A few days ago, the well-known Russian publicist Konstantin Eggert spoke at a meeting with representatives of the Novosibirsk humanitarian intelligentsia, outlining his views on the political situation in Russia and assessing our country's foreign policy. Novye Izvestia cites the most interesting excerpts from this speech, which was published on the Taiga.info website.

Politics in general, and foreign policy in particular, is a bit like football: everyone seems to understand it, and everyone has an opinion on this topic. And for me, as for a person who, starting from his student years, has been involved in international life in one form or another. I started my working life as an interpreter at the Russian embassy in the city of Sana'a in North Yemen. Everything I will talk about is not a lecture on the international situation, it is the result of personal experience and my views.

About the transition period

Today, Russia's foreign policy is a function of domestic policy to a much greater extent than in many other countries. On the one hand, we live in a country that is more than eleven centuries old, on the other hand, we live in a country that is completely new, making a transition, a transition. In my opinion, the best expert on Russia in Europe, the British historian Geoffrey Hosking, said that Russia is making three transitions at once. This is the transition from a command economy to a free market economy, the transition from empire to a state of citizens, to a nation state, and, finally, the transition from authoritarianism to democracy. These transitions are never short.

It seems banal, but the Russia in which we live is in many ways so new that it is difficult to compare it with both the Romanov empire and the Soviet Union. Although the people seem to be the same, the cities are the same. The head of the Carnegie Moscow Center, Dmitri Trenin, said ten or fifteen years ago: "The transition from the Soviet Union to something new will take three generations, 60-70 years." This is a conservative estimate. I think it will take a lot more time.

Today we do not see that Russia's foreign policy represents our interests as citizens. Not because the people who sit in the Kremlin are bad, but because we are still very fragmented as citizens, as a society. Our political influence on state institutions and the decisions they make is very weak.

What does state television tell us, state propaganda in its various forms? They say: nothing in the world ever happens just like that. Dropped a coffee spoon - it means it is beneficial to someone. Because the world is not always controlled by visible forces, only the top management knows about them. You won't get through to him. And the average person, who has been a consumer of this propaganda for many years, begins to think that in life no one does anything for nothing. This is one of the most important elements undermining democracy in Russia.

About national interests

If, in general, there are always some forces behind everything that are stronger than you, then why kick? Well, don't do anything, relax. You don't even have to vote - they will vote for you. Cynicism and irresponsibility are very common in our society. It is only the feeling of victory that moves him forward. It’s very convenient: nothing actually depends on us, they show on TV how victories happen and everyone is afraid of us. A situation is emerging in which foreign policy becomes a video game.

Go outside in Moscow or Novosibirsk and ask: - What is going on in Syria? We're killing terrorists there. – Ok, but what is the conflict about?

Let's be frank, few people in the average Russian city, and even in the capital, know about Shiites and Sunnis, Alawites, the Assad dynasty. It's just that some dudes piss off other dudes. And we intervened in this case, because there are terrorists.

This "politics as a video game" is a very misleading image. We see a picture in which foreign policy is separated from domestic. Talk to your friends, housemates, they will tell you: - Everyone around was stealing, it's a nightmare, no one is working, the deputies are swindlers. We do not understand what is happening in the Kremlin. But foreign policy is great. But there is no money. - Do you understand what this state finances?

As soon as you start talking to people about it, they think about it. Russia has not become a society of citizens, it has not even become a society of taxpayers en masse. People still don't know how much they are being taxed. Subtract something - and okay. The abstraction is complete.

There is one thing that definitely exists in the West - this is the financial reporting of political institutions to society, through the transparency of budgets, through the committees that the Ministry of Economic Development creates. This is not the case in Russia. Everything is closed, complete secrecy everywhere. How much is spent on Russian foreign policy, we do not know. How much is spent on Russian propaganda, on the RT channel and the like, we do not know. As a result, we are faced with a situation in which Russia's foreign policy in the long run ceases to be understandable to many. The main problem of Russian foreign policy is not Syria or Ukraine in the broadest sense – trust has been lost in it. It will be difficult to live without this trust.

Our foreign policy has not even come close to expressing national interests and national values. Any policy reflects how people look at the world and what values ​​they prioritize in the country. Foreign policy now is the politics of the elite, the politics of a thousand "best" families in Russia.

About who owns Russia and how

In general, our policy is not accepted in the West and in the outside world. Because the depth of that gigantic historical transition that we are experiencing is incomprehensible neither in Europe, nor in America, nor in China. Therefore, all sorts of Merkels, Obamas and others are fighting: “Well, how is it !? This is not beneficial for Putin!”

If you look at how things are calculated in this very narrow group of decision makers, then you will realize that a lot of things are perfectly logical. The interests of a rather small elite are, by definition, less stable than the interests of states with well-established institutions and values.

Very often you open some New York Times, and there: “The return of the Soviet Union! The Soviet Union light (or maybe not light) is back!” The people who govern Russia today are the generations of the late 40s and early 50s. I myself have not gone far from this generation, no need to be offended. It is quite obvious that these people have a certain matrix of thinking, habits and outlook on life that developed in the relatively vegetarian Soviet era.

But the difference between our days and the Soviet Union turned out to be more significant than one might think. Take the transcripts from the meetings of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU on the issue of bringing troops into Afghanistan. You will see that for several months the composition of the Politburo discussed whether or not to send troops to this very Afghanistan. There were real discussions. We must not forget that these people [the Politburo of the Central Committee of the CPSU] represented a certain ideology. And until the very collapse, it was believed that the Soviet Union was promoting this ideology in the world.

The Soviet collective party leadership was engaged in foreign policy, sometimes with completely disastrous results, based on their idea of ​​the national interests of the Soviet Union. Moreover, these people were actually equal in position and therefore could engage in almost pure politics, pure ideology. Today's political elite in Russia is fundamentally different from the Politburo. That is why foreign policy differs in many respects. Because those people who today lead Russia, at the same time own Russia. Wholesale. But we don't know how this is expressed in concrete politics, in concrete things and in concrete management.

To some extent, I do not envy the current leadership of Russia. It is forced to constantly conduct races on a vertical wall on a bicycle. They need to keep pedaling, inventing new proofs of greatness and success. Because there are no other forms of legitimation. There is an option to make the political system open, but then these people may have to leave as a result of competitive politics. Another option is to tighten the nuts very hard. I don't believe in him, because it's just that society is different, it's not '34. And the country is different, and the planet is different, well, it will not work. Yes, and the multibillionaires who run Russia have no strength, and no one has the desire to lead the Gulag. It remains to create a certain image that will flatter people.

On the leading role of Washington in domestic politics

Any person who tells you that he knows what will happen in Russia in 5 years is either a psycho or a charlatan. Foreign policy, bright things like the annexation of Crimea, the war in Syria are all part of a certain period and a certain type of legitimization of the current political regime. Most likely, this is a continuation of the political crisis of 2011, which for the second time in the history of the 21st century terribly frightened the Russian authorities. The first time was the first Maidan, the second time - the protests in Moscow, the third time - the second Maidan. All three times the question of how much society can be controlled was raised sharply. How much the power of people can change the political system in the country is the main question for the Russian authorities. Since the political crisis is still ongoing, she has less and less opportunity to influence it actively.

The authorities can only count on the passivity of the people. There is no vision of the future and never will be. In principle, there is money to maintain the current situation, but there is no money for a breakthrough and a particularly powerful increase in the living standards of people. There are also foreign policy actions.

In theory, you can capture Mariupol, Narva in a couple of hours, do something in Transnistria. But the effectiveness of policy is lost when it occurs in conditions of distrust. I think the political crisis within the elite, while sluggish, will continue. Not because revolutionary moods are maturing among the people. And if they ripen, then often from the cycle of "take away and divide." The real crisis of the aging political regime occurs due to the fact that the elite has nothing to offer society at all.

Of course, we will see changes soon. When it came to transformation, I said that some kind of mature civil society and some ideas about Russian democracy would take root and become stable, but not tomorrow. I don't think it will happen in my lifetime. Steps can be taken towards restoring confidence in relations with the outside world and demining the most acute conflicts. If we take small steps every nth number of years, it will already be good.

The biggest challenge for the elite is that the opportunity to “rule like Stalin and live like Abramovich” is shrinking. If we analyze the foreign policy of the Russian elite, it is important to understand one thing. I memorized it, memorized it as “twice two is four”: for the Russian leadership, the sun rises and sets not in the east or west, it rises and sets in Washington.

Forbes on Wednesday released a new ranking of the most influential people in the world. The list includes 72 political, economic, business and public figures - one for every 100 million inhabitants of the planet. The rating was headed by Russian President Vladimir Putin. The 61-year-old politician removed his American colleague Barack Obama from the first line. Rounding out the top three were Chinese President Xi Jinping. Read more about the most influential people in the world according to Forbes below.

The rating is based on the subjective choice of the American editors of the magazine. The criteria for influence are indicators such as the number of people affected by the decisions of the rating participant, the financial flows that the rating participant manages as an administrator, manager or owner, and the activity with which the rating participant uses his power.

1. Vladimir Putin

Who: President of Russia
influence: Russia
Industry: politics
Age: 61

The ascension of the Russian leader to the top of the Forbes influence rating was facilitated both by the process of “tightening the screws” inside the country and by his success in the diplomatic arena.

In particular, Putin proposed a compromise solution to the Syrian problem that would suit all parties and relieved tension in the conflict, which almost escalated into a full-scale war. In addition, the Russian President granted political asylum to former CIA officer Edward Snowden, whose high-profile revelations became not only a headache for American intelligence agencies, but also a problem for other states, whose diplomats the fugitive programmer turned to for support.

The world's largest nuclear arsenal, a vote in the UN Security Council and record hydrocarbon deposits remain under Putin's control. The leader of the rating has at least another five years of absolute power left, and can potentially rule Russia until 2024.

2. Barack Obama

Who: President of the United States
influence: USA
Industry: politics
Age: 52

The American leader lost the first line of the rating to his Russian colleague against the backdrop of numerous squabbles in US domestic politics.

Obama failed to convince Congress of the need to implement health insurance reform according to his plan, which ultimately led the country to a dead end: in early October, US government agencies had to close for 16 days due to the inability of politicians to find consensus on the budget and the national debt ceiling. No less sensitive blow to Obama's reputation was the revelations of Edward Snowden, which put the head of state in the position of an eternally justifying person.

And yet, even with his second term in office and the accompanying suspicions of turning into a lame duck, Obama remains the leader of the world's most powerful political, economic, and military power.

3. Xi Jinping

Who: Chinese President
influence: PRC
Industry: politics
Age: 60

The new Chinese leader in 2012 officially took the helm of the second most influential world power with a population of 1.3 billion people, which is almost 20% of the population of the entire planet. Under Xi, China remains the largest holder of American external debt - the Celestial Empire owns US Treasury receipts for $ 1.3 billion. The rapid growth of the economy continues: in 10 years, the number of official billionaires in China has increased from zero to 122, and GDP has reached $ 8.2 trillion. In addition to the post of chairman of the PRC, Xi is the secretary general of the Communist Party and the head of the country's military forces.

4. Pope Francis

Who: Pope
Influences: Roman Catholic Church
Industry: religion
Age: 76

Francis succeeded Benedict XVI as head of the Roman Church in March 2013. His mission is to breathe new energy into an institution that brings together 1.2 billion people around the world.

The first Jesuit pope and the first Latin American pope has already issued a number of reformist statements, from calling for gender equality to lowering the level of critical rhetoric against supporters of abortion, gay marriage and contraceptives. Francis, or Jorge Mario Bergoglio in the world, uses social media, preaches on Twitter, and even takes self-portraits for social networks in accordance with the spirit of the times.

He comes from a large family of Italian immigrants who settled in Buenos Aires. The Pope is known as a passionate fan of the San Lorenzo de Almagro football club.

5. Angela Merkel

Who: Chancellor of Germany
influences: Germany
Industry: politics
Age: 59

The most powerful woman in the world remains a key figure in solving the political and economic problems of the European Union.

Merkel's commitment to the hard line of austerity and the preservation of the euro as a single currency helped the EU a lot to survive as an integration entity, despite the crisis in the southern economies of the Old World and persistent calls for reverse disintegration from the North.

Recently, the “iron chancellor” was re-elected without any visible problems to the post that she has been holding since 2005. In the ranking of the most powerful women in the world according to Forbes, Merkel climbed to the top 8 times over the past 10 years.

6. Bill Gates

Who: Co-Chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Influences: Microsoft, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Industry: business, philanthropy
Age: 58

With a fortune of $72 billion, Gates recently regained his status as the richest person in the world according to Forbes. The founder of Microsoft himself most time spends on the work of a charitable foundation, which he manages with his wife Melinda.

As a philanthropist, he has already spent $28 billion. Gates' last major philanthropic initiative was the $335 million polio program in April, which was joined by six more billionaires with $100 million in contributions, including Mexican tycoon Carlos Slim and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Microsoft shares have been rising since the end of August, when the software giant announced the resignation of Steve Ballmer as CEO. Gates remains chairman of the board of directors of the company he co-founded with Paul Allen in 1975.

Along with Warren Buffett, Gates continues to recruit members for the Giving Pledge, in which billionaires make a public pledge to donate at least 50% of their wealth to charitable causes.

7. Ben Bernanke

Who: Fed Chairman
influence: Fed
Industry: economics
Age: 59

Big Ben is preparing to leave the most powerful economic post in the world on January 31, 2014. Recently it became known the name of his successor - Janet Yellen will head the Fed next year. During his tenure, Bernanke has become a living symbol of the fight against the consequences of the global crisis. The former Princeton professor became the main lobbyist for the soft stimulus policy and ensured, albeit modest, but still stable growth in US GDP.

8. Abdullah ibn Abdulaziz Al Saud

Who: King of Saudi Arabia
Influence: Saudi Arabia
Industry: politics
Age: 89

The influence of the Saudi monarch is made up not only of high authority in the Muslim world, but also due to control over 20% of the world's oil reserves (265 million barrels). GDP growth to $727 billion allowed the kingdom to enter the top 20 global economies. At the same time, the unemployment rate in the country remains at 12%, and 50% of the population is under 25 years old. King Abdullah recently allocated $130 billion for youth employment and housing programs.

9. Mario Draghi

Who: President of the European Central Bank
influence: ECB
Industry: economics
Age: 66

"Super Mario" got not the most comfortable position in modern economic realities. He became the face of the troubled economy of the eurozone countries with a combined GDP of $17 trillion. Every time Draghi has to set investors up for optimism and maneuver between the interests of countries so different by all criteria, like Greece and Germany. And while he copes with this paradoxical task.

10. Michael Duke

Who: CEO of Wal-Mart Stores
Influencers: Wal-Mart Stores
Industry: business
Age: 63

The head of the world's largest retailer with a revenue of $470 billion and the world's second largest employer with a staff of 2.2 million people could not help but enter the top 10 most influential people. Duke, as the CEO of Wal-Mart, can decide the fate of a product with a single signature, simply by removing it from the shelf or putting it there. In the fall, he visited Washington as part of a delegation of 20 CEOs of the largest American companies, where he tried to convince President Obama of the need to quickly break the budget impasse.

11. David Cameron

Who: British Prime Minister
influences: UK
Industry: politics
Age: 47

The Tory leader runs the world's sixth largest economy and is often compared to Margaret Thatcher for her commitment to fiscal austerity. True, Cameron got hit for a populist proposal to cut the electricity tax for households. An Oxford graduate and distant relative of King William IV is known as an active critic of Edward Snowden. In two years, Cameron will have to lead the Conservatives to new elections.

12. Carlos Slim

Who: Chairman of the Honorary Charitable Foundation
influences: America Movil
Industry: business, philanthropy
Age: 73

The Mexican telecommunications tycoon displaced Bill Gates from the position of the richest man in the world for several years, but this year again lost the palm to the American. Slim's business empire includes assets in mining, real estate development and media (under The New York Times). In 2012, the billionaire acquired three football clubs at once - two in his native Mexico and one in Spain. In February 2013, Slim joined the Gates initiative to fight hunger and support innovative farming technology.

13. Warren Buffett

Who: CEO of Berkshire Hathaway
influences: Berkshire Hathaway
Industry: business, philanthropy
Age: 83

The "Oracle of Omaha", despite diagnosed with prostate cancer and advanced age, does not let go of the threads of the operational management of his business empire. His net worth has grown by almost $20 billion to $53.5 billion in a year, and Buffett has not lost his taste for big deals. Berkshire Hathaway launched a $23.2 billion takeover of legendary ketchup maker Heinz in June, after acquiring energy firm NV Energy for $5.6 billion in cash. The investor continues to be actively involved in charity: in July, he sent another $ 2 billion in the form of Berkshire shares to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Cumulatively, Buffett's philanthropic initiatives have already reached $20 billion.

14. Li Keqiang

Who: Premier of the State Council of China
influence: PRC
Industry: politics
Age: 58

The second politician in the PRC after Xi Jinping, Li, despite being loyal to the party's communist ideals, is known as a champion of economic liberalism. He acted as one of the lobbyists of the World Bank report, which called on the Celestial Empire to accelerate reforms in the direction opposite to state capitalism.

15. Jeff Bezos

Who: CEO of Amazon.com
Influencers: Amazon.com
Industry: business, technology
Age: 49

Bezos quickly emerged as one of the world's most powerful businessmen with the explosion of the online retailer he founded. Amazon, with $61 billion in annual sales, has expanded its reach into technology, fashion, video streaming and traditional media. In the summer, Bezos acquired The Washington Post holding for $250 million.

16. Rex Tillerson

Who: CEO of Exxon Mobil
Influencers: Exxon Mobil
Industry: business
Age: 61

The head of the largest US oil and gas corporation led Exxon to a phenomenal $44.9 billion profit last year. The company remains the world's largest publicly traded oil and gas producer and operates on six continents. Tillerson is considered one of the most influential and effective lobbyists in the industry.

17. Sergey Brin

Who: co-founder, head of special projects at Google
influencers: Google
Industry: business, technology
Age: 40

The co-founders of Google have been working in tandem together for more than a decade. While Page has operational control over the entire search giant, Brin has focused on the corporation's most innovative devices within the Google X division. We are talking about Google Glass augmented reality glasses and a self-driving car. Together with Page, Brin donated $400 million to charity this year.

18. Larry Page

Who: co-founder, CEO of Google
influencers: Google
Industry: business, technology
Age: 40

Page runs the world's most popular site with a monthly audience of 1 billion users, a corporation with $50 billion in revenue and a rapidly growing business. The Google CEO is responsible for numerous M&A deals, including the $1 billion purchase of the crowdsourced app Waze and the $12.5 billion takeover of Motorola's mobile division.

19. Francois Hollande

Who: President of France
influences: France
Industry: politics
Age: 59

Hollande became France's first Socialist president in two decades and immediately ran into the financial troubles of Europe's second-largest economy. His popularity rating dropped to 23% in October amid clumsy actions in a high-profile scandal over migrant deportations. This is the lowest electoral figure for a French president in 20 years - even lower than that of Hollande's unpopular predecessor, Nicolas Sarkozy. Recently, the head of state criticized his American colleague Barack Obama for the facts of wiretapping by the US special services of telephone conversations of millions of French people (70 calls and SMS messages were tapped and viewed in a month alone).

20. Timothy Cook

Who: Apple CEO
influencers: Apple
Industry: business, technology
Age: 52

Apple is not only the most valuable company in the world, but also an unrivaled authority in the design and technology industry, in the film and music business, in media and telecommunications. This year, at Cook's request, his bonus will be linked to the company's stock performance. In 2012, the CEO of Apple, the successor to Steve Jobs in office, earned $4.2 million.

53. Dmitry Medvedev

Who: Prime Minister of Russia
influence: Russia
Industry: politics
Age: 48

The head of the Russian government, despite serious reputational losses after the reverse castling with Vladimir Putin, remains the second most influential figure in the domestic power vertical. However, the chances that the current president of the country will decide to entrust all the threads of control to his younger comrade for the second time are negligible.

60. Igor Sechin

Who: President, Chairman of the Board of Rosneft
influence: Rosneft
Industry: business
Age: 53

A faithful ally of Vladimir Putin returned to the Forbes rating after a year of absence. He did not join Dmitry Medvedev's government and maintained tense relations with the current prime minister. But in the status of the head of Rosneft, the former curator of the fuel and energy complex in the Cabinet started a “deal of the century” to take over TNK-BP in the amount of $56 billion. Soon, Sechin will officially become the head of the largest public oil company in the world in terms of production. At the same time, he maintains close relations with the first person of the state, which in Russian realities remains the main resource of administrative weight.

63. Alisher Usmanov

Who: CEO of Gazprominvestholding
Influencers: USM Holdings
Industry: business
Age: 60

The richest man in Russia made his fortune of $ 17.6 billion in metals, but in last years diversified business by acquiring assets in telecommunications (MegaFon), media (Kommersant Publishing House) and technologies (Mail.ru Group). He also owns a stake in London's Arsenal Football Club.

The system of power of Vladimir Putin is increasingly characterized as a monolithic pyramid. In the eyes of society, V. Putin actually knows how to present himself as an indispensable leader-statesman (in the eyes of the West - the "tsar"), who single-handedly makes the most important decisions. However, it is precisely this understanding of Russian processes that is one of the main mistakes that do not allow a better understanding of the origins and foundation of this regime.

What is "collective Putin"?

“Russian power is far from a strictly vertical structure, which is controlled by one person. The vertical of power is nothing more than a propaganda stamp. Russian power is a conglomeration of clans and groups that compete with each other for resources. The role of Vladimir Putin in this system does not change - it is the role of an arbiter and moderator. True, an influential arbitrator, whose word, at least in conflict situations, remains decisive.

Since 2000, due to various factors of influence, a style of political decision-making has been formed, which is increasingly reminiscent of the Soviet Politburo. The creation of state corporations in politics and economics had a great influence in the transition to this model. The specificity of Politburo 2.0 lies primarily in the fact that its members almost never gather for general meetings. Second, the formal status of its members does not always correspond to the real influence in decision-making. And thirdly, several elite groups have formed around Politburo 2.0, which can be conditionally divided into “power”, “political”, “technical” and “entrepreneurial” groups. These groups, on the one hand, are a support in the management of Politburo 2.0, but, on the other hand, they are constantly at odds with each other for influence in Politburo 2.0, they also nominate their candidates for its membership, ”this is an opinion about this structure authorities in Russia in 2012, after the return of V. Putin to the presidency, introduced the Minchenko consulting center, which is headed by the well-known Russian political consultant Yevgeny Minchenko.

Among other Russian analysts, public figures and even politicians, the term "collective Putin" has also long been rooted. In fact, this also reflects their conviction that decisions in the country are not made individually, and V. Putin is in fact just a symbol of this system, although, of course, he has not lost the role of arbitrator and moderator.

Ideas are not new

The system of clans of the Russian government is presented by various researchers ambiguously, individuals are attributed to different groups and the number of these groups is estimated differently. There is disagreement even on the question of how many of the most important can be - on the scale of the clans operating throughout the country. But more and more often they agree that there is a constant struggle within the Russian government, and its results determine certain decisions, and V. Putin constantly has to look for a balance of power.

True, such an assessment of Russian power is not a new discovery. Recently, this has often been forgotten, but, albeit in a more simplified version, even during V. Putin’s first term of office, at the beginning of the last decade, the whole world was discussing the constant confrontation between the “siloviki” and “liberals” in Russia and decisions based on results of this struggle.

Now we can safely say that such an assessment is greatly simplified, since the struggle is not only between the "siloviki" and "liberals".

V.Cherkesov - an example illustrating the system

Back in 2007, one of the leaders of the then clans, Viktor Cherkesov, director of the Russian Federal Drug Control Service, openly spoke about the constant struggle of the clans of the "siloviks" in his article in the Kommersant newspaper, which received a great echo. This article of his was, probably, the first echo of the war of the “siloviki” clans that escaped into the public space. V. Putin then limited the forces of both warring parties, but V. Cherkesov himself gradually lost power most of all. In 2008, he lost his post as director of the Russian Federal Drug Control Service, then was appointed head of the Federal Agency for the Supply of Arms, Military, Special Equipment and Materials, but left this post in 2010.

His further career developed in an unexpected way - in 2011, V. Cherkesov successfully participated in the parliamentary elections and became a member of the State Duma, but not as a candidate for United Russia, but as a representative of the Communists. Now he is vice-chairman of the State Duma Committee on Security and Anti-Corruption.

The example of V. Cherkesov in the system of Russian clans reveals several aspects. First, he must refute the myth that in this system, friends and associates of V. Putin himself can feel inviolable. This is exactly what V. Cherkesov, who worked with V. Putin in the Leningrad KGB, was considered to be, and for many years he was called a representative of the circle closest to V. Putin.

In addition, it is the clan system that reveals that V. Cherkesov, even having lost his former personal status, which guaranteed a high post, retains sufficient influence. Despite the fact that this representative of state security, who became a politician, does not pretend to be a candidate on the list of members of the "Politburo" E. Minchenko, he does not always correspond to his status when making decisions.

The best example is V.Cherkesov's wife, Natalia Cherkesova, who still controls quite liberal and still influential media in Russian conditions - the Rosbalt agency and the Petersburg Chas Peak newspaper. Maintaining this control was considered significant because the Rosbalt agency, which is the most cited media outlet in Russia, last year tried to close down in the usual way in this country. The agency was accused of violations, and the court decided to revoke the license. However, this spring, after the Crimean aggression, when a new wave of pressure on the media began in Russia, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation withdrew the decisions of lower courts and returned the license to Rosbalt, which is considered a fairly liberal representative of the media.

Real and imaginary confrontations

The fact that V. Cherkesov became a representative of the Communists in the Duma clearly demonstrates that it is not party affiliation or the division into power and opposition, but clan affiliation, that plays the most important role in the Russian system of power. After all, it is no coincidence that Rosbalt is a fairly liberal media - it is important to note that V. Cherkesov has long been acting together with one of the so-called main "liberals" of the current Russian government Arkady Dvorkovich and people of the political and business environment - billionaires Ziyavudin Magomedov and Suleiman Kerimov.

This example also shows a false idea about the confrontation between the “hard-handed supporters” of the secret services and the “liberals” who come from the environment of economists and entrepreneurs. V. Cherkesov is far from being the only representative of state security among the “liberals”. The influential former KGB officer Konstantin Chuichenko is included in the personal circle of the leader of the “liberals”, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. Despite the fact that in Lithuania this surname is known to few, in the struggle of clans, the head of the control department of the President of the Russian Federation is considered a very influential figure.

Russian Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika and even members of one of the most powerful groups of state security officers, Sergei Stepashin's clan, can at least conditionally be included among the “liberals” surrounding D. Medvedev, and not “supporters of a hard hand.”

However, the problem is that trying to call these groups "liberals" is not only greatly simplified, but also misleading. In the face of Crimean aggression, the most telling example would probably be Vladimir Solovyov, who is known for glorifying the greatness of Russia and is one of the main mouthpieces of the Kremlin. He is a personal friend of the aforementioned “liberal” A. Dvorkovich and a “propaganda outpost” of his entourage.

Even Anatoly Chubais, who is often called the godfather of the "liberals" in this sense, does not approve of the most ardent "great powers" only tactically, and not because of the imperial ideology itself. Back in 2008, when they already knew that D. Medvedev would become V. Putin's successor, he criticized Russia's foreign policy only because it "costs the country too much." Another well-known "liberal" A. Kudrin agreed with him on this, saying that "in the near future it is necessary to clarify the guidelines for foreign policy," but only in order to "ensure stable investment."

Therefore, if we talk about the ideology of clans and their representatives, the term “liberal” cannot be assessed from the point of view of Western categories: if this term at least partially corresponds to the clan’s views on the role of the state in the economy, then it does not at all reflect their “value component” - the idea of ​​place and the role of Russia in the world, which is promoted.

Major clans

So what are the main clans running Russia? As mentioned, both the clans themselves and the connections of the most influential Russian figures are often called differently by various researchers. However, an analysis of clan studies and an analysis of the public discourse in Russia allows us to quite accurately name many of the most influential groups.

In Russia itself, the clan of the head of Rosneft and the de facto curator of the energy sector of the entire country, Igor Sechin, is most often considered the most influential, despite the fact that the arguments in favor of such an opinion are not very strong. No less influential among the clans of real “siloviki” is the clan of the head of the presidential administration, Sergei Ivanov, who is known in Lithuania for his love of basketball and as the head of the VTB United League. S. Ivanov's influence has always been significant, and now it has been increased by a constant direct connection with V. Putin, which in Russian political jargon is called "access to the body."

However, the clans of the head of Russian Railways Vladimir Yakunin, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin and Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu also have no less, and in some circumstances even more power.

The already enormous influence of V. Yakunin is strengthened by the recently noticeable joint activity or even association with the once considered the most influential clan of the former Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and Intelligence Yevgeny Primakov (then it was the clan of Y. Primakov-Yu. Luzhkov). D. Rogozin, who is considered a representative of the military-industrial complex, especially strengthened his power by becoming the informal public leader of a large part of the camp of ardent nationalists, united in the so-called "Izborsk club". And S. Shoigu is helped by the huge popularity in society, which he has maintained for many years.

Another representative of the military-industrial complex, Sergei Chemezov, is not far behind in his influence. No less influential among the “siloviki” clans is the grouping of the director of the FSB of Russia, Alexander Bortnikov, who has been holding this post for quite a long time.

Since Sergey Stepashin left the post of Chairman of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation in 2013, recently his clan is no longer mentioned among the most influential. However, the current chairman of the supervisory board of the state corporation Fund for Assistance to the Reform of Housing and Communal Services, S. Stepashin, retained both his personal influence and the influence of his clan in power and in the division of state resources. In our opinion, S. Stepashin, like V. Yakunin, the best way illustrates the premise that the formal status of some actors does not reflect their real influence.

Recently, there has been more and more talk about the clan of State Duma Chairman Sergei Naryshkin, despite the fact that earlier it seemed that this former state security official was more a representative of some clan than the leader of his own.

There are many more such examples. In order to move up the career ladder, the help of other existing clans was reasonably used and indeed not the most important of their members, for example, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin, First Deputy Head of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation Vyacheslav Volodin and, probably, little-known in Lithuania, Assistant to the President of the Russian Federation for Personnel Issues Evgeny Shkolov, now all of them are often called the leaders of their groups. Among these relatively new groups, which have recently strengthened their influence, it is worth noting the grouping of another first deputy head of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation - Alexei Gromov.

Despite the fact that the aforementioned V. Cherkesov is now acting in concert with the people of Deputy Prime Minister A. Dvorkovich, this does not mean that he should not be considered the leader of the group. In this case, we can cite D. Rogozin as an example, who once also seemed to have completely lost his influence, but now is the leader of one of the most influential clans.

It is much more difficult to single out the leaders of the liberal clans. Despite the fact that there is competition between them, it has never openly developed into a struggle. Therefore, it is not easy to establish the boundaries of the groups - they all most often act as allies, and not as ardent rivals. It is precisely because of this unity that they are most often united under the name "liberals".

However, this camp is also not as monolithic as it seems at first glance; for starters, at least three axes can be distinguished. Firstly, First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov and his entourage are considered the most influential in the government. Secondly, the axis of Deputy Prime Minister A. Dvorkovich and President of Sberbank German Gref. However, the tandem of Anatoly Chubais, Chairman of the Board of OJSC Rosnano, and Alexei Kudrin, who now does not occupy any influential post, but retains his influence, is also considered no less influential.

A considerable number of experts studying Russia are increasingly calling the group of entrepreneurs close to V. Putin, the billionaire brothers Kovalchuk and Gennady Timchenko, an independent center of power. E. Minchenko even included them in his "politburo". But this assessment is not entirely correct.

Firstly, it is difficult to talk about any obvious alliance between Kovalchuk and Timchenko in all matters. Secondly, these entrepreneurs work smart and protect their interests with the help of different factions. Finally, the Rotenberg brothers are personally close to V. Putin, who have recently been successfully using state assistance in their business. Therefore, it is difficult to say why it is necessary to single out the triangle of the Kovalchuk brothers and G. Timchenko.

In general, large entrepreneurs in Russia behave differently - some of them are clearly associated with specific groups and use their "roof" and lobbying, while others manage to successfully maneuver between many groups.

D. Medvedev is a pocket overseer of the Putin system

However, such a list of the most important centers of power in Russia (and there are much more smaller centers of power both at the federal level and at the level of individual departments and at the regional level) should clearly illustrate the assertion that V. Putin constantly has to not only play the role of an arbitrator, but also to maneuver himself to maintain his power.

On the other hand, this is guaranteed by the very system of his power. “The contradictions themselves have become a source of Putin's strength. They allowed him to operate simultaneously in several different political spheres, while maintaining reliability in each, despite the fact that the basis for this was dubious, ”says one of the most famous experts on Russia, Richard Sakwa.

“The system has been created in such a way that it cannot function without the role of V. Putin as an arbiter,” says E. Minchenko. In this aspect, it is important to mention the role that Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev plays in this system.

The head of government does not actually belong to any of the groups. However, only he is the "president's man", and not members of certain groups that are close to V. Putin. He reports only to V. Putin and is under the protection of the head of the Russian Federation as a "faithful overseer." So, at least in part, the role of an arbitrator fell to him, but D. Medvedev does not make decisions on his own.

Therefore, one of the biggest strategic mistakes was made in 2008, when Russia reshuffled due to constitutional restrictions. Then D. Medvedev took the post of president. They started talking about the decline of Putin's influence and the supposedly opened “window of new opportunities” for warming relations with Russia. We can safely say that the well-known “reset” policy of US President Barack Obama in the context of the most important world events has failed, and the exaggerated hopes of the West for Dmitry Medvedev’s independence are a misunderstanding of the functioning of the power vertical in Russia.

Roots of the current system

The vertical of power in Russia has obvious roots. Despite the assertions that a qualitatively new model of relations between the state and the market has developed in Russia, the analysis of which requires new concepts and methods, it is still customary to call the current political and economic structure in the country a state corporation or a system of bureaucratic capitalism.

The essential features of such a way of life are a closed and resistant to external influence political system, the "fusion" of the political and economic elite, and the strategic sectors of the country's economy under the control of a bureaucratic corporation (these sectors are isolated from the influence of foreign capital). So how was such a system created, and what guarantees its stability?

The late Russian oligarch B. Berezovsky stated in 1996 that seven bankers controlled about half of the entire Russian economy. Meanwhile, when a new model of relations between government and business began to take shape during V. Putin’s first term of office, the dominance of the so-called oligarchs was replaced by representatives of the political elite, who already in 2005 controlled the five largest Russian gas, oil, transport companies and the company nuclear energy, which together created a third of the country's GDP.

Expert Daniel Treisman, who studies Russia, called this phenomenon “silovarchy” (in defiance of “oligarchy”), which means a system in which former representatives of law enforcement agencies, while holding high positions in the civil service, simultaneously perform important functions in large state-owned companies, therefore can always use administrative resources in the fight against business competitors.

True, on the basis of the characteristics of the Russian system of power listed above, the conclusion suggests itself that D. Treisman's formula is only partly correct. First of all, it should be emphasized that the created system of "levers and balances" guarantees that even the most influential leader of any of the groups, who has taken the post of head of a particular state corporation, does not receive full control over this corporation.

In structures such as Gazprom, Transneft, Sberbank, VTB Bank, Rosnano and even Rosneft, representatives of almost all groups are usually found. Just like, say, all clans compete in the government or presidential administration.

Features of state capitalism

On the other hand, if in “Yeltsin’s Russia” large entrepreneurs divided spheres of influence in business among themselves, controlled the political system and were not interested in forming a political vertical, then “Putin’s Russia” is distinguished by a qualitatively new assistance between politics and business, in which political groups elites take control of the most important companies and thus strengthen the centralization of the political system. Since the idea of ​​a “strong Russia” necessarily unites the entire political elite.

In other words, in "Yeltsin's" and "Putin's Russia" the direction of the merging of political and business interests is essentially different. V. Putin's policy was aimed at returning state capacities from the "oligarchs" - during Putin's period, the development of political-oligarchic capitalism shifted towards state capitalism.

True, even under such a system, private entrepreneurs can retain control over their companies, but if they accept the main condition, they will be loyal to the political system. Private business cannot become an independent center of political power - and this is another reason why it is inappropriate to include the imaginary group of the Kovalchuk brothers and G. Timchenko in the ranks of the most influential.

In modern Russia, guarantees of the right to large capital and property have become a matter of agreement between the state and business. The state guarantees the inviolability of the right to property and the balance between different interest groups, and business structures - loyalty to the state. All this was called the "new social agreement".

Models of "fusion" of business and politics may be different: private business structures may enjoy "hidden" protectionism (for example, the largest Russian oil company "Lukoil") or business may be owned by bureaucrats and senior politicians (or their groups), despite the fact that it is formal and will not be legalized. This is how the second largest oil company, Rosneft, operates.

In 2004, when I. Sechin (the current Deputy Prime Minister of Russia) became the chairman of the board of Rosneft, this company ranked 6th in the world in terms of oil production. However, it is Rosneft and I. Sechin who are considered to be the initiators of the destruction of the private company Yukos. And Rosneft became the company that took over the most important oil production centers of Yukos and became the second largest Russian oil company. In addition, the Yukos case has become news to the rest of the oligarchs and, in fact, the entire business about the new rules of the game that the Kremlin is setting.

The creation of Putin's system of power was significantly influenced by the penetration of the state into the country's economy (for example, the role of the state in the oil and gas sector increased by 60% during Putin's period) and the political appointments of heads of state companies and corporations. As the role of the state in the economy increases, the possibility of implementing a rent policy also grows, thus maintaining a balance between various groups of the political elite. V. Putin, acting as an arbiter, has the levers of control (management) of competition between various groups of the political elite.

Corruption is the foundation of the regime

Another important guarantor of the stability of the Putin system is corruption. In order to create a system of loyalty and reduce the threat of regional separatism, he made a double move: on the one hand, he created a system of rent recipients and those who pay it, and on the other hand, he significantly inflated the bureaucracy, from 2000 to 2012 increased it by 65 %, thanks to this, control of political processes is ensured. Relations between the recipient of the rent and the one who pays it within the Russian political elite maintain the stability of the regime, ensuring the loyalty of both various groups of the elite and the entire bureaucratic apparatus. According to calculations, the price of this is 16% of Russian GDP, “eaten up” by corrupt ties.

The formed political vertical and the well-established certain "fusion" of business and politics determine the fact that the Russian political and economic system is difficult to succumb to external pressure, but it is especially sensitive to internal problems: to the redistribution of various spheres of influence or competition between elite groups (clans), which between the strategic sectors of the Russian economy is constantly observed. All together, it can also mean increased friction within the political elite.

For example, companies operating in the oil and gas sectors, in search of a market for selling their products in the West, may conflict with representatives of the arms industry or nuclear energy, who are interested in developing ties with anti-Western countries (for example, Iran).

Metalworking companies have always been interested in Russia's membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO) as it should help them expand their exports, while Russian engineering conglomerates and their political elites have been very skeptical about WTO membership because it limits the possibilities of applying measures that protect the domestic market (protectionist measures). Companies in the oil sector are interested in building new oil pipelines, but Russian Railways takes a completely different position, since 14% of all Russian export oil is transported in rail containers.

Political stability in Russia and possible changes depend on the established balance between competing groups of the elite and, at the same time, on the ability to “curb” competition between different groups with the help of these rules. In other words, if they want to maintain stability in the state, these rules of the game must also be observed.

What does it mean? V. Putin maintains the stability of the political system by evenly distributing economic rent among individual groups of the elite. Obviously, such a scheme can work only if the country's economy is centralized, and the most important sectors of the economy are under the control of the state (either directly or through loyal oligarchs).

Examples of "elite control"

This model of Putin's "control of the elite" is especially evident in the energy sector, which is vital to the country's economy and very profitable, especially in the issue of transporting energy resources to foreign markets.

One of Russia's largest energy infrastructure projects, the East Siberian-Pacific Pipeline, has sparked at least two power distribution skirmishes. The first skirmish occurred in 1999, when Yukos took the lead on the project, and Transneft, which now controls all oil and gas transportation through pipelines, presented an alternative project. In 2003, when the head of Yukos, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, was arrested, Transneft finally took over this huge project in its own hands.

However, at that time, Russian Railways, headed by, as mentioned, the leader of one of the most influential groups, V. Yakunin, opposed the project. If this grandiose project were carried out, it would deprive the railway of the monopoly on oil exports to the Southeast Asian region. For example, in 2005, the Russian Railways transported 7.6 million tons of oil to China, and the implemented pipeline project would deliver 80 million tons.

Despite the fact that the project was implemented and launched in 2011, V. Putin played the role of a “peacemaker arbiter” in this story: amendments were made to the federal law “On Natural Monopolies” that included Russian Railways in the regulatory mechanisms of state exports oil. In other words, V. Yakunin ensured that the export flows of his company did not depend on the capacities of Transneft, but the latter, in turn, could continue the implementation of the grandiose project.

Another example of V. Putin's actions as an arbiter between interest groups is the recent redistribution in the gas sector, where two giants, Rosneft and Novatek, seek to remove Gazprom's monopoly on exports in the gas sector. The growing power of these two influential companies led to a change in Putin's attitude towards the idea of ​​demonopolizing gas exports through pipelines.

On June 4 this year, V. Putin, at a meeting of the Commission on the Strategy for the Development of the Fuel and Energy Complex and Environmental Safety, no longer contradicted this idea of ​​the head of Rosneft, I. Sechin, despite the fact that he had previously been categorically against it. Meanwhile, an influential friend of V. Putin, a shareholder of Novatek, G. Timchenko, said at the international economic forum in St. Petersburg that the company is ready to supply gas to Europe through pipelines and stressed the strategic importance of this moment.

Such facade demonopolization (when several giant companies appear instead of one monopoly exporter) will allow Moscow to talk about the adaptation of the Russian energy market to the conditions of competition and market liberalization that the EU puts forward. In other words, both the clashing groups and V. Putin himself win in the current situation.

The events in Ukraine have become, perhaps, the most striking indicator that the redistribution of the clans operating in the Kremlin is of great importance for the processes of Russia's domestic and foreign policy: Russia's "tough" actions towards Ukraine suggest that at the moment the "collective" .Putin is more influenced by representatives of the "great-power siloviki". Therefore, it is precisely the analysis of the clans of the Russian political and economic elite that would not only help to better understand how Putin's vertical of power operates, but would also make it possible to more accurately predict the future actions of the Kremlin.

Toxic people drive you crazy with their irrational behavior. Don't be fooled by this, their behavior is indeed beyond common sense. So why would you allow your emotions to respond to them and drag yourself into this nonsense?

Toxic people defy logic. Some are happy in ignorance of their negative impact on others, while others seem to enjoy destroying and hurting people.

It is important to learn how to interact with different people, but interacting with a truly toxic person will never justify the time and energy spent on it, it will only drain you. Toxic people constantly create unnecessary complications, conflicts, and, worst of all, stress around them.

“People can inspire or drain, so choose your conversation partner wisely.” – Hans F. Hansen

A recent study conducted at the German University. Friedrich Schiller showed how serious is the topic toxicity in interaction.

It was found that exposure to factors that cause strong negative emotions - for example, those that you experience in dealing with toxic people - provoked the respondent's brain to the strongest stress reaction.

Whether it's negative perception, cruelty, victim syndrome, or just plain insanity, toxic people create stress in you that should be avoided at all costs.

Scientists have long known that stress has a long-term negative effect on the brain. Even a few days of stress reduces the activity of neurons in the hippocampus, an important part of the brain responsible for reasoning and memory.

Weeks of stress cause reversible damage to brain cells, but months of stress can destroy them. Toxic people don't just ruin your mood, they're bad for your brain.

The ability to manage your emotions and stress resistance directly affect productivity.

TalentSmart conducted a study involving over a million people. It turned out that 90% of the best employees were distinguished by a high ability to manage their emotions in stressful situations, which allowed them to remain calm and in control of themselves. One of their greatest talents is the ability to recognize toxic people and keep them at bay.

It is said that a person is shaped by the five people with whom he spends the most time. If you allow at least one toxic person in this five, you will very soon find out how much he or she interferes with your development. You can't distance yourself from toxic people without recognizing them first.. The focus is on distinguishing really toxic people who are simply annoying or difficult to communicate with.

10 types of toxic energy vampires from which you need to stay away so as not to become one yourself.

1. Gossip

“Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.- Eleanor Roosevelt

Gossipers enjoy other people's misfortunes. At first, it may seem funny to discuss someone's gaffe in personal or professional life, but over time, it becomes tiresome, disgusting, and hurtful to others. There are too many more positive things in life, and too much to learn from interesting people, to waste your time talking about other people's failures.

2. Temperamental

Some people have absolutely no control over their emotions. They pounce and pour out their feelings on you, believing that it is in you that the cause of all their troubles. Temperamental people are difficult to throw out of life, because their inability to control their emotions causes pity. At a critical moment, such people will simply pour all their negativity onto you, so they should be avoided at all costs.

3. Victim

Victims are difficult to recognize because initially you empathize with their problems. But in modern times, the understanding comes that they have a “difficult moment” all the time. Victims are actively avoided any personal liability, inflating any small obstacle in its path to the size of an insurmountable barrier.

They don't see life's challenges as an opportunity to learn and grow. Instead, they see every adversity as the ultimate ending. There is an old saying: “ Pain is inevitable, but suffering is a personal choice.“She perfectly conveys the sense of toxicity of victims who choose to suffer every time.

4. Self-obsessed

Self-obsessed people spoil the mood by keeping a dispassionate distance from other people. Usually you can recognize such people by the feeling of being alone in their company. This is because, in their opinion, it is meaningless for them to really be in contact with someone. For them, you are nothing more than a tool to increase self-esteem.

5. Envious

According to envious people, the neighbor's grass is always greener. Even when something very good happens to an envious person, he does not get any pleasure from it.

The reason is that envious people constantly compare themselves and their successes with other people, while the feeling of satisfaction must be sought in oneself.

Also, let's be honest: there will always be someone in the world who does a better job than you, if you look hard enough. Too frequent contact with envious people dangerous because they learn to discount their successes.

6. Manipulator

Manipulators suck time and energy out of you, hiding behind friendship. These tricksters can be tricky because they manipulate friendships. They know what you like, what makes you happy, what makes you laugh, but the trick is that they use this information for their own purposes. A manipulator always needs something from you. If you look back at the relationship with them, they always take something and never or very rarely give themselves. They will do anything to subdue you, just to take advantage of you later.

7. Dementor

In her series of books about Harry Potter, J.K. Rowling described some evil creatures called "dementors" that sucked out souls, thus making people just empty body shells.

When a Dementor approaches, it becomes dark, cold, and people can be flooded with their worst memories. Rowling said that she wrote Dementors based on very negative people - those who, by their mere presence, suck the vitality out of those around them.

Dementors drain people by imposing their negativity and pessimism on everyone they meet. For them, the glass is always half empty, and they can spoil even the most favorable situation by filling it with their fears and anxieties.

Research conducted by the University of Notre Dame has shown that students who live with pessimistic neighbors become much more prone to negative thinking and even depression.

8. Spoiled

There are toxic people who initially harbor bad intentions, enjoying other people's pain and misfortune. They want to either hurt you or get something from you, otherwise they are not interested in you.

The good news is that such people can be quickly recognized in order to quickly exclude them from their social circle.

9. Critic

Critics will immediately tell you what is good and what is bad. They tend to take what you really like and make you feel terrible about it. Instead of appreciating those who are different and learning from them, critical people look down on others. Critics suppress your desire to be a passionate, expressive person, so it is better not to communicate with them and be yourself.

10. Arrogant

Arrogant people are a waste of time because they see themselves as a challenge in everything you do.

Arrogance is a false confidence that usually masks a huge lack of self-confidence. Research at the University of Akron has shown that arrogance is associated with a host of problems at work.

Arrogant people are often poor performers, less likely to agree, and have more cognitive problems than the average person.

How to protect yourself by recognizing them:

Toxic people drive you crazy with their irrational behavior. Don't be fooled by this, their behavior is indeed beyond common sense.

So why would you allow your emotions to respond to them and drag yourself into this nonsense?

The more irrational and inadequate a person is, the easier it should be for you to escape from his traps. Don't try to outplay them at their own game. keep your distance from them emotionally and treat interaction with them as a science project(or like you're their therapist, if you prefer). You don't have to react to their emotional chaos, just look at the facts.

In order not to get emotionally involved, mindfulness is needed. You can't force someone to stop provoking you if you can't see exactly how it happens. You may find yourself in a situation where you need to gather strength and choose the best option for you to follow up. That's okay, don't be afraid to give yourself more time to do it.

It seems to many that because they work or live with someone, they have no way to control chaos.

Nothing like this.

By recognizing a toxic person, you can understand and anticipate their behavior.

This will help you think logically about when and where you will have to deal with them, and in what cases it can be avoided.

You can set clear boundaries, but this must be done consciously and in advance. If you let things take their course, you will constantly be dragged into difficult conversations.

If you set boundaries and decide when and where you will interact with a difficult person, you will be able to control much of this chaos. The only thing you need to stand firm and keep your boundaries when they want to break what to expect. published

One way or another, history (and modernity) knows cases of disinterested service to the interests of the country and society in responsible government positions, which gives hope - despite the existing problems and corrosive corruption, there are honest and principled politicians in the system

Every day from all over the world there are reports of certain politicians and officials who have been at fault. It seems that when people get into the system of the state apparatus, they automatically become deceitful, greedy and corrupt, or maybe it is these qualities that allow them to reach career heights?

One way or another, history (and modernity) knows cases of disinterested service to the interests of the country and society in responsible government positions, which gives hope - despite the existing problems and corrosive corruption, there are honest and principled politicians in the system, to your attention - the best of the best.

1. Aristides (c. 530 - 467 BC)

Aristides, an Athenian statesman and commander, knowingly received the nickname "Just" from his contemporaries - he was a man of unshakable honesty and high moral principles.

The exceptional human qualities of Aristides were noted by Herodotus:

"This Aristides I consider, judging by what I have learned of his character, the most noble and just man in Athens."

As Plutarch wrote, once the people's assembly of Athens decided to hold a vote among the inhabitants, which of the politicians has too much influence, and those who gain more than 6 thousand votes were supposed to be expelled from the city in order to prevent tyranny.

Residents wrote names on clay shards and gave them to officials. One illiterate peasant, approaching the politician, asked to write the name “Aristide” on the tablet (he did not know him by sight), and when Aristide asked if this man had offended him in any way, the peasant replied: “No, I don’t even know , who is it. I'm just tired of hearing on every corner: “Fair! Fair!"". Aristide wrote his name and silently returned the tablet.

Aristides always followed his principles and was one of the few politicians who, even in the last days of his life, did not lose the trust of the Athenian people. He died in 467 BC. e. and was buried at public expense.

2. Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus (c. 519 - c. 439 BC)

The ancient Roman patrician and politician Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus distinguished himself by becoming the dictator of Rome twice in order to save the empire, which was on the verge of death. The first time this happened was in 458 BC. e., when the Eternal City was threatened by the tribes of the Aequi and Volscians, and the second time happened in 439 BC. e. - The Senate asked Cincinnatus to put down the plebeian uprising.

Any other politician in his place would have immediately seized the chance to become the sole ruler of the most powerful (at that time) state on Earth, but Lucius resigned as soon as the danger was eliminated. Such phenomenal (especially among statesmen) nobility made him a model of simplicity and virtue.

Cincinnatus led a very modest lifestyle, lived in a small villa and devoted almost all his free time to work and cultivating the land, so in many paintings he is depicted dressed in peasant clothes and with agricultural tools in his hands. One of the most authoritative Roman historians, Titus Livius, even wrote about him: "Cincinnatus, called from the plow."

It is curious that George Washington, who immediately after the US victory in the War of Independence, went to his native estate and continued to live a normal life, is considered a follower and conductor of the views of Lucius. Six years later, he became the first president of the United States, and after serving two terms in a row, he returned home again. By the way, Washington was also chairman of the Society of the Cincinnati, which consisted of US Army officers. Guess who the Society is named after?

3. Marcus Aurelius (121 - 180)

A philosopher at the head of an empire is perhaps the rarest occurrence in history. Marcus Aurelius became the last of the so-called five good emperors - the Caesars of Rome, whose reign was characterized by stability and well-thought-out domestic and foreign policies, which allowed the Roman Empire to reach its highest peak during these years.

Marcus Aurelius is also known as one of the prominent representatives of the philosophy of Stoicism, according to which sins and immoral acts destroy the personality, therefore, in order not to lose the human essence, it is necessary to develop one's moral and mental qualities in every possible way. According to the Stoics, good deeds and the rejection of all sorts of excesses are the key to human happiness.

As for Marcus Aurelius, his writings became classics of late Stoicism, as the historian Herodianus said of him:

"Aurelius proved his views not in words and not in philosophical formulas, but in his human qualities and impeccable way of life."

Marcus Aurelius died in the year 180 from the plague during a military campaign against the Germans, although in some feature films (The Fall of the Roman Empire, 1964, Gladiator, 2000), a different version is voiced. He was allegedly poisoned because he was going to transfer power over Rome to his adopted son, a Roman commander, bypassing his own son Commodus, who, according to Aurelius, was not suitable for the role of emperor, as he was a vain libertine and psychopath.

4. George Washington (1732 - 1799)

One of the most famous figures in American history, George Washington has long been a legendary figure. He presided over the convention at which the first US Constitution was written, served as Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army, and created the institution of the United States Presidency.

The British King George III once called him "the greatest character of the era", and after the death of Washington, legends began to be added about him, there were even attempts to deify him, as, for example, in the famous painting located in the dome of the Capitol. A mural called "The Apotheosis of Washington" depicts the first US president surrounded by a host of Olympian gods, and in Shinto shrines in Hawaii, Washington is worshiped as one of the deities.

As some of the legends say, in childhood, when his father asked little George who cut down the cherry tree, the boy was very scared, but he could not lie and admitted that it was his doing. This story is often cited as proof of Washington's exceptional honesty, and the phrase "I can't lie" became one of the "calling cards" of the first American president. However, the story is not confirmed by anything, so, most likely, this is just a tribute to a person whose exceptional honesty and so no one doubted without any cherry trees.

When Washington withdrew to another world, General of the Continental Army Henry Lee said about him this way: "The first in the days of war, the first in days of peace and the first in the hearts of fellow citizens," and Napoleon Bonaparte delivered a speech in honor of the deceased to the French and announced throughout France 10 day mourning.

5. Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)

Lincoln's presidency was not the easiest period in the history of the United States, but he passed this test with honor. The 16th President of the United States led the country through the Civil War (War of the North and South), abolished slavery and helped smooth out differences in the American government. Abraham Lincoln built (not personally, of course) a transcontinental railroad and began a massive reorganization of the economy - after his death, the United States became the fastest growing country in the world.

The whole world was shocked by his death: five days after the end of the Civil War, on April 14, 1865, at Ford's Theater (Washington), Lincoln was watching the play "My American Cousin" when actor John Wilkes Booth, a supporter of the already defeated southerners, burst into into the presidential box and shot Lincoln in the head. The next day, the president died without regaining consciousness.

At home, the 16th president is immortalized in numerous monuments (including the famous Mount Rushmore monument), he is depicted on a coin in 1 cent and 5-dollar bill, and his birthday (March 4) has become an official holiday in several states.

6. William Gladstone (1809 - 1898)

The fate of William Gladstone, a British politician, is unique: he became Prime Minister of the United Kingdom four times and proved himself excellently in this post.

Among his political accomplishments are the abolition of the state church in Ireland, the introduction of secret ballots in elections, two pieces of legislation expanding the rights of Irish peasants, and other tireless concern for the cultural life of the country and the interests of the common people. William Gladstone did not speak so brightly in international politics, but only because he was an opponent of wars and all kinds of violence that flourished at that time (and even now) in the world political arena.

Possessing an outstanding mind, Gladstone paid attention to various areas of British life, for example, it is known that this Victorian figure invited prostitutes to tea and had conversations with them, hoping to re-educate "misguided women." Contemporaries noted in him high moral qualities, justice and philanthropy. The best confirmation of these qualities are the numerous monuments to Gladstone, as well as the streets and small towns that bear his name.

7. Mahatma Gandhi (1869 - 1948)

“Great Soul” - this is how the title “Mahatma” is translated from the Devanari dialect, which was awarded to Mohandas Gandhi by the poet Rabindranath Tagore, and Gandhi himself denied this nickname, considering himself unworthy of him.

Gandhi became famous as a principled opponent of caste inequality, with whom he waged a merciless (but peaceful) struggle, and a supporter of the ideas of non-violence (the so-called "satyagraha" - translated from Sanskrit, "the desire for truth, perseverance in truth"), his political and public activity had a huge impact on the development of India and the reconciliation of the warring factions of Hindus and Muslims.

In 1921, Gandhi led the Indian National Congress and in this post worked tirelessly for the benefit of the Indian people. His main concerns were: improving the status of women in the country, raising the standard of living of the poorest segments of the population, settling ethnic and religious conflicts, developing the economy and, of course, freeing India from British oppression.

He shared meals with the untouchables, traveled in third-class carriages, went on hunger strikes and staged non-violent resistance and boycott of British goods, and before his death he worked on the draft of the Indian constitution.

As the inspirer and symbol of the Indian independence movement, Mahatma Gandhi fell victim to political intrigues: on January 30, 1948, Gandhi, along with his niece, went out onto the front lawn for the usual evening prayer. He was greeted by a crowd of fans and supporters, but suddenly a man separated from the mass of admirers, who approached Gandhi and fired three shots at close range. The bleeding politician gestured that he forgave the shooter and died. Later it turned out that the killer was a member of the Hindu Maha Sabha religious and political organization, which believed that Gandhi was too good for Indian Muslims.

Gandhi's birthday, October 2, is celebrated around the world as the International Day of Non-Violence.

8. Ernest Vandiver (1918 - 2005)

The 20th century was in many ways the century of the struggle for civil rights of various human rights organizations and prominent leaders, among which, for example, the notorious Maritn Luther King.

However, there are other, less famous figures who also contributed in every way to the development of civil society, for example, Ernest Vandiver, who served as governor of the US state of Georgia from 1959 to 1963.

Vandiver went out of his way to eradicate racial discrimination, a rarity at the time for governors, most of whom were corrupt racists through and through. For example, Vandiver supported the state court's decision to admit two black students, Hamilton Holmes and Charlaine Hunter, to the University of Georgia, although university students had previously rebelled against the presence of blacks in the classroom.

In addition, Vandiver reversed a Georgia General Assembly resolution banning public funding for schools where boys and girls were educated together.

Georgia State Judge Joseph Quillian praised Ernest Vandiver's performance as governor:

"This man never learned to lie."

9. Vaclav Havel (1936 - 2011)

Vaclav Havel undoubtedly had a literary talent: he wrote poetry, essays and plays, but he went down in history, first of all, as a dissident and political figure.

His political path was long and thorny: he was an active opponent of the entry of Soviet troops into Czechoslovakia in 1968, because of which he had many problems - he was not allowed out of the country, and Havel's works were banned.

For many years he fought for the democratization of the political system and the observance of the rights of the citizens of his country, several times he went to jail, but stubbornly continued his activities.

In the autumn of 1989, the famous Velvet Revolution began in Czechoslovakia, one of the leaders of which quickly became Vaclav Havel. After the communists lost most of their political influence, the former dissident was elected president of the country, however, having stayed in office until 1992, he left him ahead of schedule, believing that the days of Czechoslovakia as a state were numbered. But already in 1993, he was elected again, thus becoming the last president of Czechoslovakia and the first of the Czech Republic, and in 1998 he was elected for a second term.

Vaclav Havel's work has received the widest international recognition and support - he is the winner of numerous awards and several awards.

His debut as a director was symbolic: in 2011, the film "Departure" was first presented to the general public at the Moscow International Film Festival, and in the same year Vaclav Havel died.

10. Aung San Suu Kyi (b. 1945)

One of the brightest women in the modern political arena, Aung San Suu Kyi was under house arrest for a total of more than 15 years from 1989 to 2010 on various charges, but in general - for her active participation in the political life of Burma. This made her one of the symbols of the struggle for civil rights, not only in this country, but throughout the world.

Inspired by the ideas of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, this brave woman founded the National League for Democracy in 1988 to oppose the military junta that seized power in Burma after the resignation of General Ne Win, head of the Burmese Socialist Program Party. ".

In 1990, her party won 59% of the vote in parliamentary elections, but Aung San Suu Kyi was not allowed to head the government, for which the results of the vote were canceled and the woman was once again placed under house arrest. While at her home in Yangon, Suu Kyi received the Nobel Peace Prize, for which her sons came to Oslo.

In 2010, Suu Kyi was released from house arrest, six days after the country's first free parliamentary elections were held, which since 1989 has become known as Myanmar. What Suu Kyi fought for so long has finally come true: the party has entered parliament, and its leader now occupies the deputy chair and continues his struggle for civil rights and freedoms.