Sergei Lukashevsky. Manichaean glasses

I do not understand the special interest in the work of Mr. Popov that has been disseminated recently. The claims and accusations formulated in its text (since I cannot consider conspiracy theories to be research) were made against human rights activists back in Soviet times. Dissidents were accused of having connections with CIA agents, of working for the enemies of the USSR through their activities, both intentionally and “out of thoughtlessness,” and fees for articles in foreign publications and parcels from friends from abroad were a hidden payment for “spying.” activity".

Arguing with authors who look at the world through black-and-white Manichaean glasses is pointless and useless. It is futile for adherents of conspiracy theories about the ubiquity of malicious intelligence agencies to prove that those who “wash dirty linen in public” (another accusation from Soviet times) are not an enemy of their country.

Does Mr. Popov regret that today it is impossible to get a prison sentence for human rights activities? Firstly, under certain circumstances it is possible to end up in prison today. Suffice it to recall the ecologists (and the right to a favorable environment is the same human right) A. Nikitin and G. Pasko , lawyer M. Kivelidi, human rights activist V. Rakovich. Secondly, in Soviet times they used to say that in order to leave the USSR, dissidents were even ready to go to a camp. So the threat of imprisonment is also not a panacea for accusations. Finally, thirdly, if a human rights defender does not risk going to prison, then he no longer has the moral right to do his job? In accordance with this logic, apparently only those sentenced to death in the last word should have freedom of speech, so that suspicious people do not doubt whether he will get any material benefit from this.

The question of whether it is possible to receive a salary for human rights activities against this background may seem more serious, but in reality lies on the same plane. Many employees of human rights organizations receive salaries from their organizations. This is a consequence of the fact that human rights activities have become professionalized . The situation where human rights defenders would work as someone else just to not receive money from their organizations is absurd.

A.V. pointed out exactly to a well-known work of Russian classics, without noticing (perhaps deliberately) that he had already given an answer to the question. “Inspiration is not for sale, but you can sell the manuscript.” Human rights activities are not carried out because money is paid for it. But if a certain charitable foundation is ready to finance this activity, honor and praise be given to it. If not, then no.