• English Users


    There are few people in this world who think about the dialectic relationship between special characteristics of human psychology, mentality and milestone events of the modern era. In the public mind, these concepts are separated in principle. Historical events take place just like they occur by themselves and people are only involved in them. But obviously this is not the case. This is people who are numerous movers of the reality, created by them every minute. And surely, the content of this reality corresponds to the very essence of their human development. Take, for example, the Middle Ages. Brutal knights who were easily chopping off heads of anyone who had frustrated them and throwing living donkeys together with firewood into the fireplace in order to cheer up their ladies might easily start crying when they saw, for instance, the walls of Jerusalem. In the Orient, according to its literature, the picture was much the same. Desperate head-breakers were ready to shed their tears and pass out at every given opportunity. This is a triumph of infantilism of some ambivalent feeling, which has left an indelible imprint on that epoch. Why do you think Hitler was able to energize Germans so easily if they were not awfully sentimental at heart? The higher sensitivity, the greater, let's say, political incorrectness in all spheres of existence, down to horrors of war and genocide.

    But there is not only the horrifying side to that coin. There is also an emotional appeal. This climate is exactly what, for instance, a flowering of art needs. It is just like fire. It can burn you to ashes but without fire you cannot light a house at dusk, stay warm and cook meals. In the past century, there was enough fire for two world wars, as well as, for the unprecedented flowering of science and art. We paid a terrible price for it, but this thought never crossed our minds. Now pragmatism took the place of emotions. You think this is no more than a traditional old-age grumbling? Well, let's just look at such good indicator, which measured the level of mass emotional component, as sports. I mean elite sports that is a well-loved show for the broad masses of people. Take, for instance, football. Just try to answer the question, what nation on Earth loves football best of all. I'm sure most of you will say the Brazilians. They play football like they were born for it. But when the 2014 FIFA World Cup was held in Brazil, protest actions were roiling the whole country. Just think of it: according to recent surveys, nearly 45% of Brazilians opposed hosting the Football World Cup in their country! The big football country is against football. Why? The Brazilian people prefer not to have high emotions in order to get more money. Okay, Brazil is an impoverished country. And what about countries with deep pockets? Well, everything is just the same. Previously, nations used to go all-out for the privilege of hosting the Olympic Games. Now, several wealthy European countries, such as Germany, Switzerland, Sweden and Norway, withdrew their bids for the 2022 Olympics. It is much safer to count the money in peace and emotional dormancy. It seems that the modern Olympic Movement, as well as, the whole elite sports will soon become only the domain of Asia. The only hope we have is Russians. Russia has held the best Winter Olympics in history. Now it is hosting the FIFA Confederations Cup and is preparing to host the 2018 Mundial in a big way. And you may try to ask some poor Russian, 'What's in it for you? Maybe, you'll even make some money.' He will look at you like you are nuts. It seems we still have the place on the planet where not everything is measured only in money. Isn't that why we are so afraid of them?

  • alt text