Oleg Belyakov. Crossroads or mudslide?

Crossroads or mudslide?
Scenarios of future happiness

Oleg Belyakov

Date of publication: October 11, 2000

...Vivid performances on the visible political stage are much more effective than invisible tragedies on blood-drenched battlefields.

S. Snegov. "Dictator"

So: the Serbian rally "meeting" "cancelled" Milosevic, and this supra-democratic act, even before its more or less legal form, was immediately recognized by the world's guardians of the purity of democratic procedures. After this, one can only state that the blockbuster about the Yugoslav revolution quite clearly adhered to the prepared script. Except, perhaps, for a happy ending - the handing over of the dictator's head on a golden platter to the most independent of all international courts in the world. Although, of course, it’s not evening yet and they are working on the correct ending. Otherwise, you can create a final shot like this: a rescued Serbian girl in the arms of a KFOR internationalist soldier. Better √ African American. Or an Aussie-Norwegian. And then the credits: the performers of the roles of the savior, the main villain, directors, producers, sponsors... Special thanks to the command and soldiers of the High Command #..., the crews of such and such naval ships. Curtain, the audience goes home.

Stop: not quite like that. When actors perform “live” in front of an audience, it is no longer cinema, but another form of art. Which has slightly different laws. Because the theater (and we are talking about it) does not live by waiting for box office receipts. A successful premiere is just a reason for repeating it, including on other stages. And therefore, an outside observer has a question: should we expect a production of the hit of the season - the play “The Dictator Was Ordered?” - fashionable foreign directors in our area, with the participation of home-grown tragedians and comedians?

Actually, the left-patriotic forces of the Russian political kaleidoscope have already said so: they say, first to Lukashenka, and then wait for a popular production for us . In principle, for this type of presentation to be successful, several factors must be present:
- a successful scenario (as we found out, there are no problems with this);

- a “villain dictator” (that is, a figure who will always be proclaimed as such by the always concerned “public opinion”);

- “savior” (personality does not matter, anyone will be “promoted”);

- cheerful extras (to give an aura of “nationality” to everything that happens), best of all, those who have survived preliminary military and economic sanctions, so that they play as they should;

- massive information processing of the potential audience (so that there is a feeling that the performance is in demand by “society”);

- solid sponsorship investments (after a successful premiere, no problems are expected with this);
- and, of course, directors and producers (invited and local, visible and not so visible).

And, looking around, you realize with pride: it’s not for nothing that we consider ourselves a leading theatrical power. All the most important stage technologies are being successfully mastered, and we are quite capable of hosting such large-scale productions. Moreover, it seems that advertising for the upcoming “project” has already begun.

First, the villain is proclaimed and heavily demonized. A colonel with a KGB background - for the Western public (as well as for the most “advanced” part of ours) this is like Freddy Krueger’s makeup. You simply cannot find a more ideal and banal candidate for such an important role.

This whole story of labeling the president with “all dogs” (that is, boats, towers and passages) past and future, which reached its climax in August, should have led to the creation of the image of a classic Hollywood negative character - cold, evil, calculating and politically incorrect (ideally: offending blacks or some small democratic people). Of course, it is quite possible that the summer accusations against Putin were dictated only by the natural reaction of the public to his not very clear behavior in a critical situation, and just as naturally, the attacks are now fading away. But it's not so simple:

“Less noticed by the public was the campaign to discredit Vladimir Putin, which began in September. So far it is being conducted quite carefully and almost does not appear on the pages of leading publications. However, the importance of this event is difficult to exaggerate: the Russian president is at least being tested for strength, and quite seriously” ( " Russian thought" ).

At the same time, great importance is attached to creating a general mood of anticipation of an impending catastrophe, which, naturally, is associated with the continued stay of the “over-villain” in power. Moreover, it is desirable to scare not only Russians, but also all neighbors :

"A series of catastrophes, one after another, creates the impression that the whole country is sliding into the abyss. ... The consequences of this summer can only be a harbinger of larger catastrophes that will extend beyond Russia's borders."

Secondly, it is necessary to gradually, gradually create in the minds of the negative hero’s compatriots the inevitable evidence of impending changes , the urgent need of the whole society for this, the absence of the slightest support in society.

“Hesitant and indecisive, forced to act with an eye on old friends and be grateful to Yeltsin and his entourage, weakened by an already clearly lost war with the oligarchs and the media, worried about the situation in the defense sector, Putin can expect a surprise from his... allies... The president risks ending up in complete isolation... he is deprived of the necessary support from the military,” and so on.

In general, if they write to the colonel, it is only epitaphs. The main thing is that people should not worry about all sorts of nonsense, like whether the president will be able to debug the state mechanism that was badly neglected by his predecessors, implement tax, housing and communal services reform, etc. It is necessary for people to bet recklessly - who will win? will he squeeze so-and-so or not? And in general: will it last until spring?

Well, and thirdly, it is necessary to convince civil society that it is good and, by definition, always right, and the authorities only wish it harm. The best friend of the Russian people, Z. Brzezinski, especially notes :

“It is with this emerging people's Russia that the West should seek friendship... A more precise understanding of the differences between official Russia and Russian society will help develop policies that include selective cuts in financial assistance to the regime... Instead, the United States should direct the bulk of aid to funding non-governmental initiatives , wider exchange with the younger generation of Russians..."

Taking into account the Yugoslav scenario, the motives of Big Zbyshek, the author of a people-loving work with the eloquent title “The Great Chessboard” (this is how he sees the world), are quite understandable - in chess, the pawns do not move themselves and do not even know who moves them. It’s worse when masses of people who sincerely believe that by setting fire to parliaments they are establishing democracy become hostages of these games.

But is everything so gloomy in the scenario described above - and is a repetition of Yugoslav scenes on Russian soil realistic? It seems that the directors did not fully take into account the peculiarities of that very human factor, which, in fact, is what they rely on in such situations. It seems that they have become hostages of their own belief in the repeatedly replicated idea that the Putin phenomenon is only the result of successfully applied political technologies. It was the cunning technologists, they say, who forced voters, like sleepwalkers, to get up early in the morning on election Sunday and, without opening their eyes, put a cross where the 25th frame or other tech tricks suggested.

As a result, the anti-authoritarians put all their efforts into fighting the ratings , and not against a specific politician, and, it seems, they miscalculated. In addition, the improvement in the economic situation in the country spoiled the picture, no matter how much the “Harvard” scientists exhorted the people that this trouble happened in spite of Putin and because of the inflated “oil budget.” As a result, the revolution did not happen: events designed to raise the masses to the barricades (the president did not appear in front of the sinking boat and “attacked” the freedom of speech of Gusinsky and Berezovsky) only shook the ill-fated rating to proportions that Yeltsin could only dream of at one time . (However, our “friends” do not lose optimism : “It will take many more crises like Kursk to sink the president” ( Sunday Times ). Well, like: if we need it, we’ll organize it!)

Moreover, the funny thing is that when really serious problems come, accompanying the inevitably unpopular measures of the authorities in the social sphere, plus energy prices drop, the “revolutionaries”, it seems, will not have their own “Iskra” (that is, ORT and NTV), which could interpret what is happening in the “right” way, rousing people to storm something. The people may simply not hear the Aurora's salvo and will calmly continue to organize their lives. But this is not in the script.

Meanwhile, it is also surprising that in our society, with all the popularity of the ideas of all kinds of centrism, there has not yet been an understanding of the role of the leading figure of the political Olympus as a kind of “father of the nation,” as the head of the entire state, in which there is a place for right and left, radicals and conservatives, “democrats” and “patriots”. As soon as one of our “extreme flankers” sees anything close to his spirit in the president’s actions or statements, he immediately grabs him by the sleeve and begins to pull him in his direction.

“Why is Putin, possessing Stalinist powers, having achieved the sympathy of society, marking time, tragically wasting the reserve of national trust , afraid of breaking with criminal clans, with treacherous classes?” - they ask from one flank . “...Liberals are afraid that Putin’s alliance with Solzhenitsyn and the KGB officers could become the dominant political force , ” they worry on the other side .

"Russian Thought" , for example, having discovered with horror in the very center of the city two demonstrations of opposing political charges at once, instead of the expected annihilation, it observes the following sad picture:

“Neither the police nor the inhabitants of the surrounding buildings interfere with what is happening. It seems that the same “single legal space” that the president dreams of is reigning in the capital’s Lubyanka Square . ” To make it clear, the “single legal space” is spoken of with ironic mockery.

The result is an apparently paradoxical situation - in fact, it is the president accused of authoritarian inclinations who turns out to be the champion of democracy in society. It is he who seems to say: “Coexist; prove your worth in elections, locally, in word and deed.” But it seems that none of the “activists” really need this. How unnecessary was compliance with democratic procedures in Yugoslavia - and why, if Milosevic's opponents are louder? So: “let’s make some noise”, according to the new European fashion?

Oh! if we are born to adopt everything,
At least we could borrow some from the Chinese
Their ignorance of foreigners is wise.
Will we ever be resurrected from the alien power of fashion?

(A.S. Griboedov, "Top of mind").