The right to live

A few days ago I returned from Minsk, which hosted the European Championship of the rapid chess and blitz. The organizers have made ​​every effort to arrange this event: the organization, technical equipment and the media coverage were beyond praise. Hundreds of chess tables put in the great hall of the Minsk Sports Palace were equipped with sensors to detect the moves of the rivals online in the internet.

Chess, especially rapid, have not had such success in Belarus for quite a long time. However, the Championship was worth it: more than 1200 participants from 30 countries came to the Belarusian capital. Among them were the strongest masters, whose play brings a true delight to the chess fans.

I am sure that Minsk has proved itself as a worthy rival to Warsaw and Wroclaw (where the Championships were held in the recent years). In addition, this city has major advantages. Having the infrastructure, level of comfort and cosy architectural style that the Europeans are accustomed to; it provides its facilities that are much cheaper than in the European Union cities. Which this is very important for the players.
Thus, I think that the dream of the President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko- to annually hold the major international championship in Minsk could be realized.
Visiting more than a hundred countries every year, I often go to Belarus. By the way, this time I with President Lukashenko agreed on the introduction of chess into the curriculum in a number of Belarusian schools. This country is not like the others. However, it is not because, as for some reason some consider in Russia, Belarus is forever stuck in the Soviet 80s.
On the contrary, the country is developing dynamically. I see the new positive changes every time I come here. Before the Minsk Championship, I had been to Italy and Greece and I can say that Belarus exceeds the quality of life of citizens of those countries without yielding to their level of the technological development. If I had to describe this advantage in one sentence, I would say that Belarussians are featured by their relaxed confidence in the future.

I do not want to say that the citizens of Belarus eat of gold plates and drive around in Lamborghinis. There, as in all countries with a market economy, are those who are rich and those who are poor. However, I could feel the care for the fellow human beings everywhere.
Something like that I felt in Libya, where I was shown the districts of the new buildings, which were made by the orders of Muammar Gaddafi for honeymooners. The newlyweds were given the local flats to be paid for in instalments on the concessional terms, thus the young families instantly get the solid foundation.
I do not know if there is such a practice in Belarus. But I know that they follow the right direction, which can be determined as taking care of the most important human right - the right to live.
Visiting the completely different countries from Libya and Afghanistan to Germany and the United States, I became convinced that actually this is the only right that really concerns people. Lukashenko and his team were able to implement the policy when the people see that they are really cared for.
And if people can enjoy that basic right, then it does not matter if they are governed by democracy or autocracy, capitalism or socialism or any other ‘ism’. There are its advantages and the bright sides in all systems and ideologies as well as in all religions. However, the right to live is the cornerstone and comprehensive law without which any system and ideology is not worth a penny.
In the recent years we have been greatly brainwashed by used out of the context the phrase of Winston Churchill: “Democ­racy is the worst form of gov­ern­ment, except for all those other forms that have been”. For some reason, everyone remembers this phrase, especially the second part and profoundly forgets the first one.
However, take a look at what has now become of the democracy? What happened to the maxim of Voltaire: "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say?" Many people I spoke to in the democratic countries protest against the cultivated principles of sexual tolerance and multiculturalism, which brought the millions of illiterate, embittered refugees from the destroyed by the ‘humanitarian’ bombing of Middle Eastern and African countries to Europe.
Moreover, they do it like the Soviet dissidents in the '70s: in a low voice, with caution, after closing themselves in the kitchen. To speak openly is dangerous. No, they would not drag you to the bonfire but there surely would be problems with the career and business. And do not forget about the fate of Gaddafi and Milosevic who also did not particularly agree with the ‘democratic’ values.
Moreover, the story of the sanctions of the US Treasury against me is quite revealing. Don’t you think that is it very ‘democratic’ to put a man in a ‘black list’ only on the basis of the suspicions of the collaboration with other people without even bothering to figure out how justified these suspicions are!
Secondly, as we remember, the word democracy means ‘government of the people’, which means the rule of the majority, despite the fact, that most people are rarely able to make a reasonable and efficient decision.
Do not rush to be indignant: the billion people recently and hundreds of millions more will soon be celebrating the birthday of a man who was sentenced to a shameful and painful death by the large majority. He is known to everyone except for those who are still living in the primitive primeval societies. The name of that man was Jesus Christ.
And now we have come to the point when the representatives of the ‘democratic’ Turkey offer to negotiate with the bandits of ISIS who do not recognize any of democratic values and cut the heads off the dissents...
In reality, no right to have an opinion is above the right to live. It starts at the moment of the birth of a man and no one has the right to deprive it. However, the society should take care that this right is fully realized.
Every system and every ideology establishes the duties of a man in detail but rather vaguely declares his rights. Meanwhile, both the duties and responsibilities are inseparable from the human rights. And these rights are very specific.
Remember the first cult film ‘The Matrix’: " What good is a phone call if you're unable to speak?" What good is the freedom of speech if we do not know whether our children will be fed tomorrow? What is the use of the freedom of assembly if we can become the victim of a mad drug addict while walking down the street?
People need not the ephemeral rights of the nonbinding government and society but the ones that are quite tangible: the right for the decent work, shelter, security, fresh air, clean water and healthy food. In the end, everyone has the right not to be hungry and poorly clad regardless of his race, sex, age and the state of health.
The provision of these rights should be the only basis of the true democracy or the people’s rule. However, it would be more correct to call this approach vitacracy (derivate from the Latin word ‘vita’- the life or ‘lifecracy’) to avoid the confusion in terminology.
I remember five years ago scientists came to the conclusion that the mankind is actually capable of providing every earthling with the minimum set of the material welfare. This news flashed on the pages of the press but later disappeared. Apparently, someone in the world of big money and important persons has no desire for the people thinking about the serious things.
Today I propose to think about how to build a new society for all. A society free of the cynical politicking and the imposed want for the consumption, the fear for life and the fear for the future. A society where everyone is guaranteed the right to live.
The New Year's Eve is a good time to dream and plan. According to Buddhist teachings, we are now living in the times of change of not years only  but epochs when the era of Buddha Shakyamuni, the Buddha of Compassion, is replaced by the era of the Buddha Maitreya, the Buddha of Love. In my opinion, the vitacracy idea, the idea of the right to live is perfectly suited to meet the new era.
However, neither the era of Maitreya Buddha nor the idea of vitacracy cannot be realized by itself. To this end, the efforts should be made. But we, Buddhists, believe that the thought is material. And the more people will reflect on how to ensure the right to live the more likely is the coming of an era of love and mercy.