Date
Author
Source
Preserved copy
Translated material
Optimists and pessimists
The phenomenon of Navalny and his election campaign shared the Russian intelligentsia once again (it is not enough for it of previous disputes) and in a completely unexpected way. The point is not that some believe that Navalny is the last chance and ram that will break the totalitarian doors of the Putin regime, or finally open the possibility of a policy that has not previously existed. And others believe that Navalny with his nationalism, the fight against migrants and Caucasian dominance, Russian marches and common self -confidence are fascism Light, which may be even worse than Putin.
The point is not the correctness or errors of one of the parties, but that faith (or disbelief in Navalny) activated an unexpected topic: faith or unbelief in Russia. That is, Navalny thus turns into a sign that discloses the theme of light or its end; The bright future of Russia or the gloomy future of the cattle of Rashka. And it turns out that Navalny’s adherents, along with fierce support to him, demonstrate faith in the Russian people and their future. And the opponents of Navalny, of whom, are fair or not, they suspect and suspect in the game on the side of the authorities, they talk about the pitch hell that Putin's Russia seems to them; And it is believed that Navalny will only break the last snotty bonds, on which everything rests.
So the fierce supporter of Navalny Evgeny Albats to the question of whether we deserve the power we have, peremptorily answers : “No, we do not deserve it. There is a well -known mantra that every nation deserves its rulers, that Russia is a country with an unproductive political culture, therefore ... and we need a king, father. And I believe that Russia is a country with a very high level of education, right? We have 99%literacy. We have a country with a high level of industry development, with a very large urban population (that is, people who live in cities who are more prone to political activity than in rural areas). And so on. This is a country, these people have the right to choose those to whom they pay money for managing the country. Therefore, no, we do not deserve, this power must be re -elected. ”
Another devoted supporter of Navalny is no less categorical, Dmitry Bykov , who, with the usual Manilov -Maid, draws a bright and quick future of Russia: “Russia should turn into a country where there are no extra ones and where almost everything is permitted, and the cult of the ban is outlawed. Perestroika slogan "It is forbidden to prohibit!" It will return the first, and it is not only a question of the abolition of all types of censorship, not only that the state will lose a monopoly on morality (and generally cease to teach people whom they love and how to express themselves), we are talking about complete freedom for all types of creative and scientific experiment, the involvement of maximum people whose creative freedom is limited by political correlation or abyss. Starters should go to Russia - this is much more promising than importing migrant workers. It is worth thinking about tax benefits for writers and scientists, about the regime of maximum favors to filmmakers, about summer schools and generally about creating creative environments, since in this sense Russia has a giant experience. ” Here, of course, the patho no longer oozes, but simply falls apart, like heavy honeycombs.
Thus, love for Navalny activates the topic of patriotism, national optimism, faith in the future, including Russia, the belief that it, Russia, if it differs from other countries, is exclusively for the better. Therefore, the only thing she lacks is the sane power, which will simply correspond to the excellent quality of natural demographic material.
Those who do not like Navalny do not like to believe him, who do not believe him, who do not consider his coming to power - salvation and, on the contrary, a demetet that the only European in the country is Putin’s government, adhere to completely different positions. They traditionally lowly assess the prospects of the Russian people, believe that it is as the people, and not in the Putin rule, the main risks are concluded. Like, if the people are a scoundrel, then what regime can put it in place? And, of course, no phenomenon of Navalny is a phenomenon, since what Russia is needed already has.
So, according to Sergei Dorenko, 70 percent of the population of Russia - “This is the audience of Stas Mikhailov, people with lost ideas about good and evil, aesthetics and taste, mercy and law. This is a terrible gold grin of a suburban train. And unlike the complacent modern populists, I see this grin. I'm afraid of him. I know who I am dealing with. And therefore I do not believe in honest elections that will lead to the authorities of honest people. I do not believe in a different system of power and in the massive struggle against corruption. I do not believe that the opposition will bring their values to these people. The fact that today in Russia is democracy in action. ”
In other words, thanks to Putin for being holding in the depth of our God -bearer, otherwise these people with “lost ideas about good and evil” will twist such a buch that you still remember Putin with acute nostalgia and inconspicuous gratitude.
With the most pessimistic assessment of Russia's prospects, another implacable critic of Navalny, one might say, patented pessimist is Leonid Radzikhovsky. He, too, of course, does not believe in the likelihood of beneficial changes , since the pit in which we fell too deep: “We are just a backward European country. European and backward. Therefore, our administrative resource will always have more in the elections, we will always have more bribery and so on and so on. Why do you want to be Switzerland or Denmark only in this? Not in technologies, not in life expectancy, not in education, not in the climate, finally, but exactly in the elections? This does not happen. This is a systemic phenomenon. "
Russia, according to Radzikhovsky, is not ready for changes, and what is (that is, Putin) is well deserved. “There is simply no alternative to the existing system. And, by the way, when Navalny’s citizen finally discovered his mouth and told a great secret, that is, his positive program, it turned out that there was nothing at all. I read his positive points in the Vedomosti newspaper, that is, when he stopped screaming “Hold the thief!”, And he began to talk about what he was going to do. These are the smallest, microscopic changes, absolutely, of course, systemic ones, which can be perfectly done within the framework of existing rules. ”
Of course, it would be possible to notice as a commentary on these statements that Dorenko (television killer) and Radzikhovsky (sweet friend of the Kremlin and Surkov) reputation is not at all the same as the sultry and noble liberal Albats and Bykov (Liberal and the Patriot, who is immoderately flattering his reader in the hope of reciprocity).
But in this case, it is important not to compare the reputations of those who act in support of Navalny, and those who wet it (in the service or at the behest of the soul, in this case it does not matter). Another thing is important: Navalny’s discourse opened the topic of the future of Russia and the quality of the source material - the Russian people. And he suddenly arranged optimists and pessimists, depending on their attitude to Navalny. The expressiveness of the optimists and the gloom of the pessimists - they speak for themselves. Navalny is imposed on the role of our last hope, the last line, after which the flood, cold and the pestilence, the textbook apocalypse, the primitive end of the world. At least Russian. Well, we will check.