About people, freaks and power

All that

, from my point of view, quite reasonable.

Always and everywhere there is a certain percentage of notorious aggressive scoundrels, fans of violence and sadism. In politics, they often turn out to be xenophobes and extreme nationalists - this is the most convenient niche for them.

There are always and everywhere conscientious, sensible people who are not influenced by the roar of others, who remember the words of Anatole France (or, without knowing these words, they themselves feel this way): “Give people irony and compassion as witnesses.”

Always and everywhere, the bulk of people are characterized by the eternal: “Well, they are people like people. Ordinary people. And mercy knocks on their hearts. But the housing issue ruined them. …Put your head on!”

This main mass is a reed shaken by the wind. Now it is the ethereal wind. TV gives weather forecasts and creates political weather.

This is the MAIN circumstance about which the respected Alexei Makarkin did not write a word: people with their qualities do not exist on their own.

The wind drives the leaves... The ethereal wind drives people's moods. However, not only this wind, of course. And he himself is not taken from the “emptiness and will” of TV bosses and their political superiors.

But I won’t get into the endless question of what, where and how sets the pulse of the crowd.

Let us limit ourselves to a few simple and banal statements.

Yes, people's opinions are ripples in the water. And in this sense, the eternal excuse - “we didn’t know, we won’t be asked to,” dishonest, like an indulgence for each individual person - is true when it comes to the mass of these people.

Yes, the same crowd was ready to crucify Sakharov in 1982 and pray for him in 1991.

Yes, many people who today are choking with hatred of the United States, 15 years ago they prayed for the United States. More than that. It is precisely people with increased political excitability that are quite natural! - they are the first to fly to any new fire. They went to defend the White House in 91 - they were rushing there in 93. I personally know several who checked in there both times (among them, by the way, were representatives of the most rabid “demshiza”).

But what follows from this?

If I understood A. Makarkin correctly, then his conclusion is approximately this: there is no need to escalate! In the Russian Federation everything is approximately the same as in Europe. In general, everything is more or less normal with society.

Therefore, there is no need to “scold the people”, don’t give a damn about the wind - our “people” are the same as in any France.

I don't completely agree.

You can scold them - it’s okay, too many people look at the people as if they were a sacred cow (hoping to get some milk!). The people won’t lose sight of him even if they scold him, especially since he (“the people”) doesn’t read “HEDGEHOG”. By the way. If you look at the Western press (I’m not a big expert on it, but I read something) - “they there” deal not only with their power, but also with their SOCIETY (the word “people” is not very accepted there) absolutely savagely. Read it - the feeling that the last day of Europe has come and “it belongs there”! Since such vandals and cannibals live “here in France”, then “we in France” deserve our terrible fate! So everything is fine with emotions and swearing...

But the main thing, of course, is not the peculiarities of the press style.

NO, the people (the bulk) in the Russian Federation are OBJECTIVELY NOT the same as “in any France.” Rougher. More aggressive. From nature, or what? Well, why is it so... offensive. No. Having moved to France, our citizens easily accept THEIR rules of the game - which means “biology” has nothing to do with it. It’s just that our climate (social, moral) is different. Here you HAVE to wear fur coats, there you have to wear jackets.

Our people are not corrupted by political correctness. Unlike MODERN (not to be confused with the 1930s!) Europeans.

Yes, and “they” have Nazis there, their own molds (let’s assume for simplicity that he is an extreme xenophobe, on the verge of fascism).

But the BASIC MASS “over there,” it seems to me, has a much stronger immunity against wild manifestations of xenophobia. This is the first difference with us.

There is also a second, more dramatic and important one.

THE RULING ELITE is what matters most.

The ruling elite is more or less conservative everywhere, forced to rely on common sense, feel responsibility, etc.

But there is no doubt that our elite - compared to the Western one - is much more predatory, aggressive, unsure of its future, and subject to many fears and phobias.

Accordingly, this ruling elite, through the media, supports the “freaks” - against the “people”.

It is clear that the authorities extinguish the extremes of aggressive xenophobia as best they can. But the general imperial, anti-American paranoia, the general “sovereign nationalism” is fueled “with all four hands.”

That's the difference with Europe. She is on the surface.

Mainstream TV media are dramatically skewed compared to Europe. There are far fewer different points of view, much less political correctness, etc. etc. Needless to say, 2+2=4!

It is clear that the European media are far from ideal. They know how to whip up psychosis (either about the Kosovo Serbs, now about the Palestinians, now about the Chechens), brainwash, etc. However, the difference between an open/democratic and a semi-open/semi-authoritarian society is as obvious to me as the difference between the weather in Paris and Moscow.

Therefore, the advice to democrats - to quietly and peacefully engage in organizing and educating the masses from below - is, at a minimum, “completely insufficient.” You can run as much as you like inside the train in any direction - but the train will still go where the driver is leading it.

So “what to do”?

Change the driver? How? To whom? How? ALL ARTICLES in ALL ISSUES of “Hedgehog” are full of controversy about this. Therefore, I will not discuss the topic “what is the meaning of life” here again.

I just wanted to disagree with my respected Alexei Makarkin on one thing - the “restless tone” of my articles is justified. And, in my opinion, it is justified not only by my personal characteristics as an author, but also by the OBJECTIVE situation in which we all find ourselves.