Actually authorities of crowd-“elitism” disappear in joint initiative creative activity, based on common ethics, uniting both “authorities” and other participants of common action.
Therefore it’s not necessary to find out whose authority is a “blown” and whose is “true” (there can’t be “true” authorities) for dethroning of “blown” authorities and supporting “true” ones.
It is necessary to make relations with people on principles of humanity, accepting people such as they are: with all their merits and demerits (including displayed by an “aggregorial haze”, which activity is caused by characteristics of unconscious levels of human psyche[16]), helping them to release from oppression of peculiar for them problems. Then mutual respect will unite people, and joint actions will be basis for this respect, but not crowd-“elite” relations of trade and conflicts (even unconscious) of self-estimates like “I’m so good and clever - so why I’m not a boss?” and reciprocaclass="underline" “I’m boss, therefore I'm good and clever, and you are obliged to respect me, to submit me implicitly, to guess for and to embody my thoughts before I shall announce them[17], to care for be and to cherish”.
––––––––––––
According to the told above, in order to avoid thoughtless subordination to heaven knows how appeared or purposefully created authority of one or another person, to avoid inattention when considering “non-authorities’” opinions, when expressing opinions on problematic of conceptual power and other sociological themes in written form, – we accepted anonymity. In our opinion, anonymity of statements should remove prejudicialness, in order that everyone voluntarily thinking perceived text by his own conscience and could correct mistakes without psychological pressure of names of those, whose opinion he used to perceive as undoubtedly authoritative. For people, for a society of humans it is important the result of a deed but not persons who reach this result: if deed is good, then one doing it loses nothing; if deed is evil, then nobody would escape from God’s retribution, even he or she wants. This caused anonymity for Internal Predictor of USSR – group of developers of Concept of Social Safety (COB)[18].
––––––––––––
Nevertheless, aspiration to erect somebody in rank of authority by COB or to refuse of that rank to those or other persons have been existing all the time since first COB materials had been announced in society among those who considered themselves as true supporters of COB. All such activity, whether it is realizably-planned or unconsciously-personal (including unconsciously-aggregorial), directed to erection of some persons in rank of authorities and also to dethroning authorities, of which someone have been disappointed, lays outside of COB’s course and outside of its promotion through society algorithmic.
Internal Predictor of the USSR
February 16–18, 2008
Specifications and addictions:
March 1–2[19], 2008
[1]
[2] V. V. Odintsov “Linguistic paradoxes” – Moscow: Prosveshenie, 1988, p.33 (in Russian).
[3]
[4] Look at books by IP USSR “The Dead Water” and “The Sufficiently General Theory of Ruling” (DOTU). These and other works by IP USSR, necessary for understanding of some specific terms of COB and COB as a whole, are published on several sites: , , , etc.
[5] Total function of ruling is the term of The Sufficiently General Theory of Ruling (DOTU). It includes successive sequence of different quality actions: revealing of environmental factor affecting the subject-ruler and causing need for ruling; goals designation concerning this factor and all other further actions necessary for achieving the planned goals.
[6] Conceptual power – the term of Conception of Social Safety (COB):
first meaning – power of people, which are capable to elaborate the concept of society life organization and to introduce it in real process of public self-management;
second meaning – power of concept itself upon society.
[7] Of course, there are certain interrelations between “algorithms” and “mechanism”; however it is not the same phenomenon.
[8] In this case, it is not pertinent to refer to “people”, but it would be better to use the term “crowd”.
[9] The illustration is absent in the quoted publication on site (IP USSR).
[10] WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University
[11] The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
[12] Look at treatment of the question in analytical note by IP USSR “Review of possible variants of events after 1995” (in Russian) (in Information Base of IP USSR).
[13]
[14] Though the term “PR” in Russian society has appeared rather recently, but the following anecdote about the power of PR was popular in the USSR:
Napoleon has been invited from the other world to parade on the Red Square in Moscow. He stands on the Mausoleum tribune, looks at parade and talks to L. I. Brezhnev. Brezhnev tells him: “If you had had such cannons and tanks you precisely would not have lost at Waterloo”.
Napoleon answers: “Certainly, but if I had had such a newspaper as your ‘Pravda’ (‘Truth’), nobody would have ever known that I had lost at Waterloo...”
And in general, Goebbels with his successful in many ways PR of Nazism and Hitlerism outside Germany became the strategic weapon, which allowed Hitler carry out blitzkriegs against states of bourgeois-liberal Europe freely: on January 2, 1939, already after “The Munich Deal” and the liquidation of Czechoslovakia, that became an actual beginning of the World War II the sanction to which had been given by the Great Britain, the editorial of “Time” (American magazine) declared A. Hitler as 1938 “Person of the Year”.
[15] Look at first wording of “The Dead Water” 1992 (in Russian).
[16] In COB-materials this theme is considered more detailed in book by IP USSR “From corporationism under a cover of ideas to collectivity in God’s Ruling” (About psychological underlying reason of person and its purposeful change) (in Russian).
[17] In essence, this is requirement for subordinates to be more clever than the chief, but don't show obviously it to him to save their chief from “inferiority complex” and not to deprive him of his authority.
[18] This paragraph with some changes repeats written in 1994 at the very beginning of book by IP USSR “Questions to Metropolitan of St. Peterburg and Ladoga Ioann and to hierarchy of Russian Orthodox Church”.
[19] March 2, 2008 – President Elections day in Russia.