The problem of the nation and national values in the ideology of Marxism

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

THE PROBLEM OF THE NATION AND NATIONAL VALUES IN THE IDEOLOGY OF MARXISM

Saken Aralbay, Department of Philosophy Science L.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National University, Nur-Sultan, Republic of Kazakhstan

Gaziz Telebaev, Department of Philosophy Al-Farabi Kazakh National University Almaty, Republic of Kazakhstan

Omirbek Bekezhan, Department of Social and Humanitarian Sciences Kh. Dosmukhamedov Atyrau University Atyrau, Republic of Kazakhstan

Assem Sagatova, Department ofPhilosophy and Theory of Culture Buketov Karaganda University Karaganda, Republic of Kazakhstan

Kamchat Abdrahmanova, Department of History of Kazakhstan and Socio-Political Disciplines Karaganda Medical University Karaganda, Republic of Kazakhstan

Abstract

Analysis of the influence of the ideas of Marxism on the national values of the Kazakh people in the Western and Soviet Union were founded by K. Marx and his ideological partner F. Engels. Although the ideas of Marxism were intended to resolve the economic and social contradictions that occurred in Western countries, they belonged to this view. And the communist ideology, formed on the basis of Marxism, bypassed Western culture and radically changed the national values of the Kazakh state within the Soviet Union, the culture of thinking. Identification of the main mistakes in the ideas of Marxism and the consequences of one-sided scientific concepts took place in further development. In this article the author analyzes the Soviet government on the way of creating a formation of communism with the definition of one-sided scientific factors that took place in the ideology of Marxism and the state of Kazakhstan that was part of Soviet Union and its cultural essence. The author proves that the main mistake in the ideology of Marxism is that the problems of national values remain outside the process of society; ideologists turned a blind eye to this problem and as a result, have lost the existing opportunities

Keywords: Marxism, ideology, freedom, nation, national code, national values

Анотація

Проблема нації та національних цінностей в ідеології марксизму. Сакен Аралбай, Газіз Телебаєв, Омірбек Бекежан, Асем Сагатова, Камчат Абдрахманова.

Аналіз впливу ідей марксизму на національні цінності казахського народу в Західному та Радянському Союзі був заснований К. Марксом та його ідеологічним партнером Ф. Енгельсом. Хоча ідеї марксизму мали на меті вирішити економічні та соціальні суперечності, що мали місце в західних країнах, вони належали цій точці зору. А комуністична ідеологія, сформована на основі марксизму, обійшла західну культуру і докорінно змінила національні цінності казахської держави в складі Радянського Союзу, культуру мислення. Виявлення основних помилок в ідеях марксизму та наслідків однобічних наукових концепцій мало місце в подальшому розвитку. У цій статті автор аналізує радянську владу на шляху формування комунізму з визначенням однобічних наукових чинників, що мали місце в ідеології марксизму та держави Казахстан, що була частиною Радянського Союзу, та його культурної сутності. Автор доводить, що головною помилкою ідеології марксизму є те, що проблеми національних цінностей залишаються поза процесом суспільства; ідеологи закривали очі на цю проблему і в результаті втратили наявні можливості

Ключові слова: марксизм, ідеологія, свобода, нація, національний кодекс, національні цінності

marxism communism soviet ideology

Introduction

Any society in the process of its historical evolutionary development will naturally demand material and spiritual values. Social relations in society become more complicated, if they do not timely solve the needs for material and spiritual needs, they can lead to various social conflicts. Famous German philosophers K. Marx and his ideological companion F. Engels shared their impressions of these problems of the development of society as other social scientists. K. Marx and F. Engels considered that the strongest capital, goods, money and relations stimulates historically evolutionary development of society. Every conscious person is the fruit of his period and time, it is thought so because the period and time during which K. Marx and F. Engels lived, became the main reason for that. But these two persons not only expressed their thoughts on the development of society, but also made an ideology that encourages the thought of all mankind, their aspirations for the future [1-3].

K. Marx lived in the middle, at that time there was a formation of the capitalist states of Europe. Production plants and capital were owned by Representatives of the bourgeoisie who ruthlessly exploited workers. K. Marx and the ideological companion F. Engels were unable to approach these events seriously when they leave wealthy families. K. Marx, as a journalist, tried to reveal the arbitrariness of the authorities of that time as much as possible. As a result, Karl Marx, became a victim of critical thoughts, was forced to move from Germany to Paris and then to England. The era of Karl Marx's life, the social space of Europe, the way out of the dead end of the capitalist formation needed the thoughts of philosophers and sociologists. The peri od when society was divided into two parts, the bourgeoisie possessed endless wealth through the exploit of the labor of the working class, K. Marx understood well the suffering work groups that did not have any resources in their hands, during this period Marxism appeared [4; 5].

The idea of Karl Marx served as the main ideology for the countries within the Soviet Union, etc., when it contributed to the revision of the capitalist formation, which takes place in real forms in the social space of Europe and the solution of problems aggravated in social relations, improving the position of the working class [6]. From this interval you can see how much we understand the viability of the idea of K. Marx and Marxism. As a result, we understand that the Western countries know how from the Marxist idea and are mistaken with their re-election to the Soviet Union for more than half a century. The following methods of cultural studies were used in the course of analyzing the ideas of Marxism, comparing the cultural values taking place in the Western and Soviet Union. Cultural-evolutionary method, structural-functional method, historical comparative method.

Materials and methods

In order to dwell on the problem of national and national values in the ideology of Marxism, first of all, briefly analyze the philosophical views of K. Marx from the point of view of cultural studies, his ability to understand economic and social conflicts in society, characteristic of the Western social space. At the same time, some concepts and ideological values in the views of K. Marx are not fully realized in the formation of the communist formation. First of all, the following question arises. Philosophical views of Karl Marx, which surprised the whole world with their sharp thoughts, would they be devoted to solving the economic and social contradictions of any society that took place in the world, or to the solution of economic and social contradictions occurring only in Western countries? If K. Marx admitted that Marxism was intended to resolve economic contradictions that took place only in Western countries, then for some reason it did not take place in Europe, but the culture of thinking, the lifestyle was completely different and the capitalist formation classified by Karl Marx at that time, and the working class in it took place in Russia which had not been formed yet in the countries that later became part of it and in other states outside Europe. This question was surprised not only by the adherents of the idea of Marxism, but also by the author of the ideology of Marxism, K. Marx, if he was alive at the beginning of the 20 ^th century.

Inter-class struggle caused by the economic and social relations that took place in the 19 ^th century in European countries greatly worried K. Marx. He, being a lawyer and journalist, first began to criticize political power. Later K. Marx interested in the works of G.V.F Hegel (1993) who were influencing the German nation with his inspiring thoughts, then he began to criticize their works and developed with his thoughts. He tried to solve the social conflicts occurring in society with the help of materialistic dialectics with his sharp thoughts, relying on idealistic dialectics of G.V.F. Hegel (1993). According to K. Marx the world originates from matter but not from consciousness (according to G.V.F. Hegel, from spirit) including the historical evolutionary development of society, that is, “Consciousness of people doesn't determine their existence/being, but their social being determines their consciousness”, became the catchword of that time [1]. K. Marx classified it i nto five formations referring to the historical evolutionary development of society. That is, the first commune, slavery, feudal, capitalist and K. Marx Communist formation. The main mistake in understanding the philosophical view of K. Marx is that all the states at that time in Russia and Central Asia (all states within the Soviet Union, etc.) not all of these stages, that is, not a full-fledged place of the capitalist formation, as I thought K. Marx. In addition, there is a low level of knowledge of individuals who are able to think independently. The main factors include the extremely low education level of the herd of workers, which Marx claims.

Results and discussion

In general, K. Marx, as an economist, sociologist, philosopher understood very well the social situations in Europe and, accordingly, evoked new ideas. G.V.F. Hegel sought to explain the conflict between economic and social relations in society through his work “master and slave” [2]. And Karl Marx, deeply analyzing this point of view of his teacher G.V.F. Hegel, understood that economics is the main reason for resolving class conflicts that occur in a society that is characteristic of the social space of Europe. And when the master was fulfilling the capitalist bourgeois, he tried to p rove that the activity of the slave served the working class. In fact, in the competence of the working herd, apart from their honest work, there was nothing, and the capitalist is a bourgeois openly, without a proper assessment of their work was doomed to the slavery of the master. The position of the teacher K. Marx G.V.F. Hegel recognized some dialectical legality of the transformation of the slave to master and the master to the slave, but turned a blind eye to other values.

In Russia and her family, the Kazakh country did not know the ideas of K. Marx mentioned above. In 1917, an event filled with political content took place in Russia, that is, the Romanov dynasty, which had ruled Russia for 300 years, collapsed. As a result of the revolution, power passed into the hands of the Red Terrors. The tragedy of power in the Russian Empire, when the most common Marxist ideology on the basis of the red terror in the hands, it all came down from the will of weak countries to live, Kazakhstan is one of them, that is, the state. The leader of the Red Terrors took power into the hands of V.I. Lenin. In the first years, he came to a common conclusion with the intelligentsia of the Kazakh people, after whom I.V. Stalin was taken under the power, destroyed the entire intelligentsia of the Kazakh people. Of course, this is another topic.

In the life of V.I. Lenin, developing the ideas of Marx, he also added his own thoughts. One of them is the strategic program NEP (New Economic Policy), based on the economy. V.I. Lenin was more literate person from a prosperous family than his revolutionary companion I.V. Stalin. indeed, The NEP program he proposed, allowed states such as modern Kazakhstan within the Soviet Union to create a separate Kazakh autonomy and develop socio-economic problems based on national cultural values [3]. Unfortunately, the global process, the political and economic course in which the Soviet Union adheres, was not like the representatives of our intelligentsia. V.I. Lenin did not fully support the existence in accordance with the ethno-cultural values of other nationalities [4] V.I. Lenin after his death, K. Marx's ideas with the ideological principle of “Marxism - Leninism” made themselves for about seventy years in regions belonging to the Soviet Union and others. K. Marx did not believe that in the future according to its theory, that is, the latest achievement of the historical evolutionary development of mankind in the formation of the communist formation, Russia will be the first and there will be a revolution in this state. The main reasons: First, the imperfection of social relations in the capitalist formation in Russia, and second, the full-fledged formation of representatives of the working class and their low level of education. Such conditions also existed in Kazakh autonomy at that time, and other factors that laid the foundation for K. Marx, and then V.I. Lenin, which led to the fact that the communist ideology, which developed its though, was not fully implemented in our society.

Any ideology needs sacrifices. The communist ideology founded by K . Marx completely denied both the sacrifice and the culture of citizens' thinking. During the period of colonization of Russia interrupted by spiritual roots, and it led to the creation of communism on the basis of communist ideology, negligence towards it. “Carelessness leads to a parade, a premature death”, - says A. Chekhov. If we consider the essence of any person in the unity of three dimensions, that is, body, soul and spirit, then this phenomenon, containing in the unity of all, which has the meaning of life, these are national values. Among the main factors influencing the formation of values, we include: the family of an individual, nationality of origin and the social environment that directly influences the formation of a culture of individual thinking. Unfortunately, all these facts did not have interconnection, balance in the space of the communist formation, which should be formed on the basis of the ideology of communism.

It should not surprise any scientists that the existence of any person is physiologically similar to each other, occurs in radical specific qualities from the point of view of psychological and spiritual, that is, the culture of thinking related to consciousness. According to the evolutionary theory of the English natural scientist Charles Darwin, the flexibility of any creature, depending on the state of the environment, is based on three factors: hereditary variability, the struggle for life and natural sorting. In his philosophical approach, K. Marx, in his philosophical point of view, in the process of proving materialistic dialectics, also relied on the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin, consisting of these three factors. At one time, the teacher of K. Marx G.V.F. Hegel noted four major centers of civilization in defining the meaning of the concept of world class freedom, stressing that freedom at the level of absolute truth takes place in the future in Germany [5]. And K. Marx considered world-class freedom to be a phenomenon occurring with the victory of the proletarians of all countries. In fact, if there is a need for freedom, then it must be remembered that cultural values are the criterion of need. Due to the fact that freedom in this sense is a culture of thinking characteristic of every nation, it has a great influence on the formation of culture, and, accordingly, there is a political system for managing the spiritual foundation of any society and social environment (a source of economic capital). Taking into account this process of development of society, of course, it became known that K. Marx's view was intended only for the social space of Western countries from the very beginning. At the same time, those who insanely own his views, continuing the communist ideology, include: leaders and revolutionaries, scientists and peoples who sacrificed a false slogan are responsible.

Party leader Alash formed in the Kazakh autonomy, one of the intellectuals of the Kazakh nationality A. Bukeikhanov, from the very beginning looked doubtfully at Marx's ideas, and for the first time publicly expressed l thought and opposition leaders of the Soviet Union. A. Bukeikhanov and members of the Alash Party proved the imperfection of this system, that some ideas of a socialist society, communist ideology on the way of creating a Kazakh nationality fundamentally contradict national values and culture. Now let's consider them.

The formation of a nation is an unshakable phenomenon that deepens the roots. In the ethnological science of the formation of a nation, there have been various theories, but still not fully determine the existence of a nation. Its main reason lies in the fact that the properties of the national code, which is any individual do not assimilate their confidentiality by the culture of thinking of this nation, but remain secret, not disclosing and hiding to those who showed interest. In order to communicate with the fate of any nation and comprehend them in the culture of thinking, it is necessary to familiarize with the cultural values of this nation and think in their language. In order to carry out such activities, a scientist must not only devote his whole life to the study of a particular nation, but also teach them cultural values, as mentioned above, to speak a language and think in that language. In his era, K. Marx understood this situation very well, therefore his philosophical views, especially on the essay Capital, aroused great interest among Russian thinkers and revolutionaries. According to historical data, K. Marx studied the Russian language in order to understand the culture of thinking of the peoples of Russia, gets acquainted with the works of the Great Russian poet A.S. Pushkin. After studying the Russian language and comprehending it in the culture of the thinking of this nation, his works require further study.

In general, another important situation is in comparing the policy of the Western colonial countries and the Russian Empire in the colonization of the Kazakh people, one can be convinced by the Russian Empire in the impartiality of the national values of local peoples, and sometimes in unfair decisions. However, despite the fact that the main economic goals for making profit are the British and the French, the colonialists of other countries, the main feature of the Russian Empire is a radical change in the systemic structure of local peoples in the development and adaptation of social space under the influence of the geographic environment, as well as to a halt in development and a centuries-old the flourishing of the root of these peoples. As a result, the Russian Empire, during the colonization of the Kazakh people, not only found benefits from a political and economic point of view, but also led to the massive perpetuation and deprivation of the Kazakh nation of spiritual roots. The madman condemns his very existence by spiritually collapsing [6]. In particular, the main reason for the spiritual destruction of the Kazakh nation is, first of all, the elimination of the Khan system, and then the disappearance of the court. This tragedy, which fell on the beginning of the Kazakh nation, caused concern among the scientist Sh. Alikhanov who lived at that time. He shared his opinion in the “record on judicial reform”, emphasizing the fundament al disagreement with these violence of the Russian Empire [7]. But there were no results from this. Let us consider the characteristic issues of the disappearance of the management system characteristic of the culture of thinking and the reality of the national Kazakh society.

The Russian Empire intended not only to economically use the natural resources of the colonized Kazakhstani country, but also in the future to take these lands into full ownership. The underground political actions carried out for this purpose began to look for the weakest sides of the decomposition of the Kazakh society, which lived in a nomadic culture. It regulates all the social needs of Kazakhstan society, that is a family, religion, culture, economy, politics, etc., institutions were based on centuries-old traditions. Open opposition to traditions was very unprofitable for the Russian Empire. At the same time, the need of the Kazakh people for customs and traditions stood above the Islamic religion. Realizing the importance of the traditions of the Kazakh society, the Russian Empire found a systemic content of national values that underlie their systematic service. When national values lose their content, traditions that are always held in society on a permanent basis, in need, test new views; negatively affect the development of society until new values are formed.

For the Kazakh society of that period, the elite group responsible for the management system was the main standard of whole cultural values. In the culture of the Kazakh people, they thought: “nobility”, “master” holding the reins of government, “judge”, “host”, “saint” and others who managed to combine traditions and Islam, and the authors of the concepts were the protagonists of national values and the bridge between state and people. At the same time, the main features of these actors from the crowd were some of the representatives of the existentialist philosophy of the 20^th century, Sartre's concepts of “responsibility” and “concern” in defining the essence of human freedom [8] was the main categories in their thinking culture. Although political power was in the hands of one of the elites, the “judges”, they were always under the control of the judges. And the judges were talented people who took care of people. The political balance in Kazakhstani society was built on such harmony that power did not turn into a personal glove. If we look at the concepts of democracy and freedom in this context, we see that democracy is not a political system imposed by force from the outside, but a set of actions arising from the need and responsibility for values through the culture of thinking of each nation.

From the system of government of the khanate in Kazakhstani society, we can see not only a simple hierarchical relationship that exists in some societies, but also a true picture of the nature of the nation, based on freedom and necessity. The Russian Empire used this living space of the Kazakh society, which is a continuation of the ancient nomadic culture, in the implementation of its ideas. The structure of Kazakh society consisted of several stages based on traditions, that is, from villages collected from zhuzes, clan and close siblings. Of course, the coexistence of close brothers and siblings is one of the criteria inherent in nomadic culture, understandable to all scholars and researchers, and together with the zhuzes there is no clear answer to attempts to occupy a certain territory so far. During the meeting, the sides discussed issues related to the implementation of the state program “Cultural heritage” for 2004-2006, as well as issues related to the implementation of the state program “Cultural heritage” for 2004 -2006. In addition, the role of the generic system is very important in the issue of the national code.

The concept of a national code is one of the important issues that have been frequently moving lately [9]. The main reason for the importance of this concept could be attributed to several factors, first of all, the concept of a nation. There are a lot of forecasts of various sciences about the emergence of a nation, including ethnological science, which deals with this very issue. If we look at the problem of the nation from the point of view of cultural science, then we can give the following definition. A nation-conscious humanity is a space in which a cultural work of Homo sapiens takes place, that is, it has a different level of different cultures. One of the cultural scientists O. Spengler, in his work “The Decline of Europe”, noted eight civilizations of t he world [10], but it is a pity that the Turkic civilization cannot be found in this work. In general, as a civilization of the Turkic civilization, the scientists of the world have not yet unanimously admitted. This is a very sad situation for all mankind, striving for the knowledge of truth and science. Most scholars classify nomadic culture as one of the most typical cultures and form actions that do not contradict the ethics of science. But ecological consciousness, which today is becoming a global problem, that is, the culture of life in combination with the surrounding nature, the most efficient use of natural resources, was formed, first of all, among these nomadic cultures. In addition, the owners of the nomadic culture, as the first virgin lands, not only tamed wild animals, but also used not only labor forces, but also fully satisfied everyday needs, brought works of a world-class brand from clothes, dishes, art [11].

Mashhur Zhusup, who lived in the twentieth century, said that by observing the behavior of domesticated animals, mankind can correct drawbacks in the soul and learn edification [12]. In this regard, there is a winged expression filled with a philosophical meaning in the Kazakh nation: “the cattle is like the owner, the owner is like the grazing cattle”. His philosophical concept contained very important, deep thoughts. Any “thing in itself” that comes into contact with a person, as a result, not only turns into an “thing for us” [13], but also fully adapts to human being itself, the culture of thinking. From social relations, it expands the horizons of the human spiritual world, broadens the horizons of the soul from contact with animals through training hands. In their image, trying to understand the world, various works of art, kuis, dances were born. You can see only one of the most wonderful works dedicated to various inhabitants of the surrounding nature: lame kulan, bee, camel, a swan, etc. from the history of the emergence of all these works of nomadic culture. According to M. Heideger, we see how he received an assessment, and not to adapt being to himself, that is, to penetrate into the surrounding being. In order to penetrate into the life of the inhabitants of the surrounding nature and show their state at that moment, he needs a rich language. Only through the wealth of language can one get into the state of being, depict and understand its facets. Therefore, M. Heidegger's thoughts, it is significant “language-house of being” to say that [14].

Another philosophical meaning of the aforementioned winged word can be seen in social relations occurring in modern society. 20^th century was the century of new technologies changing without exaggeration. In a modern post-industrial society, the main task is to master new technologies, that is, everything we do is technology. There is no way for a citizen of a modern society to develop from technology; this is a globalization requirement for all of humanity in the world. According to the forecasts of philosophers, the “Technotronic era” radically changes the culture of thinking of mankind and their attitude to values [15 -17]. In his works “The Question of Technology” and “The Turn” M. Heidegger comprehensively analyzed the positive and negative aspects of mastering the “truth” of being through technology [14].

Although the Marxist point of view was convinced that the communist formation could be formed as a result of technology and new technologies, it could not at all link it to national values. As time has shown, the Soviet government, one of the great world powers in politics, ceased to exist. This process shows that the content of the concept of nation is a phenomenon deeply rooted in the definition of science in any field. At the same time, the fall of Soviet power obliged all specialists in the field of social sciences and humanities to pay more attention to the problems of the nation, to their centuries-old values, to show diligence, to show tolerance in making certain decisions. The ideas of K. Marx, who formed Marxism, are still puzzling the philosophers of the world. The works of K. Marx and his ideological companion Friedrich Engels, after about two centuries, do not lose their value and require maximum analysis. Of course, in their works, they were the main reasons not to raise the interests of the nation, that is, the social relations of Western states based on the general economic problems of that time. In the social relations of Western states, there are two opposing classes, that is, between workers and the owners of production and production equipment. The political elite that held power in the Western states (the first German chancellor at that time Otto von Bissmark), considering the ideas of Karl Marx, managed to prevent the state from radical threats, timely passing thoughts through the grids. And the attitude of the Russian Empire to the ideas of Karl Marx, attempts to turn it into a bell of power led to the ideas of Marxism.

Conclusions

In general Marxism, there is no reason to completely reject the ideas of Karl Marx. Any thought happens in advance and wear. Our task is to remove rape and develop it in line with the requirements of our time. In recent years after gaining independence, there has been a tendency in our society to radically reject the ideas of Karl Marx. In fact, Karl Marx admitted for the first time that his ideas were devoted to the West. But today, given the process of globalization in the world economic process, as an example of the achievement of developed countries of the Western economy from the economy, the task is to comprehend the works of Karl Marx. It is especially advisable for the CIS countries, rich in natural resources, to study and analyze the ideas of Karl Marx, use rational ideas.

The general economic system in the process of globalization is divided into the whole world, but the main impetus to it is economic cultural capital and natural resources. This approach was recognized by Karl Marx in the era, but the fruit of cultural capital did not interest Karl Marx with the problem of the national brand. And the national brand in the economy is the main problem of modern society. Our country cannot be surprised to recognize countries with advanced economies from science, new technologies, but through the products of the national brand it can recognize other countries besides the economy. In turn, the presence of products and goods of the national brand proves how high the competition and organization of this nation. The ideas of Karl Marx will undoubtedly contribute to the implementation of this activity.

References

1. Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1955). Essays. Moscow: Izdatelstvo politicheskoj literatury.

2. Hegel, G.W.F. (1992). Phenomenology of spirit. St. Petersburg: Nauka.

3. Kazakhstan in the years of the new economic policy. (2013). Retrieved from https://e-history.kz/kz/history- of-kazakhstan/show/9008/.

4. Semyonov, Yu.I. (1966). From the history of V.I. Lenin's theoretical development of the national question. Narody Azii i Afriki, 4, 106-129.

5. Hegel, G.W.F. (1993). Lectures on the philosophy of history. St. Petersburg: Nauka.

6. Kekilbaev, A. (1981). Kuj. Almaty: Alma-Ata.

7. Freeling, G., & Auer, K. (1973). Man - Color - Space. Moscow: Stroyizdat.

8. Sartre, J.-P. (1989). Existentialism is a humanism. Moscow: Nauka.

9. Nazarbaev, N.A. (2017). Looking to the future: Modernization of public consciousness. Retrieved from https://goo.kz>files/loader/1515217962235.pdf.

10. Spengler, O. (1998). The decline of Europe: Essays on the morphology of world history. Rostov-on-Don: Feniks.

11. Nazarbaev, NA (2018). Seven faces of the great steppe. Retrieved from https://sputniknews.kz/society/20181121/8168714/nazarbayev-zhana-maqala-tolyq-matin.html.

12. Dauitov, S. (1992). Mashhur Zhusip Kopeev. Almaty: Alma-Ata.

13. Immanuil, K. (1966). Essays in six volumes. Moscow: Nauka.

14. Heidegger, M. (1993). Time and being: The way, and you're to the offenses. Compilation, translation, introductory statistics, comments and instructions. Moscow: Respublika.

15. Mumford, L. (1950). Man as Interpreter. New York: Brace.

16. Mumford, L. (1930). The drama of the machines. Scribner's Magazine, 161.

17. Ortega-y-Gasset, J. (1936). Obras completes. Madrid, 5, 122-1285.

Размещено на Allbest.ru