Alexey Muravyov: between two chairs

When Sergey Sobyanin said in an interview with the Echo of Moskvy radio station that there is currently not a single project for the construction of new mosques in Moscow, this was almost as a public challenge. It became clear: the capital's authorities believe that for Muscovites, the Muslims are quite a cathedral mosque, they will not build new ones. The thing is that the new ones, according to the mayor, are needed for visitors from the regions of Russia and foreign citizens.

And here there is some incomprehensibility. If for the Orthodox believers even under the past mayor, the program for the construction of “temples of walking accessibility” was practically adopted and approved, then for some reason this is impossible for Muslims. If you try to imagine that something like: “Enough with you and XXS” sounded to the Orthodox, then it will become clear how far the situation is far from the declared, and how unequal are the conditions for the existence of believers of the Russian Orthodox Church and all the others. This means that in fact we introduce the order of the monoconfessional Orthodox state, but the authorities still cannot draw up this order rhetorically.

In fact, did anyone think, how many are among the Orthodox Muscovites, and how many "who came up"? Hardly, the quantitative indicators of millionaire cities over the past five to six years have changed very significantly. Most of their population are now coming. Among the Russian migrants, people of Orthodox orientation naturally prevail (it can be said that the number of truly practicing Christians of them is equal to the common country-3-5%), so they, if they go, are in the church. As for visitors from the Central Asian republics, the share of practicing among them is significantly higher. In addition, Islam, like Christianity, is not homogeneous. Someone wants to go not to the Sunni, but to the Shiite mosque, someone has a different Mazhab, you never know.

It seems that the political decision, which is behind the mayor’s words “build a mosques for everyone from all over the country, is an overkill”, we can formulate something like this: we attract the Orthodox, Muslims - we dare. But at the same time, we are forced to attract labor from Asia, so economic pragmatist is contrary to this, seemingly clear political decision. This contradiction essentially reflects the imbalance of our social policy. The authorities are forced to act according to economic expediency, but does not want to take responsibility for these actions. This responsibility, as it were, is shifted to the shoulders of the population: you need clean yards - you think where to pray to migrants. But then it is not clear what the function of the state is the collection and redistribution of rent?.

An alternative follows from this story. If you act according to democratic procedures, then the right of believers to a prayer building should be considered regardless of their residence permit. But if you forget about the procedure, make a political decision and act in accordance with it, then you need to say everything without abode. The rhetoric of actions should not be technical, but ideological, like: “We have an Orthodox power, and believers of heretical and non -Christian denominations should understand that we will limit their rights. And if they want large temples, they can contact Orthodoxy. ” This would be more honest and logically imply a decision to refuse to build another mosque. And sitting on two chairs is inconvenient.

And finally, the last consideration. There will be no damage to the Orthodox faith for migrants that migrants will be built for migrants. On the contrary, there will be an occasion to ban the national show on the surrounding streets during Kurban-Bayram. Any structure (mosques, for example) is better than the lack of it. It is the unstructured mass that carries a potential threat.