Cheap show-offs

One of my friends attended fashionable “personal growth” trainings. From her stories, I didn’t understand very well what they were doing there: the whole team was climbing over some kind of pole suspended from the ceiling (the height at which the pole was suspended symbolized the level of ambition, climbing together suggested elementary team building, and the situation itself simulated as I understand it, achieving a set life goal), then they had to earn a certain amount in a day, or something else like that. In addition, she told me that I shouldn’t say I lost weight, because losing weight means bad, that is, bad. I must say she's gotten slimmer.

I remembered this story in early August, when President Medvedev proposed renaming the police into police. “In my opinion, the time has come to return the police to its former name and to call our law enforcement agencies the police in the future,” Medvedev said at a meeting on amendments to the law “On the Police.” And instead of the series “Cops”, launch the series “Show-offs”. And use the curse word “Cheap show-off” instead of... well, you yourself understand what. That is, of course, the President did not say this. He noted that since the October Revolution, law enforcement agencies began to be called the police, which emphasized their popular, worker-peasant character - “combatants in uniform.” “We need professional people, we need employees who work efficiently, honestly, and harmoniously,” Medvedev explained.

Indeed, until 1917, the word militia (from the Latin militia - army) denoted various kinds of voluntary military formations. During the French Revolution of 1789, a revolutionary “civil militia” (the future National Guard of Paris) arose - an armed force independent of royal power. Citizens enjoying the right to vote were enrolled there under the command of persons appointed by the city government. By the way, it was their blue-red (according to the colors of the Parisian city coat of arms) cockades with which they stormed the Bastille, coupled with the white color of the royal banner of France, that served as the source of the French tricolor. But here is how defines the police V.I. . Dahl in his Dictionary (1863-1866): “temporary or zemstvo army: militia, warriors, people’s army.” During the war of 1806-07. this was the name of the militia created in connection with the threat of invasion by Napoleonic troops (it was recruited from state and landowner peasants, and officers from nobles, and was disbanded after the conclusion of the Peace of Tilsit). They were also called at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. irregular troops in Kuban and Dagestan. During the February Revolution of 1917, arose civil (people's) militia and workers' militia created by the Soviets. After October 1917, the Workers' and Peasants' Militia was formed (remember the serial film "Born of the Revolution"?). It replaced the abolished police and took over its functions. Of course, this was no longer any voluntary squad, but a regular state structure. writes to us about the police And here is what D.N. . Ushakov in his Dictionary of 1935-1940: “1. A volunteer army created in the special conditions of life of the state. Narodnaya m. 2. In the USSR - an administrative state institution for maintaining order.” As we see, the old meaning still appears first here. Now it is almost forgotten. It is curious that the combination people's militia has been preserved, but the meaning has changed. Initially, the adjective indicated the volunteer nature of the police, and later - its closeness to the people.

The word police goes back to ancient Greek. - πολιτεία - citizenship, politics, state, from πόλις - city, state. This is a system of public services and public order protection bodies. In 1722, Peter I established the Moscow Chief of Police Office, headed by the Chief of Police. It was in charge of “moving yards”, which housed police teams that kept order in certain areas of Moscow. Residents were also involved in police service, electing sots, fiftieths and tens from among themselves. Of course, the police have been reformed more than once since then, but the essence of the matter has remained unchanged. In 1917, the police with its quarter wardens, police officers and policemen were abolished, but a police force with commissars arose.

In modern language, the word militia means almost the same thing as police. Only the police are somewhere or sometime, and the police are with us, here and now.

Another thing is that the authors of the idea of ​​​​renaming the police into the police want to get rid of the unpleasant associations that the word police evokes among citizens: police - police lawlessness, police roof , etc. So, after all, the “former” name, as the President put it, is not pleasant associations. Policemen (this was the lowest police rank) were the first to be beaten in 1917. Moreover, the contemptuous word policeman (German: Polizei - police) that arose during the war - a traitor serving the occupation authorities in their auxiliary police - does not help.

I wonder why they say a police state and not a police state? Probably because the word policeman evokes associations more with individual arbitrariness, and the word policeman is more likely with total control. Well then, it really is more suitable for lovers of the power vertical.

By the way, about the police state. When several years ago I first heard the designation March of Dissent, I remembered a fragment from “War and Peace”: “By the animation of Pierre, Natasha saw that his trip was interesting, that he wanted to tell a lot, but he did not dare to speak in front of the countess. Denisov, not being a member of the family, therefore not understanding Pierre’s caution, besides being dissatisfied, was very interested in what was happening in St. Petersburg, and constantly called Pierre to talk about what had just happened in the Semyonovsky regiment, then about Arakcheev, then about Bible Society. Pierre sometimes got carried away and began to tell stories, but Nikolai and Natasha always brought him back to the health of Prince Ivan and Countess Marya Antonovna.” I remember this expression for a long time: like dissatisfied. Not dissatisfied with something specifically , but dissatisfied in general - we are, of course, talking about politics. And that's what I think. Still, there is some difference in how to designate an opposition-minded person: dissatisfied or disagreeing. Dissatisfied - this is a kind of passive role, while suggesting that a person has the right to expect some benefits from the authorities. The word dissenter implies that a person believes that he has the right to participate in decision-making, that his opinions should be asked. Well, that's already a lot.