The People's Way

The majority of those surveyed are in favor of a peaceful way to resolve contradictions with the West and see it as a mediator in resolving the conflict with Ukraine

Europe! What complex feelings are evoked in Russians by everything that stands behind this word. Beautiful and disgusting, desirable and repulsive, an example of what should be done and an example of what should not be done. Everyone knows that among us there are people who are firmly anti-European and those who are firmly pro-European. But both of them are two minorities. And the majority, or rather the mass consciousness of the majority, accommodates and combines both pro- and anti-European sentiments. First one, then the other comes to the surface.

During the special military operation, which has been dragging on for more than fifty months, the idea has gradually spread that we are faced not with Ukraine, but with the “collective West.” And the West is Europe plus America. America was number one in the West, hostile to the Russians. But Trump’s unexpected anti-European speeches sowed doubts in the minds of fellow citizens: maybe America is not a plus, but America is a minus? And America lost this prize in their minds.

But it did not remain empty. Someone must be in charge of Europe. The Russians are now putting Great Britain or, as we call it, England, in the commanding position. Oh, how much worse and more insidious it turns out to be than America! The storehouses of memory were opened, from which came anti-English, anti-British sentiments of a hundred and two hundred years ago. All over the country, Russians repeat with pleasure: “The Englishwoman is taking a shit!”, attributing these words either to Gogol or to some other authority from the past. The role of England, as it is now understood by the Russian public, is to manipulate Europe, turning it against us. Europe submits to this will. However, she herself is not fighting with us. She, in turn, manipulates Ukraine.

That is, Europe is an enemy, but not an adversary. And therefore, the Russian mass consciousness admits the idea that something can be agreed upon with it.

Levada Center* and the Laboratory of the Future of Novaya Gazeta addressed Russians with the question:

What decisions of the Russian leadership regarding European countries helping Ukraine with weapons would you support?

The solutions that the researchers offered Russians to choose from were taken not from secret Kremlin documents, but from ideas that the researchers know are found in the same mass consciousness to which the question was addressed. Four possible solutions have been proposed. Respondents were allowed to select up to three of them.

In essence, we set the public the task of choosing for themselves: which path to take next in terms of the continuation, cessation or development of hostilities.

Bottom line. The less a person is involved in communication, in civil life, the less desire and ability he has to solve issues of this magnitude.

Among housewives, those who found it difficult to answer accounted for a third. And among executives - only 7%. The average was 21%. This is a normal level of difficulty for questions of this nature.

Here are the options offered to choose from. The reader can also take part in their thinking. We remind you: the question of how Russia should behave towards European countries helping Ukraine with weapons:

• Expand military operations into their territory
• Carry out separate sabotage actions/hybrid war against them
• Invite them to mediate the peaceful resolution of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict
• Establish business contacts with partners in these countries

Anti-European sentiment grew greatly during the NWO. They seemed to the researchers to be unconditionally dominant. And it was thought that the choice of the people would be most influenced by the bellicose threats against Europe heard from the TV screen. Therefore, it was expected that the center of gravity would fall on the answer to the transfer of military operations to the territory of European countries. But it turned out that even for those who trust television the most (which is almost 40% of the adult population), this option is the least suitable of all four. And in the end, he collected only 16% of responses overall and took last place.

The option of hybrid warfare and sabotage is supported by almost the same minority - 18%.

The Russian public responded much better to the proposal to seek a path to peace through establishing business relations with partners in these - albeit hostile - countries. 31% of the population supported this.

And first place was taken by the most radical option: to invite these countries to act as mediators for the peaceful resolution of the conflict. More than a third of respondents (34%) were in favor of this.

The survey demonstrates the general mood of the Russian public very clearly: in general, twice as many Russians are in favor of peaceful paths as in favor of military ones.

Of interest are the differences and similarities in the reactions of different social categories. Men choose the forceful path somewhat more often than women, and much more often the “hybrid” path. But even among men, the main answer is to turn enemies into mediators to end the conflict.

Young people often refuse to answer, but it should be noted the rejection that forceful options cause among students; they receive half as much support as adults with higher education.

Among the bosses included in the Levada Center sample, two parts with opposite orientations are clearly visible. One part is those who, more zealously than the rest of the population, advocate force and, first of all, a direct military path. The other (one and a half times more numerous) is for the peaceful option. At the same time, bosses are more in favor of “business contacts with partners” than anyone else; they are probably more ready than others for such contacts.

Workers, employees, specialists - the active core of the population, those who do the main work in our society - definitely support a peaceful resolution of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and are ready to invite European countries to search for it.

* Recognized as a “foreign agent” in Russia.