In defense of the revolution

Against the background of the insult that the authorities inflicted on the Pussy Riot as a sentence, I would like to return to two fundamental publications of recent times with the proposals of two diametrically opposite strategies - an article by Vladimir Pastukhov in Novaya Gazeta and Irina Pavlova in the Flays. How to deal with Putin’s arbitrariness, how to regain a dignity (if it was) in a police state, what can be done when the overwhelming force on the side of the hopurian is not true?

In fact, and, so to speak, emotionally Vladimir Pastukhov is right in his radical rejection of the Putin regime. As, however, when he is looking for reasons not in Putin himself, but in what was once called the people , although he calls him completely wrong and old -fashioned lumpen . No, the oligarchic-chino system is not a lumpen, not declassed. Yes, and it is supported by completely declared pensioners, state employees, military, employees of estate enterprises such as Gazprom. As, however, the main beneficiaries - the former Soviet nomenclature raspberries, violently blossomed on the field of lawlessness and unconscious corruption.

Pastukhov, perhaps, did not find the right word, but very close to the problem, which underlies the cultural and social insanity of the larger, Putin part of Russian society. Our society is not quite urban. It, in view of the massive, rapid, but very late resettlement from villages to the city, has not gained strong city traditions, civilizationally belongs to a certain intermediate state, since our cities themselves are not quite cities in a European cultural sense. That is, it looks like it, but with village benches at the entrance. Hence, in particular, quite a peasant, rustic distrust of a stranger, hatred of what you do not know, fear of urban openness and tolerance. And, of course, a helpless gravity to supposedly traditions, conservative, but in fact a mythologized past, refusal, horror before any changes called reforms . And in general, the patriarchal poverty in most of the country, which (poverty) makes it all the strength to hold on to what is, in fear of this last to lose.

This is the basis of the Putin regime, which is bought away from the poor society with miserable handouts, allowing its direct environment, the whole vile bureaucratic bastard to be fat on corruption and thieves' saws. And this regime will never go away himself, it can die from blood loss, if high oil prices end, or will be destroyed by public indignation, the forms of which may be different.

Irina Pavlova, legally criticizing Pastukhova for many inaccuracies and incorrect formulations, ultimately categorically objects to society to revolution, uprising, actually fixed in the constitutional theory of many European countries, starting at least with John Locke. He said (I recall, suddenly someone forgot) that the people's uprising against the tyrannical power encroaching on their natural rights and freedom is legitimate and even necessary. The Putin regime has long and constantly encroaching on the natural rights and freedoms of man, humiliates this person, even if he is his devoted, but not a visionary supporter; The Putin regime has long planned to develop the framework of authoritarianism and personalism and is confidently moving towards the dictatorship.

However, Irina Pavlova, considering the revolution impossible, unlawful, unfolding rusty springs of terror, claims (in my opinion, unfair) that “world history does not know another way of the formation of democratic procedures and institutions, except for the approval of private property rights. First, private owners with a guarantee of the right to transfer property by inheritance, and then normal parliament, normal parties, normal court and other democratic institutions to uphold their interests. ”

No, world history knows not only evolutionary, but revolutionary changes. What statement of private property rights can be discussed now, when the main array of the largest Russian post -perestroika conditions was received at the expense of the cutting of the state budget and state subsoil? This is the same as calling for the bourgeois moderation of the thieves' gear or advise organizing a liberal party in the Gulag. This is the same as to exhort the bloody maniac who knows only one truth - the truth of impudent manic power. To go out into the streets with a demand to respect the “right of private property and determining the conditions for its transfer by inheritance” - this is exactly what the ruling Putin regime is today. He only dreams about this: in order for illegitimate states to become legitimate and to talk to him with liberal exhortations. Alas, with all due respect to Pavlova and her consistent peacefulness, I am afraid that these exhortations will remain a voice of a crying in the desert.

Yes, in our country the poor experience of the revolution. And not so much because the revolution (at least February) was not justified, but because the people are too dick and evil. Then there was the October Revolution, which had its own reasons, then the time of the brutal civil war came, then the era of even more cruel Stalinist repressions and everything subsequently, which ultimately led to the power of a small, mediocre and illiterate man who led the country into another terrible dead end.

But this does not mean at all that society should and can endlessly endure humiliation and insults from the authorities, convinced that to rape and deceive the naive people is a completely legitimate activity. Yes, we have no respect for the right of ownership, but we have no respect at all, including ourselves, including the law and, above all, from the authorities. We have no and did not have respect for a person and his rights; The right of ownership is one of them, but there are others. For example, the right to a fair and fast court, which in Russia is dreamed of throughout many hundred years of history, but "from the platform they say - this is the city of Leningrad." Yes, the right of ownership seems to many, although at the same time it seems to others that property is theft. And in the Russian situation to the truth, the latter, and not the first. Large perestroika states are ordinary theft, although thieves and crooks never admit this.

Does this mean that the uprising, revolution, legitimate public violence directed against obvious injustice is the only historical path that remained in Russia? Perhaps yes. Although no one forbids to endure another hundred years and wait for an unrighteous regime to scatter from old age and weakness. Like no one ever guarantees that new popular will and black redistribution will not turn into another bloody meat grinder, into which both right and guilty will be drawn. But the fact of the matter is that there are no good exits in Russian history, but the bad ones are more than enough.

Photos of RIA Novosti