Sergey Mitrofanov: A letter in traffic

Brodsky paraphrase "Letter in the bottle." Maybe because of these lines: “where the nose and mouth are pulled out, the other where the facade is turned, then there are probably“ forward ”; everything else count“ back ”... I am having fun for mentally writing a column, sitting in a stretched traffic jam caused by an unexpected test of President Medvedev Vnukovo Airport. At the same time, the safety of Medvedev himself forced a long time “Before”, in my case, traveling to Leninsky Prospekt, and I am slowly at the “back” - also not to turn around, and at that time there is a transmission along the “echo” that until our Duumvirat begins to engage in “business” - by the courts, the safety of capital, production, in the end, will not come to the country, and people will continue to lose their jobs and all around Very pessimistic.

Meanwhile, cold, hungry. The engine threshes the rubles. Moscow is a large office, the boss of which is “alms”. But fortunately, “shortly before” I managed to call in cooking, got stuck and now I am starting to eat pies with potatoes and mushrooms that I planned for the evening.

A crazy thought comes to mind: and why is this our president is sure that someone was concerned about harm to him?! In the place of the enemies of Russia, I would have made maximum efforts so that the Duumvirate rules for as long as possible. I have no doubt that then we will quickly get to the stage of Egypt.

Now, for example, because of them, due to the fact that they entered the undeclared election struggle and are engaged in a self-patient ... In particular, the country's president decides to have fun through a personal passage through an electromagnetic frame at the airport ... Everything is worth it, the working day flies into the pipe.

And before that, it was also a mileful remembrance of a simple person - the future abolition of the transition to winter time. Here, on the one hand, as they say, "they thought for a long time." On the other hand: introduced - canceled, introduced - canceled, - an excellent imitation of management!

***

But back to other topics in which considerable and frightening insanity is also traced.

First. The week began with a fake, and, it would seem, in the line of this fake was supposed to roll on, but the fake was unusual, and immediately died. I mean the proposals to establish a new nationality-a Russian, and thereby somehow generalize us all, to brown, bring us together.

The proposal itself is good, so that it is, as in America. There, an American is an American, no question. Black, yellow, even Russian, emigrated from Russia. And we would also - so that only Russians were around. It’s just not clear how to describe what is happening then?

Today, by the way, when I write this column, Russians are gathering on the arena in body armor to prevent the arrival of other Russians protesting against the dominance in Moscow of third Russians

And then, as part of the anti -terrorism strategy, to check the passports of ... Russians? By what rule? Why some, why not others?

Second. The incident of the English journalist Luke Harding. Suddenly, he was not allowed to go to Russia with something, although he had a frightened family left here. Former Outgoing Independent Gazeta Vladimir Abarinov, now on an ongoing basis living in the United States, believes that this is a return to good Stalinist practice.

However, the adventure of interpretations is interesting here. In hot pursuit of the “echo”, a noble lawyer Barschevsky comes and begins to argue that, in general, a sovereign state is not obliged to give anyone a report: “Just a person non-grata, goodbye.” Such, they say, are the rules. Such, they say, a universally recognized practice ..

But dear Mikhail Yuryevich! Probably, in any case, we can only talk about the rules of the last hundred years of the USSR-Russia. After all, under the king, such scandals were not heard. And in these last hundred years there was a very dubious political regime. This regime, for example, could also have Wallenberg in the camps and also give no explanation to anyone. Which became "universally recognized practice."

Since then, however, something in the world has changed a lot, and besides the sovereignty of the state, it has become “fashionable” to assert the sovereignty of an individual who, to whom modern international law seems to guarantee freedom of movement across the borders. Consequently, it is desirable for states, when they do such things and put the barriers, nevertheless give some explanations, and we, civil society, insist on them, no matter what arguments “diplomats in civilian clothes” cite.

The next interpretation from Latynina.

In general, Latynina is good. She usually spreads Putin to fluff, so the latter becomes a pity. Her articles are very interesting to read. But sometimes something happens to her, and from the place where she gets the information, suddenly some kind of crap begins to go through her. I believe that in this case Latynina should also give a signal as a radio operator Kat, that he works under control.

And so Latyninareports that Harding was not allowed to go to Russia, that he "forgets to celebrate several important circumstances in his article." In particular, that “Rasul Magomedov is a propagandist of“ mothers of Dagestan ”.

You can go crazy. I often visit the West, but to say that someone is very interested in what some Rasul Magomedov said would be a strong exaggeration. Someone is probably interested, but these are such narrow specific circles ... Magomedov said one thing, and the press service of the FSB of the Russian Federation-another, so what? ... take and print the third. So it usually coexists.

The next one who accused Harding was ... Fadeev at the November 4 club. And he accused him of daring to edit Vikiliks! Moreover, edit the publication of the Kazakh dispatches (if I heard it correctly) the ambassador, which is why it acquired a kind of “anti -Soviet” intonation.

I’m thinking: to figure it out, Fadeev had to do a lot of strange works. 1. I had to carefully investigate the Vikilics terribly far from our problems. 2. To find this unfortunate dispatch there is also unknown - whether it is genuine. 3. Find the publication of Harding, and we, of course, are studying Harding here from morning to evening. 4. Carefully compare them and analyze what quotes he takes and which lowers, why. Just like in the old days with the works of Vladimir Ilyich. I can’t imagine Fadeev all this voluntarily involved. But Harding must definitely be shot!

It should be added that the next day after the club I was in the EU representative office in Russia and asked their attitude to the fact of canceling the visa of the British journalist, according to Fadeev - a vile propagandist. So there they calmly answered me: everything was resolved! There was a bureaucratic failure, and now, we hope, Harding will be restored in his rights. We are not worried, but you? Hmm ...

***

Third. About the epoch -making meeting of the club "November 4".

Details here . Yes, and I spoke out about the program published there in the Russian Journal.

The main thing is that the chicks of Fadeev’s nests nominated not too much an unusual idea for them from democratizations to suit. Because democratization is dangerous. If the state, as Levkin understood, "will move to the side-towards a certain democratization-then it will fall into some kind of time of time-space and the development of the state will be buried."

“Well, as I understand it,” like the tape in the box office. It will be possible to get out, but in a very cloudy way. ”

Of course, this is only a drawing, a horror movie. As an evidence base is doubtful. With the same success, after all, you can draw the sun and grass and sign “democracy”. Nevertheless, only one thing I can say after him. Yes, gentlemen, foreigners, democratization is dangerous. But but to suit democratization - is it not dangerous?

Imagine for a second that you are right in everything. But then then explain the laws of the evolution of “non -homocracy” and our desirable political actions in its conditions.

Wait for a new Hitler?

But in addition to "theories" and optimal strategies there is also a limited space of human life. As well as the moral imperative. Fadeev offers to wait for Hitler, but I do not agree. This is the whole difference!