Even without having seven spans in the forehead, you can understand that it is much easier to command and lead single people than a large close-knit team. So wise people The "divide and conquer" method was invented. This method is used by most good leaders, as from top management, as well as from the smallest. Moreover, people easily follow their lead and themselves, without outside interference, begin to bunch up and consider some of them as their own, and others as strangers. And how it happens, whether it is for ethical preferences, for political reasons, for age, for religious or national grounds, skin color, eye shape is not so important ... the list can be for a very long time.
However, no less intelligent citizens came up with another way, as opposed to the first - " as long as we are united, we cannot be defeated". Although the first rule has long and apparently for a long time taken root in our everyday life, while the second, finds supporters among idealists, romantics and dreamers, and in fact does not have any impact on society.
Who first tried the rule of "divide and rule" in our time is not known for certain, since people from the most ancient times to the present day have not changed a bit, they were just as cynical, rude and cruel, preached the same thing, and acted in exactly the same way. Some researchers argue that the "divide and conquer" method was first used and was considered part of Roman politics. "Divide ut regnes" "Divide et impera"- "divide to reign", "divide and conquer". Although this conclusion made by modern historians is most likely wrong. However, just like the statement of G. Heine, the famous German poet, who wrote in his letter of January 12, 1842 sent from Paris, that the rule "divide and conquer" was first tested by Philip the Macedonian king (359-336 BC .X.) and made famous by the fact that he was the father of Alexander the Great.
Some scientists put forward another theory, according to which the authorship of this expression belongs to Niccolò Machiavelli Italian writer, diplomat and philosopher. Which is no less doubtful, for the reasons that were expressed above in the text.
Use of the phrase "divide and conquer" in literature
"The Nazis planned to carry out their policy in the occupied territory of the USSR on the basis of known method“divide and rule”, including using “possible contradictions between Ukrainians and Great Russians”, “tensed relations” between the Baltic peoples and Russians..."("Divide and rule. Nazi occupation policy" Fedor Leonidovich Sinitsyn)
"Divide and Conquer" This is how all peoples were subjugated: they were divided into parts-parties and pushed against each other ... in Russia there should be people who do not strive for power and do not play this dark game "Divide and Conquer!" And the church and other religions, public organizations and public figures can play..."
(Free essay on the topic "If I were a patriarch Orthodox Church Russian "Mosulezny Igor Alekseevich)
"And her motto is known to all of us: "Divide and Conquer"! But what does it lead to? Only relative Truth... similar to the godless power of the Pharaoh of Egypt!"
("Haggadah About the Mysteries of Pardis" Miller Rudolf Andreevich)
Divide and rule
Divide and rule
From Latin: Divide et impera | divide et impera).
It is believed that this was the motto foreign policy ancient rome, but no evidence of this was found from ancient authors. The German poet Heinrich Heine (letter from Paris dated January 12, 1842) believed that the author of this motto was the Macedonian king (359-336 BC) Philip (382-336 BC), father of Alexander the Great.
It is believed that the first ruler to officially use this phrase was french king Louis XI (1423-1483), who said: "Diviser pour regner" - "Divide in order to reign."
The expression became widely known thanks to the French economist and philosopher Pierre Joseph Proudhon (1809-1865), who sneered: “Divide et impera, divide and rule, divide and you will reign, divide and you will become rich; share and you will deceive people and you will blind their minds and you will mock justice.”
encyclopedic Dictionary winged words and expressions. - M.: "Lokid-Press". Vadim Serov. 2003 .
Divide and rule
The formula that guided the Roman Senate. She expresses the principle state power, Whereby best method management of a multi-tribal state - incitement of national hatred between nationalities. Its author is not exactly known. G. Heine, in a letter from Paris dated January 12, 1842, without indicating the source, names the Macedonian king Philip (359-336 BC) as the author.
Dictionary of winged words. Plutex. 2004
See what "Divide and Conquer" is in other dictionaries:
Divide and Conquer: Divide and Conquer (Politics) political principle. Divide and conquer (programming) algorithm development paradigm. Divide and Conquer (game) computer game. Divide and Conquer / Divide And Conquer episode ... ... Wikipedia
divide and rule- - Topics information protection EN divide and conquer ... Technical Translator's Handbook
This term has other meanings, see Divide and Conquer (meanings). Divide and rule (lat. Divide et impera) the principle of state power, which is often resorted to by governments of states consisting of heterogeneous ... Wikipedia
Book. On the principle of managing what l. society by inciting hostility among its members. /i> Tracing paper from lat. Divide et impera. BMS 1998, 487 ... Big Dictionary Russian sayings
Divide and rule- wing. sl. The formula that guided the Roman Senate. It expresses the principle of state power, according to which the best method of managing a multi-tribal state is inciting national hatred between peoples. Its author in ... ... Universal optional practical dictionary I. Mostitsky
This term has other meanings, see Divide and Conquer (meanings). "Divide Conquer" (translated as "Divide and Conquer") multiplayer turn-based strategy game with a web interface, launched in 2004. In 2007 ... ... Wikipedia
Divide and rule (Latin divide et impera) is the principle of state power, which is often resorted to by governments of states consisting of heterogeneous parts and according to which the best method of governing such a state is incitement of hostility ... ... Wikipedia
Divide and Conquer: Divide and Conquer (politics) political principle. Divide and Conquer (Computer Science) Algorithm Development Paradigm ... Wikipedia
Divide and conquer is an important paradigm of algorithm development in computer science. It is based on the recursive division of the problem to be solved into two (or more) subtasks of the same type, but smaller. Partitions are performed until those ... ... Wikipedia
Books
- Divide and Conquer, Gaius Julius Caesar. From the publisher: "Notes" by Gaius Julius Caesar - the story of the largest ancient Roman commander and political reformer about the events of the 1st century BC ...
According to the INTERFAX agency, over the past few years in Moscow, starting with the explosions of houses on Guryanov Street, 407 people have died from terrorist acts. The tragedy in Beslan claimed from 338 to 450 lives, including children, total figure affected in North Ossetia- 1221 people. This list does not mention the number of destinies torn and broken by the tragedy, shed tears and lost hopes. Do not count and weigh all the pain left in the soul of those who have lost their loved ones forever.
Experiencing the events and meeting with eyewitnesses of terrorist attacks, we often hear the question - “For what?” or “What was wrong with my nine-year-old daughter, who was pieced together after the explosion of the subway car? I didn't want to know anything about black political games or dirty money and oil wars. I love my job... I love my wife and daughter, whom I lost... For what?
Our interlocutor is Alexei Ilyich Osipov, a professor at the Moscow Theological Academy, a well-known scientist, theologian and polemicist.
Alexey Ilyich, in asking you the first question, I will make a reservation that it is caused by the present mood, perhaps of those who have more faith than cynicism. This question was addressed to nowhere by a children's teacher from Russian hinterland, after the hostage-taking in Beslan and the death of children - what is happening?
The question itself is simple and original. But such events occur throughout the history of mankind, even when people could be counted on the fingers, and then Cain killed Abel.
We, speaking of Christians, are well aware that our state, the state in which current person- deeply painful, because if it were not so, then there would be no war. Pay attention to what humanity has been striving for throughout its history - happiness, peace, justice, harmony, love ... What is the whole history filled with? Wars, violence, slavery, cruelty...
True, at one time they thought that our imperfection was to blame, and the time would come - the 18th, 19th, and finally the 20th century, and humanity would reach the pinnacle of its development. But the 20th century surpassed all others in the amount of shed blood and cruelty. Christianity affirms this fact, this reality, but Christianity also affirms that there is good and bad in each of us, i.e. the beginning is healthy and painful. Which of them we will give development in ourselves depends very much on ourselves, because from the totality of individual personalities a common spirituality nation, people, all mankind. There is an immutable law - the spirit creates a form for itself.
The modern world simply amazes with something active, forcibly planted from the outside, I would say - into human souls. Have we ever wondered why, figuratively speaking, 99% of the bad things and only 1% of the good are broadcast on television? What is the reason? Who needs it? Do we not understand what the planting of debauchery, violence and cruelty will lead to? And, nevertheless, this is a fact of life not only in Russia, but also in the entire civilized world.
- Is it the nature of human aspirations and values?
Yes, but if, for example, a referendum is held, then I am sure that more than two-thirds of the population of any civilized country will speak out against the total planting of evil by any means mass media. By the way, this will be the principle of democracy and the vote of the majority. Nevertheless, all this dirty trick is beneficial to someone.
Individuals? Many people talk and write about secret societies, that, driven by their idea, they play a kind of chess on the world board with whole nations.
Perhaps there are such people. They united, created secret societies... But what's the benefit? What for?
May be, general principle power, which includes all the accompanying regalia and attributes of world domination?
The fact is that throughout the history of mankind there has been a struggle between two principles, I would say, religious and anti-religious - satanic.
Christianity gave the norm human life, which the ancient world did not know in such fullness. AT best case, deity ancient world was fair and merciful, at worst - the embodiment of cruelty and depravity. Christianity declared that God, that is, absolute law being is love. Humanity simply did not know this. Christianity revealed the very essence of our nature, but, thereby, in even greater brightness and strength, the opposite became open to us, the one that destroys a person. So, throughout history there has been a struggle between religion and its opposite - anti-religion or Satanism, and the further, the more fierce this struggle. Depending on the extent to which this or that society, people, humanity is subject to one of the directions - it, accordingly, develops with greater or lesser force.
- Assessing the current events, is it possible to say that there is a phased destruction of the dominant religions?
All religions that carry moral basis. See what's happening. In the New Testament it is written in black and white what sodomy is, however, even now whole line churches directly justifies this phenomenon. There are already many translations Holy Scripture on the Western languages, where these places, for example, from the Apostle Paul, are translated in the opposite way or are omitted altogether. There is a religious justification of principles that are directly opposite to those on which human life is built.
Look at the current events through this prism. We are horrified by the tragedy in Beslan without trying to look at the root of what happened. Shouts are heard: “This is Islam!” Excuse me, but Crusades Is that also Muslim? In what faith do we not find people perverting the doctrine, planting something directly opposite to the religion they profess?
I will give you one example from history pre-revolutionary Russia. It was during the first world war. The Germans captured several thousand Russian soldiers Muslims, and Emperor Wilhelm ordered them to be gathered together and set up a demonstration camp. Fabulous! They even built a mosque. When everything was completed, the imperial dignitary came to take over the camp and was pleased with what he saw. The soldiers were also satisfied, and among them were mullahs. But the most interesting thing is that the prisoners responded to the request of the nobleman to sing a prayer for him. Do you know what they sang? "God Save the King!"
Even when the dignitary waved his hands in indignation, they did not understand and fell to their knees. We sang three times! No antagonism. Muslim soldiers served the Fatherland in the Orthodox Russian army. In fact, we see how many people live nearby, and there is no hatred.
Now what is being done? Hatred ignites! Kindled through television, through the press. Thus, Beslan is one of the strongest provocations, so that everyone will grab it - let's beat the Muslims. They count on it.
- Alexei Ilyich, can you specifically guess who is behind the incitement of the conflict?
Building such assumptions is the lot of politicians, and we see the surface, not knowing the kitchen, we are unlikely to be allowed there. Therefore, who did it, how - I do not want to guess on the coffee grounds. But pay attention, the same powerful provocation happened on September 11 in America. And who is being blamed? Muslims. But when the same America smashes Serbia, when it invades Iraq, when both women and children are destroyed in much more- it's nothing.
Divide and conquer is an ancient principle. Christianity is a powerful religion, Islam is a powerful religion... And what if they collide? Remember how one tailor defeated two giants?... There's a fight going on with the religion of those who use a different worldview. We do not believe in any way that Satanism is not just some twists and turns of the young. Satanism is an ideology whose - I don't know, but the fact that this ideology has infected people who have colossal opportunities in our earthly reality is beyond doubt. After all, nothing can explain such facts, when the Beslan terrorists did not put forward any demands, they did not need anything. Cause? Nobody answers this. There is a provocation.
Satanists can be among any nations, any races. The family is not without its black sheep, as you know.
So oil, money, power are in this case only a mechanism that feeds something more substantial, which will not be reported in the news?
It's not about material gain. Does a sadist benefit when he tortures his victim? Ask him why, he will grin. Passion is a terrible thing. We still have no idea what is behind the word "Satanism". Anger, the limit of which, God forbid, never see, and this anger is looking for expression. Satanism is a force and active force. Now even a psychologist will reveal the formulas of some fallen pleasures, only paint everything in even darker colors. Where is the sound logic? Why can one like blood, suffering and torture? With christian point I see no other explanation.
Alexei Ilyich, if you look at the mechanics of what is happening, there is a systematic kindling of war. Wars of extermination?
Apparently yes. The first reason is domestic, six billion is a lot. Secondly, religious ideals abhor something and some people. It seems that many of the people are at least slightly familiar with internal concept"not good". From here - divide and conquer, and if you manage to push the peoples together, war cannot be avoided.
Why does the New Testament speak with such fear about the Antichrist and the end of the world, about what people will be like and what awaits them? Yes, because freedom will open to evil. But now there is still a holding back, there are still many people who have not lost their conscience, who are fighting for truth and justice, who preach love.
- Is it easy to understand?
It is necessary to show what lies behind the understanding of freedom. Where is true freedom, and where is freedom of arbitrariness. It is very important.
True freedom, when a person controls himself, passions do not dominate him, his soul, by its nature, strives for God - Truth, this thirst is boundless and satiated. The opportunity to “freely” thrive in passions stuns a person and leads to what we watch with a shudder in the news. It must be remembered that man is by nature more perfect than cattle, he is able to slide down to the state of the devil.
Petr Pivkin talked to Professor Alexei Osipov
This catchphrase is traditionally attributed to Julius Caesar. When creating the Roman Empire, he quite deliberately quarreled among the provinces - so that, being jealous and not trusting each other, they could not unite and overthrow the power of Rome. For the same purpose, he kept constant fear and the tension of the consuls in the senate - so as not to rebel against him personally.
Politics is wise and, at first glance, indisputable ... The greatest philosopher Machiavelli revivals then advised others to do the same Caesar - Borgia. And in times of trouble and civil wars the latter, it must be admitted, managed to stay afloat for quite some time. And it is unlikely that someone will condemn you (well, except for appearances) if you build your career on the same principles ...
Just know what? While you have not yet begun to put into practice this wise age-old principle, remember how the Caesars ended. They were slaughtered. Both.
The principle of exclusivity. Consciously or unconsciously, careerists begin to embody the Caesar principle even at the lowest positions. Sometimes it the only way survive and not turn into an errand girl. You begin to share responsibilities - and to the usual, in general, request to photocopy something, get through, send a fax, or even help an employee who has a parka, you answer firmly: "I'm not paid for this." You can consider this your first victory: you will no longer be burdened with small things, and you will finally begin to seriously master your favorite profession. That is to make a career. And, perhaps, it would be worthwhile to stop the policy of division.
But many go further. To maintain and strengthen your position in the company, you need to become not just a professional (everyone is a professional here!), you need to become indispensable. Well, for example, to establish an exclusive contact built on personal relationships with one of the clients or partners of the firm. Or completely take on some complex production issue. Or to accumulate semi-secret information… In general, to make it impossible to do without you.
If you call a spade a spade, you cynically took away (allocated) for yourself a certain chunk, which, in theory, should be considered public property. But no one is offended: everyone understands that you occupied this niche thanks to diligence, hard work and talent. Moreover, this burden (that is, sorry, a tidbit) is heaped on you with joy: why bother unnecessary problems, when, if necessary, it will be possible to simply refer to such valuable employee who mastered like you.
You become indispensable. If you leave, the company will lose a client, lose (at least temporarily) a position in an important production issue, or disrupt a well-established work process by trying to piece together the information that you previously accumulated from yourself. In general, you can dictate the conditions - they will increase your salary, you will be promoted ...
But not unlimited. Returning to historical analogies: you can become a governor of a province, but you will never become a Caesar. That is, you can be entrusted with the management of a department or a project, but nothing more. After all, as you know, a specialist is like a flux - it grows only in one direction. And your boss is well aware of this.
But the worst thing is that the project will be completed sooner or later. A client or partner tied to you may eventually lose its significance for the company. Highly important information becomes obsolete or pops up on the Internet ... And you will lose everything. After all, you have no other trump cards, in addition to "indispensability" in this particular issue.
Conclusion. If a we are talking about official duties, then you should not separate them too clearly. Otherwise, you will not rule for long. And not in the highest positions.
Viceroy principle. Caesar and Napoleon are exceptional examples. Only a few managed to jump from captains to emperors in the entire history of mankind. We will assume that you are an outstanding, talented girl. But, thank God, not brilliant, that is, normal. This means that you will not become the president (even the president of the company or the board of directors) right away. You will move to the top in stages - an obligatory stage on your way will be the leadership of a department or direction.
And God forbid you at this stage to put into practice the principle of Caesar! It's stupid even at first glance. By the way, mind you, Caesar, until he became emperor, was a universal friend and shirt-boy, a democrat (that is, in ancient Roman terms, a republican) and a father to soldiers. Otherwise, who would have raised him to the top?
Machiavelli also subtly felt this moment: “The more enemies around, the stronger the unity inside should be.”
In general, translating all this ancient-Renaissance pathos into the language of a modern office, let's say this: your mini-team should adore you. And the most difficult thing is not only you as a manager, but also your department as an exceptional unit within the company. Do what you want - arrange gatherings at your place, seek a salary increase for all your employees ... In the end, every evening thank everyone individually (but always in public) for their valiant work and invaluable help.
Employees should not be jealous of each other and should not compete with each other. Achieve universal love, or at least sympathy (as long as the team is not very large - the task is quite feasible). Get it, because this love will be the only and most compelling argument in your favor, if suddenly the big boss gets angry and decides to remove you from your position, or even fire you altogether.
Big bosses, they also know about "divide and conquer" - and they will be happy to pit you against the heads of other departments and areas. And with pleasure they will outweigh the blame on one of you if things do not work out at the company. And, don't go to a fortuneteller, they will look for a scapegoat for various reasons ... The boss is well aware that your disgrace will only please other "deputies". Actually, opal and favor are the main tools Caesar's policy. But no Caesar will dare to quarrel with the people, and no boss will want to conflict with the whole department because of you.
Conclusion. At the level of middle management, the policy of "divide and rule" is absolutely unacceptable.
Caesar principle. Well, finally we got to the main and, it would seem, obvious. When you yourself become a big boss, when all the strings and wires of management are collected in your hands, then the only way to rule for a long time and effectively is to divide!
First, strictly divide responsibilities between employees. This is the technical side.
Secondly, tirelessly divide and quarrel between the employees themselves. This is the ethical side of the issue.
With the first point, everything seems to be clear: the boss must imagine who is responsible for what - in order to understand at what stage a puncture occurred, who is to blame (or vice versa, who to reward). In principle, an ideal boss who intends to rule for a long time will come in handy with “specialists like a flux” - everyone will be perfectly versed in their field, but no one will claim supreme power.
The leaders of such a warehouse, indeed, manage to manage very effectively, their firms bring a very good income ... But these separating "Caesars", as a rule, are not able to use their income. They are exhausted and unhappy, they are nervous and sickly. Psychologists write about them in popular magazines: "workaholics".
Having accumulated all the power in their hands. The big bosses lost their rest rights. They cannot go on vacation - because in a month all of them narrow specialists lose all coordination and completely ruin the case. They cannot even get sick for a couple of days, and with the worst flu, the poor fellows are forced (at least by phone) to issue valuable instructions and control the process. They cannot turn off their brains even at night and therefore suffer from insomnia - they have to think for too many, because each employee is responsible only for his own sector, and only the boss can make the only right synthetic decision.
Yes, they are unlikely to be overthrown. But they won't regret it either.
Governing otherwise seems dangerous and difficult. And yet, the lucky ones who dared to trust most of their powers to numerous assistants, deputies and simply heads of departments, lead a luxurious social life (for the sake of which, in fact, they sought posts and capital). Their summer vacation lasts 2-3 months, and every month they go fishing with friends (to Astrakhan or Madagascar) and every weekend with wife and kids- and nothing, the company is not falling apart, riots do not ripen, the process is underway.
The ethical side of the issue is even more complicated. Is it worth it to quarrel subordinates among themselves?
Well, if you adhere to the principle of "divide" in relation to duties and prefer accumulate power in the same hands, then, no matter how cynical to write this, it’s probably worth it. After all, if your employees trust each other and regularly share information, then it is possible that one of them will one day discover that the right final decision can be made without you. This is fraught with ... It is not for nothing that many large firms officially contract Office romances are prohibited and it is not allowed to work at the same enterprise of relatives.
But if you frivolously and recklessly delegate your powers to all sorts of managers and managers, running away on vacation for several months ... then you will most likely have no time and reluctance to intrigue, pushing your subordinates against their foreheads. Do not worry! They will quarrel in a great way without you: the need to make decisions inevitably gives rise to conflicts among responsible employees. They will make peace without you. And with such a workload, they are unlikely to have the time and imagination to prepare a conspiracy and overthrow you from the throne. Which is exactly what you were looking for.
