In the name of children

About the benevolent idiocy of the new deputy ideology

I watched the reports from the Duma and could not get rid of a strange impression: the deputies, it seemed to me, were glad about the news of the death of Maxim Kuzmin and with difficulty hide their joy, turning into jubilation. A child from Russia died just in time in the States, allowing the authors of the "scoundrel law" to speculate under television cameras about who the "really scoundrels" are here. Well, in general, a joyful moment of silence is a rare sight. Later, however, it turned out that the deputies were a little hasty to rejoice ...

All this representation in the Duma indirectly testifies: the “march against scoundrels” with portraits on posters of parliamentarians touched. Seriously. They appear to be vulnerable. Gentle, quivering souls.

We are witnessing an amazing picture now: through the efforts of the deputies, the country is acquiring a new national idea, the need for which has been spoken about by various people for so long. Ideology is sought at random, its contours outlined by the strangest and most absurd of the repressive laws adopted in recent times. Russia is gradually turning into a reserve of conservatism, but a special conservatism - in the version of an abstract layman. A tradesman who has been defamed for centuries by great Russian literature. Which was exposed by the magazine "Crocodile". And the real existence of which is still in question.

They seemed to be afraid that there was no majority behind them. Did they believe, or something, a witty poster from the romantic December of the eleventh year: “You don’t even represent us.” And they began to form the ideology of the majority through laws, in accordance with their own ideas about the characteristics of this majority.

I insist: there is no plan behind the actions of legislators. This is a search. It is an attempt to please the majority while constructing it. By the way, they have an interesting experiment. What should not be loved by the layman, average in all respects, what to scold, what to resent, sitting over a bottle of vodka in the kitchen after a hard day's work? It's clear that. Pidarasov. Pindos. In general, a foreigner. Even in speech. The bums who walk the streets with placards instead of . . . what? What's the difference. Oddly enough, smokers also fit into this logic, since the average layman understands that smoking is harmful. Despite the fact that while drinking vodka, he himself will pitch something cheap, shaking off the ashes into a tin can from under the sprat. This is approximately the same as with the "feelings of believers." A hypothetical, and by the way, a real inhabitant, if he goes to church, then no more than twice a year - at Christmas and Easter. But he knows that the Church is sacred. Most often, this is perhaps the only thing he knows for certain about the church and about his own faith.

By the way, vodka is also sacred. Vodka, which is typical, was not touched, pay attention. Although, it would seem, too, the thing is quite harmful.

And to be absolutely sure, in order not to leave opponents the opportunity to criticize, the wildest laws are passed in the name of children. Homosexuals are recorded as second-class people for a reason, but for the sake of protecting children from propaganda of homosexuality. Smokers - a significant part of the adult population of the Russian Federation, by the way - are also discriminated against for a reason, but to save children from tobacco smoke. First of all. In the case of the “law of Dima Yakovlev”, comments are probably not required. Isolationism is also in the name of children.

The rhetorical move is simple, but win-win. The fight against everything bad is reinforced by the need to protect the best. The kids are like angels. Who doesn't love children? (Oh, it is known who does not like, not in vain, recently, at the request of the prosecutor's office, the page of childfree adherents was blocked in one of the social networks). For all its naivete, the argument “towards a child” cancels the possibility of discussion: are you against this law? That is, for the Americans to continue to kill our children? For children to be poisoned by tobacco smoke? So that all sorts of geeks teach them God knows what? Yes, you are a monster.

The move, by the way, is not new, it is described in detail in the novel, which is necessarily inserted into any of the lists of "one hundred main books." It's fashionable now to make them, these lists. The Stargorod "Union of the Sword and Plowshare" was also going to help children. As time goes by, things get more complicated. Oralo yells at the TV cameras on Okhotny Ryad, law enforcement officers will have to wave the sword.

Exactly what will have to. They even pity a little. It's up to them now to apply the law. Images of the rainbow to cut out of books for preschoolers. Keep smokers away for the prescribed ten meters from bus stops. Not only with a club, but, apparently, also with a tape measure. And when the benevolent idiocy of the new ideology begins to break through into reality, the layman, the non-abstract, really existing layman, can behave in the most unexpected way.

And yes, when it comes to taking care of children. Here is this amazing jubilation over a boy who died in America - it shows with incredible clarity how the rhetoric of care differs from care itself.