Низовцев Юрий Михайлович : другие произведения.

What kind of dough is a hero sculpted of?

Самиздат: [Регистрация] [Найти] [Рейтинги] [Обсуждения] [Новинки] [Обзоры] [Помощь|Техвопросы]
Ссылки:
Школа кожевенного мастерства: сумки, ремни своими руками
 Ваша оценка:
  • Аннотация:
    Могут ли появиться герои в наше время распада общества, в котором тон задают одни проходимцы и корыстолюбцы? Быть может и не стоит героям спасать подобное общество, на место которого придет новое, где они смогут действительно развернуться? Ответ на этом вопрос можно поискать в этой статье, та как в ней показаны реальные истоки героизма и формы его проявления в разных обстоятельствах.
  
  Content
  
  Introduction.
  1. Attempts to determine the nature of heroism by thinkers of different eras.
  2. The real origins of heroism.
  3. Examples of the main types of heroes.
  3.1. Heroes of the common good.
  3.1.1. People heroes (altruists).
  3.1.2. Heroes of the idea.
  3.2. Heroes with a claim to the role of superman (antiheroes).
  4. False heroes.
  Conclusion.
  
  Introduction
  
  As a basis of heroism, almost all of its researchers put forward, oddly enough, quite superficial (external) characteristics of heroes, which, moreover, are clearly insufficient.
  Some proclaim its connection with the cosmos, others believe that the basis of heroism is intellectual, third think that the essence of heroism is charisma, fourth indicate powerful will as the true essence of heroism, fifth reveal the nature of heroism in the selfless devotion of heroes, etc.
  If you look closely at these statements, you can see that, practically, all of them are, at best, related to individual manifestations of heroism.
  Nevertheless, it makes sense, for greater clarity, to consider briefly the considerations of the most famous researchers of the nature of heroism, as well as some characteristics of the heroes mentioned by them, for subsequent analysis and criticism.
  But first, a few words about the genesis of heroism.
  The very concept of heroism has pretty much expanded and changed from antiquity to the present.
  In ancient times, between the tribes and ethnic groups there was a permanent war for resources and survival, sometimes ending in their complete destruction.
  Naturally, in order to avoid death and in order to preserve what was won, all available means were being used, including strength, courage, dedication, fearlessness, the ability to inspire and lead individual representatives of tribes and peoples.
  These were the main signs of the heroes of that time.
  With the development of culture and the advancement of civilization along the path of progress, the possibilities for the manifestation of the human spirit (self-awareness) have expanded.
  Science and technology in their development formed the concept of truth, the search for which was carried out by knowing the environment both through experimentation, and through contemplation, reflection, logical analysis and intuition.
  The emergence of morality and monotheism led to a softening of mores: ideas of mercy, beneficence, equality of all people before God, and then before the law, appeared.
  Therefore, the military mainly heroism of ancient times was naturally supplemented by the desire of individuals, in spite of everything, to the truth, as they understood it, as well as to the establishment of more just social relations, in which hostility between people, at least, should decrease, and the available goods will be distributed more or less evenly, but taking into account the merits of everyone.
  A new field of activity brought to life heroes of a different type. Despite all the obstacles in the face of the prevailing morals and rigid church institutions, they sought to prove their rightness, both in other ideas in comparison with traditional views, and in particular, on the structure of the universe - Giordano Bruno, burned at the fire - and in proposals for a new organization of society - Tommaso Campanella with his "City of the Sun", who was tortured and who were spending 27 years in prisons.
  The industrial revolution, which caused the emergence of the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, led to the collapse of feudal society, the growth of national struggle, the formation of new States on their structure and, accordingly, also to the appearance of heroes of a different type compared to the previous ones.
  They were revolutionaries who wanted to radically reorganize society in different ways, but with the same result - it must be fair and without any oppression by one person of another person. The revolutionaries believed that in this consists their social value (Bakunin). Another part of the revolutionaries led the struggle for national liberation from the oppression of the colonialists (Simon Bolivar in South America) and the formation of independent states (Giuseppe Garibaldi in Italy).
  In particular, the heroism of the fighters for the destruction of the bourgeois system consisted in the fact that, believing the reformist means of changing society were not effective, they tried to resolve the accumulated contradictions by the most radical means, which demanded self-sacrifice, courage, perseverance, fearlessness, disinterestedness, devotion to the ideals of fairness and at the same time, responsibility, as well as the ability to drag ahead those who hesitate to fight the oppressors (Rosa Luxemburg, Nestor Makhno, Che Guevara).
  As a rule, truly selfless hero-fighters for the common good suffer personal defeat - they are killed or suspended from affairs in our pragmatic world, which is so far from their idealistic impulses. Nevertheless, with their reckless aspirations, they destroy the ossified ideas of life, by their example they arouse in people a passion for change, the search for truth and justice, and they do not allow society to plunge into the swamp of stagnation and consumption.
  In addition to national heroes - fighters for the happiness of working people, such as, for example, Mahatma Gandhi, Sun Yat-sen, Jose Maria Pino Suarez, there were also such ideological fighters-heroes for the happiness of peoples as Marat, Maximilian Robespierre, Peter Kropotkin, Vladimir Lenin and Adolf Hitler who understood this happiness very not ordinary.
  In particular, both of the latter ideological and quite sincere fighters for the common good had their own and very original understanding of the happiness of mankind: Lenin proposed to create a classless, just society for all, having forced everyone to follow this idea; in his turn, Hitler wanted to eliminate from society everybody, in his opinion, the defective (inferior), who should not interfere with the development of the best (Aryans), having forced the rest to serve to the full valuable persons.
  Both of them suffered defeat. The nations, which succumbed to these attractive slogans and the charm of both pretty selfless fighters for the happiness of people were also unlucky.
  Thus, there are several types of heroes fighting for the good, happiness, and salvation of all of humanity, as well as individual ethnic groups and people: fighters against the oppressors of ordinary working people and other guardians of the common good and happiness; situational heroes, rushing in a single rush and purely voluntary in a moment of danger with the risk of life to save people in a fire, entering into deadly battles in the war in defense of the Fatherland, challenging any injustice without a shadow of doubt and regardless of the danger; as well as ideological heroes who are captured by not quite adequate ideas or even false concepts, but sincerely convinced in rightness of these ideas.. All of them, of course, more or less, but refer to themselves as altruists.
  Nevertheless, there are heroes of a different plan. They can be called, rather, self-centered heroes, or antiheroes due to the presence of some features, as well as the absence of certain features of these personalities compared to heroes of the common good. These include contempt for people, pride in themselves, which altruistic heroes do not have, and the lack of responsibility to society that is inherent in heroes of the common good, although those and others are unselfish in their intentions, sacrificial, fearless, fully aware of own mission and committed to newfound ideas.
  It must be assumed that all these properties of the personalities of heroes do not arise on their own, otherwise the heroes would meet at every step, however, they met extremely rare over the entire history of mankind, but at the same time during critical periods of history (war for the salvation of the fatherland, revolution, uprising), except of individual flag-bearers-great heroes, mass heroism of people, who were not heroes at all in the usual life, was being manifested.
  This means that there is still some other basis for heroism, and not just the purely external features of the characters' personalities indicated by its researchers.
  If we return to the anti-heroes, then these persons, just as fearless, disinterested, strong-willed, charming, persistent, valiant, seeking to overcome any difficulties and dangers without a shadow of doubt, like the altruistic heroes, play by -life not for the public good, but pursue their own goals, which rarely coincide with the interests of society, but elevate them in their own eyes, and, as they believe, in the eyes of others, flaunting their intellect, charisma and charm, although they treat ordinary people with contempt, considering them only tools for the implementation of their grandiose designs.
  They use any means to achieve their goals, the main of which is not just power and not at all material benefit, but - the achievement of greatness, which will ensure their entry into history as figures who changed the world. They strive for this goal, not paying attention to human losses.
  In this, the egocentric heroes quite agree with the heroes of the idea, who also do not consider the number of victims, but only in the course of the struggle for the people's happiness, and not for own greatness.
  Nevertheless, the egocentric heroes manage to win significant popular support thanks to clearly and enticingly formulated slogans and promises of significant changes for the better.
  Each of these egocentric heroes despises the crowd and considers oneself superior to it, not only because of own outstanding intelligence, certain talents, but also due to own willingness to sacrifice own life to achieve the desired greatness and expand influence on peoples to limitless confines, on what they do not just trip upon, but come to complete failure (Cesare Borgia, Leo Trotsky).
  Having recognized themselves as unique, ready for great achievements, these antiheroes use the resources of society not to improve the well-being of the people, but only to achieve the set goals and confirm own exceptionality, but their dreams always end in failure, even if affairs are going well at first. The hopes of the hero-egotist collapse when his followers reveal the deception, and he is deprived not only of the sympathy of these or those layers of the population, but also of the support of his comrades who also realized the illusory nature of the goals, set by this hero.
  The heroes with a claim to the role of superman believe in their exclusivity, reject the prevailing morality and value system, and thereby constitute a serious danger to any community by virtue of its charisma, power, ruthlessness, fearlessness and irresponsibility. They create their own norms and rules, which are a typical fruit of voluntarism, and are able, in search of their own "Grail", to drag many fellow tribesmen into the abyss (Russian nihilist and revolutionary Sergei Nechayev and Russian socialist-revolutionary Boris Savinkov).
  If there are heroes, then in any case there are false likenesses to them.
  These deceptive heroes can be courageous, calling to fight injustice, have an extraordinary mind, many talents, excellent organizational skills, sociability, energy, valor. But in the basis of all this is by no means sacrifice and selflessness, but the desire for a pleasant and comfortable life, the aspiration for fame, wealth and power, including in order to treat those who did not achieve these "benefits" with contempt, singling themselves into a elite of celebrities.
  As a rule, such false heroes are the fruit of the power elites of all States, who propagandize them, put monuments to them and cite them as an example in historical Chronicles (Caesar, Napoleon, Churchill and many other generals, emperors, presidents, Ministers).
  The power elite of the society of any state is not dominated by the highest consciousness, characterized by a high level of awareness of oneself as a self-valuable person with a sense of dignity.
  The low level of self-consciousness of this elite, suggesting the negative features mentioned above, leads to the dominance of natural (animal) consciousness in it, for which the main properties are dissatisfaction with the place occupied in the community and a sense of self-preservation, ensuring the desire of members of the power elite in any case not to lose the consumption of sensations, preferably the most pleasant ones, at the expense of all the others - they are absolutely not interesting for representatives of the power elite, - but nevertheless those in power understand that having lost or destroyed these pathetic in their opinion, people, they will lose the foundation of their own existence, and they are forced, with a creaking heart, to somehow interact with these people.
  Such, judging by the noted goals and features of the manifestation of consciousness, the distribution of heroes into two main groups, not forgetting, of course, and situational heroes, who are massively manifesting themselves in various kinds of disasters and incidents, saving someone or something with the risk of life.
  However, for the most part, those in power are not interested by the true heroes. They always glorified the defenders of their caste of oppressors, predators and parasites, who besides arranged the genocide of conquered or subjugated peoples, and sometimes their own citizens (Caesar, Tamerlane, Napoleon, Churchill).
  
  1. Attempts to determine the nature of heroism by thinkers of different eras.
  
  The problem of the nature of heroism due to the importance, is supposed, of this phenomenon for the development of society, attracted a number of well-known thinkers to its solution.
  The Italian enlightener, poet, scientist and philosopher Giordano Bruno was the first to try to analyze in detail the problem of heroism in the separate fundamental work "On Heroic Enthusiasm" back in the Renaissance.
  He quite adequately revealed the main features of the hero compared to other individuals.
  Bruno noted the hero"s immolation in the course overcoming obstacles and transferring suffering, the absence of fear of death and pain: "... heroically act so that you no longer perceive the fear of death and do not experience the pain of the body ... ... extinguish all suffering that could have come from any doubt, grief and sorrow" [1. Part two. Dialog first].
  Moreover, the hero is able to turn enemies into friends with his high impulse, courage, desire to act for the good of the people and with his disinterestedness, as well as turn disasters into victories: "... for people of heroic spirit everything turns into good, and they can use captivity as the fruit of great freedom. And turn defeat sometimes into a high victory" [1. Part two. Dialog first].
  The hero, according to Bruno, cannot spend time on all kinds of nonsense because of his mission, which he perfectly understands: "It is very important, of course, that time, which we can have not enough for the necessary work, no matter how carefully we saved this time, most of it is spent on things superficial, that is, cheap and shameful" [1. Part two. Dialogue second].
  The hero also does not subordinate himself to the will of fate, or only to passions, but strives for beauty, relying on the power of reason: "... not soaring under the control of unworthy fate in the snares of animal passions, but a reasonable impulse that follows the mental perception of the good and beautiful and knows what should be adapted to in pleasure..." [1. Part two. Dialogue third].
  He does not seek to fraternize with the crowd, because he understands its vices and ignorance: "Since thought aspires to the divine radiance, it avoids communication with the crowd, departs from conventional opinions; it, I say, not only and not so much moves away from the mass of people, as from the community of their efforts, opinions and utterances. After all, the danger of adopting vices and ignorance is greater, the more people you come into contact with..." [1. Part two. Dialogue first].
  The hero is always in search of the truth, not departing from the acquired ideals, neglecting the fatigue and the seemingly, by unattainability of goals: "... a thought that strives for a high one, first of all leaves care, about the crowd, taking into account that the torch neglects fatigue and is found only there, where there is a true understanding, and not where there is any understanding, the true understanding is that which is among the few, - the main and the first, and it itself is the first, main and only" [1. Part two. Dialog first]. "... if anyone seeks the true, he must rise above thoughts about bodily things" [1. Part two. Dialogue second].
  The accuracy and quite adequate coverage of the characteristics of the hero, which really give an almost complete characterization of the hero, can hardly be questioned, except that this characteristic is related to heroes of the common good (altruistic type), and not to egocentric heroes who manifest a little interest to the public good. Self-centered heroes are more attracted the underline of one's own credibility and own importance in comparison with the crowd, and only in the second - power and glory. A high assessment of oneself should be confirmed by appropriate actions that the gray mass is not capable of, as the egocentric hero believes. These actions may not be entirely adequate, but the main thing is not this, but confirmation by them of own exceptionalism, for which this hero can sacrifice both himself and other people's lives, which he does not appreciate at all.
  Bruno also tried to find out the nature of heroism, which, in his opinion, consists in the manifestation in the heroes of the divine plan of saving people through their intellect and will: "The rise occurs in the soul from the ability and push of the wings, that is, from the intellect and intellectual will through which it, of course, tunes in and strives for God as the highest good and the first truth, absolute kindness and beauty" [1. Part two. Dialog first].
  Here Bruno makes two mistakes.
  The first is that the intellect and providentiality, which he believes to be nature, or the essence of heroism, can hardly be by it, since heroes are not always smart and do not always act in accordance with God's providence.
  His second mistake consists in that he presents the effects as the essence of heroism. The hero, indeed, can rely on his intellect and follow, for example, the precepts of Christ, but many other people, not heroes at all, follow to the same. In other words, Bruno takes some manifestations of heroism for the essence of heroism.
  The British writer, historian and philosopher Thomas Carlyle, like Bruno, makes a similar mistake, believing intellectuality as the nature of heroism. Moreover, he preaches the cult of heroes: "... world history, the history of what a person has done in this world, is, in my understanding, essentially a story of great people who worked here on earth. They, these great people, were the leaders of mankind, educators, models and, in a broad sense, the creators of all that the whole mass of people generally sought to carry out what she wanted to achieve. Everything that has been done in this world represents, in essence, an external material result, the practical realization and embodiment of thoughts that belonged to great people, sent to our world" [2, p. 7].
  Based on his false conception of the essence of heroism as intellectualism, Carlyle makes the following mistake, arguing that by raising the intellectual level, that is, thanks to educating and educating - by examples of great people - any person can be made a hero:
  "A full world of heroes instead of a whole world of fools... - that's what we want! We, for our part, will put aside all that is base and false; then we may hope to be governed by nobility and truth, but not before... You and I, my friend, can in this perfectly stupid light be, each of us, not a fool, but a hero, if we shall want to" [3, p. 38-39].
  These fragments also indicate that Carlyle, generalizing excessively, confuses heroes with great people (leaders, prophets).
  Below we show by examples that heroes can be different - not only noble and highly intellectual - depending on the differences in the content of their consciousness.
  In addition, not a single person managed to completely destroy the "low and deceitful" in oneself, as well as stupidity, but, despite this, the heroes always appear from generally imperfect people, but not thanks to upbringing and intellect, but at certain periods of history, having the appropriate basis for the manifestation of their heroic qualities, and the small number of heroes during the entire history of civilization indicates that to make all heroes has not yet worked, and will not work, judging by the content of the consciousness of each person, as will be discussed below.
  David Hume and Friedrich Nietzsche, like Bruno and Carlyle, in their attempt to determine the essence of the phenomenon of heroism, alas, drew attention to its purely external signs.
  Hume stated that pride and self-esteem lie at the heart of heroism: "Everything that we call heroic valor and which we admire as greatness and exaltation of the spirit, is nothing but calm and firmly grounded pride and self-respect ..." [4, p. 416].
  Nietzsche added will to this characterization of heroes, the absence of the fear of death and the inevitable following towards a goal set, which is consistent with their obligatory pursuit of greatness: "Heroism is such a mood of a person striving for a goal beyond which he no longer counts. Heroism is a good will for absolute self-destruction ... As for the hero, I don"t have a very good opinion of him - and yet: he is the most acceptable nature of existence, especially when there is no other choice ... ... People striving for greatness are usually evil people: this is their only way to endure ourselves" [5, p. 725-726].
  Naturally, the desire for greatness, which Nietzsche's supposed hero does not measure with the own forces of just mortal person, leads him so far that he begins to think himself superhuman, and invariably crash, although Nietzsche himself was of a different opinion: he saw in this transformation the meaning of humanity's existence: "The superman - the meaning of the earth [ibid., p. 8] ... ...he (a person) is transition and perdition... How to surpass the person?" ... To the superman is predisposed my heart, he for me the first and only" [ibid., p. 207] ... The freer and stronger the individual, the more demanding his love becomes; finally, he longs to become a superman, for everything else does not satisfy his love" [ibid., p. 728].
  What makes the superman by such - this is mainly the will for power, without which development is impossible: "But wherever I find the alive, I have heard everywhere about obedience. All living things are something obeying ... In order to the weaker served to the strongest - the will of the strongest induce him for it, which wants to be master over the weaker: he cannot do without this joy ... Only where there is life, there is also will, but it is not the will to live, but - as I teach - the will to power!" [ibid., p. 82-83].
  But the superman cannot do, as F. Nietzsche believes, without the will to live, instincts, inner will, or "desire", as well as the will of passions and attractions: "... your body with its great mind: it does not say I, but it does I ... The tool and toy are feeling and mind: behind them lies yet Oneself. It also seeks through the eyes of the senses; it also listens by the ears of the spirit ... it compares, subjugates, occupies, destroys ... There is more reason in your body than in your highest wisdom ... Oneself speaks to I: Here you feel joy! ... You once had passions, and you called them evil. And now you have only the virtues: they have grown out of your passions" [ibid., p. 24-26].
  The will to life and instincts are inherent in any living organism.
  However, the inner will, or "desire," belongs in the most concentrated form to the predator.
  The will of passions and attractions cannot but be attributed for each person, but, of course, to a different extent.
  The will to force, or rather, to authority, expressed, according to Nietzsche, in the desire to subjugate another, is in fact a dominance characteristic of any living organism that always seeks to create more convenient living conditions for itself.
  This property is most pronounced among pack leaders, for example, the alpha-male monkeys. Actually, first of all, thanks to him, and not the strength, intelligence or cunning that can be found in assistants, the creature becomes a leader.
  Thus, Nietzsche"s superman is, contrary to desire of Nietzsche, not "half-saint", not "half-genius", not "creator", directing historical development in the direction he needs, not extreme individual, "absorbing" life in its extreme manifestations, surpassing a person so much how far a person surpassed the monkey, but this is just a copy of the monkey alpha-male in human form, that is, somewhat cultured.
  Nietzsche, may, have wished for a more noble higher person to appear in the future, but, alas, our desires do not always coincide with reality, and Nietzsche"s superman, judging by the above analysis, is not a noble, super-smart and hypersensitive being of the future, for whom an ordinary person is only a transitional stage from the animal, but he is only an egocentric with exacerbated desire to dominate.
  Thus, Nietzsche could not adequately determine the nature of heroism, noting only a few features of the hero, but he showed that in addition to altruistic heroes, who are responsible for their own actions for the good of society, there are heroes, albeit unselfish and sacrificial, like heroes altruists, but irresponsible, and striving to designate by their actions own genius, unpredictability, mighty will, the ability to resist any forces and, thereby, own greatness and the gigantic separation from the population which obediently to fate.
  Such egocentric heroes can also be called anti-heroes, since they don't care about the public good, although they cannot be attributed simply to strong personalities or leaders who are simply trying to rise higher in the hierarchy of society.
  Even the most valiant of strong personalities are by no means heroic. La Rochefoucauld characterized them like this: "The desire for glory, the fear of shame, the pursuit of wealth, the thirst to arrange life as conveniently and pleasantly as possible, the desire to humiliate others - this is what often lies at the basis of valor, so praised by people" [6, p. 306].
  Anti-heroes, due to the fact that they put themselves above society as demigods, despise its members for widespread utilitarianism, pettiness, fear of death, religious and domestic prejudices, possessing, however, in contrast to ordinary and even outstanding personalities, not only fearlessness, perseverance, courage, but also disinterestedness, although, unlike altruistic heroes, self-centered heroes have no incentive to sacrifice by themselves for the interests of society, but can do this to demonstrate their superiority over the crowd, they have no responsibility to society, because they do not care about the welfare of all, considering it a true good to strive for the unattainable, which is available to the chosen, and not to the crowd, which only wants to be near a good feeder.
  Nietzsche himself so marked the difference between the superman-hero and the altruist-idealist: "The opposite of the heroic ideal is the ideal of harmonious all-development - a beautiful opposite and very desirable! But this ideal is valid only for good-quality people" [5, p. 725].
  But all historical Chronicles do focus not on altruistic or egocentric heroes and not on the rather numerous situational heroes who appear in various border situations - wars, floods. fires, conflicts, etc., but these Chronicles describe the exploits and life of ostensibly heroic emperors, kings, generals, reformers, religious leaders, etc., who in the best case turn out to be to some extent useful to society, and, for the most part, by no means heroes, but their false semblance, who was so vividly and fairly characterized by La Rochefoucauld (see above).
  The German historian, philosopher and sociologist Max Weber saw the essence of heroism in charisma: "Charisma in most cases arises in extreme historical conditions, when the corresponding socio-psychological need arises. The qualities of a charismatic leader acting on a religious or socio-political field are in some cases mystified. He is considered a prophet, the chosen one, the greatest historical person, deliverer, demigod, carrying out a great mission, which ascribe with all the successes of his supporters and followers. Even obvious failures turn into his glorification (flight is regarded as salvation, any loss - as obligatory sacrifices or intrigues of enemies, ridiculous statements - as incomprehensible wisdom" [7, p. 308].
  Weber believed that charismatic domination, including heroism in general, resists to other types of domination, because it stands out for its dedication, by the contraposition to routine [8, p. 263].
  If we mean by charisma (in Greek, "mercy") authority, sociability, the ability to convince the crowd of the need to achieve own goals, then Weber believes that this property underlies both domination and heroism.
  Weber's similar view of this problem follows from his General approach to solving problems in sociology.
  He interprets any human action in society as a subjective relationship between individuals, based on the understanding of the meanings and goals that determine their actions, that is, understanding a certain event [8, chapter 1].
  This approach to the multi-sided problem of heroism quite naturally leads Weber to single out as the essence of heroism one of its purely external manifestations, although one of the most impressive in its effect on the crowd.
  The fallacy of this approach can be seen from the fact that charisma is inherent in many personalities who cannot be attributed to heroes (Timur, Mao Zedong, Emperor Peter I of Russia), although outwardly they may resemble them, since they have many properties of heroes, including charisma, but, unlike true heroes, they lack signs such as disinterestedness and immolation, but there is passion for power and vanitу.
  Therefore, Weber by the adequacy of determining the nature of heroism is as far away as his predecessors.
  In turn, the Russian philosopher Sergey Bulgakov represented the essence of heroism in a completely different way from the thinkers mentioned above: "Heroism seeks to save humanity by its own forces and, moreover, by external means; hence the exceptional assessment of heroic deeds, to the maximum extent embodying the program of maximalism. It is necessary to move something, to accomplish something beyond strength, and at the same time give up the most precious thing, your life - such is the commandment of heroism. To become a hero, and together with it, a savior of mankind can thanks to a heroic deed, far beyond the bounds of ordinary duty. This dream, living in soul of the exponent of intelligentsia, although only feasible for units, serves as a general scale in judgments, a criterion for life's assessments. To commit such act is also unusually difficult, because it requires overcoming the strongest instincts of attachment to life and fear, and it is unusually simple, because it requires volitional effort for a relatively short period of time, and the implied or expected results are incredibly considerable" [9].
  Bulgakov believed that the role of the hero, which he saw in the salvation of mankind, should be played by representatives of the intelligentsia, as the most educated and cultural members of society, noting that few can be a hero, since heroism, in particular, "requires overcoming the strongest instincts of attachment to life and fear". Therefore, Bulgakov appeals to all representatives of the intelligentsia, making rather transparent hint that only mass involvement in the commission of extraordinary acts (maximalism) can select the true heroes from this cultural layer, and these extraordinary acts he designated in the title of his article as selfless devotion (asceticism).
  Of course, Bulgakov is right in that the role of the few altruistic heroes - he means only them - is suitable for people who understand what needs to be done to save humanity, that is, they are sufficiently educated and not stupid, possessing along with that by the qualities of sacrifice, responsibility and fearlessness.
  However, it is possible and necessary to save not only humanity, and, therefore, not only representatives of the intelligentsia can provide, for example, mass heroism during times of various cataclysms.
  Bulgakov also did not identify other types of heroes except for altruists, and therefore, the essence of heroism has remained secret for him, just like for the thinkers already mentioned above, since they all limited their efforts to find the nature of heroism only by the external manifestations of consciousness, such like strong will, sacrifice, disinterestedness, self-esteem, charisma, intellect, pride, etc.
  Modern psychology represented by Vladimir Shadrikov, highlighting such manifestations of human consciousness as sacrifice and egoism, defines the nature of heroism as the victory of sacrifice over egoism, which few are capable of: "Conscious sacrifice in the name of others, as a rule, of the members of a kind, and stands at the origins of spirituality. Heroism is at the forefront of spirituality. And fundamentally important here is not that a person sacrifices himself in the name of the clan, but that he does it consciously. And sacrifice is now becoming available to everyone. Everyone can be elevated to a spiritual act, but not everyone is being elevated. Consciousness, exalting a person, at the same time aggravates his egoism, uniting with the instinct of preserving individuals (preserving life). A situation of the struggle of motives is formed: to sacrifice oneself in the name of others or to save oneself. The poetization of heroic acts, their consolidation in myths and traditions contributes to the formation of spirituality (heroism and sacrifice) as a conscious form of behavior" [10].
  It is difficult to argue with the fact that sacrifice in heroes prevails over egoism, but sacrifice is mostly associated with altruistic human aspirations, and heroes are not always altruists. Sacrifice is also by no means the only characteristic of the hero's personality.
  In addition, the struggle of sacrifice with egoism does not determine the nature of heroism even of altruistic heroes, since sacrifice itself is only an external manifestation of heroism, and not its essence.
  N. K. Roerich., E. I. Roerich and L. V. Shaposhnikova suggested that the essence of true heroism lies in the togetherness of the hero with Cosmos.
  In her diaries, Elena Roerich makes it clear that the hero"s thought contains cosmic creativity, while the hero"s desires promote evolution [11. Part 2. ј 797].
  Helena Roerich believes that a person is connected with beingness of Cosmos and the processes occurring in it, through one of the aspects of the Universal Energy - own internal fire. Psychic energy, spirit, human thought is a manifestation of man"s fiery nature, and the accumulation of psychic energy develops his moral qualities: "Mental energy is love and aspiration ... ... The development of a constant, indestructible striving for perfection, towards light in all manifestations will be by the development of this vital energy" [12, p. 148].
  Heroic deeds, therefore, suggest a kind of peak of the psychic energy of a person.
  Lyudmila Shaposhnikova brings a certain concretization to these ideas about the role of the hero in cosmic evolution: "The spirit personified in a certain hero is the driving force that breaks through the energy corridors of further spiritualization of earth matter. Through the hero and his feat cosmic lightning strikes a substance, which promotes human thinking and consciousness and creates an opportunity for humanity to take a certain evolutionary height" [13, p 378].
  Shaposhnikova believes that heroism is a manifestation of the meta-historical action of some Great Teachers of humanity, who are in a certain Cosmos. This creativity of the subjects of cosmic evolution, manifested primarily in the field of culture as a self-organizing system of the spirit, is the directed energy impact of a higher system on humanity, giving birth to heroes [14, p. 54].
  Thus, the authors of the proposed concept consider the appearance of heroes as the result of cosmic evolution, and heroes help at a certain stage of development of society by their example to rise even higher in the course of evolutionary development: "Cosmic energy, as an ongoing creative impulse, will give an exceptional life there, where aspiration is manifested. If a person realized the great mutual involvement, then he would more often direct his energy towards cosmic creativity. After all, the call is established as a great magnet" [11. Part 1. ј 55].
  I must say that the concept of unity of heroes with Cosmos has a clearly religious connotation, proposing to take on faith certain postulates that reflect something external and completely unknown to the authors of this concept. They put this absolutely fantastic at the base of heroism, artificially ensoul some Cosmos, whereas only the living beings are ensoul.
  The authors of this concept represent outer space as an energy source of heroism in the form of the Great Teachers of mankind (subjects of cosmic evolution), who direct mankind over and over again to higher stages of evolution under the influence of the example of heroes, in who they create a peak of psychic energy that determines the heroic deeds.
  Such external Cosmos of the Great Teachers of mankind, existing only in the imagination of the authors of this concept, of course, can have no relation to the essence of heroism, which can only be related to the internal content of human consciousness.
  In fact, a person is a self-active being who is aware of both himself and his activity, gradually developing in generations. That is, a person is controlled by his own consciousness, which does not have any outsider - cosmic or similar of it influence. Not only that, the activity of both a person and his communities, as well as all living creatures that are finite entities, in contrast to their consciousness, not only develops a general (single) infinite consciousness discretely through mortal beings, but also makes consciousness by eternal and keeps whole Creation in a stable state of eternal development.
  In our opinion, in addition to individual forms of consciousness in living beings, a single consciousness also functions, which accumulates in the databases of a holographic projection of an infinity out of time, representing a single consciousness, the results of the activities of all living beings.
  Along with that, a single consciousness is able to control the functioning of each organism, ensuring its viability for a certain period of time thanks to its own holographic basis, in which, like in any hologram, each section of it repeats the whole (everything in each part), due to which, in particular, the single consciousness of the hologram does not lose unity with each of individual forms of consciousness in their infinite totality.
  Therefore, a single-plural consciousness can, in its single quality, provide with the help of this unity a connection with each individual consciousness in a living being, organizing its functioning through the genome.
  The hologram itself is a high-frequency formation as a product of the overlay of several coherent waves, giving a stationary interference picture, since the phase difference of the waves does not change.
  The holographic basis of beingness is described in more detail in my work on the role of consciousness in beingness and the structure of Creation as a whole [see, for example, 15. Chapter 2].
  Nevertheless, the authors of the concept of the unity of the hero with the cosmos rightly noted that, besides man and his communities, there is a certain structure, which they designated as Cosmos. This structure, but in a completely different form, is really involved in the development, but not so much of a person and humanity, which is finite is in its civilizations, like human life, but in the form of a hologram, which is a projection of an infinity out of time. The interaction of beingness (current reality) and an infinity out of time through its holographic projection creates, as a result, the infinite development of consciousness, which is eternal, but manifests itself sequentially and discretely only through mortal beings.
  The authors of the hero"s unity with the cosmos also quite adequately noted a certain property of a person, which, however, they mistakenly called psychic energy.
  In fact, the main thing in a person is not some vague psychic energy or the equally far-fetched energy of passionarity, which L. N. Gumilyov points to, which not clearly where came from, but the human consciousness, thanks to which he possesses inescapable activity and is capable of developing both his own organism and his own consciousness, that is ensured by the main and all understandable state of consciousness - his enduring dissatisfaction, without which a person loses aspiration towards something, and turns oneself into a living corpse, which is incompatible with development.
  More details about the main feature of consciousness - its perpetual dissatisfaction, as well as the passionarity of L. N. Gumilyov are described in my work "The driving force and source of development of the person and his communities" [16. Part 3, sections 2, 4].
  In a hero, dissatisfaction of his consciousness in both its forms - animal (natural) consciousness and self-consciousness - manifests itself very specifically, giving birth to heroes of different types, while the authors of the concept of the unity of the hero and Cosmos point to only one type of hero-altruistic.
  The problem of the connection between the dissatisfaction of both forms of consciousness with heroism through certain external manifestations of this property of consciousness and understanding by the hero of his mission, which indicate a certain interaction of dissatisfaction of the natural consciousness and dissatisfaction of self-consciousness, is disclosed in the next chapter.
  
  2. The real origins of heroism.
  
  First, we note that the signs of heroism which are accepted by its researchers for the true nature (essence) of heroism fall into two categories.
  One includes, in fact, the purely external characteristics of the personality of the heroes, such as charisma, courage, enthusiasm, self-esteem, pride, strong will and intellectuality.
  These features, as we show below, are not related to the essence of heroism, but are only certain manifestations of consciousness. Their external character can be seen from a comparison of true heroes and false heroes, since these signs are usually inherent in both heroes and false heroes (see below).
  The fact that these features of a heroic personality are properties of each altruist hero is not in doubt, but they can be, with some exceptions, features of not heroic personalities, that is, individuals interested primarily in the pursuit of fame, power, honors and wealth, but sometimes those who conceive and achieve these goals really do something extraordinary: they conquer other peoples, establish empires, make coups and revolutions, etc. due to own talents, good intelligence, ability to lead people along, determination, fearlessness and ruthlessness.
  The actions of the altruistic heroes are disinterested, sacrificial and responsible precisely because they set themselves higher goals: the good of the people, the independence of the country, the fight against the oppressors, the protection of the disadvantaged; the desire for harmonization of society, justice for all, etc. at the same time, another part of the heroes - egocentric type, who therefore can be called antiheroes, - strives primarily not to the good of society, but to give oneself a status of extraordinary significance and greatness by rebellion against fate.
  Another sign of heroism, which is accepted by its researchers (see above) for the true nature of heroism, is the unity of the hero with the cosmos.
  In fact, man has only that relation to cosmos, if, of course, we consider it as an self-active living creature, that cosmos, indeed, is the infrastructure for the existence of living beings, being just the outer shell, necessary for the functioning of inhabited planets.
  From the historical excursion on the nature of heroism, it can be seen that reducing the essence of heroism to any of these signs or even to their totality is clearly insufficient and superficial, that is, it does not directly relate to its origins.
  Obviously, the essence of heroism is different, but to determine it, we must first find the main thing that makes a primate by a creature that is able to realize own existence in time and thereby begin to change everything around quite consciously, consistently setting goals oneself goals as well as solving related with them tasks.
  The activity of living creatures, including humans, in contrast to other objects of beingness, which are subjected only to natural laws: conservation laws, the law of non-decreasing entropy Newton"s laws, etc., must be conscious, and the presence of consciousness in them, in fact, is the only difference between living things from other objects of being. Otherwise, the activity of living beings would have no difference with the rotation of the remaining objects of being, but we do not observe this.
  Consciousness makes a person and, in general, all living beings not stand still - to develop, while it sensitively reacts to the circumstances of life and the environment, manifesting itself in a person's feelings, thoughts and actions in two ways: on the one hand, forcing him not to lose in any case activity, on the other hand, sharply increasing or decreasing activity under a certain set of circumstances, both natural and man-made, as well as keeping activity at a certain level in case of invariable circumstances of life.
  If we manage to determine the underlying property of consciousness that affects a person"s activity, then his fluctuations should somehow reflect on the degree of initiative, enterprise, responsibility, expression of will and other external manifestations of human life and the activity of human communities, as well as, in general - on the life of other living creatures, making them either dynamically functioning, or hibernate like a bear in winter, that is, passive.
  All human life, all beingness, the whole Creation is an eternal manifestation of the active or alive among the passive, that is, inanimate objects [17. Ch. 1.2].
  Thus. the rudimentary (instinctive) state of consciousness of a living being is due to its enduring own activity, without which it simply could not be considered alive, and this subconscious activity manifests in indefatigable dissatisfaction oneself among things and other living creatures in dynamics, without which any living creature would lose aspiration to change its existence for the better, that is, more profitable - pleasant, safe and comfortable - side, having lapsed into stagnation, which always leads to degeneration and death.
  The space of such dissatisfaction is expanding in a person by the awareness of this feeling (the main property of consciousness), manifesting itself already in his conscious activity, which comes down to the processes of destruction and creation in everything that surrounds him.
  This dissatisfaction, which is now inherent only in the human consciousness in its self-consciousness, but which does not go anywhere from its lowest (natural) consciousness, but by no means will and passionarity, gives impetus to activity for any living creature, appearing in conscious and subconscious actions to overcome the constant resistance of the environment.
  By the lowest (animal or natural) consciousness of a person, liberty or the action of dissatisfaction manifests itself instinctively, that is, without an explicit goal - by trial and error, in his desire for survival, reproduction, convenience, dominance and safety.
  Nevertheless, the basis of any aspirations and decisions of natural consciousness in a living being is the dissatisfaction of his consciousness, since alive or an active being strives away from what it has, to where, as it suggests by sensations, where is better for it than in this moment, that is, more pleasant and profitable: heartier, warmer, safer, etc. But, how it is known - relying on sensations cannot always be done, which, for example, is proved by regular locust flights to the desert or migration of fish schools directly into the mouth of predators for their own dying.
  By the highest consciousness (self-consciousness) liberty, or the action of dissatisfaction of consciousness is manifested in aspiration for the intended goal. This part of consciousness is already able to qualify, that is, to understand at least the visible restrictions on a person"s aspirations for the set goals as bondage, and the liberation from these restrictions as freedom "from", calling it, therefore, independence, which can be achieved by perseverance in a certain direction.
  In addition, a person acquires the ability to choose from a certain set of things that are more appropriate to his interests both at the moment and for the future. In other words, thanks to the dissatisfaction of a person"s self-awareness, he gains the ability to regulate and plan his life the way he wants, but taking into account the environment, and evaluating in advance the consequences of the planned actions, that is, understanding that he will have to answer in front of oneself as well as in front of own surrounding for these actions.
  However, this significant addition in the consciousness of a living being in the form of self-awareness, which allows him to comprehend himself in relations with the community and, as it seems, to act reasonably and responsibly, does not in the least reduce the actions of the lower (animal) consciousness, which at any moment can begin to block which whatever the aspirations of a highest consciousness, if it only seems to him that they contradict the survival of a given person, or even if they can worsen the quality of his life, or, conversely, when the lower consciousness of a person accumulates his own dissatisfaction with current circumstances up to such extent (not enough food, tired of cold and harmful neighbors), at which a person or the whole community will tend to go where the horizon of the best in the opinion of the lowest consciousness flickers, which is not able to predict on a long term, but is able, with its sufficient dissatisfaction, to push aside the highest consciousness, and to force the community to migrate to an unsuitable place or to lead the whole people to a hopeless war with neighbors for a better share, in which it will die completely.
  Nevertheless, a person who is a natural consciousness and self-consciousness, combined in the form of a body is a real manifestation of the action of liberty in both instinctive and conscious aspirations. The intrinsic contradictoriness of these aspirations and, at the same time, their fusion in the basis does not make it possible to unequivocally distribute the human actions into purely conscious and purely instinctive ones. Therefore, it is impossible to clearly predict the actions of any person or predestine them, and in this he is also free.
  Thereby, the free manifestations of a person, that is, his advancement, occur through both instinctive and conscious actions, which are based on the inescapable dissatisfaction with oneself and own surrounding. Another thing is the extent to which this fundamental property of activity is manifested both in the sphere of the lowest (animal) consciousness and within the boundaries of higher consciousness (self-consciousness).
  Overfilling a person with dissatisfaction, in particular, with his place in society, for example, in the form of an unsatisfied desire for power, which is in the sphere of animal consciousness, leads him to forget all moral standards and to crush by any means his opponents, who also seek into power.
  Overfilling a person with dissatisfaction with a place in life from the position of the most effective defense of his own dignity, dignity of his fatherland from unrighteous encroachment of enemies, remained in vain in the ordinary life, and this is the sphere of self-consciousness, makes the humble accountant to show miracles of heroism in war, where this property of consciousness allows him, unlike everyday life, turn around like a professional military did not dream about.
  This dissatisfaction of consciousness, which causes the desire for the new, is being fed the incessant and changing information flows that permeate the entire human being, which he can interpret, having self-consciousness, in different ways, to the extent of his understanding. Thereby, each person inevitably executes all time the hesitations from a habit, or an established way of life, to the destruction of order created by considerable labor, to liberation from it. Having established one and having joined it, sooner or later he begins weary of this order and decides to change it no matter how his external conservative nature resists this.
  Each person, realizing his own mortality, is forced to determine for oneself the attitude to death - first of all, how afraid he is of it, and what could be worse for him than death.
  Practice has shown that the vast majority of people clings in every way to life, even understanding the inevitability of the near end.
  This fact indicates the affinity of their consciousness to the consciousness of animals, which, although do not recognize themselves as personalities and do not know anything about death, but, possessing the ability to feel, are not able voluntarily to abandon sensations ever.
  This means that most people are not able voluntarily to take place as fearless individuals in a usual environment, that is, without cataclysms, during which the value of life is lost. In other words, the animal component (limbic in the brain or natural in consciousness) predominates in their consciousness, and the personal component of consciousness - self-awareness - is at a relatively low level, at which the dissatisfaction of human self-consciousness is focused on changes in its environment with the purpose of consumption for the most part material goods and entertainment, that is, his goals coincide with aspirations of the animal consciousness, wishing to bring sensations to the most pleasant, as well as to survive by any means, in particular, denying sacrifice, with the exception of special cases that were inherited still from animals.
  This, their sort, instinctive heroism of animals is manifested in critical situations of threat of attack on their cubs, in which, for example, female birds lead predators away from the nest away with a high probability of falling into jaws of predators.
  Similar threat, which should be eliminated for the sake of saving offspring, and therefore of the whole kind, arises during wars, earthquakes, etc., causing both genuine mass heroism and awakening to life individual great heroes who perform amazing feats that they themselves and could not have previously assumed, since they were engaged in the most ordinary work of mechanics, doctors, teachers, etc.
  These heroes can be called the situational, since they appear only in critical situations, returning to normal life with their elimination, while other heroes always seek and often find a field for the application of their exploits, only these exploits can be not only in defense of the fatherland or in the good of the people (the heroes-altruists), but also for the sake of their own exaltation (the unselfish heroes with claims to the role of superman).
  Nevertheless, the degree of dissatisfaction as well as the external manifestations of both self-consciousness and animal consciousness are not the same, distributing people into certain groups according to their behavior [16. Part 3, section 4], and the main of these groups is the group of so-called inhabitants, more accurately, philistines, comprising from 80 to 90% of the population.
  The weak development of self-consciousness and equally the weak manifestation of the lowest consciousness (low level of dissatisfaction of consciousness in both cases), which are in a balanced state, characterize the basic group of any communities. All members of this group are guided generally by own mind and experience: they are occupied by themselves as well as own wellbeing, and do not aspire to either "high" or "low" goals, being limited to the desire to a problemless and well-fed life, in which trouble is desirable to see only on the monitor screen. The philistines do not experience the aspiration to new due to own efforts, trying to obtain more comfortable state in life from a position of simple acquisition and consumption of benefits.
  Therefore, a relatively rare exception is individuals who despise well-being and are not afraid of death, but not because of stupidity and not because of circumstances, but with the understanding that there is something higher or worse than death, that each of them represents in its own way, depending on the development of own personality, that is, the development of self-consciousness.
  For them, covetousness is laughable and absurd. The various goods, honors and glory are also of little concern to them. By the way, they differ exactly these properties from most generally recognized heroes, who in fact are simply fake, even celebrities such as Caesar or Napoleon, whom, in particular, Nietzsche considered the closest persons to superhuman, but, nevertheless. did not classify them as such, realizing, however, that the impudence, ruthlessness, avarice, and self-interest of these characters of the story are incompatible with heroism.
  True heroes, the main features of which are the awareness of their great mission, selflessness, sacrifice and devotion to the found ideals, are interested in other values.
  Some - the heroes-altruists - are worried about global injustice, and they want to restore fairness so that everyone lives well and are as brave and noble fighters for justice as they themselves (Giuseppe Garibaldi); others want to free their people from oppression by foreigners (Jeanne d"Arc); still others dream of eliminating the state, which divides persons into estates or classes, preventing, as they believe, people from living in friendship and developing harmoniously ( ideologist of anarchism Peter Kropotkin).
  But there are those who, on the contrary, want to establish such order in States, in order to there are only the best, or full-fledged citizens, which, as productive units of society, are capable of ensuring the development and real prosperity of the whole society. But various kinds of the inferior individuals, more accurately, the defective (underdeveloped, sick, beggars, criminals, lumpen-proletariat and racially unsuitable for development) to remove out of society, having made part of them by servants, and the rest, as unproductive or harmful elements, simply to decimate, ensuring those who remained the permanent happiness and satisfaction with life (Adolf Hitler).
  Heroes- egocentrics are interested by society only as an arena for achieving own farfetched goals, which, since these goals contradict the real interests of society, turn out to be illusory.
  Some of these egocentric heroes want to rise above the crowd to an unattainable height for all others by achieving goals that will veer the world on new rails, but these rails, as it turns out later, lead to a dead end, since the choice of clearly utopian goals was dictated not in the interests of society,
  but for one"s own elevation above it due to short-sighted, which is characteristic of this type of heroes, who are mainly self-oriented (Leo Trotsky), despite the fact that these egocentric heroes have many talents, strong will and the ability to resist any forces and circumstances to the end, emphasizing their own greatness and gigantic margin from the population, resigned to fate.
  Other heroes-egocentrics who want to prove to themselves and others their exceptionalism by attaining on their own the sole domination of the entire civilized ecumenical community, get disappointed when achieving this goal, since they have nowhere to go farther and the rest of own life they are in despondency (Alexander the Great), not finding due to the narrowness own consciousness other ways to embody the dissatisfaction of one"s self-consciousness.
  Thus, from the understanding of own role as a kind of unselfish saviors of the fatherland, people or all humanity in critical periods, the heroism of the common good (altruistic type) arises, the reasons for which may be different, but its nature, or essence is always the same: the highest level of self-consciousness in its dissatisfaction with the situation in own surrounding or the whole society, from which comes compassion for people, selflessness, responsibility and nobility, reflecting, in particular, the understanding of the impossibility to let the elimination of certain cultural values belonging to the common commons or, conversely, not to enable to impede to the emergence of new values, which, in the opinion of this personalities will lead all or chosen ones to good, how this heroic personality understands this good.
  Along with that, the degree of dissatisfaction of the natural consciousness with the situation surrounded by the altruistic hero is such that it allows one to sacrifice a sense of self-preservation due to an aggravated sensation, for example, the loss of stability of the surrounding, which should be restored for posterity even at the cost of own lives.
  Such heroes of the common good, in self-consciousness who the private in a certain period coincides with the common, become popular, although among them there are heroes limited by the idea that captured them (charismatic Vladimir Lenin), which looked attractive in the eyes of the majority, but ultimately turned out to be utopian, and just situational heroes (Russian soldier Alexander Matrosov, who covered dot's embrasure with his chest, saving from death of a chain of comrades, who were going on the attack at the fascist invaders).
  The main soil for such altruistic heroes is a stratum of reasonably well-educated and opposition-minded the informal intellectuals, in whom dissatisfaction of self-consciousness with the state of society and the actions of the authorities reaches a value close to maximum, combined with a rather low degree of dissatisfaction of animal consciousness with material goods, the consumption of which is inferior to consumption of values which cognition and culture give.
  The difference between the self-consciousness of altruistic heroes and the self-awareness of ordinary informal intellectuals consists in the amplification up to the maximum possible values their dissatisfaction with the state of social relations, coinciding with a significant decrease in the dissatisfaction of their natural consciousness, which affects the weakening desire for survival and consumption of material goods, that allows these individuals fearlessly often fight hopelessly against ruthless enemies, try to overcome the insurmountable, fiercely defend the old, but good traditions, or, on the contrary, with irresistible impulse to introduce new values that they consider necessary at the moment for society.
  Outwardly, this difference between ordinary informal intellectuals and altruistic heroes is expressed in their sincere permanent unselfishness, contempt for death, and understanding of own noble mission, determination, perseverance, devotion to the ideals of justice, as they understand them, a sense of high responsibility for the success of any deed, uncompromising communication with enemies and obligatory charisma, that is, the ability to come to the fore and lead the masses in any circumstances; besides, in their self-consciousness there is no place for ambition and power-hungry.
  The heroes of the idea, aimed, as it seems to them, for the benefit of society, are not much different from the altruistic heroes, but their self-consciousness in its dissatisfaction by own surrounding is limited by the framework of the idea that mastered by them, and therefore, they lose to a large extent compassion for specific persons, since the heroes of the idea operate with large human flows for achievement of the set goal-good.
  In addition, the globality of goals leads the heroes of the idea to personify themselves in the form of aspiration to be highlighted, in which they are supported by an animal consciousness, striving, whenever possible, to dominate, partially destroying the nobility in behavior and responsibility for the fate of those, who trusted themselves to them, and the heroes of the idea abandon them into the "furnace" of their intentions, which consist in providing society with all possible benefits in a short time.
  In the case of a certain decrease in the level of self-consciousness from the maximum possible with a turn of its dissatisfaction with the position of people in society towards the side of dissatisfaction with the attitude of society towards oneself, for which a hero with a claim to the role of a superman could do a lot thanks to of his exclusivity, indeed, often justified, because just like the heroes of the common good, these heroes with inescapable love for themselves yet are independent, have a strong will, are fearless, brave, smart, decisive, unselfish, believe in themselves, go to the end, are afraid of nothing and nobody, as well as they are able to captivate masses (charismatic), their judgments are timely and accurate, they have certain experience, professional skills, and at least basic education, but these egocentric heroes are not interested in society, which they see as a collection of small-minded people with primitive interests. Moreover, they despise these pathetic characters of everyday life with their lowest consumer demands and do not consider themselves responsible to such an insignificant breed, although they are not averse to using it for their own purposes.
  However, they themselves are by no means visionaries, and they lack the understanding that manipulating society for their own goals, which are quite divorced from real life, is at least unreasonable, albeit spectacular, which ultimately leads them and the peoples, which have believed to these heroes, to the collapse.
  But similar antihero has long been disappointed in these mentally and emotionally underdeveloped and weak-willed day laborers, who can only complain about life, moan, desire low-level shows, eat in three throats and collect, if possible, all kinds of badges and medals. Therefore, he wants, using the resources of society, to accomplish the incredible and climb to the height of a demigod, to force everyone to look at himself with never-ending gratitude and sincere love, condescendingly accepting this admiration, confirming own faith in himself as a superman or, at least, a person not from this primitive world.
  In this opinion the egocentric hero is supported by a sufficiently high level of animal consciousness, whose dissatisfaction is reflected in the desire to dominate in his own surrounding at the expense of the actual loss of a sense of self-preservation, a significant decrease in which is the cause of contempt for the death of this hero.
  That is, the egoism of the animal consciousness in the form of the increased dominance supports its opinion of its own merits in comparison with the crowd, putting above plebs, and the heroism of such egocentric comes down mainly to demonstrating by any means, including fearlessness, one's own significance to the public - not for the sake of a real solution of urgent problems in the interests of the people, but for using these problems so that everyone convinced of his greatness, genius and uniqueness.
  In other words, sufficiently high level of self-consciousness and not bad intellect allow them to comprehend both their own significance and the essence of urgent social problems, but under the pressure of high degree of dominance of own animal consciousness, these egocentric heroes begin under the pretext of solving pressing problems to satisfy the consciousness of their own exclusivity by striving for various kinds of fantasies, such as recognizing themselves as standing above everybody as a pointing guidance for them.
  Thus, all the superhuman aspirations of such heroes despising death, but trying to jump above their own growth not only at their own expense, but also using the resources of their own surrounding to achieve chimerical goals, are always focused only on themselves by the content of the goals, they set, presupposing separation from the crowd not so much by seizing power, but by raising oneself in one"s own eyes, and therefore having in mind not a public or purely personal good, but opposing oneself to all those around with their risky and often illogical actions, but with bravado and narcissism in any danger, even if it threatens inevitable death.
  The main soil for such egocentric heroes is a stratum of creative people in whom dissatisfaction of self-consciousness by the state of society reaches a high level, combined with an even higher degree of dissatisfaction of animal consciousness with the material benefits available.
  In other words, there are individuals, always crowded with deep feeling of dissatisfaction in relation to their environment, which comes to them from the lowest consciousness in its aspiration to creation of big conveniences to existence. However, this feeling is combined with their highest consciousness, and its dissatisfaction with insufficient public comfort, development of science and art, reaching high degree, demands to extend achievements of a civilization and culture to all.
  But, at this, the lowest consciousness dominates, because the activity of these individuals is manifested mostly instinctively, without much reflections, with a minimum of reasonableness, while giving, nevertheless, the most creative persons from all living.
  This category of any community - a kind of "reckless persons" - prefers non-standard life situations owing to rejection of some formal-logical approaches to life - such a life for them is boring and meaningless, like working on a conveyor for tightening nuts.
  They do not love reasoning, logical constructions, try to avoid analytical and synthetic work, hate the actions according to pragmatic calculations; at the same time, they, as a rule, - at all not workaholics.
  Therefore, the target programs of self-consciousness in combination with programs of the lowest consciousness can be applied by the reckless beings with great success, if, of course, these beings are capable to combine so contradictory forms of consciousness, for fast and resolute change of a situation in favor of the conceived.
  In other words, they prefer not the long-term reflections, not systematization of the facts and phenomena, i.e. not rational actions, but actions spontaneous, or actions at which the goal can be achieved for one-stage as if instinctively though, of course, they should work beforehand in acquisition of craft skills and gain experience.
  Exactly such people make discoveries, create masterpieces of poetry, painting, inventions, they become by the outstanding commanders. That is their activity is manifested generally in the creative scope, which attracts them at all not with a position of consumption of some benefits and goods - they are interested in the process.
  The difference between the self-consciousness of antiheroes and the self-consciousness of creative people (creators) consists in the turn of dissatisfaction of self-consciousness of antiheroes towards identifying the shortcomings of this social environment not to really eliminate them, but for exalting own person, coinciding in this respect with the increased dissatisfaction of the animal consciousness with the position of its carrier in own surrounding, hat is, a high degree of dominance compared to other individuals, due to a weakening desire for survival and consumption of material goods, while creative persons are not satisfied with the state of social comfort and seek to improve this comfort by development of science, technology and art.
  Outwardly, this difference between self-centered heroes with a claim to the role of the superman and the creative people is expressed in the sincere unselfishness of these anti-heroes, their contempt for death, pride by themselves, determination, perseverance, strong will, charisma, thanks to which they come to the fore and lead the masses upon themselves to any circumstances, lack of ambition, and along with that - in contempt for people, lack of nobility and responsibility towards society, as well as setting goals before themselves, which can show their greatness and originality, despite the very likely unattainability of these goals, but about it they are not able to think or try not to think.
  Egocentric heroes, breaking away from society, and, in fact, parasitize it, consider by the true value the good only for the chosen, believing all others to be a stupid and needy crowd, a gray mass that cannot rise above itself, and which can only be used to achieve goals of anti-heroes, exalting of own persons without special basis for it.
  History has clearly shown the utopianism of their goals, that is, the obligatory collapse of all their undertakings precisely because of the dropout of these goals from the framework of the general civilizational trend, aimed at the development of both individual and mass consciousness.
  These altruistic and egocentric heroes are pulled together by their limitation by certain prejudices, self-confidence, and hope for a favorable outcome of their own actions, as well as unselfishness, sacrifice, awareness of their great mission in the pursuit of good, how the hero understands this good, or towards great goals, loyalty to newfound ideals and contempt for those in power.
  This limitation contributes to their heroism, since they do not think about the long-term consequences of their actions, considering them to be correct and timely, although they, saving, surprising or outraging, as a rule, have little effect on the growth of public welfare and never bring peoples to harmony, and the heroes themselves do not seek to own prosperity of any kind, which causes them just boredom.
  On the other hand, the limited character of the heroes does not allow them to think about the fact that they, for example, as disinterested altruists, only and do, that correct the mistakes of the rather stupid those in power that led to disaster, or they, as egocentrics, put themselves in the position of outcasts in moral attitude leading to the collapse of the individual.
  However, heroes of any type never act under the pressure of anyone else - they, as volunteers, are always independent in their actions, and their heroism is reflected in the fact that they do not deny themselves an attempt to resolve the insoluble and to fulfill the unrealizable not by unreasonableness, but quite consciously, coming, for example, in military art - to new forms of conducting battles as Hannibal, who almost destroyed Great Rome.
  Unselfishness of heroes and often open disrespect for those in power deprives them of a prosperous life, which ends mostly with poverty or fatality, but that's why they're heroes in order not to complain about fate and they accept hunger and death with a smile, and not with a grimace of disappointment.
  The difference between altruistic and egocentric heroes manifests itself also in their attitude to liberty.
  In principle, a person who is a combined inferior (limbic in the brain) and higher consciousness (self-consciousness) in the form of a body is a real manifestation of the action of liberty in both instinctive and conscious aspirations.
  Internal contradictoriness of these aspirations and at the same time their unity in a common base doesn't allow to determine actions of the person as purely conscious or purely unconscious. Therefore, accurately to predict actions of any person or to predetermine them is impossible, and in this also is manifested liberty.
  Thereby the free manifestations of the person, i.e. his advance forward happen by means of as instinctive and conscious actions.
  The explicit impossibility for the person to escape from public and natural fetters led, as it seems at first sight, to the fruitful idea: liberty is the cognized necessity.
  However, this restriction of liberty in favor of some order doesn't explain ways of this cognition - necessity in a form of order and organization is manifested everywhere, but everything can't be cognized - neither in one human life, nor in life of many generations, especially as everything continuously changes, and on the cognition is required time.
  Besides, this purely external interpretation of liberty can cause bewilderment due to the fact that even if to admit of knowing or understanding of all restrictions, with which are encountered the person, it is possible to qualify such cognition only as humility before external thingness factors, which thereby are admitted as primary.
  Similar approach, in effect, denies development and can result not to liberty, but to the thought of release from similar oppression only after death, or to the paranoid idea that the course of soulless things must determine (to dictate) all motions of the person.
  Last, automatically assumes the totalitarianism in the public relations, which is trying to deprive of the person and liberty, and independence that leads it as a result to crash. A notable illustration of this result is the drop during not so long time almost all Marxist regimes that have adopted this "remarkable" formula of liberty.
  The result of such type again shows the inadequacy of the domination of things over consciousness, which arranges the world for oneself, starting since the formation of things on own understanding, that is, in accordance with the existing form-building abilities at it.
  The egocentric hero-individualist with a claim to a demigod spits on the circumstances, being a typical voluntarist, that is, trying to achieve, without taking into account the circumstances and possible consequences, his really illusory goals, which consist only in his own elevation above the crowd by any means and self-obsession at this by his outstanding volitional attempts.
  In other words, this individualist hero considers it possible to use randomness supposedly directed by free will in view of the unpredictability of the outcome of the event, that is, something opposite to necessity.
  Trying to seize by will the arbitrariness, the individualist hero also becomes a toy of circumstances, that is, a figure, subordinate to them, losing freedom in his actions and gaining instead of fame only the ridicule of contemporaries and future historians over his superhuman aspirations, which are ordinary stupidity, invariably leading to collapse.
  Heroes of the common good argue in a very different way.
  They, as true folk heroes, without especially going into the genesis of catastrophic events, lead, possibly, into the last battle of all volunteers who succumbed to their confidence and charm, making them heroes too. It is they who, without an order, remain in the rearguard to die, covering the retreat of their unit during military operations.
  In science, these heroes, despite on any personalities, overthrow authorities, receiving in return not medals and honorary titles, but exile and curses during life, and not always a mark in history, since their merits are often stolen by ordinary scoundrels from science.
  Altruistic heroes always throw themselves without regret on the altar of the Fatherland, science, art, or just camaraderie, feeling free in the most complete degree, which not available to any reasonable citizens, or even sages.
  Ordinary, but very real heroes from the common people not only do not wait for a reward, but try to quickly and imperceptibly move away from the place of their heroic deeds, if, of course, they survive, to the former, usually modest occupations until the Motherland again calls them to the feat.
  Therefore, true altruistic heroes, in addition to the above-mentioned qualities common to all heroic individuals, are able to feel compassion, enjoy life, and fight for the rights of ordinary workers.
  Along with that, history has long shown that heroic deeds do not occur spontaneously at all times.
  Take Switzerland, for example, where a smooth, well-fed, well-established life has been flowing for centuries without any cataclysms, revolutions, and other upheavals. Naturally, it doesn"t smell of any heroes there.
  But this does not mean that there are no heroes at all in a trouble-free and "well-fed" time, when insoluble contradictions are absent. Everywhere and always there is a struggle between progressive persons and conservatives, not transferring for the most part in the revolutions, although the ruling elites unwittingly have to carry out reforms in order not to become dependent on more developed states. Potential heroes do not disappear anywhere, nor does a high level of self-awareness in many people, requiring the elimination of any injustice, and it is everywhere and always with respect to the working masses in excess. Therefore, potential heroes simply become the most active members of society, manifesting themselves mainly in organizations and enterprises, which are in opposition to authorities, trying to improve the structure of society and helping disadvantaged.
  There are quite a few such people, and it is they who go ahead in a moment of danger of any kind, be it a defensive war or a flood, dragging along the rest of the voluntary helpers, and thereby ensuring mass heroism that often saved entire nations, or all these heroes were perishing with honor, but never asked for mercy.
  The most famous of them are Joan d"Arc, Chang Hyung Dao, Giordano Bruno, Tomaso Campanella, Jan ижižka, Simon Bolivar, Giuseppe Garibaldi, Nikolai Chernyshevsky, Jose Maria Pino Suarez, Sun Yat-sen, Nestor Makhno, Mahatma Gandhi, Ernesto Che Guevara, Martin Luther King.
  If there are heroes, then in any case there are its deceptive similitudes.
  These false heroes can be bold, calling to fight injustice, they can have an extraordinary mind, excellent organizational skills, sociability, energy, valor and even be charismatic, at least for a while. But the basis of all their deeds is the desire for a pleasant and comfortable life, the desire for fame, wealth and power, including in order to treat those who have not achieved these "benefits" with contempt, singling themselves in some exceptional group among the rest, but not separating themselves from the power elite, and being therefore the highest expression of corporate solidarity of those in power.
  Official historians, being, as a rule, propagandists of the power elite, to which these false heroes belong, and these are emperors and kings, presidents and ministers, known for their military victories and reforms, expose them as heroes, while they have nothing to do with heroes of the common good and even to antiheroes, whose goals are always high, due to the meagerness and banality of the goals of these false heroes - power, wealth and honors, although outwardly they may look like heroes, showing, sometimes, courage, steadfastness, fearlessness, and even responsibility, and sometimes showing certain talents, but they always serve the ruling class and not the people, and their ideas, judging by the results the actions of these "heroes", are reduced only to expanding their own power, increasing wealth, privileges, ranks and ranks, as well as strengthening the power of the ruling elite.
  Why these personalities are false can be understood from what reservoir they mostly appear - and these are the power elite, force structures and bureaucracy.
  Let's first see what the consciousness of the representatives of these strata is.
  The power elite of the society of any state is not dominated by the higher consciousness (self-consciousness) of its members, the basis of which is dissatisfaction by public relations and the desire to improve them, bearing in mind all fellow tribesmen, manifesting itself, however, in different ways.
  A high level of self-awareness as individuals with a sense of self-esteem, compassion for the suffering, nobility, high culture, selflessness and responsibility to society for their actions is not available for the members of this elite and its associated security forces and officials.
  Selecting from the highest consciousness (self-consciousness) the appropriate share of self-image, own merits and shortcomings, and, therefore, determining on this basis its own prospects in society, and from the lowest consciousness - rapidity of reaction, quite strong-willed qualities and energy, skill to communicate, sufficient dexterity, cunning, and, as a consequence, - insidiousness and unprincipledness, these subjects gain an advantage over the rest - the more inert members of the community in the form of ordinary people, highly moral intellectuals of any kind, and other members of the population who are sluggish or preoccupied with other matters, and who are not able to deftly push aside or slander their opponents, as well as really enjoy the humiliation of the lower ones, and at the same time endure mock from the side of own bosses.
  The low level of self-consciousness of these strata of society, in which the emphasis is not on the struggle to improve the state of society as a whole, but on protecting the interests of the ruling class, permitting for the features mentioned above, brings to the dominance of animal consciousness in them, for which the main feature is a sense of self-preservation, striving in any case not to lose the consumption of sensations, preferably the most pleasant ones, at the expense of all other members of society, on who they do not give a damn, but nevertheless they understand that having lost this miserable, in their opinion, people, they will lose the basis of their own existence, and they are forced, with a creaking heart, somehow interact with this people.
  Thus. for representatives of power, the dominant is inevitably animal consciousness, that is, in their consciousness there is a clear lack of awareness of themselves as self-valuable, creative individuals, and not as consumers.
  The difference between the self-consciousness of false heroes and the self-consciousness of representatives of the power elite lies in the extreme degree of dissatisfaction of the attitude of society towards them, and, accordingly, own place in the hierarchy of those in power, who, it seems to them, underestimates their talents and energy, thanks to which they are able to achieve a lot, not only for themselves, but also for other colleagues in power. This dissatisfaction of self-consciousness coincides with a high degree of dissatisfaction of animal consciousness (the increased dominance), which at all costs requires more power, reverence and comfort.
  Outwardly, this difference in the consciousness of false heroes from ordinary power-hungry and ambitious persons is expressed in their strong will, charisma, high degree of intelligence, various types of natural giftedness, determination, perseverance, fearlessness, but at the same time they are proud, complacent, sophisticatedly insidious, cruel, merciless, despise ordinary people, considering them cattle. They are magnificent intriguers, easily sacrifice people to achieve their goals, which consist in the concentrate in their hands more and more power, wealth and various privileges, without renouncing the honors, awards and titles that, they believe, have deserved, protecting the interests of the power elite, and they never take the side of those who are offended and oppressed, except smile at the people and throw to it generally insignificant charity things.
  
  3. Examples of the main types of heroes.
  
  3.1. Heroes of the common good.
  3.1.1. People heroes (altruists).
  
  Italian revolutionary and commander Giuseppe Garibaldi (1807-1882)
  
  From his youth, Garibaldi dreamed of freeing Italy from the Austrian invaders. In 1834, he tried to raise the uprising in Genoa. The plot failed, but he managed to escape. Garibaldi was sentenced to death in absentia.
  Then he voluntarily worked in the cholera barrack in Marseille, participated in the war for the independence of the Republic of Rio Grande against the Brazilian empire, was wounded in a battle with an Argentine ship, was arrested, tortured, and participated in the war against Uruguayan conservatives.
  In 1848, Garibaldi received news of the beginning of the uprising throughout Italy against the Austrians. He quickly joined the rebels and soon joined the battle with superior enemy forces at the town of Luino, having won. Large Austrian military formations were sent against his small detachment, and he was forced to retreat and cross the Swiss border.
  At the end of 1848, Garibaldi with a small detachment joined the rebellious people in Rome, who were besieged by opponents. Garibaldi successfully repelled the assault, and then defeated the troops of the Neapolitan king.
  In mid-1849, large forces of the French occupiers approached Rome. The rebels were forced to leave it. The revolution was defeated. Garibaldi emigrated from the country.
  In 1858, the war for the unification of Italy began. Garibaldi took an active part in it. He defeated the Austrians several times with a detachment of volunteers of 3,000 people, but unsuccessfully attacked the Austrians at Treponty, barely escaping complete destruction, which was the result of the betrayal of the joint Allied command (Sardinian kingdom and France). Garibaldi refused all ranks, ranks and returned to his home.
  In 1860, the uprising broke out in Sicily. Garibaldi immediately joined the rebels and, after several battles, cleared the entire island of Neapolitan troops. He began to distribute land to peasants, freed political prisoners.
  After the liberation of Sicily, the Garibaldi detachment landed in Calabria and after several battles freed the entire southern part of Italy, and transferred power to the king of Sardinia, who now he became the head of the Italian kingdom.
  During the Austro-Prussian-Italian war, Garibaldi again won a series of victories over the Prussians and Austrians, and Venice was annexed to the Italian kingdom.
  In 1867, Garibaldi decided to liberate Rome, but his small detachment was defeated by the combined papal and French forces, he was arrested and sent into exile.
  In 1870, Garibaldi helped France defend the south of France from the German invasion in the war with Prussia.
  In his memoirs, Garibaldi noted: "I am used to subordinating any of my principles to the goal of uniting Italy, no matter what way this happens" [18, p. 341].
  The hero formulated his general position as follows: "Being a supporter of peace and friendship between nations, I find myself forced again to take up arms, which contradicts my principles ... I do not like war, it"s the tears of the oppressed are forcing me to take up arms" [19, p. 4].
  
  Chinese revolutionary Sun Yat-sen (1866-1925)
  
  While studying at a medical institute, Sun Yat-sen, together with his friends, planned to overthrow the Chinese-hated Manchu Qing dynasty, which ruled in China. Over time, he came to the conclusion that only revolutionary measures can return the country to the ranks of leading powers in the world and bring its population out of poverty.
  He created the first revolutionary organization of China, but the authorities revealed it, and he was forced to flee to Japan.
  During the 1912 revolution, Sun Yat-sen was elected the interim president of China and founded the Kuomintang National Party of China.
  Sun Yat-sen set about developing the basic principles, the implementation of which will make China a powerful and prosperous power.
  In his opinion, it is necessary first of all to exclude egocentrism from political life and unite the various peoples of China in the struggle for independence.
  Sun Yat-sen also proposed to carry out the democratic reforms in China, giving all citizens the right to vote, the right to recall elected representatives, the right to take legislative initiative, and the right to a referendum.
  In his opinion, it is necessary first of all to exclude egocentrism from political life and unite the various nationalities of China in the struggle for independence.
  He considered, in accordance with Chinese traditions, to add the control and electoral power to the legislative, executive and judicial.
  The welfare of the people, for Sun Yat-sen's idea, could only be achieved by creating an industrial economy and ensuring the equality of peasant land ownership, and the Chinese government should ensure that the population has adequate housing, clothing and normal food.
  Thus. Sun Yat-sen believed that China could shy away from the flaws inherent in capitalism, and that socialism could be built by enlightened people with the help of the state outside classes.
  In 1919, he restored the Kuomintang, and in 1921 he again took the post of the interim president, but his power was limited to only one province of China.
  At the Kuomintang Congress in 1924, which he led, a revolutionary manifesto was adopted.
  Sun Yat-sen tried to unite all of China with the support of the Comintern, but died during one of his trips along China.
  
  Latin American revolutionary Ernesto Che Guevara (1928-1967)
  
  A very characteristic example of a hero - a fighter for the people good against any oppressors - it is an ordinary Argentine doctor and a native of the bourgeois family Ernesto Che Guevara, who joined the group of small number of fighters of another country against dictator Batista - a ruthless American puppet in Cuba.
  Che Guevara, despite chronic asthma, worked in leprosories and traveled to many countries of Latin America. He had seen enough of the terrible living conditions of ordinary workers, the mockery of planters and factory owners under workers, and his soul was being filled with disgust for such an order, and he devoted his life to improving the situation of the broad masses of working people.
  But, as soon as the possibility of a real fight against the oppressors appeared, he did not fail to join it, although only 82 people had practically no chance of defeating the numerous troops of the Cuban dictator Batista, which had tanks and aircraft.
  Really, after the first battle only a few dozen people survived.
  Nevertheless, they started a guerrilla war, which was gradually joined by the Cuban peasants, who were tired of the scoundrel Batista. The struggle for a just cause carried away the people of Cuba and in a few years the active fighters won. The dictator fled the island. A few years of life in leadership positions in socialist Cuba seemed boring for a hero who was used to a ruthless and bloody struggle.
  Therefore, he gave up all his titles, high positions, and even his Cuban citizenship, and went to raise the poor to revolt in other countries.
  However, Che Guevara did not take into account certain factors.
  In particular, in the Congo, peasants reacted hostile to the detachment of Cuban revolutionaries and they had to leave this country. Che Guevara also failed to raise the revolutionary movement in Bolivia. The population did not support Che Guevara, his partisan detachment of 50 people was defeated by a detachment of government troops of 650 soldiers, he was wounded and killed several days later.
  There is no doubt that contempt for the death of Che Guevara does not mean his stupidity or irrational, but the weakness of the sense of self-preservation, which is at the core of every natural consciousness, while his merciless struggle with the oppressors of the common people was essentially laid down in his self-consciousness, the level which was such high, that it did not allow him to live an ordinary life, but all the time pushed him into a completely conscious struggle for a worthy and happy life for all working people on Earth.
  
  3.1.2. Heroes of the idea.
  
  As for the heroes of idea, they are distinguished by their faith in the correctness of this or that idea, which they have adopted with their minds, and which as if leads to a common good and happiness, whether it be anarchism, communism or some other utopia.
  For the most part, they do not have time to become disappointed in this faith, since they are the first to die in the struggle for the triumph of utopias, leaving a field of activity for different crooks against the background of ordinary people (philistines).
  
  French revolutionary Maximilian Robespierre (1758-1794)
  
  Maximilian Robespierre was ideological fighter of freedom, equality and fraternity, which in fact, as later events showed, were incompatible slogans.
  Robespierre was engaged in the work of a provincial lawyer in France in the second half of the 18th century. He was famous for his integrity and straightforwardness. He was raised on the ideas of such enlighteners as Montesquieu and Rousseau. He stood for reform, was modest, advocated the expansion of citizens' rights.
  During the revolution, his oratory talent, enthusiasm, open hatred of rotten royal power, as well as the slogan: truth, freedom and society are more expensive than life brought him to the forefront. In his speeches, he expressed his readiness to die in the fight against tyrants. His extreme left-wing views led him to organize terror against all the enemies of the free Fatherland and the public good. These enemies he considered not only the royalists and the rich, but the entire middle class.
  After the destruction of his political rivals, Robespierre became the de facto head of government and began to pursue a policy of reducing great fortunes, helping those in need, and introducing uniform education. The cult of the Supreme Being was proclaimed, and the terror was recognized as a means to correct souls.
  Worshiping the Supreme Being meant hatred of unbelief and tyranny, the desire to punish traitors and tyrants, helping the unfortunate, respecting the weak, protecting the oppressed, rendering all kinds of good to one's neighbor and avoiding all evil.
  However, the unfitness of terror, as a means of correcting society, quickly restored almost all other leaders of the republic against Robespierre, wishing to end the terror. The convention recognized Robespierre as a tyrant. He was eventually announced outlawed and beheaded.
  The ideological Robespierre, the fighter for fairness, as he understood it, was replaced by ordinary crooks and corrupt officials, who protected defended the interests of the rich, led by the unprincipled careerist Barras.
  
  
  Russian revolutionary Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924)
  
  Lenin, limited by the short-sighted considerations of Karl Marx, threw the Russian people into the furnace of the struggle for a typical utopia - communism, but he believed Marx and promised all peoples, in fact, the establishment of paradise on the earth, which is rather primitive and strongly smacks of religion.
  The population of Russia was largely exterminated in this senseless struggle for world domination in order to bring all other peoples to the happiness of ostensibly true equality and fraternity, which in fact led to the loss of liberty by the peoples who were captured by this attractive, but thoroughly false idea, and Lenin himself died, having discovered in practice the failure of Marxism.
  Nevertheless, his activity, distinguished by selflessness, sacrifice, awareness of his great mission, devotion to the ideals found, and hatred of the oppressors of working people, encouraged the rest of the people to fight for the rights of workers and has involved the world into a new orbit of existence, where the estates in most countries were destroyed, and the workers received more rights and freedoms.
  
  Russian revolutionary and anarchist Nestor Makhno (1888-1934)
  
  At the age of 18, Makhno became a member of a group of anarcho-communists and participated in terrorist acts, was subjected to arrests, was sentenced to death, replaced by indefinite penal servitude.
  In 1917, he was released from prison and led the Peasant Union of his county, and then a local group of anarchists.
  Makhno advocated radical revolutionary transformations. He created the Committee for the Salvation of the Revolution in his county and began the confiscation of landowner land. By nationalizing the land, he distributed it to the peasants.
  The ideological anarchist Makhno has expressed his thoughts on the new social structure as follows:
  "We will organize it (the new system) on the basis of a free public, the content of which will allow the entire population not exploiting the labor of others to freely and independently of the state and its officials, even the Reds, build all social and social life completely independently at their own places, in their own surrounding ..." [20].
  In 1918, Makhno led the struggle of the peasants and anarchists with the German invaders and the troops of the hetman Skoropadsky.
  He was handing out property and food, taken from the rich, to the population.
  In battles, Makhno showed extraordinary courage, courage and ingenuity, constantly developing his military successes. He was personally leading the cavalry into the attack.
  The Makhno detachments fought with the Petliurites and the troops of General Denikin, either uniting with the Red Army, or acting separately from it.
  Makhno"s actions in the rear of the white units destroyed Denikin"s hopes of taking Moscow. At a time when the white units were retreating, Makhno created an anarcho-peasant republic in Ukraine on the basis of free councils without communists, where land was transferred for free use to those who cultivate it, subject to redistribution by number of eaters. Makhno denied the ownership of land as a natural asset for the whole people.
  Makhno"s army was used by the red units to fight against the white troops of General Wrangel, but after the defeat of the white troops was first partially, and then almost completely destroyed by the red troops.
  The wounded and shell-shocked Makhno was transferred by his last fighters across the border to Romania and interned.
  Makhno ended up abroad without any money, but American anarchists helped him not to starve. He, as an ideological anarchist, refused to cooperate with both Ukrainian nationalists and Polish communists. After arriving in Paris, he worked as a joiner and a carpenter.
  In the press, Makhno was publishing essays, as well as attracted witnesses to refute the insinuations of their enemies, and in the end, the public recognized that the alleged atrocities of the Makhnovists over the population and their participation in Jewish pogroms were malicious fiction.
  Spanish revolutionaries called Makhno to lead the revolution in their country, but the sick Makhno could only help them with advices and soon died of bone tuberculosis.
  
  3.2. Heroes with a claim to the role of superman (antiheroes).
  
  French Anarchist Revolutionary Anselm Belzharri (1813-1890)
  
  In 1844, Max Stirner's book published, "The only and his property" (Der Einzige und sein Eigentum), in which he outlined a new concept of so-called individualistic anarchism, according to which the human rights are limited only by his force, in turn, limited by the force of other people: "... that, what you are capable of becoming, on this you have the right to. All rights and all powers I draw from myself. I have the right to everything that I can overpower. I have the right to overthrow Zeus, Jehovah, God, and so on, if I can do it, if I can"t, then these gods will always remain right and strong in relation to me, I will have to bow before their right and force ... I only not have right on that, which I do not do quite freely and consciously, that is on that, on what I myself do not authorize" [21, p. 176-177].
  It was this ideology that penetrated the heart of Anselm Belzharri, apparently during his travels and meetings before the 1848 revolution in France, in which he actively participated. He, as a true anarchist, located on the edge of the anarchist front, disassociated himself from the positions of other revolutionaries, declaring that a true revolution is the final elimination of the need for government. Anselm Belzharri called for disobedience to the government, which he considered a form of slavery, and argued that anarchy is an order (norm).
  Anselm Belzharri was harassed for publishing anarchist pamphlets.
  The extreme form of his anarcho-egoism is confirmed by the following statement by Belzharri: "I reject all, I affirm only myself ... I am the only reliable fact. Everything else is an abstraction that falls into mathematical X, into the unknown ... There can be no interests on earth above my interests for which I have at least partially sacrificed my interests" [22, p. 276].
  It must be assumed that such voluntarist statements emphasize the nature of the heroism of this individualist, which consists in dissatisfaction with his self-consciousness with the state of society, the insufficiency of his democratic foundations, expressed in hatred of any power, except selfgovernment, at which the power of each person is equivalent to the power of each of the rest. This dissatisfaction of his self-consciousness was supported by the dissatisfaction of his natural consciousness, which was outwardly expressed in his desire to dominate in all activities, in particular, he called all the political parties of France of that time "the plague of the nation" and called for civil disobedience.
  
  Russian revolutionary Sergey Nechaev (1847-1882)
  
  Listening to lectures at St. Petersburg University, Nechaev was inspired by the ideas of Mikhail Bakunin and Nikolai Chernyshevsky.
  Having taken an extreme position in the revolutionary movement of that time, Nechaev became the leader of his radical wing, calling for subversive activities, ruthless terror and the use of any means to liquidate the existing system.
  In accordance with his extremely voluntarist position, Nechaev developed the "Catechism of the Revolutionary," in which he called for "to exterminate a whole horde of robbers of the treasury, vile tyrants of the people ... ... to get rid one way or another from the false teachers, scammers, traitors, dirtying the banner of truth" [23, from. 576].
  Nechaev decided to confirm his radical views and superiority over own associates by decisive actions, killing student Ivanov, a member of his circle, for refusing to obey him.
  
  Italian writer and politician Gabriele d´Annunzio (1863-1938)
  
  Gabriele d'Annunzio, in addition to writing poems and novels, by his restless nature, could not help taking part in the First world war, although he was already quite an elderly man, showing himself in it as a fearless hero, who also reached the lieutenant-colonel from lieutenant, but lost one eye.
  A group of officers proposed to the popular in the people poet and military officer d'Annunzio in 1919, to lead a liberation campaign in the city of Fiume, which was unjustly rejected, as many believed, from Italy.
  With a handful of associates, dannunzio captured the city, where his proud and irresponsible nature unfolded to its fullest.
  Taking advantage of the indecision of all interested states, d'Annunzio proclaimed the independent republic of Fiume and was recognized as its leader.
  The people in the city sang songs and robbed passing ships, marches and free political discussions were organized there with the leader, who condescending communicated with the masses. In general, the loose morals flourished.
  After a year, the conflict between Italy and the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was settled, but d'Annunzio refused to leave the city, and only after its shelling he resigned from office of Duce.
  D'Annunzio tried to influence Mussolini"s policies in order to bring it closer to Fiume"s model of governance, and he tried to discourage Mussolini from contacting Hitler, calling him the "ferocious clown", but failed.
  All literary works of d'Annunzio indicate his individualism, egocentricity and extraordinary ambitions. He glorified the enjoyment and will of own I, and in his decisions was a typical voluntarist.
  Lacking a definite political position, d'Annunzio was always inclined to change, believing that by his great example he was influencing social institutions.
  The fantastic and ambitious nature of his superhuman tasks and illusory goals was that he wanted to set up a state system in the manner of a musical symphony, where individual corporations form the brought together system, in which the main decisions are made by creative "aristocrats of the spirit", who set improvisation, that transforms the world.
  
  Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)
  
  Trotsky did not have firm beliefs in the fidelity of certain doctrines to change the backward society of the Russian Empire, but he was convinced of own talents, firmness of spirit, and the possibility of becoming great only through the revolutionary struggle.
  Therefore, when Trotsky was still very young, he began to actively campaign among the workers, participated in the creation of workers' unions in southern Russia, and was subjected to harassment, arrest, imprisonment and exile.
  At the same time, he successfully engaged journalism, studied Marxism, and during his first emigration gained great fame. Even then, he astonished all by his education, oratory and aplomb.
  He quite rightly criticized Lenin for a split in the party, suspiciousness and doctrinairism, having suggested the theory of permanent revolution in underdeveloped countries, modified by him.
  This theory in itself, proposed by Marx and Engels, about the pass of the bourgeois revolution directly to the conquest of power by the proletariat, was absolutely fantastic, and the authors quickly abandoned it.
  Trotsky, on the contrary, as a true individualist and original, decided to surprise everyone by modifying this theory to a state in which it becomes outwardly acceptable and can capture enthusiasts.
  And at first he surprised everyone with a wonderful somersault, pointing out the possibility of a socialist revolution at once, in view of the inability of the bourgeoisie of the underdeveloped countries to fulfill the bourgeois-democratic demands: "It (bourgeoisie) could not lead the workers, who were hostile to it in everyday life and very early learned to generalize their tasks. But it turned out that bourgeoisie to be equally unable to lead the peasantry, because it was connected by a network of common interests with the landlords and dreaded of shock of the property in any form" [24, p. 41].
  Indeed, Trotsky, together with the Bolsheviks, managed to seize power in Russia, despite the enormous sacrifices among the population involved in the struggle for utopian goals.
  But this was not enough for Trotsky. He believed that with the help of the new Russia it would be possible to rekindle the fire of the world revolution and come to communism on a global scale.
  It was this idea that he laid down in the "development" of the ideas of the classics of Marxism, proving, that building socialism and communism on a global scale is possible only if the socialist revolution is transferred from petty-bourgeois Russia to the industrialized West, which, in turn, will contribute to Russia in the final overthrow of the classes of oppressors. If this is not done, then capitalism will be it will be restored in Russia.
  However, the idea of a permanent revolution with the help of Russia could not be realized due to the weakness of Russia itself, and the West so and remained capitalist, and Russia for several decades tried to become a communist paradise separately from other countries, but failed, and, as Trotsky predicted, there was a restoration of capitalism in it.
  The victory of communism did not happen either in a single country or throughout the world with the help of a permanent revolution.
  All Trotsky's undertakings ended in failure, as, indeed, the actions of his opponents - Stalinists, due to the illusory nature of their goals of passing the human society, antagonistic in its unchanging nature, which contributes to the development of consciousness, into a harmonious - swamp - existence, incompatible with development.
  Trotsky is still popular with volunteers-rebels', prisoners of meaningless but attractive ideas.
  Nevertheless, about such limited enthusiasts who aspire to become world-famous persons like Trotsky, Nietzsche said so: "As for the hero, I don"t have such a good opinion of him - and yet: he is the most acceptable form of existence, especially when there is no other choice ... People striving for greatness are usually evil people: this is their only way to bear themselves" [24, p. 725-726].
  
  4. False heroes.
  
  The commander and ruler of Rome Guy Julius Caesar (100 - 44 BC)
  
  Caesar became famous mainly for his military victories, personal courage, strategic talent and luck, as well as many other talents, in particular, and literary. He was an active politician, occupying successively the highest posts in the republic.
  However, it is little known that he was a banal schemer and a big fraudster.
  In particular, in order to obtain the highest position in the system of Roman religious magistrates, he bribed all groups of voters, spending huge sums on it. But his creditors did not stint, understanding the guaranteed return of money, because this position attracted universal attention and ensured success in his political career.
  By intrigue, bribery, family connections, military success, periodic generous gifts for the plebs, in no small measure intelligence, organizational talents and determination, as well as the successful elimination of competitors, the main of which was the famous commander Gnaeus Pompey, Caesar moved to the first place in the Roman Republic, becoming at first one of the consuls (59 BC), and after the victory over Pompey - the sovereign dictator.
  Earlier, he fluttered before the famous cruel dictator of Rome, Lucius Cornelius Sulla, but having advanced to the first roles in the republic, he became to disdain even senators, not taking into account the long-established republican traditions of the state.
  He considered his own intellectual abilities and accomplishments to be unique and therefore did not impede all kinds of honors into own honor right up to the lifelong dictatorship, the father of the nation, the statue next to the gods, he did what he wanted in the management of the state, for example, appointed officials for many years, contrary to domestic customs, for many years to come.
  Except the love of power dominating in him, he was also possessed by a passion for money grubbing: "Neither when in command of armies nor as a magistrate at Rome did he show a scrupulous integrity; for as certain men have declared in their memoirs, when he was proconsul in Spain, he not only begged money from the allies, to help pay his debts, but also attacked and sacked some towns of the Lusitanians although they did not refuse his terms and opened their gates to him on his arrival. In Gaul he pillaged shrines and temples of the gods filled with offerings, and oftener sacked towns for the sake of plunder than for any fault. In consequence he had more gold than he knew what to do with, and offered it for sale throughout Italy and the provinces at the rate of three thousand sesterces the pound. In his first consulship he stole three thousand pounds of gold from the Capitol, replacing it with the same weight of gilded bronze. He made alliances and thrones a matter of barter, for he extorted from Ptolemy alone in his own name and that of Pompey nearly six thousand talents ..." [25, ј54].
  In the interval between the first consulate and dictatorship, Caesar, as proconsul, began the wars of aggression in Gaul, eventually capturing by the year 50 BC territories of modern France and partially - Germany and Belgium. He arranged a real genocide of the population in this territories, reducing it by more than a million. The robbery of the new territories gave Caesar astronomical sums, which to a large extent contributed to successful conduct of the civil war by him.
  In addition to power and greed, Caesar was a passionate lover of women: "That he was unbridled and extravagant in his intrigues is the general opinion, and that he seduced many illustrious women, among them Postumia, wife of Servius Sulpicius, Lollia, wife of Aulus Gabinius, Tertulla, wife of Marcus Crassus, and even Gnaeus Pompey's wife Mucia ... But beyond all others Caesar loved Servilia, the mother of Marcus Brutus" [25, ј50].
  Thus, in Caesar, the main signs of the lower (natural-primitive) consciousness were clearly concentrated, the main of which was self-centeredness in the desire to stand out and take a leading place in the hierarchy of the community, for which one should not disdain by any means, without remembering morality. That is, Caesar was a high-level dominant, like an alpha male, seizing power and grabbing the best of everything in a row - from luxury to a lot of attractive females, since power allows to make it.
  The above facts also indicate that in addition to dominance, two more properties of the lowest consciousness were clearly manifested in him - the aspiration for a comfortable life with feasts, palaces and triumphs (the best food and living conditions for living creatures), as well as aspiration to fertilize as many females as possible for their own pleasure, and (unconsciously) to continue themselves in the offspring (transfer of their own genome to next generations).
  
  Emperor of France Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)
  
  Napoleon is considered by unusually great - a true heir to ancient heroes, a brilliant commander, a talented organizer and lawyer who has put the world on a new - more adequate - foundation by his Civil Code.
  Indeed, he was not only a great commander, but also a talented administrator, a brave warrior, and many times wounded.
  Along with that, in an effort to strengthen his power, Napoleon put the press under control, created a powerful police and secret service, limited the opposition, returned Catholicism, secured the right to property and equality before the law, and then made himself by the lifelong consul, like Caesar.
  Napoleon's new order consisted primarily of supporting the French bourgeoisie in its expansion beyond France, which was most hampered by Great Britain, which had similar interests in the foreign market.
  Napoleon"s main aspiration is nothing less than lust for power, as evidenced by the elimination by him of his main rivals - General Pishegru (was strangled in prison) and Moreau (was expelled from the country).
  French historian Jacques Tulard confirms grotesquely exaggerated opinion of Napoleon about himself in his book about him in the following words of Napoleon: "Not for this I took upon myself the work of governing the Netherlands in order to listen to the opinion of the Amsterdam rabble or to act what others want ... Subordinate to me the peoples of Italy know me well and must remember that in one my little finger there is more intelligence than in all their heads combined" [26, p. 286].
  Napoleon's expansionist policy consisted of waging endless wars, which he, thanks to the outstanding talent of the commander, as a rule, won. In addition, he rightly believed that the main way to strengthen and maintain power was the conduct of predatory wars, during which you can not only gain popularity with your victories, but also get rich in military booty, and distribute part of it to strengthen your own positions in power.
  However, the flip side of wars is the losses of alive power. The number of these losses is indicated in one of the French encyclopedias: "At least 5 million people - military and civilians - became victims of the Napoleonic wars" [27. P. XVII-XVIII].
  Napoleon"s biographer J. Tulard writes: "In 1813, the French, at whom began to draft 16-year-old sons in the army, called Napoleon a cannibal" [26, p. 321].
  Thus, in sacrifice to his ambitions and lust for power Napoleon brought unprecedented earlier number of victims of the war, and France itself became the victim of his ambitions, having turned from the leading into the secondary power, which ceded Great Britain superiority both in Europe and in the world.
  Like Caesar, Napoleon, penniless at first, was not spared the passion for wealth, luxury and other attributes of the "sweet" life in full accordance with the instinctive desire of any living creature as best as possible to settle himself to get the most pleasant sensations.
  He lived in stylish palaces, surrounded by numerous servants and new nobility in galunas, epaulettes and gold.
  True, he had enough money for all this luxury, since in all campaigns Napoleon was engaged in undisguised robbery, exporting gold, jewelry, art objects in astronomical quantities from Italy, Egypt, occupied European countries.
  His other instinctive desire, like that of Caesar, despite Napoleon's intensive load with military and state affairs, was the transfer own genome by the help of attractive females to the future.
  According to E. Roberts [6], from December 1804 to August 1813, Napoleon presented to his mistresses, who were at least 21, over 480 thousand francs. This amounts to almost $ 10 million in modern equivalent.
  
  British Prime Minister Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
  
  The high-born aristocrat, the greatest politician, the witty weirdo, the gourmet, the workaholic and the Nobel laureate. So Churchill is seen by historians, and with their filing - by the rest of the public.
  The British themselves named Churchill in 2002 as the greatest man in the history of their state.
  Churchill, at the beginning of his political activity, has not yet closed in complete and final love for himself and his clan. Therefore, he was supporting the social reforms carried out by the liberal government at the beginning of the twentieth century. In particular, in 1908 he initiated the law on the minimum wage, which established the norms of working hours and wages.
  Martin Gilbert in the preface to his book on Churchill [29] describes him as follows: "A shrewd, reasonable and cautious politician, Churchill was always a supporter of bold actions. One of his greatest talents was his exceptional mastery of the word, his love of language, which allowed him to eloquently and easily expound the most important things, convince and inspire people. He had a great sense of humor".
  Churchill also had a creative imagination. In particular, he proposed scattering foil from aircraft to bring down German radars, expressed the idea of creating a pipeline under the Atlantic Ocean, proposed the construction of a navigation device for pilots, and was involved in journalism and literature with success, eventually receiving the Nobel Prize.
  It must also be said that to a large extent his energy and tough control of the country in the war with Hitler Germany, allowed to mobilize Great Britain, despite casualties and hardships, to the all-out struggle against the enemy, which was crowned with success.
  However, the primary goal of Churchill was to achieve the highest power in the country, and, if possible, in the world, since the sun does not set in the British Empire. He followed this goal invariably until the last premiership, refusing already in a completely weak state to retire.
  Churchill once admitted to his mother: "If I do not succeed, it will be a disaster for me! Failures will break my heart, because ambition is my only support" [30. P. 441].
  And one of the well-known prime ministers of Great Britain - Lloyd George, who worked with Churchill, described Churchill as a person who is ready to make a drum from her own mother"s skin to drum the march in own honor.
  An example for Churchill in his quest for Supreme power was Mussolini.
  Pierre Milza notes in his book "Mussolini" Churchill"s words about him: "Mussolini is the greatest living legislator" [31].
  And at a press conference in Rome in January 1927, Churchill said: "If I were Italian, I"m sure that I would be completely with you from the beginning to the end of your victorious struggle against the brutal appetites and passions of Leninism" [29, Chapter 22].
  For career advancement, Churchill actively used his connections in the highest circles of society.
  Churchill needed power not only for its sake, but it provided many other opportunities, in particular, to get good money through corruption, that he repeatedly used.
  Churchill, who did not have capital, but wished to live in luxury, rendered services to bankers, receiving a corresponding bribe for this.
  Sevastyanov A. N. in his book about Churchill writes the following: "The Jewish banker Kassel secured him participation in the loan issued by the Japanese government in the amount of 10.000 pounds (in current money - 500.000 pounds). Churchill wrote to his brother Jack about this financial transaction: "I hope to get a small profit from this." In 1905, Kassel paid for furniture in Churchill's bachelor"s apartment in the Mayfair district of London. Kassel"s financial support was ongoing. The income from the shares of the Etchison, Topeka and Santa Fe railway, which he bought for Churchill in 1907, enabled the politician to pay for the typist's services. When Churchill married Clementine in 1908, Kassel gave them £ 500 for their wedding, that is, about £ 25.000 in terms of current money" [32, p.20].
  "During the First World War, the production of explosives in the UK in large quantities (thirty thousand tons) required acetone, which was not on the market. The state was ready to pay for it in full without bargaining ... Weizmann, the head of the Jewish Agency, received from Churchill a monopoly on the production of acetone throughout the empire. You can imagine what fabulous profits such contracts bring!" [32, p. 21].
  Churchill as the true dominant-power-lover could not help but wage or at least accompany wars and local conflicts, that had not only to support his image as a great strategist, but also strengthen his position in power as a fighter for the interests of the British Empire.
  In particular, he made considerable efforts to create the permanent conflict situation in Palestine - the territory mandated by Britain, having confronted actually Jews with Arabs in order to "fish in troubled waters" in the future, paving the way not only for Britain but also for the USA actual to dispose without hindrance of the region"s richest oil resources.
  As for the Second World War, Churchill, being the head of his country, in agreement with Roosevelt, was dragging out this war in every possible way, reasonably considering it the result weakening his opponents - the USSR and Germany. Of course, he had in mind the interests of Britain and the USA, that is, the Anglo-Saxons and himself as their protector.
  Churchill does not spare his opponents and participates in a number of punitive operations and wars: he fights with the Boers in the Boer War, goes to Cuba, where José Marty 's rebellion is suppressed, participates in punitive operations in Sudan, repressions against the Irish, Somalis, Rhodesians, fiercely fights with the Bolsheviks.
  But his greatest "achievement" was the Bengal famine in India in 1943-44, actually organized by him, in which, according to the estimates of the Indians themselves, about 7 million people died.
  Personal and corporate egoism, corresponding to animal egocentrism, as well as suspiciousness and prejudice, corresponding to animal caution, were clearly expressed in obvious hatred and contempt for other communities: "I do not believe that a dog on the hay has any right to hay, even if she lay on it for a long time. I don 't recognize that right for her. I do not admit, for example, that great injustice was committed against the Red Indians of America or the black Aborigines of Australia. I don"t admit that injustice was committed against these people because a stronger race, a more advanced race, a wiser race, let"s say so, came and took their place" [33].
  Like all males among animals who have achieved power and are able to get what they want, Churchill, since the income allowed it, became a gourmet, consuming the best delicacies, the most expensive cognac and champagne, Cuban cigars. He also liked to play in the casino, used a luxurious state-owned yacht for himself and relaxed in the most expensive resorts in the world.
  From this it is clear that despite the external brilliance, in Churchill, as in all false heroes, all the basic properties of the lower consciousness have gathered: dominance is expressed in their fierce desire for power; the creation of the most favorable conditions for themselves, being reflected in aspiration for a comfortable life, where was possible to receive all best.
  Churchill used all his talents and skills, as well as not bad intellect, as can be seen from his actions, despite the distracting maneuvers in the form of literary creativity, to enter power and entrench himself in it, making decisions primarily not to improve the lives of at least citizens of own state, but to maintain the dominance of the large owners of own country and international capital, serving them, sparing no strength, and receiving considerable bonuses and privileges from them.
  
  Conclusion
  
  Inasmuch the dissatisfaction of human consciousness, being its main state, which supports its activity, able to change quite significantly under the influence of sudden metamorphoses, insofar almost every person is able to become a hero, that is, at least, the savior of someone or something, for example, in a disaster situation with a risk to life, although this, in part, reminds the behavior of a rat cornered, and vice versa, a heroic personality in an atmosphere of quiet and calm life is lost and can turn into an ordinary resident (philistine).
  Similar changes in the dissatisfaction of human consciousness cause mass heroism in earthquakes, floods, during wars, revolutions and other shocks, but disappear under favorable and comfortable living conditions when almost nothing outstanding happens.
  The total absence of heroes in the community can serve as a measure of stagnation in its life, despite external well-being, and, therefore, an indicator of the subsequent collapse or absorption of this stagnant community by more active communities.
  Along with that, for separate individuals, the degree of dissatisfaction with both natural (animal) consciousness and self-consciousness can be due to various reasons, which are to some extent noted above, quite stable throughout life - stably low or high.
  The consequence of this factor is that the outward manifestation of both forms of consciousness can be very specific and significantly differ in personality traits such as courage, fortitude, fearlessness, selflessness, responsibility, will, charm, sociability, energy, a sense of self-preservation, pride in oneself, charisma, love of power, ambition, etc.
  This difference was shown by us above on the example of different types of heroes, whose features of the external manifestation of their consciousness had certain differences, which allowed them to be divided into two main groups - altruists and egocentrists, as well as to decouple the false heroes from them.
  Nevertheless, throughout life, under the influence of circumstances and age-related changes, the dissatisfaction of consciousness can change significantly, causing in turn a change in the character of a person, his mental abilities, emotional state and various external properties - from fearlessness up to fear of death, from nobility up to contempt for people, etc.
  In addition, it is impossible to establish a rigid framework between the indicated types of heroes, whose consciousness not only changes over time, but also his state at one moment may not coincide with the state at another moment. Therefore, it is difficult to characterize definitely a person who is quite responsible today, but evades responsibility the next day in other circumstances.
  This factor, of course, cannot but affect the division of heroes throughout the marked groups, often making the line between them quite unsteady.
  For the most part, the heroes cause time. Over time, they disappear, mainly. returning to previous occupations.
  However, such return may not occur if, in the process of heroic deeds, circumstances cause a decrease in the degree of dissatisfaction with self-awareness, and at the same time, an increase in the degree of dissatisfaction with natural consciousness with its typically animal manifestations, for example, in the form of increased dominance over neighbors.
  Similar temporary heroes-transformers, turning sooner or later into their opposite, can be called half-heroes-half-villains.
  In these characters, consciousness undergoes significant changes during life, which is reflected in its external manifestations in the form of specific actions, sometimes heroic, then treacherous or selfish. These figures may at one time be actual heroes, and at other times they may be villains or pathetic and cowardly losers.
  Quite typical representatives of temporary semi-heroes are the ruler of the USSR in the first half of the twentieth century I.V. Stalin and the ruler of Italy in the first half of the twentieth century B. Mussolini.
  Joseph Stalin at first quite sincerely tried to make the country an instigator of the world revolution, at least in Europe, for building communism in it according to the covenants of Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin, imagining himself an ideological hero, but he quickly realized by his pragmatic mind the unpromising of the world revolution, and, unlike Leon Trotsky, who always strove for it no matter what, Stalin simply made himself a dictator in the country of "victorious" socialism, and after the war - by Generalissimo, and it was not quite deserved and not at all heroic.
  His egocentric nature, however, was kept for a long time within the framework of selflessness characteristic of any real hero. but this disinterestedness over time turned into ostentatious modesty with the availability in the reality of numerous residences, and the desire for greatness, at least in own eyes, turned into a banal dictatorship and the destruction of all opponents.
  This transformation was facilitated by his initially hidden love of power, ambition, resourcefulness, lack of nobility, lack of courage and sacrifice, contempt for people, and fear of death. Of course, the basis for manifestation over time, these negative features of the personality of this half-hero-half-villain is the change in the degree of non-satisfaction of the consciousness downward to the actual replacement of its by dissatisfaction of the animal consciousness, which made Stalin a kind of alpha male of an entire country.
  That is, dissatisfaction with the state of public relations of this figure over time has fallen to the point at which social needs ceased to interest him, giving way to the desire for sole power and its retention. This love of power was supported by a high degree of dissatisfaction of his animal consciousness, or, in other words, increased dominance. That is, in fact, he changed the image of an ideological hero not even to the image of a false hero, but to the image of a banal, uncontrolled ruler-villain who keeps his subjects in fear.
  Italian dictator of the first half of the twentieth century Benito Mussolini at the beginning of his career joined the socialist movement. He became the editor of the socialist weekly, and then the daily newspaper, and subsequently the weekly class struggle magazine, in which he criticized the government, which, in his opinion, defended the interests of the capitalists. He organized strikes, was arrested.
  In 1911, Mussolini opposed the war in Libya. He tried to prevent the sending of troops to the front, organizing strikes and was repeatedly arrested.
  Mussolini in these pre-war years became one of the leaders of the socialists of Italy.
  However, after the outbreak of World War I, Mussolini unexpectedly declared that a German victory would put an end to freedom in Europe, and began to fight with the socialists.
  At the front, Mussolini showed extraordinary courage, throwing himself by the first into attack.
  After the war ended, Mussolini declared that socialism had collapsed and should be replaced with a new doctrine. Thus arose fascism, which was actually supported by the bourgeoisie, which chose it as a counterweight to the communist movement.
  Mussolini became a dictator of Italy, launched political repression, officially began to support racist theories, organized a police state in Italy, got involved in wars.
  In addition, he showed exorbitan love for power and ambitions, making himself not only a dictator (duce), but also he spearheaded the cabinet of Ministers, as well as he headed seven ministries at once and covered himself by various medals and orders.
  Mussolini dreamed of making Italy a great empire on the base of the Mediterranean, but he had failed utterly, turning from a fighter for the rights of workers and a brave warrior into the defender of the parasitic ruling class and the militarist who lost the war.
  In the same way as Stalin, the basis changes over time its self-consciousness from altruism to selfishness was the lowering of the degree of dissatisfaction of consciousness, largely replaced by dissatisfaction of animal consciousness, as evidenced by not only its all-encompassing lust for power, but and the number of lovers and sporadic relations with women that are difficult to count.
  For comparison with these half-heroes-transformers, it makes sense to give a brief characterization by no means to the hero, but still an outstanding figure in the field of management and politics - the Russian ruler and then Tsar Boris Godunov (late XVI and early XVII centuries).
  Boris Godunov was a practical and responsible intellectual- statesman, who wanted not only power, but also thought to increase the welfare of the population.
  At the same time, he did not prove himself in battles, but turned out to be a talented intriguer, breaking through from the very bottom to the heights of power, taking advantage of circumstances, and, moreover, when he was still his ruler of the country, he became the richest man in the state. And if such external characteristics of altruistic heroes as responsibility, highly developed intellect, as well as great organizational abilities and sociability cannot be denied for him, then he had such - by no means heroic qualities, as adaptability, treachery, love of power, greed, hypocrisy, as well as the lack of valor, courage, determination, pluck, sacrifice and contempt for death.
  So, despite his outstanding intellect, significant successes in rebuilding the state after the catastrophic reign of Ivan IV and certain merits in joining Western Siberia to his Power, he is simply an outstanding representative of the power elite who has not accomplished any feats.
  That is, the content of Godunov"s self-consciousness is not much different from self-consciousness of any representative of the power elite, who, because of its low level, sees itself mainly, evaluating its prospects in occupying a higher place in the dominant hierarchy, and the leading place in its consciousness is occupied by the animal of consciousness, which encourages him to push opponents away from power and acquire all kinds of privileges, coinciding in this regard with his truncated self-consciousness.
  In conclusion, it should be noted that the main external differences of any hero from a false hero or from a half-hero-transformer are the enduring sincere unselfishness, sacrifice, awareness of his great mission in the pursuit of good, how the hero understands it, or great goals, devotion to acquired ideals and contempt to those in power as typical parasites and unworthy representatives of the human race.
  
  Bibliography
  
  1. Bruno G. On Heroic Enthusiasm. Kiev. 1996.
  2. Carlyle T. (1841) On hero, Hero-worship, & the Heroic in History. New York. D. Appleton & Co.
  3. Карлейль Т. Этика жизни. Люди и герои. СПб.
  4. Юм Д. Трактат о человеческой природе. Книга 2. Москва, Издательство "Канон". 1995,
  5. Ницше Ф. Сочинения. Т. 1. Издательство "Мысль", Москва. 1990.
  6. Франсуа Ларошфуко "Мемуары. Максимы и моральные размышления". Минск. Издательство "Попурри". 1999.
  7. Weber M. The sociology of religion. L. Methuen. 1965. - LXVII.
  8. Weber M. Economy and society. University of California Press. 1978. Vol. 1.
  9. Булгаков С. Н. Героизм и подвижничество. Из сборника "Вехи". Сборник статей о русской интеллигенции. - Москва, 1909.
  10. Шадриков В. Д. От индивида к индивидуальности. Институт психологии РАН. 2019.
  11. Рерих Е. И. Записи учения Живой Этики. Учения Живой Этики. Беспредельность. Часть 2. ј 797. Издательство - Андрей Люфт. 2011.
  12. Рерих Е. И. Письма. В 9 т. Т. 5. С. 148. М. МЦР, Благотворительный фонд им. Е. И. Рерих, Мастер Банк, 2003.
  13. Шапошникова Л. В. Мудрость веков. М. МЦР, 1996.
  14. Шапошникова Л. В. Рерих как мыслитель и историк культуры. "Культура и время". 2008. No 3.
  15. Nizovtsev Y. M. Why does not science have the ability to identify the essence of consciousness? 2020. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. (C) Yury Nizovtsev.
  16. Nizovtsev Y. M. The collection of the especial and outlandish - for the check with respect to creativity. 2019. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: www.litres.ru. Amazon. (C) Yury Nizovtsev.
  17. Nizovtsev Y. M. Everything and Nothingness. 2016. [Electronic resource]. Access mode: Amazon. (C) Yury Nizovtsev.
  18. Garibaldi G. Memorie, v. 2.
  19. Garibaldi G. Scritti..., vol. V.
  20. Махно Н. И. Воспоминания. Париж. 1936. Глава "На распутье". Hoaxer.
  21. Штирнер М. Единственный и его собственность. Харьков. "Основа". 1994.
  22. Woodcock G. Anarchism. A History of Libertarian Idea and Movement. 2005. ISSN 0887-3763.
  23. Нечаев С. Г. Катехизис революционера. Революционный радикализм в России: век девятнадцатый. М., Археологический центр. 1997.
  24. Троцкий Л. История русской революции. 1 том из двух. Февральская революция. М., "Терра" "Республика", 1997.
  25. Гай Светоний Транквилл. Жизни двенадцати цезарей. Божественный Юлий. М., "Художественная литература", 1990г.
  26. Тюлар Ж. Наполеон, или Миф о спасителе". М. Молодая гвардия. 1-е изд. 1996. ISBN: 978-5-235-03157-9.
  27. The encyclopedia of the French revolution and Napoleonic Wars: a political, social, and military history. Gregory Fremont-Barnes. - ABX-CLIO, 2006. ISBN 978-18510-96466. Roberts A. Napoleon the Great. Penguin. 2014. ISBN 978-0-241-01919.5.
  28. Roberts A. Napoleon the Great. Penguin. 2014. ISBN 978-0-241-01919.
  29. Martin Gilbert. Churchill: A life. 1992. An Owl Book. Henry Holt and Company. New York.
  30. Churchill Randolph S. Op. Cit. V. I. 1899. 11.01.
  31. Milza, Pierr. Mussolini. Paris, Fayard. 1999.
  32. Севастьянов А. Н. Преступник номер один. Уинстон Черчилль перед судом Истории. 2017. ООО "Яуза-пресс".
  33. To the Peel Commission (1937) on Jewish Homeland in Palestine.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 Ваша оценка:
Связаться с программистом сайта.

Новые книги авторов СИ, вышедшие из печати:
О.Болдырева "Крадуш. Чужие души" М.Николаев "Вторжение на Землю"

Как попасть в этoт список

Кожевенное мастерство | Сайт "Художники" | Доска об'явлений "Книги"