If you don't want war, prepare for it. If you want peace, prepare for war

On the role of the fifth column in state authorities in the preparation of a color revolution in Russia

AT last years the possibility of a color revolution in Russia is constantly being discussed in expert and political circles.

The relevance of this topic has especially increased in connection with the approaching elections to the State Duma of the Russian Federation this autumn.

It is no coincidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking at the FSB board on February 26, noted that “ our enemies "over the hill" are also preparing for these elections.

In this regard, he called on the security authorities "to suppress any external attempts to interfere in the course of elections, in our domestic political life."

Naturally, the question arises, how justified are the fears of the Russian leadership, is a “color revolution” possible in Russia? To understand this, it is necessary to look at the phenomenon of the color revolution from scientific positions, to consider it in conjunction with other political phenomena and processes.

In doing so, it becomes clear that any color revolution is one element of a broader process known as hybrid warfare. In essence, the color revolution is the final stage, the final chord of the "hybrid war", when there is a change of power in a country that has undergone hybrid aggression.

The coming to power in this country of collaborationist circles essentially means the renunciation of sovereignty and complete submission to the aggressor, who, with the help of a puppet regime, is able to solve any problems in relation to this state.

The fact that the West unleashed a hybrid war against Russia is now recognized, perhaps, by everyone who are somehow interested in international politics. Not everyone understands, however, that The West is pursuing the most radical political goals in this war.

The defeat of Russia in a hybrid war will mean not only the surrender of the most important geopolitical positions - Donbass, Crimea, Transnistria, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. It will mean the liquidation of the Russian state and the further dismemberment of the Russian nation. At the first stage, Russia will be divided along national lines (starting from the North Caucasus), and then along territorial lines (the Far East, Siberia, the Urals).

For the first time since the German invasion in 1941, Russian civilization faced the threat of complete annihilation. But this fact is not yet sufficiently realized in society, one might even say that it is not realized at all. One has to be surprised at the numerous examples of the frivolous attitude of representatives of the Russian elite to the threat of a color revolution in Russia.

Most experts and politicians firmly believe that such a revolution simply cannot happen. They say that there is political stability in the country, the president's rating is extremely high, there is a rigid vertical of power, marginals from the non-systemic opposition do not enjoy public support. All this is so. But one is not counted important fact. Public sentiment can change dramatically, and quite unexpectedly and unpredictably.

History knows many such examples.

The most obvious example from the recent past is the fate of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. It would seem that nothing foreshadowed the coming storm. Libya was quite a prosperous country even by European standards, not to mention Africa and the Middle East. Logically, the Libyans should be proud of their superior position compared to other states in the region. Moreover, there was a rigid vertical of power in the country, and the leader of the Libyan revolution enjoyed great prestige both abroad and within the country.

But the hybrid war of the West has done its job. The regime tottered and fell.

Are there any guarantees that such a scenario is impossible in Russia? It seems that no one can give such guarantees.

The light-hearted attitude towards the possibility of a color revolution in Russia is partly due to the fact that many mistakenly present a hybrid war as an information-psychological war only.

And at the same time proceed from the fact that the spirit Russian people do not break that enemy propaganda will not be able to achieve its goals, since the people understand what is what and will not be led to the intrigues of our geopolitical opponents. In part, this assessment is correct, but only in part.

The information war, indeed, will not be able to shake a country that is in a state of economic and political stability. Propaganda has little effect on those who are satisfied with the policies of their leadership, and these people will never go to anti-government rallies.

Of course, in any country there are always dissatisfied, offended and even outrageous people who are ready to take active steps against the authorities. But in countries with a stable economic and political situation, there are relatively few such people. And they are unable to form sufficient social base for the color revolution.

There are such people in Russia too. They are grouped around the so-called non-systemic opposition and regularly come out in Moscow to rallies of no more than 50,000 people. This represents approximately 0.3% of the metropolitan area's population. In other cities, there are even fewer such people. In the country as a whole, electoral support for these circles fluctuates around 1% of the population.

Meanwhile, a targeted information war against Russia has been going on since the end of 2013, that is, more than two years. Obviously, Western propaganda has not yet achieved the desired result - the number of people who are ready to support the non-systemic opposition is not growing.

But one must understand that hybrid warfare is not limited to propaganda and information-psychological operations. It includes a whole range of means of influencing the enemy state. Here we can recall what E.E. Messner, the founder of the theory of hybrid warfare, wrote about this. He singled out seven elements of such a war: propaganda, sabotage, sabotage, sabotage, terrorism, guerrilla actions, and insurrection.

We note right away that the uprising is the final, the final act of the hybrid war, the very “color revolution” that is now being discussed. However, the experience of Libya and Syria shows that in modern times the uprising can take place in a classical form, and not in the form of a color revolution, as happened in Georgia in 2003.

Even the coup in Kyiv in February 2014 was an armed seizure of power, although the rebels used clubs, rebar, stones and Molotov cocktails. But this is also a weapon, although not a firearm.

It is also important to understand that all elements of a hybrid war are closely interconnected, mutually support and complement each other. Only together they can lead to a color revolution, especially in a country that is characterized by acceptable economic conditions and political stability.

Wreckers and sabotage are precisely aimed at worsening the socio-economic situation in the state and discrediting the authorities in the eyes of the population. Moreover, sabotage and sabotage can be carried out in the most sophisticated, veiled forms. Long gone are the days when sabotage was an act of disobedience to the orders of superiors, and wrecking was reduced to breaking down cars and spoiling food.

At present, sabotage is a steady unwillingness of officials and leaders at various levels to take measures to improve the socio-economic situation in the country. And sabotage lies in making decisions that lead to an even greater deterioration in the situation in the economy and public life. Moreover, all this is masked by the best intentions, references to economic theory or objective circumstances.

Meanwhile, the adversary's propaganda skillfully plays with these facts, proving to citizens that the government is not coping with its duties, that it is corrupt, does not think about the population, and seeks to satisfy only its own selfish interests. Well, this leads to a change in the attitude of people towards the leadership of the country. Moreover, the negative accumulates gradually and perhaps even imperceptibly for sociological services.

However, any major negative event in the life of the country can give these sentiments a new quality, throw people out of balance.

And from this point of view, sabotage and terror play an important role in the hybrid war. They sow panic among the population, cause chaos in the administration of the state, which further discredits the authorities in the eyes of citizens. Thus, a picture is formed of the complete incapacity of the authorities, who have lost the threads of governing the country, hid behind high fences, leaving their people to be torn apart by the elements of the market, terrorists and murderers.

All this is pushing the population towards the opposition circles, demanding the removal of the existing regime. In the end, the situation reaches a boiling point, when people in a seemingly prosperous country are ready to support actions of disobedience to the official authorities.

In the context of modern color revolutions, such actions may represent the blocking of roads, organs government controlled, capturing various public institutions and commercial organizations, moral and psychological terror against civil servants, military personnel, police, etc.

Under the current conditions, such actions may well be equated with partisan actions. They further disorganize the situation in the country, causing discontent not only among the population, but also among a certain part of the elite, which begins to suffer economic losses and fear for their safety.

As a result, in these circles of the elite, the idea of ​​the need to replace the top leadership, which is unable to normalize the situation in the country, begins to mature. And then the process comes close to its final stage - the stage of the uprising.

The most important condition for the success of the color revolution is the transition to the side of the opposition of representatives of state authorities, especially law enforcement agencies or their neutrality, when there is no one to protect the government and this forces it to capitulate to the pressure of the rebellious crowd. A similar phenomenon can be observed in virtually all revolutions, both classical and modern.

A typical example is the events during the Kyiv Maidan, when the head of the presidential administration, S.V. Lyovochkin, actually played on the side of the opposition against his patron, which contributed to the success of the coup d'état in Ukraine. Later, in one of his interviews, President Yanukovych explicitly stated that he suspected Lyovochkin of organizing a provocation to disperse students on the night of November 30, 2013.

The split in the ruling elite is provided in two ways.

Firstly, by early implantation of agents of influence into the elite, that is, persons loyal not to their homeland, but to foreign sponsors. As Messner noted: “... Now even the stupidest government understands the need to have “fifth columns” in a hostile and neutral land, and perhaps in an allied one”.

Secondly, by deliberately pulling part of the elite into the ranks of the "fifth column" through propaganda, psychological and economic pressure, and bribery. It is no coincidence that in this regard the application by the West of targeted sanctions against high-ranking Russian officials, large entrepreneurs and their businesses. These measures are intended to arouse dissatisfaction with the policies of Vladimir Putin among part of the Russian elite and encourage them to start internal resistance to his policies.

Is it possible to say with 100% certainty that none of these people succumbed to the pressure of the West and will not betray the president at a critical moment? After all, the ancient truth is known "only betray their own."

Meanwhile, in Russia, representatives of the non-systemic opposition - Kasyanov, Navalny, Yashin and other such figures and their few supporters - are identified with the fifth column.

But this is just the weakest and harmless part of the fifth column, which diverts the attention of the public and law enforcement agencies. In fact, all this non-systemic hangout can be easily and quickly beheaded by the actions of the special services.

The main danger is not they, but those who are in recent times commonly referred to as the "sixth column". In fact, the use of this term is erroneous. The constant increase in the number of different "columns" only confuses people.

It is necessary to talk about the same “fifth column”, but only a hidden part of it, entrenched in government bodies and cleverly disguised as supporters of the course of Vladimir Putin. It is this group that performs the functions of the hybrid war of the West against Russia, which are associated with wrecking and sabotage, it is this group that has the financial and material resources to organize the “color revolution”.

It is on this segment of the fifth column that the Russian special services and law enforcement agencies should focus their main attention.

Russian citizens encounter the activities of this fifth column constantly, everywhere and, one might even say, on a massive scale.

One of the clear examples of such activities is the construction of an energy bridge to the Crimea. The President spoke in favor of the construction of this bridge back in mid-2014. However, its construction began only at the end of 2015, only when Ukraine began the energy blockade of Crimea.

The question is, why did they wait so long, why it was impossible to start construction immediately after the president's words? I am sure that the officials immediately found a lot of excuses - they began to blame each other and refer to objective circumstances, they say, they didn’t give money, they didn’t bring materials, the weather let us down. But this is nothing more than a disguise for sabotaging the president's policies.

A similar situation has developed with the construction of the Vostochny cosmodrome. In the current conditions of growing confrontation with the West, this cosmodrome is of paramount importance for national security, primarily for launching satellites into geostationary orbit.

However, the construction of Vostochny stalled, the commissioning of the cosmodrome was constantly postponed, despite the fact that President Putin designated this project as a priority.

Some might say that the reason for the delay in construction was simply corruption among the contractors. However, one must understand that corruption always goes hand in hand with sabotage and sabotage. After all, a representative of the fifth column, who has settled in the authorities, cannot alone carry out large-scale actions to disrupt production. To do this, he needs to attract a lot of people.

It is clear that honest and decent people will not engage in sabotage and sabotage. Therefore, the most logical solution is to involve corrupt officials and give them the green light to embezzle state funds, which objectively leads to the failure of any creative work.

You can find examples of sabotage at the regional level. So the policy of the Moscow Mayor's Office to expand the paid parking zone outside the city center caused justified indignation among Muscovites. The same can be said about the policy of the Moscow authorities in the field of education, associated with the creation of school conglomerates and throwing children between different school buildings. And mergers and acquisitions of hospitals and polyclinics provoked protests by the city's medical workers. Even Minister of Health V.I. Skvortsova had to distance herself from these decisions.

Well, the actions of city hall officials, seemingly aimed at a good cause - the construction of new Orthodox churches, actually led to a confrontation between the Russian Orthodox Church and residents of a number of districts of the capital. The fact is that land for the construction of temples, as if on purpose, allocated in parks, green areas and recreation areas of Muscovites. Naturally, this causes dissatisfaction among the residents of these areas.

Taken together, these and some other decisions of the Moscow authorities lead to the growth of public discontent in the capital, pushing Muscovites into the arms of the non-systemic opposition. It should be recalled in this regard that the mayor of Moscow, Sobyanin, did not in any way interfere with the protest actions of the non-systemic opposition against President Putin in late 2011 and early 2012. Is there any certainty that he will be on the side of the president in the event of an attempted color revolution in Russia?

However, the greatest danger to socio-political stability in the country is the activity of the economic bloc of the government and the Central Bank of Russia. In the two years that have passed since the West imposed sanctions against the Russian Federation, the government and the Central Bank have not proposed a single significant solution to improve the economic situation in the country.

The only useful measure is a ban on the import of Western food, and that was proposed by the president himself. However, the country's economic situation continues to deteriorate, GDP is falling. But that doesn't seem to bother the government much.

Ulyukayev, who is in charge of the economy, instead of offering measures to stimulate economic growth, constantly talks about the fact that the crisis will only deepen. Like, these are the objective circumstances - oil prices have fallen, and the West has imposed sanctions. What can I do in this situation? ( In this position, one can read the idea that if the president had not annexed Crimea, then everything would have been fine. And now, they say, disentangle).

It would seem that you can not offer anything, resign, give way to someone who can. But Ulyukaev does not want to leave. And it's understandable why. If another person comes, he can offer real measures to stimulate the economy. But this is exactly what the West does not need. He is very satisfied with the inactivity of Ulyukaev as Minister of Economic Development.

Another economic guru, Finance Minister Siluanov, also has nothing to offer but to increase taxes on the population and small businesses. Thanks to his efforts, the price of OSAGO and excise taxes on gasoline have already been increased. He constantly proposes to raise the retirement age, stop indexing pensions and benefits, imposes funded pensions on citizens, in which no one in the country believes.

All these measures and proposals not only cause an increase in the discontent of the population, but also affect the purchasing power of people, slowing down economic growth.

At the same time, he brushes aside obvious steps lying on the surface, such as the introduction of a progressive tax, a tax on currency exchange, and the issuance of domestic loan bonds. Moreover, Siluanov constantly claims a shortage of money, while, according to the Accounts Chamber, huge untapped resources worth trillions of rubles are concentrated in the accounts of various ministries, state enterprises and organizations. But Siluanov, as it were, does not see this money and does not let it into the economy. That is, on the one hand, it slows down economic activity, and on the other hand, it provokes dissatisfaction of the population with ever new requisitions.

The Central Bank also operates synchronously. Having robbed the Russian population twice by devaluing the ruble, this institution has not taken any measures to normalize the financial situation for two years now, pointing to some objective market factors. Various measures proposed by economists, such as restrictions on currency speculation and an increase in the targeted issue of the ruble, are immediately rejected as allegedly provoking inflation.

In fact, inflation is provoked precisely by the inaction of the Central Bank, its unwillingness to use tools currency regulation, fight against currency speculators, as well as unwillingness to issue the ruble without its link to the dollar.

Most people consider this behavior of the Russian economic and financial authorities as some kind of mistake, negligence, indecision. But how then to explain that these leaders persist in their delusions for so long?

Suppose that the manager made a mistake, but he cannot but see that the measures taken by him do not work, and not only do not give the desired result, but even aggravate the situation. Under these conditions, a conscientious leader begins to look for ways to correct the situation, offers new moves and solutions. And if such solutions are not offered and it is pretended that it is simply impossible to correct the situation, then this can only be explained by the unwillingness to improve anything.

Most likely, the fifth column intends to bring the situation to a boiling point by the Duma elections in the fall of 2016. Well, the elections themselves will serve as a catalyst for a massive protest surge, which will be caused by accusations of the authorities of electoral fraud.

That such outbursts will not be in doubt, even if the elections are held extremely honestly. After all, it is important not what really happened, but what was said in the media and the Internet. Then it will be possible to understand, but it will be too late. In addition, we must expect that the fifth column will not be limited to information stuffing and will carry out real provocations in the elections. That is, with one hand to give orders to rig the voting results, and with the other hand to expose these frauds, causing discontent among citizens and spontaneous protests.

In short, the situation is dramatic. And if everything is left as it is, then by the time of the Duma elections in the country a situation may indeed arise that favors a color revolution.

To prevent this from happening, we must now take decisive steps to purge the authorities and the state-run media from representatives of the fifth column.

If you want peace, defeat the rebel war! Creative heritage of E.E. Messner / Ed. IN AND. Marchenkov. Moscow: Military University, Russian Way, 2005. S. 90−91.

There. S. 109.

Mikhail Alexandrov

If you want peace, prepare for war
From Latin: Si vispacem, para bellum (si vis patsem, para bellum).
The author of the expression is the Roman historian Cornelius Iepot (94-24 BC), who used it in his biography of the Theban commander of the 4th century. BC e. Epaminonda.
Already in the era of antiquity, this Latin phrase became winged. It was repeated, somewhat modified, by the Roman military writer Vegetius (4th century) in his essay “A Brief Instruction in Military Affairs”: “Qui desiderat pacem, praeparetbellum” (qui desiderat pacem, preparat bellum) - “Whoever wants peace prepares war” .
The meaning of the expression: the peace of the country is guaranteed only by its reliable defense, powerful armed forces, which discourage possible aggressors from any desire to attack, objectively there are no other guarantees of peace.

Encyclopedic Dictionary of winged words and expressions. - M.: "Lokid-Press". Vadim Serov. 2003 .

If you want peace, prepare for war

This expression, often quoted in the Latin form: "Si vis pacem, para bellum", belongs to the Roman historian Cornelius Nepos (94-24 BC) and is found in the biography of the Theban general of the 4th century. BC. Epaminonda. A similar formula: "Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum (Whoever desires peace prepares war)" is found in a Roman military writer of the 4th century. AD Flavia Vegetia ("Epitome institutorum rei militaris", 3, Prolog).

Dictionary of winged words. Plutex. 2004

See what "If you want peace, prepare for war" in other dictionaries:

If you want peace, prepare for war. Wed Chi la pace non vuol, la guerra s'abbia. Tasso. Gerusalemme liberata. 2, 88. Cf. Si vis pacem, para bellum. Wed paritur pax bello. Corn. Nepos. Epamin. 5, 4. Cf. Suspicienda quidem bella sunt ob eam causam …

Wed Chi la pace non vuol, la guerra's abbia. Tasso. Gerusalemme liberata. 2, 88. Cf. Si vis pacem, para bellum. Wed paritur pax bello. Corn. Nepos. Epamin. 5, 4. Cf. Suspicienda quidem bella sunt ob eam causam ut sine injuria in pace vivatur. Cic…

If you want peace, prepare for war- wing. sl. This expression, often quoted in the Latin form: "Si vis pacem, para bellum", belongs to the Roman historian Cornelius Nepos (94-24 BC) and is found in the biography of the Theban commander of the 4th century. BC e. Epaminonda. Similar… … Universal optional practical dictionary I. Mostitsky

- (accurate translation word) Cf. Si vis pacem, para bellum. If you want peace, prepare for war. Wed Qui desiderai pacem, praeparet bellum. Vegetius (late 4th century BC). Ep. rei militar. 3 prologue. Wed Suscipienda quidem bella sunt ob eam causam, ut … Michelson's Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary

SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM- If you want peace, prepare for war. This formula is often used in capitalist countries to justify a militaristic arms race and to prepare for aggression. strong wars... Soviet legal dictionary

See If you want peace, prepare for war. paritur pax bello. See If you want peace, prepare for battle ... Michelson's Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary (original spelling)

See If you want peace, prepare for war. Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum. See If you want peace, prepare for battle ... Michelson's Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary (original spelling)

See If you want peace, prepare for war. Si vis pacem, para bellum. See If you want peace, prepare for battle ... Michelson's Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary (original spelling)

Michelson's Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary (original spelling)

See If you want peace, prepare for war... Michelson's Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary (original spelling)

Books

• The world of captain Toot, Vladimir Sverzhin, “Officers are never former” - it seemed that someone, and hereditary military Attayr Toot, did not need to explain this simple truth. And yet, after a successful coup in the Capital and… Category: Fighting fiction Series: Rotmistr Toot Publisher: Vladimir Sverzhin, electronic book (fb2, fb3, epub, mobi, pdf, html, pdb, lit, doc, rtf, txt)
• S. T. A. L. K. E. R: HABITABLE ISLAND. Sverzhin Mir, Vladimir Sverzhin, `Former officers do not happen` - it seemed that someone, and hereditary military Attayr Toot, did not need to explain this simple truth. And yet, after a successful coup in the Capital and… Category: Fantasy Series: Inhabited Island Publisher:

Prepare for war - para bellum

In the 5th century AD, they were reproduced in a modified form by the Roman writer Vegetius in the book “Summary of Military Affairs” (Flavius ​​Vegetius Renatus “Epitome institutionum rei militaris”): "Whoever wants peace, let him prepare war"("Qui desiderat pasem, praepaet bellum")

Variants of the phraseological unit "if you want peace, prepare for war"

• For those who do not want peace, war is a foregone conclusion (Chi la pace non vuol, la guerra s'abbia) (Torquato Tasso's chivalric poem "Jerusalem Liberated")
• If we want to enjoy peace, we must fight
• Wars strengthen peace
• There is no peace without war (Suspicienda quidem bella sunt ob eam causam ut sine injuria in pace vivatur)
• In time of peace, one must take care of what is needed for war (Prospicere in pase oportet, guod bellum iuvet)
• Who, satisfied with little, having little hope for the future, could, like a wise man, be ready for war in the continuation of the world (an qui contentus parvo metuensque futuri 110 in pace, ut sapiens, aptarit idonea bello)

The name of the famous Parabellum pistol (or Luger-Parabellum after the inventor) uses the last words of "our" expression para bellum

Application of the expression in literature

- “In appearance, it was as if nothing had happened ... only some string broke inside ... business, dry relations began according to the formula Si visraet, para bellum”(V. I. Lenin “How the spark almost went out”)
- “Arnold's eyes, usually radiating benevolence and peace, suddenly turned stern: Why Vytak? I understand: if you want peace, prepare for war, but not to the same extent.”(T. Severin "Shadows on the pavement")
- “Ha ha ha! If you want peace, prepare for war? Great! But you won't fool us. Bits, killed"(I. Sinobonidze "The Tournament That Wasn't")

When you're holding an enemy by the balls, there's only one way to keep him from breaking loose, and that's to keep him over a precipice.

Somehow, in my childhood, during the period of boy fights, I got into a situation that later taught me a lot ...

Got a gun - get ready to shoot

We fought with one kid, as it often happened, for the amusement of others. It all started as a game sparring, but the intensity of aggression grew, and the blows became more and more powerful and cruel. We went on equal terms for a long time, but after his next series it was my turn to hit back, and I didn’t. Not out of any nobility, but because he was afraid. That fight was much more serious for him than for me, and at some point I saw madness in his eyes. I realized that he would not stop, no matter how far everything went, and at that moment I was not ready for this.

I chose to lose then, and it tormented me for a long time. But not so much because my self-esteem suffered, but because I did not know what to do in such a situation. And in this sense, my choice was, of course, the right one.

The decision came later, in adulthood. Although my unconscious received a lesson for him back then, at school.

Somehow, one guy from our class had a fight with a scumbag known throughout the school. Well, due to the weight, my classmate did it and went to class. The Thug stood up, dusted himself off, and charged into the fray again. Got it in the neck again. He got up again, rushed into the fray again and got it again, this time stronger.

And here we are sitting in a physics lesson, writing something, and suddenly, in the midst of the test, that dude enters, and like a terminator, not reacting to anything, passes through the whole class, approaches his offender and starts to beat him. Another round of fighting continues in the classroom.

As a result, he was dragged away by the entire teachers' council and the forces of high school students. I don’t remember what stopped him - either the fact that he managed to return his amount of aggression to the enemy, or they somehow settled this issue in the teachers’ room in some other way ... But the moment he appeared in our class, everyone understood one thing: despite the difference in weight and guaranteed defeat, he will never stop.

I hated him then. Just like everyone else at school. Because his manners were not ice, and, probably, there was no person whom he would somehow offend. But I will never forget how he appeared in the middle of the lesson and calmly walked through the entire class - no one even twitched. And my unconscious made him its master.

So, now let's get back to the question: what to do when you realize that if you continue to “hit”, in response you will again receive a blow, even stronger, and aggression will grow indefinitely ... But you can’t not beat - your boundaries have been violated, oh they wipe your feet and think that your name can be rinsed as you like.

The solution is really obvious. It's just very unpleasant and, at first, a little scary.

If you want peace, prepare for war

All the stories about the fact that "a bad world is better than a good quarrel" is bullshit. It has long been known that if you want peace, prepare for war. One Gestaltist friend of mine said differently: “In order to make good friends, you must first fight well.” In other words, if you are not able to answer, you will not be considered an equal in order to be respected and friends. This is inherent in us at the level of the instincts of the reptilian brain, and appeals to "reasonableness" do not make sense here. Reason is needed when choosing methods of struggle and the type of "weapon".

The answer is very simple - the enemy needs to strike such a blow that it stops him once and for all. Or, if that's not possible, make it clear that you will fight as long as you live.

And the most important thing. When you strike, you must know what you will do next, instantly, if this one does not lead to a result. The guns must be loaded and decisions made.

It will certainly require more effort than you were willing to put in when the battle began. Therefore, it makes sense to assess your readiness for war at the time of decision. And strike when the enemy is most vulnerable.

In that situation, as a child, I did the right thing, I was not mentally ready to beat the guy in a game fight so that he would not get up. And he was. For him, this battle was not a game. Later I found myself in his place more than once, and now I understand him perfectly. And this from an enemy makes him my master.

Fear is just an indicator

Fear is what stops people. From attacking and from defending. But fear is a very rational thing. It is present when you have something to lose. And he leaves when you've lost everything. Within the context, of course.

The kid we fought knew that if he didn't beat me, he'd be hoodwinked because I was one of the weakest in the class. They didn’t even let me go to physical education because of a stupid medical tap, so I sneaked in and passed all the standards purely for myself. And in the evenings, like many at this age, he went to karate. I had a good hit.

And he was the main scapegoat in the class. He was not lucky. He wasn't skinny to the point of being transparent like me, but he was quite dumb. And therefore he was beaten for entertainment and mocked in every possible way. And then we were put in the ring. None of us really wanted to fight, but refusing meant pissing. And that's a shame. It's better to lose in a sports fight. And in my case, the loss did not mean any losses at all, but in his - a broken nose in the same place and a series of new humiliations. In our duel, he had nothing to lose, and therefore he went to the end like a psycho.

Take any situation in your life where you have stepped back and you will realize that something was being saved by it. Remember when you rushed into battle without sparing yourself, and alas, you will see that at that moment everything was already lost.

Does heroism make sense then? Yes. But it is not personal, it goes beyond the boundaries of the person himself and is based on his values.

And if we are not talking about a deadly fight, then the question is the scale of the losses from which we protect ourselves or with which we threaten the enemy. Everything is dryly rational, emotions are just indicators. But there is, of course, an overly generalized experience that shapes a person's character in one direction or another. True, for the time being.

Know when to stop

We grow up, but we don't stop fighting. Just moving from fists to other instruments. But on a psychological level, everything is controlled by the same skills that we either develop or lose: knowing when to hit, knowing when to stop, and knowing who not to touch.

Somehow I happened to argue with another troll on the Internet, who wrote harsh slander about me under an anonymous nickname. However, I was not his only target - a person has such a hobby. Apparently, he was so hooked by the text of the announcement of one of my courses (which was not even taught by me) that he, like an overexcited teenager, poured slops on me in his LiveJournal.

At first, I foolishly got involved in a discussion with him, thinking that something could be proved to someone. But with a person who twists the facts and omits everyone who disagrees with him, this is a meaningless and endless process. Even if your clients stand up for you. Then I retreated - I didn’t want to waste time and energy, and a couple of years later I stumbled upon that record again, and it became a matter of principle for me to clear my name. After letting off steam in the air, I realized that there was no need to execute anyone, you just need to make sure that his page disappeared from the Internet.

Unfortunately, LiveJournal is not an organization (at least as they position themselves) and this complicates normal legal communication with them, so I had to go a long way.

I spent a couple of days and found who is hiding under an anonymous nickname, figured out his name, place of study, place of work, social network profile and photo. Imagine my amazement when I saw that an institute teacher in his 60s turned out to be swearing at his colleagues and acting like a dissatisfied teenager.

I had everything to strike a crushing blow by sending a revealing letter to his superiors and applicants with a demonstration of what their saint does in their free time ... And my hands itched wildly to do it. But, fortunately, I am a rational and legally savvy person, so I acted differently.

Through the LiveJournal administration, I sent him an official charge of libel with reference to the relevant article of the civil code and the amount of the fine with the grounds, which I will sue him if the case goes to court. In the same message, I asked the LiveJournal administration to fix the violation of my civil rights text and, if necessary, provide it to the court as a third party, confirming that the text was written by the defendant's account. And in the end, he asked to delete the page within three days in order to resolve the conflict in the framework of pre-trial proceedings.

The page has disappeared, but that's not even the point. The fact is that by sending this message, I was ready for a full-scale war. I contacted a lawyer, collected information, recorded all the necessary evidence, reserved money and time for the trial, and even thought about how I would present it online if I had to.

The moment a sniper fires a shot, a mobilized army is already standing behind him in full combat readiness. The bluff wouldn't work.

I confess that I was even sorry that I did not have to use everything that I had prepared. But the second important point in battle - this skill will stop in time. If the goal is achieved, there is no point in war. And the enemy must be given the opportunity to retreat while saving face. Otherwise, he may turn into a madman, and then two armies will have to be mobilized.

You can't really smile without showing your teeth

In a fight, people are often led by emotions, and carried away by bloodthirstiness and revenge, they sometimes cross the line after which to name everything " defensive reaction' won't work anymore. Then retribution is inevitable. And it's only a matter of time before the enemy gathers strength and attracts allies.

But we live in modern world where adults negotiate with adults, and bring up teenagers. No matter how old this teenager is. So no matter how friendly we are, we still have to get the belt more than once, and it's good to have it.

There are two classes of weapons in military policy: weapons of destruction and weapons of deterrence. Nobody wants to use a nuclear bomb, but everyone wants to have one. Because, as my karate teacher used to say: “The best fight is the one that doesn’t take place.” And so that it did not take place, he practiced karate and taught it to others. His sparring was excellent.

How many battles can you lose to win the war?

At one of the field trainings simulating social life, I got an unexpected experience. When it was time for my turn, I had to pick someone and attack. The guy was stronger than me ... everyone there was stronger than me, but someone had to be attacked. He chose the tug-of-war as a contest, because it was obvious that I would not support his weight.

I dug into the ground as best I could, fought with all the strength that I had, with all that I did not have, and from those that I could reach with my energy practice skills. I was heavier than usual and the opponent could hardly cope ... But the laws of physics are a stubborn thing, the middle of the rope was slowly moving into his territory. Then I got smart. Pulling back the rope, I wound it around the tree and blocked its movement in any direction. There were no rules on this score, and formally I created a draw where it could not be.

The whole group watched the competition with furious pain. And the ambiguous situation caused a storm of emotions and disputes, how it is possible and how it is impossible, who is right, and what the "Gods" should do.

Then the "Gods of the game", in order to bring the competition to a result, but to act honestly, ordered to return the rope to the field and not do it again. But allowed all willing members of the group to join the chosen side. I joined the training a day later than the others and was a new person to everyone, so most joined my opponent. However, some people, in a larger weight category, took my side.

The battle continued, and in the end the majority won. I lost the match. And at the debriefing, he was about to sign his defeat: “I myself could not overpower the enemy, and fewer people followed me ... I failed.”

But the moderators looked at me and asked: “Did you even notice who followed you?”

"No," I said, "I don't remember who is who here yet."

Then they showed me to these people, and it turned out that they were all the leaders of the group. The only leader who was not on my side was the one with whom we tug of war. On the evening of that day, he approached me and proposed a strategic alliance. And the next day I united all the leaders and we formed the ruling elite, which no one in the whole game managed to either break or enter into it. By the end of the training, I had taken the highest managerial position. I lost the first battle then, and during the training there are many more different battles. But I won the "war". Not at the expense of his physical qualities, but with the help of those whom he rallied around.

From Latin: Si vispacem, para bellum (si vis patsem, para bellum).
The author of the expression is the Roman historian Cornelius Iepot (94-24 BC), who used it in his biography of the Theban commander of the 4th century. BC e. Epaminonda.
Already in the era of antiquity, this Latin phrase became winged. It was repeated, somewhat modified, by the Roman military writer Vegetius (4th century) in his essay “A Brief Instruction in Military Affairs”: “Qui desiderat pacem, praeparetbellum” (qui desiderat pacem, preparat bellum) - “Whoever wants peace prepares war” .
The meaning of the expression: the peace of the country is guaranteed only by its reliable defense, powerful armed forces, which discourage possible aggressors from any desire to attack, objectively there are no other guarantees of peace.

Encyclopedic dictionary of winged words and expressions. - M .: "Lokid-Press".Vadim Serov .2003 .

If you want peace, prepare for war

This expression, often quoted in the Latin form: "Si vis pacem, para bellum", belongs to the Roman historian Cornelius Nepos (94-24 BC) and is found in the biography of the Theban general of the 4th century. BC. Epaminonda. A similar formula: "Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum (Whoever desires peace prepares war)" is found in a Roman military writer of the 4th century. AD Flavia Vegetia ("Epitome institutorum rei militaris", 3, Prolog).

Dictionary of winged words.Plutex .2004 .

See more words in ""