On the Way to Happiness

Original Russian text "На пути к блаженству"

“People will do anything, no matter how absurd, to avoid coming face to face with their soul.” - Carl Jung

“Poland is a country where everyone lives by deceiving each other.” - a vile stereotype from the 70s

“...And everything is collapsing. And this winter, and these houses, and these people - everything will go away, everything will burn, disappear. And only snow will remain, white, dull, indifferent...”   - Mikhail Bulgakov, “The White Guard”

“I live in a very interesting time!” - this is how countless generations of people have formulated their attitude to the contemporary period of history because although changes are always happening, when you are close to something moving, it seems that, passing by you, it is incredibly accelerating, just as, for example, watching a moving train from a distance of several miles is not at all as impressive as when an express rushes past you standing on a suburban platform, having taken a step back from the yellow safety line. And suppose these changes somehow affect you, even with a stream of compressed air or a frightening roar of a siren. In that case, you want to replace the definition “interesting” with something more meaningful and talk about a permanent crisis, the collapse of the system of public order, or the decline of morals. The reader has already understood that if anyone can speak out on these issues, it will be the author who has something that is hurting and is bursting to get out.

The fact that the world is heading for the abyss is clear to anyone who has lived at least fifty years, that is, to almost everyone reading this opus, since I am practically sure that representatives of another age group have already got bored at the first paragraph and switched to more important things - no time! Of course, we are not talking about the entire planet, but only about its part occupied by Western Civilization: North America, Europe up to the Urals, and a country in the Middle East - a participant in the Eurovision contest, and all the other earthlings are waiting for the death of this Civilization to profit from the remains. Vladimir Vysotsky expressed these feelings very well in the song “My Funeral” when he asks vampires to wait a little before drinking blood: “Wait, I’ll pour it myself, I know, I know, it’s delicious ...”

There is nothing special about the death of a civilization – it has happened many times before, and the most famous example is the collapse and death of the Roman Empire, beautifully described by Gibbon in his six-volume work back in the 18th century. There are many analogies with the current situation, but we will focus only on the most obvious ones. For example, the historian has written that money played an increasingly important role in the election of a new emperor: at the end of the 2nd century, the lawyer and financier Didian Julian simply bought this position from the Praetorian Guard, promising each soldier 25 thousand sesterces, which was equal to a 10-year salary for a legionary. Given the number of interested parties, the total amount of payments was about 1 billion current dollars, which is very close to the costs of the recent presidential election campaign.

Twenty years later, for the first time in the history of Rome, the son of a slave - a freedman from North Africa - became emperor. Marcus Macrinus, who was also a lawyer in the administration of Caracalla (have you all seen his baths?), led a conspiracy against his patron. Just in case, Macrinus immediately appointed his young son vice-emperor, but this did not help: both were executed very soon, as was Didian, about whom Gibbon said: “He became a victim of stupidity and wealth ... “, but the number of candidates for emperor did not decrease.

Ask how events developed further, implying what awaits us. - At the beginning of the 3rd century, the Roman Empire was in deep crisis: continuous barbarian raids along all borders, economic decline, and inflation - “there was no silver left in coins”, the state actively interfered with the pricing system by introducing new tariffs and duties, pirates controlled sea trade routes, and since there were no people left who wanted to join the Roman army, barbarians were recruited en masse at recruiting stations, who in turn received Roman citizenship and a significant bonus, after which it was very stupid to die for the Empire.

At the end of the 3rd century, Diocletian divided the empire into four regions (tetrarchy), each with its own emperor, and a hundred years later, the number of local Augusti and Caesars reached thirty, and Theodosius again divided the empire between his sons into Western and Eastern, with the capital in Constantinople. The Western Empire fell under the onslaught of barbarians at the end of the 5th century, and Roman Civilization practically ceased to exist.

“Rome, having lost its central power, ceased to be the heart of the world. Its ruins are silent witnesses of how the empire surrendered to the barbarians, and its spirit migrated to Byzantium .” Note that the decline of the Roman Empire coincided in time with the transition from paganism to Christianity, which Gibbon considered one of the main factors that led to the collapse, noting that the new religion weakened the empire due to ideological intolerance, the substitution of secular authority by the church, and pacifism, which contradicted the civic duty to defend the country. One can guess that after the publication of the “History,” his views on Christianity were subjected to harsh criticism.

Let us now listen to an eyewitness whose evidence is unlikely to survive for the next two thousand years, and even if someone who considers himself a historian of the 21st century AC finds this “scratched” (corrupted) file and manages to read it, he will certainly consider it a falsification - such chaos did not exist even in Ancient Rome and could not exist. Remember how, in Egypt, archaeologists dug up a stone tablet from the 3rd millennium BC and, after deciphering the hieroglyphs, read with surprise: “Terrible times have come: money for the repair of the Sphinx has been squandered, children do not obey their parents, and everyone wants to write a book. “

Let’s start with modern politics: here, all the external signs of decay are obvious: systemic corruption and complete isolation of the elites from the people, who they no longer need as a productive force, and everything they need for a comfortable existence can be made in third world countries - cheaply and without the headache of trade unions. The institutions of power are practically dysfunctional: the “left” and “right” parties disagree on everything by definition, and any law to be adopted by Congress must include various handouts that, at best, neutralize any positive effect for the state. For example, to pass the “Farm Bill” in 2018, which provides subsidies to farmers in the amount of 38 billion, the Republican Party had to include food aid of 326 billion for low-income families voting for Democrats.

But even adopting such package deals, called laws, is troublesome. Therefore, each new president endows himself with dictatorial powers and issues countless decrees, that is, by-laws, which the next president immediately cancels and replaces with his own, fair ones. Obviously, getting one’s own man into the presidency becomes a categorical imperative for each party and makes any means acceptable, such as the liquidation of an opponent, election fraud, vote buying, and, innocent in this context, the continuous publication of fictitious results of public opinion polls. Note that such a political system is characteristic, with a few exceptions, only of Western Democracies, while other “serious” civilizations consider it unacceptable and are governed by real dictatorships that ensure stability for at least decades to come. Since elections to Congress, the Senate, and the President are held every two years, it is impossible in principle to plan anything more than three or four years in advance: if the result of your initiative or program is unsuccessful, you may not be re-elected, and if it is positive, your political rivals or followers will appropriate it.

A terrible example of what political struggle on the 'ALL IN' poker principle leads to, when the thirst for power, multiplied by hatred for the opponent, puts the existence of the state itself in a critical situation, was demonstrated by Israel in 2023, when it allowed a large-scale invasion of its territory by enemies. Hoping to compromise the Prime Minister, the heads of the security forces went so far as to disconnect him from operational intelligence information and themselves ignored alarm signals about the impending attack. Those in the know may object that this was not entirely true and the Prime Minister himself is to blame for everything, but since they have not yet dared to conduct a real investigation over the past year and a half, the truth can only be even more terrible, and the disintegration of state structures even deeper.

Politics and money are linked inversely: to make good money, you need political power, and vice versa, you need money to get and hold this power. A fresh illustration is the recent upheavals with import duties - tariffs: what is the point of introducing tariffs and then canceling them three days later, “at the request of the working people?” - Stupid and leads to chaos? - Of course, but if someone (from friends) accidentally finds out about this plan, then you can make good money from the stock exchange fluctuations. Representatives of both parties who have not been made friends are already demanding an investigation, which will lead to nothing. "To our friends — all favors; to our enemies — the full weight of the law."

In fact, introducing tariffs has a more reasonable and legal explanation. We here in the conditional West do not want to work [productively], but we want to receive a decent salary, live comfortably, and have goods that can be purchased at a reasonable price. That is, we have nothing to sell, and to buy, we print money and pay for foreign goods with it. “To sell something unnecessary, you must first buy something unnecessary,” said Matroskin the Cat (from the famous Russian cartoon).

If you want to put it in numbers, the US debt is 36 trillion, of which 7 are just printed, and the remaining 29 are issued to creditors in the form of Treasury bills and bonds (goverment debt securities) at 4-5% per annum, and 1.2 trillion a year is spent on servicing this debt. This is a significant amount, given that the state’s income is about 4 trillion a year, which is not enough for a “good” life. Therefore, every year, it is necessary to borrow (it is better to print  - author’s note) an additional 3 trillion, which means that tariffs will help reduce the balance of payments deficit, i.e., imbalance. There is logic here, but it is about the same as in the proposal to cut off the leg of a person who wants to lose weight. I want to believe that America will not go bankrupt, and in Europe the financial situation is not much better, and the debt spiral will spin in the opposite direction, like a DNA molecule when heated.

Okay, the author doesn’t understand anything about politics, and, to put it mildly, he hasn’t succeeded on the stock exchange - no good friends? But he must have worked somewhere, seen and heard something? - Of course, he worked, and sometimes even productively; it’s not for nothing that I put this word in square brackets in the previous prophecy. He worked for ten years in science, four in the Soviet perestroika business, and the last 35 years in Israel and America, in four large corporations and about ten startups, both as a full-time employee and as a consultant; of course, the most relevant to this conversation (monologue) are my latest American observations over 20-25 years.

The fundamental purpose of any company is to produce goods or services that are needed by individuals or other businesses to create their own final products. This broad definition of productive labor includes scientific and technological innovation, the development of new medicines and software, infrastructure construction, and the education and training of skilled professionals. In contrast, unproductive labor is a hollow imitation—work that lacks real substance or value. A civilization, society, or nation can develop sustainably only when productive labor is respected and fraudulent activity is outlawed. What kind of law ensures this? — we’ll return to that shortly.

Here are some chemists who have discovered a new reaction and decided to make money on it: WE will build a plant and, using our technology, WE will produce a new absorbent material for sanitary pads and diapers that will replace the old adsorbent, and WE will capture the world market and enrich ourselves and the investors who finance our project. This is called the beautiful term “Disruptive innovation,” and so far, everything looks good. They organized a startup, investors gave money, and the work began to boil, and, of course, there were difficulties, and they were overcome. Still, after a couple of years, it became clear to the management that their technology did not work. As honest people, they went bankrupt and closed the business. I wrote “honest” because this exit strategy scenario is very atypical. It may well be that there was no chance of success from the very beginning, and the business was directly planned as a scam (see the history of the Enron corporation), which means that the ending was criminal in essence: the data was falsified and success was declared, the company issued shares and went bankrupt, or it was sold to someone and the buyer went bankrupt.

Have I met any successful startups in my practice? – Yes, just two: one commercialized an innovative procedure for isolating the main substance from marijuana, and the other developed an opioid-based energy drink for athletes.

Let’s say the author was unlucky, but what’s existentially scary about this example? There are dishonest people everywhere, and maybe they were sincerely mistaken at first and only later showed weakness, trying to stay afloat at any cost? - The problem here is philosophical, connected with the transition from quantity to quality: as long as a couple of card sharps work on a cruise liner, everything goes well, but when three-quarters of the passengers are sharpers, the vacation can be spoiled for everyone. Recently, I attended a conference on “Clean Technologies,” where the organizers proudly announced that 40 thousand startups engaged in extracting carbon dioxide from the air have been registered in the USA. Any modestly competent engineer knows that this is not only stupid but also impossible to make economically profitable, but many still want it - "Their name is Legion."(Gospel of Mark)

At first, it seemed to me that the driving force behind this madness was simple greed: I’ll build a plant and make a profit like a capitalist. However, in recent years, it has become obvious that an increasing number of young entrepreneurs do not plan commercial success at all. The driving force now is quality of life: get money investments for something fashionable at the moment (CO2 sequestration, greenhouse effect, driverless cars, windmills, algae energy, nano, pico, femto...), and live on them for several years your sole pleasure: traveling around the world for negotiations, meeting smart people, the power to hire and fire - also pleasant, and, most importantly, freedom from exploitation. The risk is minimal; if THEY don’t give you more money, then bankruptcy, a farewell banquet for the dismissed employees, selling the equipment for scrap metal, and you can start over.

Assuming that the most modest startup spends a million dollars annually, this is already 40 billion just to combat carbon dioxide. In addition, five, ten, and sometimes a hundred company employees, plus the innovator himself, are removed from the sphere of productive labor but remain consumers. Apparently, this cannot continue for long: the example is contagious, and in the next cycle, the dismissed young engineers who “smelled blood” will want to start something of their own, environmentally friendly. And this means that with a high probability they will end up in the sphere of imitation activity: to come up with something new is not at all as easy as it seems, and useful - even more difficult; of course, you can get lucky, but you need to play for good chances, and this is either Nano-Pico or Global Warming.

You think, well, venture capitalists will lose money, and rightly so, don’t invest in dubious ideas. However, there are no fools there: the capitalist gives his several million and acquires control over the startup, and then all efforts are invested in obtaining a loan of hundreds of millions from some government department, or investor-shareholders, or a bank. The money is spent, and society or you and I pay: if it was some government department - then these are our taxes; if shares - then absorb losses; and if after bankruptcy the bank does not get the loan back - then it will cover its costs by selling our pension funds at a certain loss. But how and why 'naive' bankers issue unsecured loans to swindlers is a separate story, and no less dirty, but ... enough about innovations.

Want pure science, without commerce? About the fight against diseases, say, Alzheimer’s, in which the young French scientist Sylvain Lesne became famous, having discovered in 2006 a new protein, Beta-Amyloid-56, which accumulates in the brain tissue of patients; an article in Nature and multi-billion dollar grants, and a close Nobel Prize for him and the head of the laboratory, Professor Karen Ash, who took ubder her wing the prodigi. Their research turned out to be very useful for the company Biogen, which, based on the Lesne-Ash theory, developed a drug against Alzheimer’s disease and, having received accelerated FDA approval in 2021, began its production. Great, true?

Yes, it would be great if it were true. Still, unfortunately, a certain Matthew Schrag analyzed photographs of the test results cited in Lesne’s articles and showed the content of Beta-Amyloid-56 in brain tissue, and proved that they were all falsified using a Photoshop-type program. The fight between neuroscientists and Schrag lasted for several years and ended in capitulation: the articles were retracted from journals, all employees of Karen Ash’s lab resigned of their own accord, with Lesne himself leaving last, without admitting anything, and Biogen quietly stopped producing its drug, which was deemed useless. It is worth noting that before this, Schrag had found many falsified tests in articles by other scientists, and Sylvan accidentally fell into his hands in the heat of the moment.

It happens, you might say, that there have always been swindlers in science. Of course, but their number is growing too fast; look at the table showing the growth dynamics of scientific articles retracted from journals (from The Retraction Watch database).

Year	2000	2005	2010	2015	2021	2023
Retracted papers	40	100	300	800	2000	10,000

The function is very similar to an exponent: the process has started and is accelerating. And the reason? At the end of the 19th century, Mendeleev said something like this: “Knowing how easy and pleasant it is to live in the science of chemistry, I want many to join it .” If we consider that there were very few scientists at that time and much fewer rich scientists, then Dmitry Ivanovich perceptibly meant how interesting it is to do research work and how inspiring scientific success is, both in chemistry and other sciences. The divine feelings of a discoverer have not changed since the time of Mendeleev, or in general, since the invention of an oar or a stone knife. Still, material gratification has increased incredibly: doing science somewhere in an academy or a large company, you can get a good salary and, in addition, enjoy the work, as Mendeleev noted. For the first ten years after graduating from the chemical institute named by Mendeleev, I was engaged in scientific research work (in the science of chemistry, indeed). I found it so interesting that I often wondered whether I was actually getting paid for such a thrill. I probably would have worked for free, but I still needed the money and had to give up on pure science.

But we digress... There are a lot of scientists now, and to rise above the average level, to switch from Toyota to Lexus, you need to discover something outstanding and practical, not just a new reaction, but one that allows you to easily and cheaply obtain something that has consumer value. Not all scientists want to become entrepreneurs, and in academic science , the struggle is usually not for creating a new startup, as was written above, but for receiving a grant. Grants mean money, subordinates, fame, and independence from exploitation, and for the sake of this bouquet, more and more members of the scientific community are ready to do a lot, for example, forgery and falsification of data, like Lesne and company.

The number of retracted articles indicates this phenomenon, and if someone thinks that 10 thousand is nonsense, 9 million articles are published yearly; they are very wrong. Firstly, these are only those who were “caught,” meaning that for such a serious accusation, it is necessary to prove falsification or plagiarism with a 100% guarantee; otherwise, the scientist will be offended and sue the slanderer. Secondly, few people “go to pull a job” alone, which means the laboratory staff is also aware of what is happening: Lesne’s epochal article in Nature had ten co-authors. Thirdly, articles and studies based on fictitious data should also be retracted, as Biogen was forced to withdraw its Alzheimer’s drug. So we see the tip of the iceberg. It means that science, as part of our Civilization, is plunging into a state of crisis from which there is no visible way out: dishonesty is practically not punishable, well, the most sensitive and fragile will resign, and the incentive to deceive is very high and the rewards that I wrote about, money, fame, and power, can captivate even those who are really talented and not lazy. By the way, they are the most dangerous.

If the exponential growth of fraud continues, then in five to seven years, the imitation of scientific activity will become the main occupation, and real scientists will be forced out, just as decent people disappeared from politics in recent decades. If they have nothing on you-no crime, no dirt—that makes you dangerous to the system.

We have not looked into all the institutions of Western Civilization, such as the education system or the judiciary, defense, or mass media, but even without this, it is clear that all the pillars are in a state of deep crisis, the exit from which, whatever it may be, will hardly bring pleasure to those living inside the system. Nevertheless, the examples given are sufficient to speculate on the cause or causes of this natural process. Yes, mass outrages are happening at or beyond the bounds of common sense, but why do those mechanisms of self-preservation of society, which philosophers developed over the past three millennia, not work? How did the “checks and balances” system, laid down in the American Constitution and in one form or another present in the constitutions of other countries of the Western World, fall apart? It worked, worked, and then stopped at the beginning of the 21st century.

It seems that the problem lies in people, or rather in the change in their views. As biological beings with their instincts and needs, modern humans are no different from the visitors of the First Temple. There are two main changes: the adoption of the philosophy of individualism and the loss of faith in God.

The main contribution to the development of the philosophy of individualism was made by the 18th-century thinkers John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Immanuel Kant. They put forward the revolutionary principle of the primacy of the individual over society, which led to the following very important consequences.

- Personal autonomy – a person makes decisions on his own and is capable of making reasonable choices.

- Freedom of the individual – in political, economic, and moral terms.

- Responsibility – everyone is responsible for their decisions and actions.

- Intrinsic value - acting in one’s self-interest is natural and, in theory, leads to the common good.

The best minds of humanity have shown their strength, proving and refuting these positions, placing the individualist in difficult situations, such as whom a mother should save first: herself or her child, or whether it is possible to deceive a killer to save a friend or even one’s own life, and although thousands of philosophical books have already been written, each person still acts according to his internal moral law, laid down in him by his upbringing and cultural environment.

Kant “recommended” that all thinking beings follow the Categorical Imperative when making decisions, that is, the absolute moral law of doing good and only from good motives, and at the same time check their decisions with the principle “What will happen if everyone does this? And will it be good for the world from this? “However, it is regrettable that the Hypothetical (conditional) Imperative, hated by Kant, has become much more widespread among the people, according to which, yes, one must act morally and well, but only if this does not lead to any unpleasant or undesirable consequences. As Cardinal Richelieu formulated it: “Always tell the truth, the whole truth, the pure truth, but never the whole truth .”

It must be acknowledged that individualism, as a declaration of personal freedom, led to an unprecedented flourishing of productive forces in Europe and America and the creation of a modern capitalist society of abundance. In just the past two centuries, Western civilization has far exceeded the rest of the world in both economics and political structure, sciences, arts, and military, and it has become a symbol and example for other nations. It is no coincidence that many want to join it, but the opposite is not true.

At the same time, it is clear that individualism, elevated to the absolute, undermines the functioning of human society (community) and gradually leads to its disintegration: an adherent of individualism does not want to work more than is necessary for his personal existence, and therefore not supports the weak, does not reproduce sufficiently, does not consider it necessary to defend his state from enemies - this can harm his health, that is, he behaves, if not antisocially, then at least indifferently to the needs of the collective, and calls those who condemn him for this nazis, fascists and communists.

As soon as the number of individualists exceeds a certain share of the population of any state, it is finished: the “barbarians” will seize it and remake it in their barbaric way; that is, they will destroy Civilization and establish their “wild” values, sometimes even more correct and economically effective (for an outside observer). The defeated will either disappear physically or accept the new order and dissolve in it, as in Michel Houellebecq’s novel “Submission,” where the main character, Francois - a liberal professor at the Sorbonne - converts to Islam, and everything turns out well for him.

It’s funny that Western countries in Europe and America deliberately promote individualism, utilitarianism and existentialism, and then get offended when someone attacks them and they are not ready for war and no one wants to die; support non-binary families and complain that the birth rate is falling and the population is aging - the number of dependent pensioners is growing; open their markets to foreign manufacturers and are surprised that selfish entrepreneurs, pursuing their “individual” benefit, move production abroad, and do not pay local taxes. Now they remembered about tariffs, but, as they say, it’s too late to drink Borjomi mineral water when you have liver cancer... However, it has always been like this: civilizations first collapsed from within, and then a small push was enough: if you can call the USSR a civilization, then people there first listened to Western radio, then stopped believing in the wisdom of the Communist party and its leading role, tried to limit the power of the KGB, that is, violence, and the empire fell apart in a five-year period (piatiletka in rus).

When prescribing a new drug, a doctor must consider not only its direct therapeutic effect but also potential side effects related to the patient’s anamnesis and any previously prescribed medications or treatments. For example, if you take the anticoagulant Coumadin (aka Warfarin or rat poison), you cannot drink Ibuprofen - the risk of internal bleeding increases sharply, or almost everyone knows that alcohol interacts poorly with sleeping pills. At the same time, a doctor can prescribe an antibiotic in case of a dangerous microbial infection, knowing that it will kill the intestinal flora for a while. The situation is approximately the same with philosophical theories: individualism is the engine of progress, but it is good as long as something keeps it within the bounds of reason. Until the end of the last century, this role was played by religion, in Western society - Christianity, the same one that Gibbon blamed for the death of the Roman Empire, but for slightly different reasons.

Christian morality was the counterweight that did not allow individualistic impulses to fly too high: of course, the higher the exploitation, the greater the profit, but still, most capitalists at the beginning of the last century would not have consciously poisoned workers with harmful substances or killed their competitors to increase their market share. That is, they did it, but at least they knew that it was bad and God could punish. Much bigger was the influence of religious morality on ordinary people, not capitalists, but employees, peasants, and workers: it was considered bad to cheat, one had to work honestly, forgery of documents was presumed shameful, the homeland had to be defended at the cost of life, and children and parents had to be taken care of even though they interfere with relaxing and taking drugs. Once again, all this was there, and crime existed; still, it was morally condemned by both society and the conscience of the individual, and the majority of people believed that living honestly and being respected by your neighbors was more important than living splendidly and only for yourself.

When America’s Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution in the late 18th century, they considered it necessary to spell out the laws of government and the transfer of power, mainly to avoid a return to absolutism; still, they also assumed that the basic Christian norms would remain valid, and there was no particular need to spell out the obvious. And for a long time, this hypothesis worked, mainly because the population of the colonies was homogeneous in the professed Protestant religion - only 1% were Catholics in the 1790 census. In the 19th century, the number of Catholics arriving from countries like Ireland, Bavaria, Poland, and Italy increased dramatically, gradually leading to a shift in moral standards in society, that is, an understanding of what is right and what is wrong. To most people today, the differences seem insignificant, but two hundred years ago, they were enough to make a job ad end with the refrain: “No Irish Need Apply!”  The main difference was the attitude towards God: for Protestants, it was personal responsibility before God and the primacy of conscience, while for Catholics, it was obedience to the church and the performance of rituals, and also the opportunity to confess and receive atonement for sins - without sinning, you will not repent. The fact that the Irish loved drunkenness, gambling, and theaters, Protestants considered a manifestation of sinfulness.

If attitudes towards the same phenomena differ, the state may consider it necessary to recognize something as the norm; that is, a new law, an amendment to the previous one, or even changes to the Constitution are needed.

But if the Irish and Italians had been absorbed or melted by the beginning of the 20th century, then subsequent waves of emigration brought to America increasingly ethnically and ideologically heterogeneous material, Muslims and Jews, Buddhists and Adventists, socialists and atheists, and to keep them within the framework of “normal” behavior, many, many new laws were needed, and lawyers, of course. Gradually, the basic law - the Constitution - was overgrown with so many additional acts that the moral component of behavior did not exactly disappear, but lost its effective force: everything is allowed that is not prohibited by law; the question of good or bad was replaced by legal or not.

Meanwhile, the authority of the Christian religion in America, and especially in Europe, was rapidly declining. For example, the table shows the percentage of residents of the USA and Denmark (a European country) who attend church at least once a month. Due to the scandal of mass violence against children in Catholic schools at the end of the last century, the outflow of parishioners in America would have increased even more but was partially compensated by the huge immigration of Catholics from Mexico and Latin America.

Year	1950	1960	1970	1980	1990	2000	2010	2020
USA %	53	48	43	41	39	37	33	28
Denmark %	23	18	13	10	7	4	3	2

This is where individualism as a moral criterion is detonated: you test your actions not by Judeo-Christian commandments but by personal or family benefit and legality - can I be persecuted and judged for my actions or not? I take a loan from a bank, knowing that the business will most likely end in bankruptcy, so what? - Bankruptcy is a legal procedure, you need to incorporate in advance so as not to risk your personal property, and put aside enough money for lawyers, and go ahead, to fight Climate Change, damn it: sometimes it gets warmer, sometimes it gets colder. I apply for a grant, but instead of the experimentally achieved concentration of a useful substance of 5 milligrams per liter, I write 5 grams per liter. If anything happens - this is a typo, Freud is to blame, and if the grant is received and used, then we will deny everything, and at most, we will withdraw the articles; there are many of us, when Matthew Schrag is alone. Manufacturers add an incredible amount of sugar to soft drinks – children like sweets, and the shelf life increases, albeit this leads to obesity and diabetes, but the principle of utility is observed. Well, sure, it's unethical — but hey, at least it's cheap and convenient! Even if the decision to add sugar was made collectively by the management, there is no doubt that everyone will receive a hefty bonus from the profit, each individually, and there is no need to talk about personal responsibility – the company’s legal department occupies three floors.

If there is any doubt or hope that, despite everything, Civilization will still survive, then look at its immigration policy: millions of people from the so-called Third World are not simply sneaking illegally to America and Europe but are invited there, and immediately receive the promised material support, and soon civil rights and the opportunity to participate in the democratic process. Most of them belong to other civilizations or ethnic groups, with their own religions and value systems, completely different from Christian ones and often hostile to them. Having arrived in a democratic country, they quickly understand that here “everyone is for himself,” to succeed, you need to unite with your own, so they live mostly in compact communities: Somali, Syrian, Indian, and others. As soon as the community has formed, the demand for a special education system immediately arises: Muslim religious schools or Russian mathematical schools, their children must be torn away from the corrupting influence of Western culture. The principle of individualism is alien to new immigrants – you can’t survive alone, and the collapse of Western society doesn’t bother newcomers at all – it won’t make things worse for them as they experienced in Darfur.

Nevertheless, it worries ordinary citizens of the Western world, who feel that the world they are accustomed to is falling apart at the seams: production with good salaries has long been moved abroad, and for the remaining jobs in the service sector, they have to compete with immigrants who are ready to accept any conditions to gain a foothold. The same applies to the middle class: engineers and programmers whose positions are going to China or India. I have heard from several acquaintances that they will be fired as soon as they pass on their work experience to foreign colleagues. The average (median) family income in America has not changed over the past fifty years and is about 60 grand a year; with this money, you can make ends meet, but you can’t think about a vacation abroad or sending your children to college, and you are not entitled to welfare. During this same period, the income of the top 1% sector, the elite and upper class, has increased 8-10 fold. Normal citizens know nothing about the lives of the elites; their habitats practically do not intersect, but they see immigrants everywhere and, therefore, vote for those who promise to remove them from the country: this has been the case in America for the last three presidential cycles, during Brexit in Great Britain, and in Europe, conservative parties with an anti-immigration orientation are gaining more and more votes.

Do people belonging to the political or bureaucratic elites understand that their activities are leading to a catastrophe? - Absolutely! But for the elites, the preservation of Western Civilization is not only unimportant, but on the contrary, by pursuing globalist goals, they are trying to destroy it, hoping that under the new order, their material position will somehow be preserved and their power will increase to the maximum. However, this is a topic for a separate conversation, and the urgent tactical task is to bring in more potential voters who depend on the state bureaucracy and vote for the one who promises them a larger piece of the social pie.

Conscience has nothing to do with it: there is no God, my personality is valuable in itself, and it needs money and power to realize its potential. If something is left unclear, reread the Declaration of Independence, the second paragraph.

“We hold this to be a truth beyond doubt, that all men are born equal, and that their Creator has endowed them with certain rights which cannot be taken away, including the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. “

By the way, the English word Happiness used to be translated into Russian as Bliss.