PRIVATE PROPERTY IS MALIGNANT NEOPLASM

СОБСТВЕННОСТЬ – ЗЛОКАЧЕСТВЕННОЕ НОВООБРАЗОВАНИЕ

Научная статья

Салин Ю.С.¹, Супруненко О.И.^2, *

¹ Тихоокеанский Государственный Университет, Хабаровск, Россия;

² Всероссийский научно-исследовательский институт геологии и минеральных ресурсов Мирового океана имени академика И. С. Грамберга, Санкт-Петербург, Россия

* Корреспондирующий автор (onaimo[at]centurion.vniio.nw.ru)

Аннотация

Выделиться из массы можно чем-то неповторимым, присущим только тебе. Силой, умом, талантом, красотой, умением, мастерством. А если у тебя нет ничего, что делало бы тебя личностью, то в ход идет принадлежащее тебе имущество. Собственность – подмена особенности. Внутреннее развитие человека подменяется развитием внешним, самоутверждение человека пошло по пути наращивания собственности. Ничем не ограниченное экономическое пространство гарантировало неограниченное возрастание богатства и привело к росту пропасти между богатыми и бедными. Единственный способ избавится от сверхконцентрации собственности – избавиться от собственности вообще. Лучший путь самореализации личности – самосовершенствование, самоограничение и самопожертвование во имя человечества и природы.

Ключевые слова: особенность, собственность, самореализация личности.

PRIVATE PROPERTY IS MALIGNANT NEOPLASM

Research article

Salin Yu.S.¹, Suprunenko O.I.^2, *

¹ Pacific National University, Khabarovsk, Russia;

² All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Geology and Mineral Resources of the World Ocean named after Academician I. S. Gramberg, Saint-Petersburg, Russia

* Corresponding author (onaimo[at]centurion.vniio.nw.ru)

Abstract

You can stand out from the crowd with something unique: by force, mind, talent, beauty, skill, skill. If you have nothing that makes you a person, then the property that belongs to you is used. Property is a substitution of a feature. The internal development of a person is replaced by external development, the self-affirmation of a person has gone along the path of increasing property. The unfettered economic space guaranteed an unlimited increase in wealth and led to a growing gap between the rich and the poor. The only way to get rid of the over-concentration of property is to get rid of property altogether. The best way of self-realization of the individual is self-improvement, self-restraint and self-sacrifice in the name of humanity and nature.

Keywords: feature, property, self-realization of the individual.

A man without property is impersonal. The supporters of the theory of labor property insist on this: a man expresses himself in the results of his work. However, self-fulfillment is achieved not only by labor property.

Leo Tolstoy: "All the aspirations of our rich life, from food, clothing, housing, our cleanliness to our education, everything has the main goal distinguish yourself from the poor people. We spent 0,9 of our wealth on this separation to close by impenetrable walls from the poor people" [37, P. 219].

You can stand out from the masses with something inimitable, that characterizes only you. Strength, intelligence, talent. Beauty, skill, mastership. And if you don't have something that would make you a person, then belongings are used. Property is the substitution, ersatz of peculiarity.

"An insatiable ambition, the rage of raising their relative fortunes, not so much through real necessity, as to over-top others, inspire all men with a wicked inclination to injure each other... A secret desire of thriving at the expense of other constantly prevailed. Such were the first effects of property, and the inseparable attendants of infant inequality" [29].

V.l. Dal in dictionary of russian living language: "Собь" - all your ownership, goods, belongings, wealth; moral, spiritual and all personal qualities of a man.

The solution must be searched between of meanings the peculiar and the own. The peculiar is what is mine, and can't be not mine: my hand, my will, my courage; it's undoubtedly mine, and it doesn't depend on someone's prohibition or permission. Own - is recognized as mine, but may not be mine, I may lose it, sell it. Of course, I can lose both of them my talent and my hand, but they won't become someone else's talent, someone else's hand.

Meanings of the own and the peculiar are similar in other languages. Property in English means feature, quality and ownership. German Eigenschaft - quality, characteristic; Eigentum property, goods. Suffixes -schaft and -turn give the root of the word collective meaning, in the practice of word usage, they are difficult to separate.

Ethnographers noted, that you could found people without clothes, but never without adornment. A little further - a loincloth, weapons, utensils.

And that’s a funeral rite. What to do with the things that have inspired fellow-tribesmen all their lives the same feelings as the outgoing one? Spear, paddle is extension of the hand; personal amulets, a fur shirt, a hat - all these things come to mind with every memory.

All bearing the stamp of uniqueness of the deceased, should follow him to the other world. The canoe overturns on his grave or goes by the will of the flow. In barong's, when a member of a tribe dies, all his clothes is thrown into his abandoned hut. Plates, vessels are broken on his grave. The aborigines of the chulikata mishmi set on fire all the personal belongings of the deceased. Death doesn't interrupt the connection of participation, that is going on beyond the fatal line. This is a personal feature, not yet alienated to level property.

But... The first comma appears in the human history. Not old, not worn things haven't yet become an integral part of the deceased, they will be detachable, replaceable, passed from hand to hand. Property. No longer a feature.

Diogenes of Sinop (412-323 BC) was the first to call for a reassessment of the values of European civilization: "Don't you notice that animals and birds live are more carefree than people live? Life for them is sweeter, they are healthier and 'stronger than people, and each of them lives as long as he is supposed to. They don't have hands, human mind, but instead of this and many other things that they lack, they have one greatest advantage, they don't have property” [1, P. 341].

Adaptation of nature to man or man to nature?

L.S. Vygotsky assesses the significance of the invention of writing: "In this transition from the natural development of memory to the development of writing, from eidetism to the use of external systems of signs, from mnemonic to mnemotechnics is a significant break, which defines him the whole further course of cultural development of the human mind. External development takes place of internal development" [39, P. 91].

When external development takes place of internal development, the internal suffers damage. Plato makes an unambiguous conclusion about the introduction of writing: "For this discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves" [27].

However, internal development was replaced by external development much earlier than writing had been appeared, and embraced a much wider scope of personal and social life. Self-assertion of a person went along the way an increase in property, and not an improvement in characteristics, personal merits.

The meaning of the transition from the development of the internal to the external consisted in subordinate to my will not only my, but also other people's organs, as well as objects and processes of the external world. The problem of management was born.

Democritus: "Use the servants as parts of your body, one for one, the other for the other services" [21, P. 85]. The Greeks used not only talking tools, but also mooing, as well as silent ones. Using some physical processes for one service, and others for another, it took knowledge, which is power.

This is how Hegel characterized the goal of science. Whatever forces nature used against a man, the cunning of his mind gives him the ability to direct others against some natural forces, make them destroy the latter and, standing behind these forces, to preserve himself [13]. The cunning of mind is one of the main concept for Hegel, it provides nature to suffer, calmly observes and with a small effort controls the whole.

The lust for power is a compensation for personal powerlessness.

Each, incapable of ruling his inner self,

Would gladly rule his neighbor’s will,

In the manner that his proud mind dictates to him... (Goethe)

The poet puts this formula into the mouth of the Thessalian witch Erichto, which can make a dead person alive. The living dead man.

A dead man is a person whose arms and legs don't work, no strength in the limbs. But you are alive, you see and hear, command your organs, despite the fact that none of the commands of your soul are executed by the body.

This generative model also has quite earthly incarnations.

Thought rules everything in everything (Heraclitus). A manic desire to take revenge on the world for its impotence grows up to heaven, when there is no strength. "His ethic is a kind of proud asceticism, very similar to Nietzsche’s" [30]. Heraclitus despises the crowd, which fills Its belly like cattle, Diogenes Laertius: "And at last, becoming a complete misanthrope, he used to live, spending his time in walking about the mountains; feeding on grasses and plants, and in consequence of these habits, he was attacked by the dropsy, and so then he returned to the city, ...he shut himself up in a stable for oxen, and covered himself with cow-dung, hoping to cause the wet to evaporate from him, by the warmth that this produced. And as he did himself no go good in this way, he died, having lived seventy years" [5].

Life is the will to power - Friedrich Nietzsche declares [25]. He never hid behind streamlined wording: "The misery of tolling men must still Increase in order to make the production of the world of art possible to a small number of Olympian men... Therefore, we may compare this grand culture with a blood-stained victor, who in his triumphal procession carries the defeated along as slaves" [24]. There was not a single day in the life of F. Nietzsche when he felt healthy.

Compensatory relationships are inevitable in a society which is built on the domination of man over man, man over nature. David Hume: "Power or an authority over others makes us capable of satisfying all our desires; as slavery, by subjecting us to the will of others, exposes us to a thousand wants, and mortifications" [16].

Erich Fromm: Physiological desires, - hunger, thirst, sexual desires, fade away as they are satisfied. The desires of the envious, proprietor are unquenchable. A person draws in his imagination more and more pleasures that will restore his inner balance. But greed is insatiable, it's source - the sick imagination of the person [9].

All desires of a living individual are the consequences of the instinct of self- preservation. The engine of development is not competition, but the ability to resist chaos and decay. Death.

"The idea that life concerned mainly with its own maintenance is inhuman" [10]. Such a life is not an animal, because the main thing for an animal is procreation. If for a mortal individual the Immortality of the race is not the meaning of his own life, then life will end there. And if the meaning of any other individual life was not concern for Life, all life on earth would have died out long ago.

Goethe sets up an experiment - what would a person do if all his desires are fulfilled? And here is the result - Faust walks over the corpses: his beloved went to prison and dies, her brother is killed, her mother is poisoned, his daughter is drowned. The old men Philemon and Baucis are swept from the face of the Earth with their wretched huts. But Faust, flesh of flesh of the German philistinism, wasn't going to do anything bad to anyone.

The origins of perversion are not in the human soul, but in the deep essence of the society that gave birth to it. In a proprietary civilization.

Herrschaft gewinn' ich, Eigenthuml - Faust confesses: I’ll win power, and property! But Siddharta Gautama had power and property. And he experienced a shock out of mere awareness - there is so much suffering in the world!

And if all your egoistic aspirations are achievable, then God forbid, your dreams will come true, - a complete, irreplaceable emptiness awaits you. If these are sky-high dreams, devastation threatens the planet.

The tribal and neighboring community

First was the Golden Age. Then rectitude spontaneous in the heart prevailed, and faith. Avengers were not seen, for laws unframed were all unknown and needless. Punishment and fear of penalties existed not. Thus spoke Ovid [26].

Are interpersonal relationships regulated by external means - threats of retaliation, legal laws - or by inner motives. In the human soul? If a person doesn’t allow himself antisocial actions, if rectitude and faith are deeply rooted in his soul, then there is no need for laws.

"The reign of Saturn was a fabulous Golden Age: the land bore many fruits, there were no wars in the blessed world, and the destructive spirit of profit had not yet penetrated, like poison, into the blood and flesh of industrious, contented peasants. Slavery and private property were not yet known to people, and they owned everything together" [8].

The Iroquois had a common food supply. "Theft, the most despicable of human crimes, was scarcely known among them. In the days of their primitive simplicity, a mercenary thought had not entered the Indian mind" [23]. The feeling of freedom was generated by the lack of property. "Individual ownership, with the right to sell and convey in fee-simple to any other person, was entirely unknown among them" [22]. And this attitude towards ownership prevailed not only among the Iroquois: "Neither the Peruvians, nor the Aztecs, nor any Indian tribe had attained to a knowledge of the ownership of land in severalty in fee simple at the period of their discovery" [22].

...We got in touch with the culture of the peoples of the North in expeditions. We are amazed that mutual aid is the main feature of social psychology. Lack of Profit! The roots of moral principles go back centuries and generations [31], [32].

The Tungus considered any prey to be a common and sacred gift, for it he’d risked his own life, in which he invested only his labor. The prey must feed, clothe and shoe everyone.

Exhausted by the long pursuit, the Yukagir hunter thought: "How can I rest if my people are starving?" And one more, and also no material incentive didn't give rest to the strong and courageous man - if he got the most, then he was the Great Hunter.

All Evenk kamp perceived as her own any booty brought from the forest. When the Chukchi and Eskimos killed the whale, they announced this success both coastal trapper and nomadic reindeer-breeding. Everyone who wants to come for meat and fat. Moreover, often bread-winners themselves delivered it to neighbors.

Throughout the tundra and taiga, there were similar, so strange views of wealth that the European even had to invent a special term for it, almost common property [34].

"There is no doubt that the nomads consider herds to be public property. But if you tell a nomad that the herd is not yours, but a public one, he will be offended and will say that he is the sole owner, and at the same time he will not command of the herd as an owner. He will help and feed the poor free of charge, and if necessary, he will give the whole herd to prevent hunger" [2, P. 17].

For most peoples, communist concepts have been preserved for many centuries. They turned out to be ineradicable in our country. Foreigners were amazed - Russia is a country of communal equality, Russians are a nation without needs. The war on communal foundations was started by P.A. Stolypin, and it led to those ten days that shook the world. Further, our survivals found their embodiment in collective farms, in factories and other city collectives, in the ideology and construction of Soviet power bodies and the state apparatus.

Everything belongs to everyone - the main principle of the community's social structure. "Many generations of ancestors, living under a more or less strictly communal system, have bequeathed to us feelings of sociability and humanity, which are latent but still alive in the depths of our consciousness... All the agricultural populations of our continent lived under the village community system, and that they kept to it so much the longer the more they were sheltered from conquest or Greco-Roman influence" [20, P.57, 299].

Religious communities have served as a model for the modern world order. For Christians, the apostolic community became an ideal: "No one possessed aught which individually belonged to him. On becoming disciples of Jesus, they sold their goods and presented to the society the price of them. The chiefs of the society then distributed the common possessions according to the needs of each member" [28]. In the community formed by the followers of Buddha, everyone was equal, and no one owned property [33].

"The Russian peasant hasn’t morality, except for the one that flows instinctively, naturally from his communism; this morality is deeply popular; little that he knows from the gospel supports it; the obvious injustice of the landowners binds him even more to his rights and to the communal structure" [14, P. 167].

A deep impression left in the Russian culture the Doukhobor sect, which Leo Tolstoy called people of the XXV century. "They have nothing to divide or share, and all their possessions are in common... And whoever needs anything, he takes it as his own" [17, P. 262].

The Dukhobors moved to Canada to escape persecution. In Canada, private property was vacant land, and if it remained uncultivated for a specified period, it was taken away. But the Dukhobors cultivated their lands like on a Soviet collective farm. And it turned out: "Ivanov, you have been allocated a piece of land, by the day of X you must cultivate it."And Ivanov replies: "But I worked on the plot of the land of Sidorov and Kozlov, look at the result!" But excuse me, Mr. Ivanov, Inspector Smith objects to him, where are Sidorov and Kozlov here? Here is a piece of land that you received, you haven’t even thought about it, and therefore in the name of the queen I take it from your unscrupulous possession... [38].

Socio-technical progress

The increase in production efficiency created a surplus product that became a commodity. Trade gave impetus to abstract thinking, logic and dialectics. The calculating began with merchants' calculations of profit and loss. At first, dialectics meant the ability to argue for and against in litigation between debtors and creditors in the absence of lawyers. Logic at first was the art of operating with verbal evidence.

Science gave merchants and conquerors more and more sophisticated types of weapons, former social institutions collapsed like houses of cards. Money has taken on enormous importance. All means are good as long as they work, whether fair production or handicraft, proposing a new, profitable invention; lending money at interest. Even magic began to be dealt with as a means of achieving j- wealth and power, as evidenced by the history of Faust [3, P. 261].

Development of river civilizations can be considered as frozen, in terms of progress.

The floods of great rivers cannot be dealt with alone. Here it turned out to be impossible to replace collectivism with individualism, mutual aid with competition.

Ancient Egypt. For many centuries, economic inequalities between the Egyptians of different estates were from birth. Everyone had to die in the title in which they were born. Under this regime the privileged will be born rich, but getting I rich is hard. The priests viewed trade, which in all countries served as a source of I personal enrichment, with prejudice [20].

Why was there practically no scientific and technological progress in China? - asks J. Bernal. Because there officials hindered the formation and spread of the merchant class. In the Confucian table of ranks, merchants were below officials, warriors, farmers and artisans — below students!

Empire of the Sun. The achievements of the Incas in building a social system that provide the entire population with the necessary benefits are striking. But the greatest impression is made by the efficiency of the planned-distribution economy. She worked without goods and money. The answer is simple - there was no private property in the country of the Incas. The entire system was based on the Indian Ailyu, community. Inequality existed. But it was highly regulated. The social structure consisted only of the service classes [12], [4].

In Russia, communal principles have ruled the world since the days of Kievan Rus. There is a well-known expression - to doom property to the flow and plunder: "The robbery of the prince's property, carried out by the decision of the veche community, is the return of temporarily individualized wealth to the community" [11, P. 145].

And by the beginning of the 20th century, communities retained their fundamental role only in Russia: "Below is a rural community, frozen in anticipation, slow, but confident in its own development, conservative, like a mother carrying a baby in her womb, and enduring a lot, enduring everything, except for the denial of its basis. This is the feminine principle and the building cornerstone, its monad, cell of a huge fabric, called Russia" [15, P. 517].

But the evolution of property on the planet has nevertheless leaned towards an individualistic rather than a collectivist version.

Why does private property immediately expand its sphere of domination? It switches on the positive feedbacks. The richer you become, the faster your advantage over others grows, and the less you fear other people's encroachments on your freedom.

Adam Smith: "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity, but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages" [35]. But this is, by definition, Aristotelian chrematistics, the science of advantages. Economics, according to Aristotle, is the science of housekeeping.

The defining feature of a market society is selfishness. You have no opportunity for choice - if you want, become an egoist, and if you don’t want, remain an altruist. If you don't fit into the system, then you will be thrown to the roadside, you will become a marginal.

It’s difficult to find detailed descriptions of the transition from realm of mutual aid to a competitive society, but it is understandable. Writing originated from accounting procedures. First there were counting stones, sticks, then cuts in the tree, grooves in the clay. The lines on the clay tiles became more and more varied. They already indicated the peculiarities of the object. A drawing letter appeared.

In the era of developed writing society has already become a trade and exchange. The scriptures inevitably portrayed the superiority of greed over unselfishness.

According to Adam Smith, capital is a part of the stocks of a product accumulated in excess of what is needed, from which the owner expects to receive income [35].

Joseph, the high official of the Pharaoh, fill up warehouse for seven fruitful years. And then came seven lean years ... And there was no bread in all the land.

Joseph gathered all the silver throughout all Egypt, and then the famine increased, and Joseph gathered all the cattle for bread ... And finally he bought all the land of Egypt for Pharaoh. And Joseph made the people slaves from one end of Egypt to the other (Gen. 47: 20, 21).

The same social factors were at work among the Greeks: "They were active, clever, and grasping traders; they invented manufacturing companies with capital held in shares, trading companies, the bill of exchange, insurance even, at least insurance against the escape of slaves" [20]. At the turn of the VII-VI centuries BC Athens was on the verge of a general explosion. The fields were decorated with pillars-signs that the land was mortgaged and not redeemed. Farmers, trapped in unpaid debts, were sold into slavery.

Solon in his laws (594 BC) forbade providing loans with slavery and canceled debts. But his medicine was worse than the disease. He introduces into practice private property. Previously, the inheritance of deceased remained in his family. Solon first introduced the institution of testament.

The category of life is made eternal by the transfer of life from one mortal individual to another. The category of property was made the same eternal by the transfer of the accumulated belongings to the heir at the choice of the outgoing. In this case, property does not disperse in the gens, in the community, but is accumulated and concentrated.

The inheritance of life is new instead of old. The inheritance of the property is new along with the old. A living individual, dying, frees up space under the sun for posterity. Inert, undying matter piles up one on top of the other.

The testament passes on the relay positive feedback, promotes self-expansion of property. The family line makes property inequality all the more egregious and leads to the depletion of resources. Procreation is a guarantee of Life, then a testament is a guarantee of Death.

In 453 BC roman senate sent a commission to Athens to study the laws of Solon. The Romans, populus romanus, were in the stage of decomposition of the communal-tribal system. Internal regulators of behavior no longer worked, and external, lex public, had not yet been established. On the recommendations of the commission, the senate drew up the Code of Laws of XII tables in 451. The main thing was the introduction of money and private property.

In Russian, private property means separation, individuality as opposed to community. In the German-Romanesque specifics, it has nuance take away: a privateer is a sea robber, privative is a taking away, depriving.

In the Laws of the XII Tables, private property is called quiritarian. Quiris is a spear, quirit is a spearman. “It was very natural that the private appropriation of these Quiritarian possessions, which no other citizen was authorized to claim, implied for the occupant or captor a right of absolute ownership, and in fact the dominium quiritarium conferred the right of use and abuse, the famous jus utendi etabutendr [20].

The entire European civilization perceived the category of private property as it was introduced into Roman law. "This absolute power is even considered as the most sacred of rights, and most articles of our modern codes have been drawn up with the aim of guaranteeing the tranquil possession and regular transmission of property thus understood" [20].

This right to use, possession and disposal of was absolute in the most literal sense. The unpaid debtor was given the full power of the creditor by the court I decision. If the debtor couldn't pay off several lenders, then... Table III, 6: "On third market day the creditors shall cut shares. If they have cut more or less than their shares it shall be without prejudice" [36].

Private property is exclusive because it belongs to only one; it is absolute, because the will of the owner is not limited by anything.

Modern liberalism

Many things struck F.M. Dostoevsky at his first acquaintance with Western democracy. Liberte, ЁдаМё, Fraternite were proclaimed in France. What is liberte? Equal liberte for everyone to do whatever they want within the law. When can you do whatever you want? When you have a million. Does liberte give everyone a million? No. What is a man without a million? A man without a million does not do anything, but do anything with him [7].

The Declaration of Human and Citizen Rights proclaimed liberte, property {inviolable and sacred - Article 17), security and the right to resist oppression as the natural inalienable human rights.

The Convention decided how liberty and property should be related: “It must decide that it eliminates all restrictions and declares the most complete liberty of circulation of products" [6, P. 87]. "Property determines a person ... Whoever has no property is an isolated being, a stranger in his own country, not attached to anything" [6, P. 140]. In a decree of March 18, 1793, "the national Convention establishes the death penalty for anyone who proposes an agrarian law or other law that abolishes land, commercial and industrial property" [6, P. 80].

In the world of independence-liberte laws are dictated by selfishness. Each individual person, using his capital, "intends only his own gain; and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention" [35].

Laissez-faire, non-interference of the state in the economy, this is the liberty of circulation of goods, for which the French bourgeois revolution fought.

An open, unrestricted economic space guaranteed an unlimited increase in wealth. Clarity came only when even theorists understood that open space was just conquered colonial territories.

In 1995 David Korten predicted: "The more we increase the economic product, considering it a solution to the problem of poverty, the faster the abyss between the rich and the poor will grow and the more accelerate our movement towards final environmental collapse" [18, P. 41]. Subsequent economic processes have confirmed this. In 2010, according to the charitable organization Oxfam, 388 of the richest people owned the same property as the poorest half of humanity (3.6 billion people). By 2016, there were 62 of them. And in 2018, the 26 richest people on the planet already owned the same wealth as the 3,8 billion of the poorest.

More and more new management tools were introduced into action: mass of goods, money, bank notes, electronic surrogates.

At first, it was necessary to operate with inactive reserves of real products. Exchange multi-moves with the movement of such masses of commodities were not feasible. In addition, the correlation of the values of natural products needed unification. Kaleidoscopic barter options awaited the appearance of a mediating link, the value of which could be taken as a standard.

You can insert a third link between the two products. Matter with its own high value, stored, divisible, transportable would be suitable as money. The introduction of money led to an acceleration in capital turnover. The levers for managing economic development moved to the financial sphere.

The consumer product has been accumulated for centuries, in case of emergencies. But if in the communal world order the reserves were used to help the victims and to rescue the starving, then in the proprietary civilization the accumulated masses turned into threatening overhangs, potential avalanches. Excess stocks became a tool of violence, as Joseph's economic innovations showed.

Money overhang put into the hands of its owner a much more effective instrument of power than overhang of anyone consumer product. After all, this is not just an excess of any one necessary product, it is the total use value. If you achieve monopoly control of financial flows, and at the same time leave only cheese in a mousetrap free of charge, then is more totalitarianism in management possible? Money rules the world!

And then came a completely fateful discovery - you can put into circulation paper notes, that is, designations of values. If gold has its own value, then banknotes only declare how much precious metal you can exchange it. Producers of banknotes, money surrogates, could build a banknote overhang without any problems. Gold had to be found, mined and processed, and it is incomparably easier to make any product in a printing house. The power of the printing press took on threatening proportions.

Counterfeit money exchanged for goods firstly. This is their meaning. If you present to the exchange all the money at once, then the goods will not be enough. Of course, this doesn't work in a closed system. Inflation in the state leads to a general distrust of the monetary policy of the authorities and the financial and economic situation is getting out of control. But in an open economic space, when dollars are printed by one country and others give for them goods, there can be no inflation. The pump for transferring values from donor countries to recipient countries is working stably.

Banknotes are not yet the pinnacle of financial and technical progress. They also had to be transported in bags to all banks. For PC owners, it will be more convenient - we will send you to your personal account (a combination of numbers), another combination of numbers, this is your received or spent money. And is it difficult drawing an extra zero? Electronic money can bleed any country instantly. And if paper money ruled the planet, then the virtual dollar rules the universe.

There should be as much money as goods. When the gold equivalent was used, commodity growth was limited by the amount of gold available. But there is little gold in the earth's crust, mining is difficult and very limited. Therefore, the growth of the mass of commodities was inhibited.

When money, bank notes, electronic dollars are used, they become a means of accumulation, currency fraud and deception. They supplant to the background all other instruments of enslavement and violence. The current neoclassical, neoliberal or libertarian economics, neolibertarianism, market capitalism or market libertarianism (D. Korten) frees financial totalitarianism from any restrictions.

Excessive, in comparison with the quantity of goods, funds are the aces in the sleeve of the card sharper, they always provide a prize when put into action.

Overhangs of economic resources put pressure on a person. The surplus of goods compared to the amount of required consumption. Excess financial capital when there is more money than goods. There are more banknotes than money. There are more electronic surrogates than banknotes. And this excess of means of influence is concentrated in the hands of the private owner, giving him power.

David Korten: The financial system is increasingly functioning completely independently and on a scale that by several orders of magnitude exceeds the scale of the production sector of the economy. In August 1987, depositors on the New York Stock Exchange lost a little more than one trillion dollars in a little over two months ... One trillion dollars would be enough to feed the entire world for two years, to raise the countries of the "third world" from extreme poverty to the level of the middle class. This money can buy a thousand nuclear aircraft carriers. The global financial system has become a parasitic predator, feeding on the flesh of its master - the productive economy [19].

Why is the spirit of capitalism established in the world only with the ethics of Protestantism? - asked Max Weber. There were many manifestations of greed and selfishness before. Protestantism gave divine sanction to self-interest, elevated personal material interest to the rank of a godly system-forming factor of social development. Man has become an income-generating machine. It was Puritanism that stood at the cradle of the modern economic man. The only permitted motivation is to work, save, make money! The most important dignity of the profession is its profitability and, therefore, pleasing to God. All Christians should strive for wealth. Profit is the main goal for an entrepreneur [40]. Protestantism freed the property owner from the chimera called conscience.

And the power of the main figure in the current liberal economy, the corporation. Even Pope Innocent IV in 1245 defined the corporation as a fictitious person. Can every owner be excommunicated? Persona ficta, a legal entity, has neither soul nor conscience. There is no one to excommunicate - one name! R.Lering: in fact, the rights of a legal entity belong to those individuals who get profit from the property attributed to this fictitious person.

Once property arose as a substitution of a peculiarity, then counterfeit money, virtual dollars appeared, and the turn of a fictitious man should have reached!

David Korten: Individuals of fifty or sixty years of age win over competitors until the grave makes everyone equal. Legal entities have accumulated fortunes for centuries. Individuals pay progressive inheritance taxes several times while undying legal entities save and grow. We created a system that united corporations, but divided people and put them in a competitive relationship with each other in the interests of corporations. When the market rules, the corporation sits on the throne.

The combined transnational corporations rule any government, rewrite other people’s state laws, swallow up people's property rights and suppress the personal freedom of all members of society, except for the wealthiest. This monster creates a world that even corporate-class representatives would hardly wish to bequeathed to their children [19].

Metastases of a proprietary tumor have pierced the social fabric of humanity. Of course, civil society tried to limit interest rates without prohibiting usury, bringing them to the level of divine ones, tried to introduce mortgages in a framework acceptable to the poor, tried to crush excess profits with super taxes, everything was useless. The wealth of the multibillionaires and the poverty of the disadvantaged grew, depletion and pollution of nature threatened the existence of the biosphere, competing with the threat of a planetary social explosion.

The only way to get rid of the over-concentration of ownership is to get rid of ownership altogether.

Hellas and Rome collapsed because no one began to protect the rich, as soon as they had problems. And if then still acted the oldest technique of economics as a science of housekeeping is putting things in order by sweeping garbage into another room, then financial globalization has ruled out this possibility.

...There are two ways of personal self-realization. The first is self-affirmation on the way of competition, violence and appropriation, at the expense of the personality of the neighbor, at the expense of the society and nature. Another way - self-improvement, self-restraint and self-sacrifice in the name of humanity and nature.

Lay not up for yourself treasures upon earth, but layup treasures in heaven. Be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect, Jesus called. "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven" (Mat. 19:21).

Конфликт интересов Не указан.

Conflict of Interest None declared.

Список литературы / References

1. Антология кинизма. Философия неприятия и протеста. – М. – 1993. – 403 с.
2. Беретти Н.Н. На крайнем Северо-Востоке / Н.Н. Беретти // Записки Владивост. отдела Русского географ. общества. – Владивосток. – Т. IV (XXI). – 1929. – 88 с.
3. Бернал Дж. Наука в истории общества / Дж. Бернал. – М. – 1956. – 967 с.
4. Сьеса де Леон П. Хроника Перу / Сьеса де Леон, Педро. – 384 с.
5. Диоген Лаэртский. О жизни, учениях и изречениях знаменитых философов / Диоген Лаэртский. – М. –1979. – 524 с.
6. Документы истории Великой французской революции. – Т. 2. – 1992. – 181 с.
7. Достоевский Ф.М. Зимние заметки о летних впечатлениях / Ф.М. Достоевский. – 1863. – 81 с.
8. Фрэзер Дж. Дж. Золотая ветвь / Дж. Дж. Фрэзер. – М. – 1980. – 625 с.
9. Фромм Э. Человек для себя / Э. Фромм. – Минск. –1992. – 272 с.
10. Фромм Э. Анатомия человеческой деструктивности / Э. Фромм. М. –1998. –534 с.
11. Фроянов И.Я. Древняя Русь IX-X веков / И.Я. Фроянов. – 2012. – 1087 рр.
12. Гарсиласо де ла Вега. История государства инков / Гарсиласо де ла Вега. – 1974. – 263 с.
13. Hegel G.W. Enzyklopadie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse / G.W. Hegel. – 1991. – 560 с.
14. Герцен А.И. Русский народ и социализм / А.И. Герцен // Сочинения в 2 томах. –1986. – Т. 2. –50 с.
15. Герцен А.И. Пролегомены / А.И. Герцен // Сочинения в 2 томах. –1986. – Т. 2. – С. 118-128.
16. Юм Д. Трактат о человеческой природе / Д. Юм. – 1996. – 338 с.
17. Клибанов А.И. Народная социальная утопия в России. Период феодализма / А.И. Клибанов. – М. –1977. – 335 с.
18. Кортен Д. Развитие, ориентированное на человека / Д. Кортен // Управляемость мировым развитием: опыт и перспективы. Новосибирск. – 1995. – 203 с.
19. Кортен Д. Когда корпорации правят миром / Д. Кортен. – СПб. – 2002. – 103 с.
20. Летурно Ш. Эволюция собственности / Ш. Летурно. – М. – 2012. – 440 с.
21. Лосев А.Ф. История античной эстетики. Ранняя классика / А.Ф. Лосев. – М. – 2000. –626 с.
22. Морган Л.Г. Дома и домашняя жизнь американских индейцев / Л.Г. Морган. – Л. – 1934. – 356 с.
23. Морган Л.Г. Лига ходеносауни или ирокезов / Л.Г. Морган. – М. – 1983. – 770 с.
24. Ницше Ф. Греческое государство / Ф. Ницше // Фридрих Ницше и русская религиозная философия. –1996. – Т. 2. – 66 с.
25. Ницше Ф. По ту сторону добра и зла / Ф. Ницше // Сочинения в 2 томах. – М. – 1997. – Т. 2. – 232 с.
26. Овидий. Метаморфозы. – 1922. – 400 с.
27. Платон. Федр II Федон, Пир, Федр, Парменид. – М. – 1999. – 348 с.
28. Ренан Э. Апостолы / Э. Ренан. – СПб. – 1911– 348 с.
29. Рассел Б. Дискурс о происхождении и основе неравенства между мужчинами / Б. Рассел. – 1755. – 44 с.
30. Рассел Б. История западной философии / Б. Рассел. – 2016. – 955 с.
31. Салин Ю.С. Собственность с точки зрения нравственности / Ю.С. Салин // Экономическая жизнь Дальнего Востока. –1993. – № 1(2).

Список литературы на английском языке / References in English

1. Antologyja kinisma [Anthology of Kinism]. The philosophy of rejection and protest. - M.-1993. - 403 p. [in Russian]
2. Beretti N. N. Na krainem Severo-Vostoke [In the extreme North-East] / N. N. Beretti // Zapiski Vladivostok. department of the Russian Geographical Society. - Vladivostok. - Vol. IV (XXI). - 1929. - 88 p. [in Russian]
3. Bernal J. Nauka v istorii obshhestva [Science in the history of society] / J. Bernal. - M.-1956 – - 967 p. [in Russian]
4. Cieza de Leon P. Chroniki Peru [Chronicle of Peru] / Cieza de Leon, Pedro – - 384 p. [in Russian]
5. Diogenes Laertius. O zhizni, uchenijah i izrechenijah znamenityh filosofov [About the life, teachings and sayings of famous philosophers] / Diogenes Laertius. - M. -1979 – - 524 p. [in Russian]
6. Documenty istorii Velikoi frantzuzskoi revoljuzii [Documents of the history of the Great French Revolution]. - vol. 2. - 1992 – - 181 p. [in Russian]
7. Dostoevsky F. M. Zimnie zametki о letnich vpechatlenijach [Winter notes on summer impressions] / F. M. Dostoevsky. - 1863. - 81 p. [in Russian]
8. Fraser J. J. Zolotaja vetv' [The Golden Branch] / J. J. Fraser. - M.-1980 – - 625 p. [in Russian]
9. Fromm E. Chelovek dlja sebja [A man for himself] / E. Fromm. - Minsk. -1992 – - 272 p. [in Russian]
10. Fromm E. Anatomija chelovecheskoj destruktivnosti [Anatomy of human destructiveness] / E. Fromm. M. -1998. - 534 p. [in Russian]
11. Froyanov I. Ya. Drevnja Rus IX-Xlll vekov [Ancient Russia of the IX-X centuries] / I. Ya. Froyanov. - 2012 – - 1087 pp. [in Russian]
12. Garcilaso de la Vega. Istorija gosudarstva inkov [The history of the Inca state] / Garcilaso de la Vega. - 1974 – - 263 p. [in Russian]
13. Hegel G. W. Enzyklopadie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse [Encyclopaedia of Philosophical Sciences in outline] / G. W. Hegel. - 1991 – - 560 p. [in German]
14. Herzen A. I. Russkii narod i socialism [The Russian people and socialism] / A. I. Herzen // Essays in 2 volumes. -1986. - vol. 2. -50 p. [in Russian]
15. Herzen A. I. Prolegomena [Prolegomena] / A. I. Herzen // Essays in 2 volumes. -1986. - Vol. 2. - pp. 118-128.
16. Yum D. Traktat o chelovecheskoj prirode [A treatise on human nature] / D. Yum. - 1996. - 338 p. [in Russian]
17. Klibanov A. I. Socialnaja utopia v Rossii. Period feodalisma [Popular social utopia in Russia. The period of feudalism] / A. I. Klibanov. - M. -1977 – - 335 p. [in Russian]
18. Korten D. Razvitie, orientirovannoe na cheloveka [Human-oriented development] / D. Korten // Ustojchivoe razvitie: mat-ly k seminaru «Upravlyaemost' mirovym razvitiem: opyt i perspektivy» [Manageability of world development: experience and prospects]. Novosibirsk. - 1995 – - 203 p. [in Russian]
19. Korten D. Kogda korporacii pravjat mirom [When corporations rule the world] / D. Korten. - St. Petersburg. - 2002. - 103 p. [in Russian]
20. Letourneau Sh. Jevoljucija sobstvennosti [The evolution of property] / Sh. Letourneau. - M.-2012 – - 440 p. [in Russian]
21. Losev A. F. Istoryja antichnoi esthetici. Rannija classica [The history of ancient aesthetics. Early classics] / A. F. Losev. - M.-2000. - 626 p. [in Russian]
22. Morgan L. G. Doma i domashnjaja zhizn' amerikanskih indejcev [Houses and home life of American Indians] / L. G. Morgan – - L.-1934 – - 356 p. [in Russian]
23. Morgan L. G. Liga hodenosauni ili irokezov [The League of the Hodenosaunee or Iroquois] / L. G. Morgan. - M.-1983 – - 770 p. [in Russian]
24. Nietzsche F. Grecheskoe gosudarstvo [The Greek State] / F. Nietzsche // Friedrich Nietzsche and Russian Religious Philosophy. -1996. - Vol. 2 – - 66 p. [in Russian]
25. Nietzsche F. Po tu storonu dobra i zla [On the other side of good and evil] / F. Nietzsche // Essays in 2 volumes. - M.-1997. - Vol. 2 – - 232 p. [in Russian]
26. Ovid. Metamorphoses. - 1922. - 400 p. [in Russian]
27. Plato. Phaedrus II Phaedo, Pir, Phaedrus, Parmenides. - M.-1999 – - 348 p. [in Russian]
28. Renan E. Apostles [The Apostles] / E. Renan. - St. Petersburg. - 1911-348 p. [in Russian]
29. Russell B. Diskurs o proishozhdenii i osnove neravenstva mezhdu muzhchinami [Discourse on the origin and basis of inequality between men] / B. Russell. - 1755. - 44 p. [in Russian]
30. Russell B. Istorija zapadnoj filosofii [History of Western philosophy] / B. Russell. - 2016 – - 955 p. [in Russian]
31. Salin Yu. S. Sobstvennost s tochki zrenija nravstvennosti [Property from the point of view of morality] / Yu. S. Salin // Economicheskaja jizn Dalnego Vostoka [The economic life of the Far East]. –1993. – № 1(2). [in Russian]