Symptom of rebellion

The Russian revolt, senseless and merciless, never began out of the blue; it was always preceded by high-ranking injustice. The long-suffering of the people suddenly became exhausted, and a bloody bacchanalia began, when “someone else’s little head is worthless, and your own neck is worthless.” Wise rulers try not to push the people to the extreme; Stupid people don’t notice this line.

Andrei Borodin, who raised an ax against federal judge Elena Ivanova, is most likely an unbalanced, exalted person, and maybe even sadder. Judge Ivanova, who authorized the extension of the arrest of those involved in the Pussy Riot case, no matter how biased and unprofessional she was, should not pay for this with her life. Neither according to laws, nor according to customs, nor according to common logic. The trouble, however, is that rebellion does not know logic and law. Even when this rebellion ignites in one person. At the heart of this rebellion is injustice, which becomes unbearable for people who are acutely aware of the mockery of justice. Even when it doesn't affect them personally.

Borodin is being prosecuted under the article “Encroachment on the life of a person carrying out justice or preliminary investigation.” From a formal point of view, this is correct, but in essence it is doubtful. Judge Ivanova carried out whatever she wanted - the demands of the investigation, the will of her superiors, the wishes of the church, but not justice. There is no trace of this there. Her unjust actions became the cause of a dangerous incident in the Tagansky court.

It is also doubtful that Borodin actually made an attempt on the life of the judge, and did not imitate an attempt. Otherwise, Elena Ivanova would hardly have escaped with a slight fright, without even receiving minor injuries.

A demonstrative and inadequate reaction is characteristic of exalted people. For example, to the same church hierarchs who reacted this way to the Pussy Riot punk prayer service. The state can also be inadequate, bringing down on people the full force of its power and the full weight of legislation for insignificant actions. Once upon a time, starving people were given 5 to 10 years in camps for the ears of corn picked up in the field. People were kicked out of college for wearing tight trousers. People were sent to camps and mental hospitals for reading banned books. Inadequate repression by the authorities naturally gives rise to an inadequate reaction from society. At first, not of the whole society, but of its most nervous representatives.

In 1878, revolutionary Vera Zasulich came to an appointment with the St. Petersburg mayor Fyodor Trepov and shot him twice in the stomach, dangerously wounding him. She was outraged by the obvious and unpunished injustice: the mayor ordered political prisoner A. Bogolyubov to be flogged for not taking off his hat in front of General Trepov while in his prison cell. And this despite the fact that corporal punishment was prohibited by the law of April 17, 1863. Vera Zasulich was sentenced to 15 to 20 years in prison for attempted murder, but the jury found no guilt in her actions, and judge Fyodor Koni acquitted her. But that was a royal court, nothing like the current one.

A person faced with unfair actions of the authorities can act in different ways: try to find justice in court, circumvent the law through corruption, seek justice through political methods, or give up on everything and leave for prosperous countries. But there are also those, not even familiar with the calls of Nikolai Chernyshevsky, who pick up an ax and go to seek justice on their own. These hikes usually don’t end well, but such walkers don’t exist in our country.

In the 90s there was such a case in Moscow. A pensioner, old, sick and lonely, trying to make ends meet, was selling something in an underground passage. Like everyone else, he regularly paid tribute to the policemen who fattened on old people, but one unlucky day he had no money, because he spent it on medicine. The indignant policeman took him to the police station, drew up a report, and the pensioner was tried. The judge, a young, well-groomed woman, did not pay attention either to Yeltsin’s decree on freedom of street trading in force at that time, or to the plight of the old man - a war veteran, sick, with a tiny pension that arrived with many months of delay. She gave him administrative arrest - 5 or 10 days. The old man served his time, was released and did not seek the truth in other courts. He quite sensibly decided that he would hardly achieve justice in the courts. He took an ax, came to court and killed the judge. Then he was tried and given a long prison term. Thus, an inadequate decision by the judiciary led to an inadequate reaction from a person offended by injustice.

Everyone, due to their temperament, legal culture, patience or temper, cowardice or courage, can have their own attitude towards the actions of Vera Zasulich, Andrei Borodin or an unfortunate pensioner from the 90s. But no matter how you look at it, it is impossible to deny that personal rebellion in all these cases is provoked by judicial abuses - indifference where it is necessary to react, cruelty where it is necessary to be lenient.

And one more thing must be remembered by the entire society and, above all, by the authorities - a personal rebellion can become a harbinger of a general, senseless and merciless one.