Vyacheslav Igrunov. KSI and others

KSI and others
The Short Age of "Nonviolent Peace"

Vyacheslav Igrunov

Publication date: December 29, 2000

It didn't last long, this club. Just a few months. But the Antenna-2 film crew from France managed to film it. “On display,” an overly zealous scribbler will write, and will tear away the smiles of the respectable public, which has not stained itself in dubious, that is, fruitless and fleeting, undertakings. Yes, yes, fruitless, another Komsomol speaker will emphasize from the podium of “Perestroika” and call on us in a fatherly manner: “Enough talk, guys! Let’s get down to business!”

What does it matter when very young boys and girls talk about themselves and ask each other about each other, argue on topics that another adviser, getting down to business, has long exhausted for himself? Everywhere you hear only: where are your affairs, informals? And the informals dance to modern rhythms and drink (in our anti-alcohol era!) not only tea and delicious Fanta...

They ask questions: “Will Germany be united?”, “Is there state anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union?” - and immediately move on to projects of an international cooperative, which are not destined to come to fruition. And is it the fault of young dreamers, builders of castles in the air, captives of dreams?

“The world is entangled in so many contradictions that it is not possible to resolve them at the government level,” says one of the informals, G. Pelman. Therefore, protecting the world, economic cooperation, and preserving the habitat are today the responsibility of not only governments, but also peoples. The responsibility that lies with each of us encourages us to act within the broadest possible framework. The future depends more on public diplomacy, on broad international cooperation at the level of small social groups, than on the political game of governments...

Isn’t it typical that the words of the “chattering” informals no longer contradict the words of the country’s leaders, but seem to follow them? And the time when an idea only had to be born outside the walls of the Institution to be rejected has passed. This changed social atmosphere, if it did not lead to the massive birth of public initiatives, then at least gave rise to many attempts to realize themselves in their own projects. This also applies to the Nonviolent Peace project.

But how to implement your project? After all, for decades we lived in a structureless social environment, an environment where horizontal connections were erased and we all fit not so much into the social organism as into the managerial hierarchy. And today informals are invading this viscous amorphous world, creating in it centers of crystallization, centers of unification of people with initiative, illuminated with ideas. Not finding ready-made structures through which they could spread their influence and implement their plans, they spend the lion’s share of their energy searching for like-minded people, searching for at least some kind of roof under which they can spend a few hours a week. Many problems are practically unsolvable today. And who knows: won’t they become even more hopeless when a new, mysteriously being developed law on amateur associations is adopted? Is it surprising that in the Conditions many clubs disintegrate as soon as they arise, while others, having existed for a short time, do not leave behind a trace of the “real business” that is for some reason so expected from informals? It is rather surprising that they nevertheless arise and, disintegrating, are reborn again. Closely observing what is happening in an informal environment, you discover that destructive conditions do not break the most inventive. Moving from club to club, they structure the environment, transfer experience from one group to another, learning from past mistakes and generating organizing ideas. Isn't this enough? A thing that time itself did not do!

We should not make claims against those who created ephemeral circles and short-lived clubs. And I am outraged by the situations that are repeated with bad monotony in a number of television programs, when an official responds to some enthusiast or inventor’s complaints with a reproach: you yourself are to blame for not showing fighting qualities. Like this! It’s not enough to spend the night at the enterprise, it’s not enough to offer a brilliant idea - you also have to be a fighter! Otherwise, it's your own fault! How many wonderful ideas have been ruined this way, and how many people have lost faith in their own strength and in the rationality of the world!

Today we approach informals with similar standards. Aren't we afraid of ruining a new and promising movement in the bud? Isn't it better to look for partners in informal groups? This is exactly what the Soviet Sociological Association of the USSR Academy of Sciences did by establishing the KSI (Club of Social Initiatives).

What is KSI?

Today people often ask: who is in your club, how many of you are there after one and a half years of existence? And they are surprised to learn that there are only two dozen, a little more. And so much noise? Perhaps KSI's fame is the fruit of self-promotion? Why is the central press so worried? Such excitement is justified: the concept of CSI is unusual for our society. So let's start with an example.

Today, many people know about the Mercy program and society. But few people realize that the embryonic period of the development of this program passed under the roof of KSI. Initially, it seemed lifeless: in the heat of the struggle for a better world, we lost our inclinations to sympathy, attention to the individual was replaced by attention to great ideas, to class ideals. We were building a bright future, and in its outskirts little people suffered and vegetated - old people, disabled people, orphans. It was difficult to imagine how a handful of enthusiasts, five or ten of them coming out for the first charity subbotniks, would be able to turn people’s attention to the “minor” problems of the disadvantaged. It is difficult to say what the fate of the program would have been if the KSI activists had not seen in it the moral foundation of a reviving society. And at the call of the club, not only its members, but also those with whom the club is connected in daily work began to go to cleanup days. of the Komsomol Central Committee, Interlocutor, responded to the KSI’s appeal The weekly journal . This program is supported by central television and the powerful appeal of Daniil Granin. It is viable now, but KSI... KSI is busy with initiatives, the sprouts of which today are as weak as the sprouts of “Mercy” once were.

Two years ago, several unrelated people, inspired by the idea of ​​workers' self-management, were looking for opportunities to test their proposals in practice. When Vladimir Korsetov and Pavel Kudyukin met at a meeting of the Council of Internal Affairs, the “Self-Government” program was born. Today it is an inter-club group, which is responsible for an all-Union conference organized by the SSA AS USSR together with the KSI, more than two dozen people conducting experiments on the election of councils of labor collectives at several Moscow enterprises, and an extensive dialogue with workers’ clubs throughout the country.

Within the framework of the CSI, the “Civic Dignity” project was formed, and the Federation of Socialist Public Clubs was born and took shape. Even more projects have been implemented that, like “Nonviolent Peace,” did not exist for long and passed on only fragments of their ideas to the future.

But, perhaps, most characteristic of the work of the KSI is the First Information Meeting-Dialogue of Informal Associations held by it with the support of the Moscow City Committee of the CPSU (August 1987). This meeting became a kind of impetus in the explosive evolution of the movement of public initiatives. More than 300 people took part in it, representing 50 clubs and 12 cities. And after the meeting - hundreds of letters, phone calls and, without exaggeration, thousands of meetings. The emergence of new clubs, the rapid growth of old ones, a change in orientation and personnel, the establishment of a network of connections stretching to all corners of the country - this was the expected and yet unexpected result of the meeting.

And what about KSI?

The August dialogue meeting was a turning point for the club. By stimulating the emergence of the movement and involving more and more new groups in the emerging network, the KSI tried to absorb everyone who needed help and protection. Clubs and groups from almost all over the country became its associated members. But what was natural before August now turned out to be an unbearable burden for the club. Being involved in many projects at the same time, the members of the Commission were actually deprived of the opportunity to coordinate their activities. Instead of joining forces, the club began to lose unity. The unusually expanded youth association "Community" dropped out of it, for which being within the framework of the KSI lost its meaning. The prospect of being taken apart loomed before the club.

On February 26, 1988, a joint meeting of the Council of the KSI and the Council of Founders was held, at which a new concept of the club was discussed - in fact, it was actually in effect before. Its main feature was the rejection of a permanent structure - an unusual idea for an amateur movement; So it’s reasonable to ask: what does this mean in practice?

That's what. The founding members of the KSI - most of them professional economists and sociologists - while studying social processes, remain citizens and do not want to limit their participation in the development of society to scientific recommendations. They are actively involved in the formation of those structures, the need for which is revealed in their research. They are ready to introduce their ideas into already formed structures and transfer their knowledge and experience. KSI turns out to be like a nursery for young social groups. But they grow out of the manger. As soon as the KSI or the club organized by it feels that this latter is firmly on its feet, the formal connection between the “guardian” and the “ward” is broken. This is what clubs need: the longer you walk on a leash, the less stable your gait. But this is vital for the KSI itself.

What do clubs care about?

I remember the times when immutability of views was considered one of the virtues of a person. Today I am ready to laugh in the face of anyone who sings this virtue. A man who learns nothing may be hard, but he is hard as an oak. Today, in conditions of rapid development, people’s views on society are constantly changing. And in the overtaking evolution of the worldview, our hope glimmers that we will cope with the catastrophic development of our society, human society, and the biosphere.

Today, questions are often asked: what can’t you share? There are so few of you, perhaps only two thousand, and you are divided into dozens of clubs. Why don't you all unite? And the clubs not only do not unite, but on the contrary, they split up every now and then. And this applies not only to KSI. How long has Moscow's "Perestroika" been divided? And now the second generation club “Perestroika-88” is already in a state of crisis. There are countless examples. What's the matter?

Clubs do not exist to engage in conversation, although discussion sessions are often dominated by those who need to talk. Is it surprising? - There are decades of silence behind us. But those on whom the clubs rest, and, may the participants of the movement forgive me, those on whom the talkers parasitize, are people who are, of course, deeply concerned about our development and our future. The conditions that promote perestroika, that contribute to our return to the normal course of historical development, are for them both a problem of research and a problem of formation. But is it possible to act together without a common understanding of what you face and what you want? Pluralism, says Boris Rakitsky, vice-president of the Sociological Association, one of the founders of the KSI, is good for conversation, but for work you need a circle of like-minded people. Many people think so, and few manage to work differently.

But now there is no common idea, no common vision. When the taboo on free speech was lifted, it suddenly became clear that perhaps the most important thing that we have lost over the past 20 years is clarity. Clarity is lost at all levels. In any section of the people, in the club movement, among leaders, in science, there is no definite idea not only about the mechanisms of functioning of the economy or other social institutions, but also about the goals.

What is our image of the future? In the name of what is perestroika being carried out? It seems that in the minds of many the process - perestroika - has itself taken the place of the missing ideal. Of course, this is better than following preconceived concepts, but today, with many competing processes running simultaneously, we need both a broad strategic vision and a constant willingness to reconsider.

We need an image of the world to which we strive. It is necessary to have an idea of ​​what perestroika is in all its aspects: economic, political, social, cultural and ethical: it is unacceptable that we again reduce everything to effective production management. In the end, it is time to realize that the structure of our society, its goals, and culture must be human-oriented and have a spiritual and moral character. Unfortunately, too often one reads and hears that the Administrative System or another political monster simply failed to manage the economy - and the author is ready to call on new Varangians. So isn't it better to discover the real diversity of forms of human work and life? These forms will be as unique as the unique abilities of their creators and leaders, as well as the unique characters of the performers. From competition, comparison, and study, optimal options will emerge and be formed. And the more such options remain, the better: the more people will be able to find their niche and work without breaking their character or habits, freeing themselves from perhaps the most severe of daily stresses - stress coercion _

Previously, when there was clarity, we more or less decisively moved forward, without going around obstacles - we took them head on, sweeping them out of the way and without asking about the price, because we knew: the forest is being cut down, the chips are flying! We very widely used the slogan: “Whoever is not with us is against us.” The historical consequences of this are known.

Lack of clarity is a disease of a divided society, but people are different. Numerous recipes fill our brain. He, without accepting the mistakes and crimes of the past, is with complete certainty ready to sweep aside everything that currently exists. Another, seeing the losses, calls for the return of the mirages of the past, providing them with a very real club. And so, such “clear-eyed” initiators either organize combat detachments of Afghan veterans to fight profiteering and prostitution, or conduct demonstrations designed to fuel hatred. Are they on their way with those who are no longer ready to “sweep away from their path”, who are not ready to pay a price that makes ideals meaningless? Ascending and descending social flows in a fairly short period of time can destroy the established structure of society, and rapid changes are threatening because the psychology and ideology of people do not have time to adapt to new conditions. We need to know about this and we need to think now about compensation mechanisms, both economic, political and ideological. But should we be afraid of this? After all, there is no easy way to change society and increase the contribution of new groups to economic development. In general, it is naive to believe that serious socio-economic changes are possible without moral and emotional upheaval within the entire society. You just need to clearly understand their inevitability and choose the best solutions to avoid confusion. We, wanting to speed up perestroika in every possible way, persuade those who doubt it and gloss over social sacrifices for the sake of credibility. You cannot take a step without knowing what the other one will be, therefore the actions of “clairvoyants”, obsessives, provoking rash actions are not only an ethically unacceptable position for many strawberries, it is a direct threat to all of us.

And here I want to say that the loss of clarity is also a gain. For this gives us the opportunity to hear other voices, and the one who listens hears. The thinker speaks quietly. The voices of those who shout are heard, proclaiming the knock of truth in their hearts. As a result, “screamers” stand out in the clubs, calling either to the square, where there is room for their voice, or to institutions, where they are ready to destroy bureaucrats. They cannot get along with us, who are afraid to tease a monster overcome by passions. Splits are becoming almost inevitable. Memorial, which has set the noble task of perpetuating the memory of the victims of Stalin's time, has so far avoided them. “Perestroika-88” is developing a completely unusual charter, allowing even opponents to work together within the club, but not allowing any vote to impose a decision on even one person. “Perestroika-88” chose the path that sees the formation of think tanks of civil society, which we so lack in a rapidly developing and incomprehensible world. Will she succeed? Let's see. But KSI decided not to wait - and became an incubator of clubs capable of turning into such centers.

We need islands of freedom of thought. Even if they are few in number, they are able to withstand the inhuman clarity of the possessed, and their fall will result in the sleep of reason. There is a demand for optimism - and it is being satisfied. But when will there be a demand for truth? When will we learn to face challenges head-on with our eyes open, rather than hiding and getting stabbed in the back?

It's time for us to embrace a new philosophy of responsibility. Internal responsibility, based not on everyday control and punishment, but on the consciousness of involvement in the great and dangerous processes of history.

(1988, 6)