How mate is associated with antiseptics, and how it threatens each of us
Swearing benchmarks personify public outcry over social issues, including nepotism. You open the news feed and see: "the collection of Yudashkin's daughter was presented by the children of the stars." The next "relative" where there should be fair competition, outrages so much that it would "kill everyone", but the criminal code forbids. And yet, if aggression was limited only by law, people would have exterminated each other long ago …
Cords on the cover of Esquire, on Channel One and in the headphones of the players. His freedom of expression is protected not by some cattle, but by quite intelligent people. But he does not turn their souls over with a violin, although his musical education allows him. What for? Matom is much more likely to assemble the stadium. Shnurov is the answer to a public inquiry. As well as a string of obscene performers like him. Neither give nor take - "the hero of our time."
Nobody would care about three-story rhymed constructions if the stage offered an alternative. The most talented singers of the whole country would go on stage and perform in such a way that people gasped with admiration. But for now, on this side of the TV screens, instead of shouting "Bravo!" only the famous remark of Stanislavsky. The audience doesn't believe. And why would, since the song does not creep to goose bumps. Without talent, the audience's hearts cannot be reached. But young talents were not given the floor. They are marking time in queues for auditions, while the top of the ratings are a priori occupied by the offspring of rich and influential parents: nepotism has walled up access to the upper floors of the social ladder.
Only talent is not bought and inherited, otherwise newspapers would have written about the dynasties of football players long ago. Fortunately, this does not happen, since the lack of talent in sports is obvious. If you did not fulfill the standard, you cannot blame the failure on the fact that you are an artist and see victory that way. And on stage, you can think of a lack of skill as "concept art." So it turns out that it is better to listen to performers with the vocabulary of the gateway - such "guys from our yard" than the grandchildren of the stars, mutually honoring each other in the same type of TV show.
Swearing benchmarks personify public outcry over social issues, including nepotism. You open the news feed and see: "the collection of Yudashkin's daughter was presented by the children of the stars." The next "relative" where there should be fair competition, outrages so much that it would "kill everyone", but the criminal code forbids. And yet, if only the law limited aggression, people would have exterminated each other long ago.
There is a more powerful weapon to contain hostility: culture. Like the law, it was invented by mankind for its own preservation, only it does not appeal to reason, but to feelings. Awakens empathy. If on the way to the theater the neighbors get angry at the traffic jam, then after returning from a good performance, you don't really want to swear - the state of mind is not the same.
The problem is that with each new generation, hostility between people increases. Under its pressure, the limiters of aggression burst at the seams - like a river overflowing its banks washes away a dam. And the cultural prohibition breaks through with obscene language. This is how the psyche works. It is no coincidence that in a war, where you have to kill, there is no way without a mate.
From a rational point of view, obscene words can look like a harmless enhancement of the figure of speech or a way of rehabilitating a TV channel's falling rating. But the deeper reason that the avalanche of public swearing is growing is hidden in the collective unconscious. The mate is picked up by the majority, since it allows you to throw off the oppressive oppression of culture.
Profanity relieves the tensions built up from chronically insoluble problems. Is someone wrong on the internet? And to hell with him! He swore with a strong obscene expression - and his soul felt better. Another thing is when it comes to vital issues. Devaluation of problems with obscenities depletes the resource for their solution. When a dam limits the river, there is energy to run the hydroelectric power plant. When the water breaks through the dam, it remains to go with the flow.
Worse still, obscene words appeal to primitive aggression and are encouraged to express it by action. Silently I would have hated it further, but if I swore, my hands somehow went hand-to-hand. As long as the kulak was the only argument of the aggressor, it was possible to do without culture.
Today it is enough to press one button and there will be no peace. The natural constraints of human enmity (culture) need to be nurtured and strengthened. By introducing mat into the standard, people personally destroy the fragile barrier that separates humanity from self-destruction.
You can argue, they say, what nonsense, mate - these are ordinary words.
Well yes. When the Hungarian physician Ignaz Semmelweis first announced the importance of antiseptics, he was persecuted. The very suggestion that the doctor's hands could be a source of danger was considered offensive. And what kind of threat can be concealed by something that is not visible, and, consequently, that which is not? And here - just a word.
Your word, gentlemen.
