translate many works into English today, but it is sometimes impossible to translate all meanings of the word and all its relatives! Moreover, “to translate” means “to find a word in another language for the same thing, for the same image”. But how can one translate the concept, if there are no images in another language, no such things at all! Thus one should do not “a trans-lation” but “intro-lation” (introduction, intromission). So we “introlate” the word zhrets. And also we introlate another word: знахарь “znakhar”.
“Znakhar” (‘kh’ is a single consonant as Scottish ‘ch’ in “loch”) originates from the verb “знать” (“to know”), which is very close to the word “значить” (“to mean”, “to sign”); the suffix ‘-арь’ (‘-ar’) refers to the Latin suffix (‘-ist’), so znakhar is “he who knows”, who has some knowledge but doesn’t share it with people.
Today in Russian all the words with such meaning: “ведун”, “ведьма” (from “ведать”=“to know” Though not only “to know” (in “ведать + Accusative case”, direct object), but as well “to be in charge (of); manage” (in “ведать + Instrumental (Ablative) case”, indirect object)), “знахарь” means something like “a witch”, “a quack doctor”. But it doesn’t mean that one cannot understand the word in its literal meaning. And in literal meaning the word znakhar means only “he who knows ”.
Zhretses with their foresight, knowledge, words in advance lead the course of life of society to an absence of poverty and to the well-structured and comfortable state, with all this keeping the society in harmony with the Earth biosphere, the Cosmos and the God.
Znakhars are self-interested while exploiting the society on the basis of their knowledge, and they wittingly cultivate the ignorance and perverted knowledge in the society exploited.
And this is the difference between zhrechestvo and znakharstvo.
The harmony of society, its culture and Earth biosphere needs the global level of responsibility and of CARENESS about the well-being (not only a material one) of all nations on the Earth. English is today the most popular for international communication. So we take care of that you, English speakers, understand that what we want to say you but not what the masters of “false horses of enlightenment” “Translators – are false horses of enlightenment” as the Great Russian poet Pushkin said. want to give you as our opinion.
Russians don’t need such words as “conception” – we have the word “жизнестрой” (“Life organization”), and English can also find some its old roots to avoid the dead Latin.
Our opponents must understand that their monopoly on the knowledge is over. Using imagery: We pour our “spring water” into their “old wine-skins” for their “skins” split: we don’t like their “skins” and their stupefying narcotic “wine”.

One of the questions, which both enemies and supporters of COB usually ask, is the question referring to the persons – authors of COB. As an answer we’ll print the extract from the work by IP USSR: “Questions to the Metropolitan of Saint-Petersburg and Ladoga Ioann and to the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church”.

About the anonymity
A person in our ill civilisation is not perfect. That’s why any creation of the cult of person (even if this person has rendered real services to the society), shows the viciousness of everyone following the cult; in the sense, that he or she wants to impose his or her own responsibility for solving problems to the cult person, who can be vicious (in his or her own way) as well. So we use anonymity when writing about the conceptual power and other sociological themes for avoiding an insouciant following this or that authority (formed by a chance or created for purpose) and for avoiding inattention while reading opinions of “non-authorities”. As we see it the anonymity should put away all prejudices, so everyone reading should understand the text according to his own conscience and morality. So he gets a chance to correct his mistakes without a psychological oppression of those, whom he considers to be doubtlessly authoritative. The deeds, the results of activity are important for people, for the society; but not persons who do it. If the action is good – he who does will lose nothing; if it is evil – none will avoid the God’s punishment, even if he or she wants. After saying this, we ask you not to understand the anonymity of the letter as an offence or distrust. Moreover the anonymity can disappear only after a personal communication, even if letters are signed and stamped.

At the end of January – beginning of February 2008 “Russia” TV-channel has two times shown the film “The Fall of the Empire. The Byzantium Lesson”, filmed by “the pastor” archimandrite Tikhon (Shevkunov, who has been raised to the rank of V. V. Putin’s “personal confessor” by mass-media), and who has got a cinematographic education. According to the concept of Byzantium history stated in the film, in the history of Russian Empire – USSR – post-Soviet RusZionia those cultural and political mistakes, which by Tikhon’s opinion have brought Byzantium to ruin, have been repeated in many aspects. The main mistake (in his representation) is the of Empire people’s apostasy of the so-called “orthodox faith” that caused numerous mistakes – consequences of that “principal mistake”.

In press (which in present RusZionia, as in 1980-90th, is still overwhelmed by the spirit of liberalism so the West is “all light in window” for them) all the discussion on film was reduced to the following. Reproaching Tikhon of tendentious interpretation of the history of the Byzantium society and its mutual relations with the outer world; indicating several actual mistakes and discrepancies; charging that the film groundlessly tries to convince RusZionian people that the West is the pathological enemy of Russia during all the history.

Actually the film has the indisputable advantage which hasn’t been noticed by liberal critics. It states the question: What defects does the so-called “Orthodoxy” have? The defects, since which the Byzantium society, based on the “Orthodox” worldview and world-understanding , wasn’t able to solve actual social and state problems in proper times and tried to find ready receipts at the West during thousand-year history of “East Rome empire”? In fact the, the same repeats as well in the history of Russia, which had accepted the “main treasure” of Byzantium – the so-called “Orthodox faith” (as it is stated in the film).

Without answering this question or without accusing its inconsistency perspectives of Russia's revival as the society self-sufficient in the aspect of meaning of life – are vague. I.e. “the Time of Troubles ” as a crash of the historically formed culture may repeat.

read more: Authority as an obstacle for personal and social development

1. The Provocation

“The Kommersant Ъ” newspaper N 230 (3806) (Dec 13, 2007) published the article “Americans Imagine a World without Putin”In Russian it is called: “Russia and the world will be shocked by Vladimir Putin’s Murder”. with subheading “The future of Russia studied”http://www.kommersant.com/p835684/futurology/.

The article begins with following notification:
“A report called ‘Alternative Futures for Russia’http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/071210-Russia_2017-web.pdf will be issued in Washington today by the authoritative nonprofit Center for Strategic and International Studieshttp://www.csis.org/. Besides the usual criticism of democracy in Russia, some parts of the report are downright fantastic. One of the alternative futures the report contains is a scenario built around the possible assassination of Russian President Vladimir Putinhttp://www.kremlin.ru/eng/ on January 7, 2008, in Moscow.According to the prognosis, Putin’s assassins will not be revealed and Russia will fall into chaos. This will cause the stock-market collapse. Mass strikes and demonstrations will arise and will lead to the state of emergency declaration on February 20, 2008. After that Vladimir Yakunin (Russian Railways’ (RZD) president) will become the President of Russian Federation. By his order striking oil workers in Surgut (West Siberia) will be shot, and the Majors of Saint-Petersburg (Valentina Matvienko) and Moscow (Juri Luzhkov) will be sentenced to death for misappropriation of billions of dollars. (Look at the publication at www.newsru.com: “The author of ‘Putin’s murder on Christmas’: Relatively positive scenario with enough positive final tends to realize in Russia during following 10 years” (http://newsru.com/Russia/24dec2007/catchins.html) – this footnote was added on December 31, 2007). Kommersanthttp://www.kommersant.ru/ Washington correspondent Dmitry Sidorov has read the report.

The authors of the 59-page report are director of the CSIS Russia and Eurasia program Andrew Kuchins, former senior director for Russian affairs at the National Security Council Thomas Graham, Assistant Professor of International Affairs at George Washington University Henry Hale, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics Anders Aslund and others. On the report’s cover are five photographs: Russian President Vladimir Putin with the G8 leaders, Putin with the Chinese President Hu Jintao, the recent arrest of Other Russia leader Garri Kasparov, snow-covered oil wells and children in a computer class.”

2. How to regard with this?

Political terrorism may have enemy political figures extermination as one of its aims. And in this role it really may be effective for strategic tasks solving in politics in the case if potential terror victims politics almost fully depends on irreplaceable “key figures”.

Correspondingly, if in fact conspiracy is deployed and operated, then this publication – is order for scenario's execution (non obligatory on January 7 and on placed named in the publication). InitiatorsThis context means certain correlation: initiators inspire customers; customers seek out organizers; organizers seek out first-hand executors and directly coordinate conspiracy going. Reporting follows in reverse order – from executors to initiators. may belong to liberal-bourgeois branch of masonryNote for skeptics: some others collect butterflies and stamps; bros “free-masons” from the very beginning were putted forward to politics and foreign affairs. – first of all, in Great Britain, and, second, in the USA (The British prefer not to sully in such deals, but to operate through figure-heads)Their representatives participation in organization the conspiracy aimed to kill the Emperor Pavel I, in organization of Grigori Rasputin's murder and in organization of February Revolution in 1917 – were extraordinary events: when usual methods of political terrorism management by cascade of figure-heads had no enough fast-acting.. Foreign curators and their subordinate organizers and executors in Russia may have any opposite to post-Yeltsin bureaucratic regime political opinion (but, most likely, they aren't liberals: because liberals in Russia must stay unsullied in the case of conspiracy failure) or may have none – simply excited psychopaths permanently dissatisfied to all.

In aspects of sociology the counteraction to such structurally organized conspiracy is in competence of certain special services of Russian Federation. Although their activity undoubtedly needs for matrix-aggregorial support (i.e. prayers and direct volitional influence upon society aggregors from those who is able doing that).

Liberal-bourgeois brands of world’s free-masonry has motive for organizing conspiracy against top-officials of post-soviet Russian statehood: the realization into a fact of directive NSC-20/1 (Aug 18, 1948) “Our goals in Russia”It envisage Soviet power liquidation, USSR and Russia dismembered into several puppet states (alone and altogether depended from the West), which have to comply with western standards of false-democratic and keeping “human rights”. Russian translation of this outlandish directive (NSC-20/1) can be found in the WWW, for example at http://www.patriotica.ru/enemy/dalles_plan.html. In IP USSR information base it is included in part “Other authors”. was slowed down during previous 10 years. “Putin’s Plan”, which provide for country modernization and for several re-integration (within the former-USSR boarders) and integration (outside the USSR boarder) processes in international politics, in which Russia itself operates as subject (and moreover as coordinator – in some of them), on the whole raise a question about probability of realizing named directive.

So the question appears: What is the basis for the confidence of directive masters and western special services that such conspiracy may have success in Russia?

— Cause during 60 years, while NSC-20/1 acting, nor the Soviet leadership, nor the Russian leadership never gives it proper political estimation (not to mention about elaboration measures to counteraction NSC-20/1’s realization). Even after they got convincing proofs of its main proposition on the territory of USSR-Russia. So, how directive’s masters gave to interpret such behaviour of their “political opponents”?

— If not falling into decay, then the answer is evident: “Either we deal with our deeply conspired political allies, or – with hopeless idiots”.

If there is really no structurally organized conspiracy, then transatlantic report “Alternative scenarios for Russia” – is the sample of social witchcraft and expression of way of control by gossips and anecdotes spreading. In terms of DOTULook through “The Dead Water” by IP USSR and materials for learning course on applied mathematics – process-management at Saint-Petersburg State University. These and other books and articles by IP USSR were published in the Internet (look at www.dotu.ru, www.mera.com.ru) and also on CDs as part of IP USSR Information Base. (Russian abbreviation for The Sufficiently General Theory of Ruling) – this is attempt to organize the desired activity with non-structural methods of control. This method bases on the idea that probabilistic predetermination of certain events always exists. This predetermination may become real in consequence of circular non-address certain information spreading through society and some persons may react in a desirable (for initiators of this spreading) way when receiving such information. In this case this way assumes, that someone psychopathic maniac (or team) will respond to the “prognosis” of American political strategist and will transform transatlantic twaddle into action list.

In such cases (the same information was in mass-media before Russian president's visit to Iran) corresponding special services must function as in the case of structurally organized conspiracy, thus safeguarding on routes and at residences of governor ant other “key men”. Particular attention must be given to “non-typicalnesses” and inaccuracies in plans of guarded people movements and residencies: matrixes display in such “non-typicalnesses” and out-of-plan events, but interpretation of such signs may be accomplished only with their concrete conditions in situation development pace. There are no common receipts for interpretation (like “book of dream interpretations”), besides this one:

It is inadmissible to rate emotions nor through society, nor through special services, about real and unknown maniac (or maniac team) with aim to attempt to somebody's life) and thus they (i.e. special forces) must be “over-vigiled”Soviet time pun, well-known through circles of people dealing with secret information: “It's better to over-vigil, then to short-vigil”..

If, against of this advice, enforce of fear emotions and apprehensions begins, then psychic energyThose varieties of energy, which keep up information treatment process in human psychics and which radiated by human into environment during psychical activity. of those, who was caught by such emotions, goes to rate up scenario matrix (with which scenario “over-vigiled” bind their fears and apprehensions). This, in turn, favours to realization of such fears, for example P. A. Stolypin’s murder, which became true, because guard service was overwhelmed by “over-vigil” but had no control over situation and had not understood real goals of those political forces, who's choice was political terrorism during that time.
December 14, 2007

3. Continuation (December 28-30, 2007)

Later, as NEWSru.com told (December 24, 2007): “Kuchins accused “The Kommersant” of misinterpretation of American politologists report essence”. (Look at publication on this site: “The author of ‘Putin’s murder on Christmas’: Relatively positive scenario with enough positive final tends to realize in Russia during following 10 years”).

Nonetheless, affected problems don't lose their actuality, despite of that refutation. Matrixes become apparent by events. The same matrixes – in essentially the same events repetition, may be with some differences, in other historical decorations.

The well-known aphorism tells about specific class of special cases of such repetition of essentially the same events: “The history repeats twice: first – as tragedy, second – as farce”. But this is not the only opportunity. In other cast there will be no the verb “to step twice on the same rake”.

IP USSR's Analytical Report “The Current Moment” N 11(59), 2006 “Time of Troubles in Russia (Smuta): the origin, the course, the overcoming” was dedicated to analysis of matrix-aggregorial processes in Russia's history.

It points at:

• The Time of Troubles (Smuta) – was a specific Russian phenomenon. It results from the lack of coincidence common people and “elite” notions about truth (harmony) in society.
  


• The full cycle of the Time of Troubles development contains of 2 phases:
  
  
  
  • during the 1st phase it takes place solving of tasks of Russia's civilizational building, opened for other nations. During that “elite” becomes impudent and shows tendency to establish common people slave-owning in certain civilizational forms – according to achieved development level of slave-owning sub-culture (from rough power to “brain-washing”);
    
  
  
  • fully impudent “elite” arranges its own time of troubles, at which ending “elite” builds anti-national clan-corporate “elitist” state (this is the aim for organizing time of troubles by “elite”), which follows to its break-up in consequence of vices and management incapacity of ruling “elite”, which opposed themselves to common people.
    
  
  


• Foreign forces always meddled in the Time of Troubles development in Russia. Anti-popular in its essence “elite” always collaborated with these forces. And thus “elite” (in consequence of its foolishness and arrogance) became dull instrument in foreign forces political struggle for final and irrevocable enslavement of Russia.
  


• Post-Soviet Russia is an “elitist” clan-corporate anti-popular state, which is typical for 2nd phase of Time of Troubles full development cycle.
  


• There are two ways in this phase of further statehood development:
  
  
  
  • either break-up in consequence of ruling “elite” non-adequateness and viciousity;
  
  
  • or either transformation to really common to the whole people and national state, in which power is a service to God and people, but not a sinecure or a means of parasitism of the clans standing apart on nation.
    
  
  

In the historical past – on boundary between XVI-XVII centuries – there was an opportunity to avoid statehood break-up (if one judges by known historical facts): Boris Godunov made activity towards solving of critical social problems.

However he crashed with sabotage and slander of those “elite” clans, who didn't recognize Ivan Grozny’ and his descendants rights for Russian throneThey didn't recognize competent the dissolution of marriage between Vassiliy III and his first wife Solomonia; also many people believed that Ivan Grozniy was not son of Vassiliy III, because they blamed his wife (and later – widow) Elena Glinskaya that she have begot Ivan from boyar Ivan Fedorovich Telepnyov-Ovchina-Obolenskiy. Remains investigations in XX century revealed (in spite of slanders on Elena Glinskaya) that Ivan Grozniy nevertheless was son of Vassiliy III and thus – he was heir-at-law. Questions on divorce of Vassiliy III and Solomonia Saburova, which took the veil; on destiny of their son (who took priority over son of Elena Glinskaya in right for rule) – belong to particular theme.. This conspiracy formed early during childhood of tsarevich (“son of tsar”, i.e. prince) Ivan (to come Ivan Grozny) and was multi-turned play. In this play Romanov dynasty was not the lowest player and finally got the throne. And all the blame for happened disturbance (Time of Troubles, Smuta) was laid upon Boris Godunov.

Analytical report by IP USSR “The Current Moment” N 5(65), 2007 “Egoists Are Doomed to Live and to DieIt seems more correctly by content to use “live” as slaves, but only human can live; contrary slave don’t live, but drag out miserable existence. Being Slaves” showed certain parallels in biographies of Boris Godunov and Vladimir Putin.

Yeltsin only got name Boris at his birth. And some people spoke ironically of him “tsar Boris”, after he became head of post-Soviet statehood in Russian Federation. Quite the contrary, in biographies of Boris Godunov and Vladimir Putin there are many things in common, despite the 400-years historical period between them:

• both were born in the 52nd year: Boris Godunov – in 1552, Vladimir Putin – in 1952;


• both started their state service at special service: Godunov – in oprichnina (special administrative elite under tsar Ivan Grozny), Putin – in KGB;
  


• both became actual governors in the presence of nominal state head: Godunov started governing during the reign of Fedor Ioannovich, Putin became prime-minister in August 1999 during B. Yeltsin was nominal president;
  


• both are “upstart without kith or kin” from standpoint of ruling “elite”;


• both are quite good administrators for their society, which initiated projects of social importance:
  
  
  
  • from one side, these projects loyally oriented to meet also common people wishes but not only “elite” wishes;
  
  
  • from other side, both of them (Godunov and Putin – undertook to solve actual tasks with wittingly unfit means (both don't have notion about that due to non-critical perception of received education), and both don't have social resources among common peopleIn this cast the question is not about “emotional support” and carried politics approval, but about erudition and skills bearers needed for manage work and economics., from which they may get skilled management personnel for solving these tasks;
    
  
  


• while being in fact alone in their politics, they avoided to conflict with historically established “elite” and to carry out any mass political repressions, didn't ask questions like “are you a fool or an enemy of the nation (parricide)?”, even when there were bases for that question, this let their political opponents to think better of it or to retreat off quietly;
  


• rumour groundlessly and presumably put the matter to Godunov’s and Putin’s hands responsibility for grave crimes: to Godunov – murders of tsar Ivan Grozniy and his son tsar Fedor Ioannovich and also “well-known” murder of younger son of Ivan Grozniy – prince Dmitri in Uglich-town; to Putin – poisoning of his chief A. Sobchak, explosions of houses in Moscow, murder of journalist A. Politkovskaya (citizen of the USABy the way, when admitting the American citizenship oath's text commits to high treason of former country.) and poisoning of former FSB employee A. Litvinenko in London with radioactive polonium;
  


• Godunov facilitated the Moscow patriarchy establishment, according to which Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) became autonomous, but not one of metropolies of Byzantine Orthodox Church; Putin set himself as obedient orthodox Christian, and he successfully furthered joining up Moscow Patriarchy ROC and Foreign ROCAct on canonical intercourse between Moscow patriarchy ROC and Foreign ROC, i.e. on comity of churches, was signed on May 17, 2007 at Moscow. (by means that ROC got global status), also in Putin’s time orthodox propaganda get appreciable time at Russian TV and broadcasting and is in fact the only alternative to liberal lack of principles at federal TV and radioThere is really no political parties propaganda.
  

Godunov made start of formation of “elite’s” slave owning in serfdom form in relation to common people; Putin furthers spreading of promissory servitude (kabala) in form of mortgage and other methods to “live on credit, getting at interest”.

Also there are differences between disturbance times at XVI-XVII AD and at XX-XXI AD. Mostly marked differences are:

• During XVI-XVII AD disturbance, at first, Godunov attempted to reform state and society, and, at second, disturbance began. In our days we can see other turn of events: at first, state crash and chaos, at second, initiated by Putin reforms, which pretend to led revival of state and to further society's development.
  


• Moreover, Godunov and Yeltsin have only the same name (Boris) and death date (April, 23): Godunov dead in 1605, Yeltsin (officiallyAccording to one version, B. Yeltsin died in 1996, after that his double acted as president. Look at basis of this version in Y. Mukhin’s book “Yeltsin’s code” published in 2005 and in his articles in “The Duel” newspaper (www.duel.ru).) – in 2007. Vladimir Putin is alive, continues to lead the state, and “Edinaya Rossiya” declares that: “Putin’s Plan” programs Russia’s revival, and Putin will be “national leader” even after expiration of his leading authority.
  
  I.e. Yeltsin, as named “Boris”, in certain sense became victim, which replaced another person in matrix-aggregorial processes (whose biography has a lot in common with Boris Godunov biography, while he has another nameWe hope, this is not occasion for “new chronologists” (Fomenko, Nosovsky, Kasparov) to once again shorten the history and to declare that B. Godunov – is V. Putin, who on some reason was written by chronicler under another name and was put at 400 years to the past by historians-traditionalists (and thus history was artificially prolonged). Look at IP USSR’ book “God’s Providence Is Not Algebra...”). Boris was made “to fill the sacrifice” premeditatedly or he placed himself – this is another question.
  


• During Godunov's governing under Fedor Ioannovich some gossiped about would he be a tsar. Godunov had an evident choice: at throne or in exile (in better case) – so he became tsar. During Putin’s presidency also some gossip about either he break Russian Constitution and will be president for 3rd time, or either he’ll not break the constitution, but will stay governor in fact even after 2nd presidency ending. (end of quotation from named Analytical Report of May 2007).
  

After May 2007 many things happened in Russian political life. These facts have to do with examined problematic of matrix displays:

• Putin didn’t change present Constitution, and he is not participating in president elections (on March 2, 2008);


• He backed up Dmitry Medvedev for president of Russia.
  During Time of Troubles (XVI-XVII AD) throne changed hands to man called Dmitriy. In official history he is known as Lzhedmitry I (false-Dmitry I). Someone may consider this coincidence of names of highest state power successor during past and present times of troubles as something like “historical curious”. But it is safer to consider this coincidence as repeating (even with variations) of the same matrix.
  

The latter binds to remember that (with no matter what historians say: either Lzhedmitry I – was Grigory Otrepyev, either Grigory Otrepyev was temporary alias of true prince – Fedor Ioannovich, which have been concealed from attempt upon his life and which was heir at law in forehand) man, who really ascended the throne under name of Dmitriy, didn't dead his own death, but he was killed.

I.e. this is reason to think about safeguarding of D. A. Medvedev.

It’s necessary to understand, that attempt at “key figures” life is not end in itself of its initiators; that such attempt (moreover successful attempt) – is means to attain another goals.

As an example one can take the murder of Benazir Bhutto at Pakistan. As a result Musharraf’s regime got problems, which it wouldn’t get in case of B. Bhutto would still be alive and her party would win parliament elections. It was certain third power who won after Bhutto’s murder, but not Musharraf’s regime or opposition, and, moreover, not the whole nation. This murder might not happened, if someone at Pakistan special services have not winked at preparation for killing of political figure (who evidently was not sympathized by everybody in these services).

If one of goals of the conspiracy against Russia is – to complete realization of directive NSC-20/1 (Aug 18, 1948)And also realization of earlier documents with analogous content, which were published by foreign press before the World War I. But they have not been realized due to sagacity and political will of J. Stalin., then owners of this project need destabilization and chaos in Russia. And what exactly can service to that – preparation for killing of V. V. Putin or D. A. Medvedev – is a political concreteness.

Also, it’s necessary to understand there is scenario, which let its initiators to kill two birds with one stone:

* * *

If D. A. Medvedev will be elected for President of Russia and V. V. Putin will become a premier, then, in case of D. A. Medvedev for some reasons will not be able to act as president, V. V. Putin (premier) will be his successor (until next president elections).

If attempt upon D. A. Medvedev will be organized and will be successful, then this scenario’s developers will put all the blame for conspiracy organization on Putin (i.e. with the aim to retain the highest state power for himself on the grounds of law. If attempt on D. A. Medvedev will not be successful, then imputations will be the same.

* *
*

I.e. D. A. Medvedev in reality of present days may be entrusted the role, analogous to role of his namesake – Prince Dmitry Ioannovich (younger son of Ivan Grozny), who was killed in Uglich-town by assassins sent, according to official historical version, by Boris Godunov. Though history course indicates that this assassination was organized if not by Romanov dynasty, then by their foreign puppeteer with the aim to remove both Ryurik-RabinovichVladimir I Christener (Krasno Solnyshko) was son not only of duke Svyatoslav (from Ryurik dynasty), but also of Malka (daughter of Khazar rabbi from Lubech-town). dynasty (which became essentially pan-EurasianAccording to “Grand Soviet Encyclopedia”, khan Mamai (whose army was defeated by Russians at Kulikovo battle in 1380) was one of ancestors of Elena Glinskaya – mother of Ivan Grozny.), and Godunov dynasty, which have pan-Eurasian roots. However, gossips on theme that “Godunov” is guilt for all evil deeds in past and present are kind of “humanitarian factor”, which is able to arouse for disturbance only specific group of home intellectuals. For stimulating to disturbance the rest (sufficient mass of common people) someone needs financial crisis, which can defeat “Putin’s Plan” accomplishment: don’t forget, that despite of sufficiently successful situation with state debt (thanks to Putin’s regime), private businessmen were under such conditions, that during more then decade it have been profitable to get credits at foreign banksWhy and what for it was done? – These are questions, which must be asked to heads of Ministry of Finances and Central Bank. V. V. Putin on the basis of their common juristic education can't have adequate to life notions about how on the basis of specific ‘know-how’s under cover of official economy science gibberish control over another's economy for somebody’s interest realizes, despite wishes and will of their nominal owners..

What works for such scenario in Russia today? – Many things:

• Named dependency of private and private-corporate sectors of economy from foreign crediting sources.


• Lack of not only national ideology, but also distinct and directly interpreted ideology of political parties – first of all of “Edinaya Rossiya” party – a kind of “bureaucracy trade-union” (considering citizen demands from any political party: course of world history, course of own country history, course of economy and finances, course of sociology – no one from parties, however, can't offer set of these courses).
  


• Journalists, keen to sensations, for some reasons haven't jet unearth “historical curious incident” – parallels in biographies of B. Godunov and V. Putin. However, opera (written by Johann Matteson in XVII century) “Boris Goudenow” was taken out to theatre stage especially for “elite” review. Mass-media trumpeted about it joyfully. This is one of stages of so called “collective unconsciousness” (aggregorial algorithmic) programming.
  


• Spreading in the Internet information about D. A. Medvedev’s Jewish ancestors and his marriage with Jewess, at the least, doesn't favour so-called “patriotic” circles (at society, state bureaucracy, army and special services) to trust him, and, at the most, impels to actions against him personally and his career up to connivance of attempts to his life.
  


• On December 28, 2007 at the evening TV-channel “Kultura” (culture) showed “Julius Caesar” movie, based on Shakespeare’s play (British performance of late 1950-s). This movie, obviously, doesn’t blend with pre-holiday preparations for the New Year, Christmas and “Old Style New Year” (by Julian calendar).
  
  In this movie Brutus, while appealing to Rome citizens after Caesar’s murder, delivers a speech full of modern “democratic rhetoric”. This speech may be a ready text for self-justification in case of successful attempt at V. V. Putin or D. A. Medvedev:
  
  BRUTUS:
  Be patient till the last.
  Romans, countrymen, and lovers! hear me for my
  cause, and be silent, that you may hear: believe me
  for mine honor, and have respect to mine honor, that
  you may believe: censure me in your wisdom, and
  awake your senses, that you may the better judge.
  If there be any in this assembly, any dear friend of
  Caesar's, to him I say, that Brutus' love to Caesar
  was no less than his. If then that friend demand
  why Brutus rose against Caesar, this is my answer:
  --Not that I loved Caesar less, but that I loved
  Rome more. Had you rather Caesar were living and
  die all slaves, than that Caesar were dead, to live
  all free men? As Caesar loved me, I weep for him;
  as he was fortunate, I rejoice at it; as he was
  valiant, I honor him: but, as he was ambitious, I
  slew him. There is tears for his love; joy for his
  fortune; honor for his valor; and death for his
  ambition. Who is here so base that would be a
  bondman? If any, speak; for him have I offended.
  Who is here so rude that would not be a Roman? If
  any, speak; for him have I offended. Who is here so
  vile that will not love his country? If any, speak;
  for him have I offended. I pause for a reply.
  
  After that Marcus Antonius condemns killers:
  
  MARCUS ANTONIUS:
  I thrice presented him a kingly crown,
  Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition?
  Yet Brutus says he was ambitious;
  And, sure, he is an honorable man.
  I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke,
  But here I am to speak what I do know.
  You all did love him once, not without cause:
  What cause withholds you then, to mourn for him?
  O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
  And men have lost their reason. Bear with me;
  My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar,
  And I must pause till it come back to me.
  
  In 2006 specially made crown (so-called “Monomakh’s cap”), adorned with precious stones, was presented to V. V. Putin, and he refused from it.
  
  Shakespeare in this play shows clearly how to manipulate the crowd in order to justify any meanness of thirsting for power “elite”. Also, with such effect somebody, while arousing passion of the crowd, may arouse civil war in order to advent another “elite” to power. Brutus’ speech is full of democratic rhetoric, which is widely used by democrats in presence. However, Markus Antonius’ speech is also full of rhetoric, with help of which somebody can just to stir up hatred to rival's clan, but not to stabilize the situation in the state for nation’s blessing.
  


• Picture of V. V. Putin’s marble bust, almost the same with Caesar’s one, appeared in the Internet.

Though pro-American liberal-democrats in Russia still regard as main scenario the destabilization of political situation in Russia (K. Rogov told that without any confusion at article “Predictable Russia” (“The Vedomosti”, December 28, 2007):

“... while trying to paint “balanced scenario”, we inevitably put our foot into it. Because non-balanced scenario still is base and inertial. And crisis still is tool for settling contradictions”);

— none the less, discharging of destructive matrix, due to God’s charity and to personal initiative of those people, who work for transformation of their Motherland and the whole Earth, but not for consuming or other social status of their clan or their patron’s clan...

read more: On the Discharge of the Destructive Anti-Russian Matrix

In the analytical note there are cited several significant mass media publications regarding the reaction of Muslim countries on the speech made by the Pope Benedict XVI on September 12, 2006. In that speech he told about the Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaiologos’s opinion on Islam and Muhammad. The discords between the historically formed Judaism, Christianity and Islam in sociology, in organisation of the life of society, in economics and theological questions are shown. It is noted, that those discords of the historically formed confessions follows from and thus express people’s fictions, self-interest of ruling “elites” and their backstage supervisors. With it, if one considers the conscience to be God’s voice addressed directly to man’s soul, then taking religious traditions as an indisputable truth, free from perversions and mistakes, suppresses the voice of conscious and makes an individual deaf to the call of God.

This peculiarity of the traditional confessions together with their discords in sociological and theological-dogmatic questions poses a threat! It is so, since within the conditions of globalization the rousing of such excitement around return to traditions and adherence to them appears to be the way to a new World War. And the new war is necessary for the “world backstage” as a mean for discrediting Islam and Koran and finishing the biblical project of enslaving the mankind.

1. Is the conscience free within the traditional confessions?



2. God is the best of planners…



3. Conjecture will not avail aught against the truth…



4. Why are hierarchs of churches against the Rightness-Truth?



5. The task is to prevent from unleashing the new world war on the basis of interconfessional enmity.

read more: The Future of the Humankind: The Dictatorship of Conscience or the Tyranny of Bible Owners

1. The transformation of G7 into G8: goals and result


2. G7 or UN -> Gx + UN?

read more: G8 Summit in Strelna

The 21st century has just started and immediately an important event has happened. The reaction on it was so outstanding and violent that one can surely say – there wasn’t such striking occurrence during the 20th century peacetime. Only the laziest hasn’t told his opinion on the events of September 11, 2001, on that tragedy that shocked the world. There was told much, but few has been made clear. Is America a victim? Or has it “punished” itself? Why there are so much secrets and mystical coincidences about this tragedy? And could it be parts of some plot rather than coincidences? And what is the plot and who stands behind?
The great-grandsons of famous Conan-Doyle’s characters Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson are trying to find out the cause of the skyscrapers destruction and clear up some details of the incident. During their investigation they solve this one and other mysteries of the last decades.

The genre of this book is called “mystical-philosophical political detective story”. It tells about important information on world-view and on ruling, acquaints a reader with the “backstage” hidden motives of the world’s events, narrates about secret means of ruling the social processes.
Extraordinary chances use to recur.
Karel Čapek.

There is nothing casual. Chance is something beyond one’s comprehension.
Michael Liteman.


Introduction. From Editors to a Reader

Part I. Holmes and Watson

• Saturday morning. September 22, 2001. London

Part II. Watson’s investigation

• Evening. September 22. Russian “picnics”


• September 23 – 24. “Matrix”


• September 25 – 30. Holmes’s books


• Evening. October 4. Hotel “Woldorf” and “Flight 1812”

Part III. Holmes’s Investigation

• September 22 – 27. Switzerland – Liechtenstein(Zurich – Vaduz – Geneva)


• September 27 – October 4. Spain. Madrid – El Escorial


• October 5 – 7. Egypt. Cairo


• October 8 – 12. India. Bombay-Puttaparthi

Part IV. Holmes and Watson Again

• Saturday morning. October 13. London


• The principles of tandem activity

read more: The Last Gambit

(Alternative principles of globalization)

This work concerns the outlook on economy and social life belonging to two men who are usually thought to be very different. The first one is Henry Ford I, founder and head of «Ford Motors Company», one of the world’s largest automotive corporations. The other one is Joseph Stalin — a politician, sociologist and economist, whose world understanding and will were embodied in the foundation and prime of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the «superstate № 2» of the 20th century, the «super concern» state.

Despite what used to be taught at schools about the fight between capitalism and socialism those two people share a similar view on normal social life. The difference lies in Henry Ford’s focusing mainly on microeconomy and relations between people as employees of a single enterprise, avoiding the issues of macroeconomy and building state institutions, while Joseph Stalin concentrated on the issues of developing political economy as a science, on cultural transformation and arranging the macroeconomy by the scheme of a «super concern» state, leaving the microeconomic issues to society’s creative force.

Thus they in fact complement each other and therefore pave the way to uniting the people of Russia and America as well as the people of the world in a common culture based on morals and ethics of a conscientious laborer.

But contemporaries as well as descendants refused to understand both of them. And the world has paid for this reluctance to understand with World War II followed by the «cold war» between NATO and the USSR and with the deformed globalization that is currently taking place.

Though this work quotes both Ford and Stalin extensively where it is necessary, those are merely quotations. Their heritage should be studied not by quotations but by their works in order to form a complete and coherent understanding of who and in what way was wrong or right.

But if the heritage of Ford and Stalin is understood, expanded and realized then the historic perspective of all peoples will acquire a new, a better quality...

The Preface to the English Edition
Foreword

Part I SOCIALLY USEFUL Management Principles Have Been Proclaimed Long Ago

1. Globalization as a Means to Counter Globalization


2. Henry Ford and Industrialization in the USSR


3. Marxism Talking on «Fordizm»


4. A Campaign for What: for Capitalism? Or for Socialism?
   
   
   
   1. Humanism in Deed and in Word
   
   
   2. What Guarantees the Ruin of Economy?
      Digression 1: On System-Forming Delusions
      Digression 2: The Axioms of Modern Economics
      
   
   
   3. Fordizm — the First Advent of Bolshevism to America
      Digression 3: Objective Rights and Subjective Laws
      Digression 4: The Moral and Ethic Results of Bourgeois Reforms in Russia
      
   
   
   4. The Ethics of Bolshevism: CONSCIENTIOUS Labor to the Welfare of Laborers
      Digression 5: Directly Productive and Auxiliary Labor, Managerial Labor, Remuneration of Labor
      Digression 6: Political Economy of the Industrial Civilization
      
   
   
   5. Planned Economy of Bolsheviks is a Socialist Economy
      Digression 7: The Post-Stalin USSR was an Anti-Socialist State
      
   
   
   




Part II Historical Experience of Bolshevism in 20th Century and its Prospects



5. Results of «Fordizm» as the American Attempt of Bolshevism in 20th Century


6. Essence and Results of Stalin’s Bolshevism
   
   
   
   1. Distinct Terminology is the Key to Understanding the Epoch
   
   
   2. On Hidden Motive of Revolutions of 1917
   
   
   3. New Line of the «World Backstage»: Socialism at an Individual Country
   
   
   4. Unpreparedness of Russia for Socialism and its Consequences
   
   
   5. «Social Realism» as a Means of Overcoming the Power of Marxism
   
   
   6. The «World Backstage» and Soviet Bolshevism in the Second World War of the 20th Century
   
   
   7. How to Protect the Future from the «World Backstage»
   
   
   8. Stalin’s Directions for the Future to Bolsheviks
      
      
      
      1. Refuse Marxism
      
      
      2. To Overcome the Atheism
      
      
      3. To solve the problems
      
      
   
   


7. The Prospects of Bolshevism

SUPPLEMENTS

1. The Biblical Doctrine of Global Slavery


2. The interview with Joseph E. Shtiglits

read more: Ford and Stalin. How to Live in Humaneness

Calling things by their proper names.

1. What they urge to do in their appeals


2. The essence of the Russian-Chechen relationship problem


3. Jihad


4. Every people has a government slightly better than it could have been

read more: Сomment on the present situation, N10

Both existing and possible economic theories may be ranged into one of the two following categories:

The first group of theories describes the economy of a society in a way, which implies the need to give the answer to the question how an entrepreneur can legally fill up his pockets.
The second group describes the economy of a society in a way, which implies that the economic activities in the society are to be used as a means of approaching some other, fundamentally noneconomic, goals.

1. Introduction to the Topic


2. On macroeconomics and microeconomics – in an objective and considerate way
   
   
   
   1. Target macroeconomic parameters and the macrolevel managerial tasks
   
   
   2. The purpose of finance-and-credit system and distortion of its functions
   
   
   3. What is what in credit-and-finance system. Credit-and-finance system as the means of production and distribution management
   
   
   4. Rates of exchange: relative and absolute
   
   


3. Ownership


4. Afterwards

read more:

(On the recipe of gaining “freedom”, given in the “Matrix” movie)

1. Well, just another movie?
2. Hunt for the man and the issues of life and death
3. Mathematics and God’s Providence
4. Matrix control and management
5. About matrixes and aggregors
6. Freedom is in the Transformation of the contents, but not in change of wrappings

read more: Matrix DIFFERENT to “Matrix”

Global sociology as seen from the heights of the US “high” political analytics: on Z.Brzezinski’s book “The Grand Chessboard. American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives”. — M. International Relations.1998.

read more: Egoist is like one sitting for long in a well