Kirsan Ilyumzhinov: Most blood was shed for "people's happiness"

Yesterday, many celebrated the Soviet holiday of November 7th. It was observed by those who was born in the USSR and are nostalgic for those times. I want to congratulate everyone on this holiday, but especially those who remember the country of victorious socialism, our Soviet childhood, school, cinema, exams, factories, institutes, hospitals, sanatoriums and pioneer camps. Yes, we didn't have much. There are much more varieties of sausages and cheese now. But we were young, happy, and we had hopes. That means a lot!

But life goes on and one must live. As for the present day, there are two things that invariably amaze me, and for which I can in no way find any explanation or justification.
This is, firstly, the unbreakable, stubborn unwillingness of people to think and calculate the consequences of their actions. And secondly, the equally persistent desire of a rather small part of humanity to force other earthlings to live according to patterns that seem to them to be the road to happiness.
And it’s quite a disaster if such desire takes possession of the minds of those in power. I'm afraid not a single self-proclaimed ruler of the world shed so much blood in his conquests as it was shed "for the happiness of the people." However, we do not observe global people’s happiness.

At the beginning of autumn, millions, or even tens of millions of people, who had never looked at the stock exchange reports in their lives, suddenly, holding their breath, began to track energy prices. Natural gas prices, which yesterday were $ 150-170 in Europe, suddenly began to rise rapidly. 200 dollars, 300, 500 and now the price is 1200 dollars per thousand cubic meters, and it exceeds 1800 today. More terrible thriller than in any Hollywood fantasy!

The European authorities embarrassedly explained to their fellow citizens that the "unexpected" crisis was caused by a few factors: the exit from the pandemic lockdown, which caused a rapid growth in production, and an unprecedentedly hot summer, when citizens massively turned on their air conditioners at full capacity. Both provoked a sharp increase in electricity consumption but the gas used for its production was consumed in the past harsh winter, and current supplies are not enough for everything. This caused the rise in prices for blue fuel (as well as for oil and coal).
Hold on, but until recently, the same people argued that fossil fuels are terribly harmful to the environment, and almost vowed to completely get rid of its use by 2030? Under this pretext, many coal and gas power plants, which provided uninterrupted energy supplies, were closed and to be replaced by wind turbines and solar panels. However, as European officials explained, nature is again to blame: the past summer turned out to be the calmest in the last hundred years. The wind turbines stopped, and solar panels’ energy was not enough. What a surprise.
I'm afraid, the European bureaucrats are disingenuous. Back in 1975, the Soviet physicist, Nobel Prize laureate Petr Kapitsa argued the inefficiency of the so-called "Green energy". That is, even under the most favourable weather conditions, “green energy” generators will never be able to provide the electricity needed by humanity.
I am not at all against the development of green energy. In the end, I initiated the construction of the first wind power park in Russia in Kalmykia. But it never entered my mind to transfer the entire republic to wind power. Sadly, green energy is still in the experimental stage. I really hope that in the foreseeable future we will learn how to get this energy more efficiently and in a more environmentally friendly way. As I heard, there are quite promising searches in this direction.
But to offer it now as an uncontested replacement for traditional sources? Don't you think this is a bit premature? Especially if the lives of billions of people depend on such decisions?
It seems that mass madness has gripped the authorities of half of the world: I could cite a dozen examples when initially good ideas are brought to the point of absurdity. And this absurdity in habits, behaviour, and in anything becomes mandatory for any person, regardless of whether he shares these ideas or not. Violators will be severely ostracized, and even jailed.
As Vladimir Putin said recently: "You need not impose anything. We need to be more convincing and prove it by example". The entire history of human civilization shows how fragile our society is and how much it could be damaged if it is forced to do something for which it is not yet ready. And when this happens in half of the world, it threatens us with a catastrophe comparable in consequences to the fall of an asteroid or a nuclear war.
That is why I agree with the president: it is necessary not to impose, but to convince and prove. Only I would add that this is not enough. In the old days, Soviet propaganda worked like a well-oiled machine. People pretended to agree for the sake of appearance. There was even such an anecdote: “By the year 2000, our citizens will live under communism! The list of these citizens is currently being specified."
Therefore, I again turn to the idea of ​​Vitacracy, when the highest priority is ​​the value of anyone’s life. And this is much better than ethereal attempts to forcibly make the whole world happy. It is impossible to force anyone to get to paradise, and this is not required. If we begin to live according to the principles of Vitacracy, evaluating each of our actions, each idea, proceeding from harming others and, conversely, benefiting everyone, then may we will finally no longer be forced to achieve universal happiness brought to the point of absurdity? Then there will be no point in convincing.