As for theatrical performances, if desired, they can generally all be banned, without exception, because many Directors have long recognized that the lack of freedom is better than freedom. It is important, of course, to determine exactly who of our contemporaries finally became mired in the loose, and who is still holding out and not want to slide into liberalism. It is known that to be a liberal are much worse than a Democrat.
The question is how to deal with conflicting reality — who is who? Here can be very useful physiognomy is a special doctrine, when only one face can be defined in almost everything: background, education, character as useful to society and are useless. What is worse, you can very accurately determine that the person has in mind, unless the mind itself is viewed. If you look closely — you can even find out the existence of a criminal record.
The physiognomy is widely used by specialists on personnel issues at the Federal level and at the municipal. The only exception for bikers to actually study, I personally do not suggest.
From the achievements of modern physiognomy has naturally arisen and face-control — and not in one only night clubs and beauty salons. In each area, institutions at the Federal level, in the same State Duma and at the polls, in my opinion, has formed a group of professional face-supervisors, who, unfortunately, are still very often wrong, as can be seen on a television screen, if you look closely, but they are the future.
Opponents I would argue is a utopian dream — a constant holding the face-controllers may require new expenses, and our budget does not have this. Here is just useful and correct tax policy. In this direction, recently made a very important and bold steps. For example, the resort fee. It is a fair tax on those who go on vacation in a beautiful scenic area. Here you can identify the differences: for some it’s a resort, but for someone- a place of permanent residence. To consider each person individually is unrealistic. Before mother nature all are equal, so the resort in our country is not necessarily the black sea coast and Kamchatka, and the Kuril Islands, Sakhalin, and especially with the Ust-Ilim. In short, where one is good, where it resort. Who’s to say that the picturesque banks of the Yenisei and the Volga beauty inferior to the Terek or the Irtysh river? No one will say. So, one needs to apply fiscal policy.
Today among officials at the state level there was a strong desire to impose taxes and fees all the things that have not lined. Great oppression is exposed primarily road transport, which is true. If the owners are gradually turning into urban rogue with black boxes on their window stick derogatory labels — pedestrians continue to enjoy fiscal immunity that is fundamentally opposed to social justice. Because their beauty and comfort a pedestrian area lined with expensive tiles and expanded so that today they can be played even in small towns, at least in football, the more that they look deserted, as most of Pyatnitskaya street in Moscow.
I think, while standing in the entrance of his house, you just pay the cost of your stay, but if you suddenly suffered to the vast pedestrian zone — pay up with a special collection in the state.
Generally, in the writings of the new injunctions there are still huge reserves. Although we have, thank God, is not extinct the well-known specialists in bans, they are no less popular than the stars of show business. And still it is a drop in the bucket compared to our capabilities. I say this quite seriously.
Emperor Peter I may be subjected to fair criticism on the part of its inherent shortcomings, but he was clever and far-sighted. Can’t argue with that. Knows the role played by the great Emperor for shaving beards in his contemporaries. This, incidentally, reflect, and A. S. Pushkin, regretting that the reform of the Emperor did not touch the servants of the Orthodox Church. But here, of course, “everything” was wrong — the Church do not touch. But by itself, the topical issue is not attributed to antiquity. When Solzhenitsyn, after the success of “One day of Ivan Denisovich” suddenly grew a beard, it caused confusion, and then the protest in party circles. Tvardovsky how could urged the great writer to shave, but he did not succeed. However, it was not possible Tvardovsky — managed current legislators. Who is surrounded by first-person today can boast of a beard? Few, which most likely will fall under the next personnel move. The conclusion suggests itself: do you want to go with a beard — pay for the privilege of a special collection, so it was not a shame to those who every morning have to shave off the bristles. But the beard used the best representatives of Russian and Western companies. Even Lenin had a beard. And Karl Marx because of his hair do was hard to see. The entire cultural Golden age was marked by beautiful beards, mustaches, sideburns, which today hardly make their way. However, this should not feel sorry. Often better to think about what else can be disabled, in order to reduce the deficit of our budget in spite of the state Department and personally to Barack Obama.
Under certain circumstances, which are established in countries with a unique path of development, lack of freedom is much better than freedom, as proven by the tragic examples of the past and present.
What would we have to ban? That is the question!..