The nation wants to rally. What would it?

The joy that swept my compatriots about the accession of Crimea, in my opinion, is stupid. But not groundless.

There are no rational grounds for her. Crimea is not a strategic bridgehead, this is a subsidiary region with an obsolete infrastructure, with a corrupted and paternalistic population, moreover, territorially separated from Russian energy and transport systems ... that is, from common sense - a continuous headache.

Nevertheless, there are grounds for the joy of fellow citizens, although they are all in the area of ​​the unconscious.

Their main feeling: the country, that is, a kind of community with which citizens correlate themselves, showed itself as cool, that is, hard, that is, strong, that is, capable of standing up for themselves, subject. “Firmness is not stupidity,” as the character of the film Alexei Mizgirev “flint” says.

If you transfer the personality trait to a collective image of the people (it seems that this is called anthropological historicism), then the situation is quite familiar. A person at a certain stage of development needs to feel his belonging to a certain group and receive approval as part of it.

When the personality is not yet completely independent, a person especially wants to be part of something strong-this is normal.

The current Russia, part of which we all are, does not give its citizens a sense of support. Since the seventies, the dissatisfaction of most citizens of its external and domestic politics grew. Then it gave way to euphoria about the changes that began. And the pleasure of the consciousness that you together with the whole country move in the right direction was very strong.

The outside world supported this movement, everyone loved Russia, helped humanitarian, introduced into their circle, included in all eights, invited to symposia, festivals, conferences ...

But here it turned out that, firstly, there are more differences between them (strong and developed world powers) and us more than similarities, secondly, that some intentions are not enough, thirdly, that we, with all due respect, did not coincide ... Interest in the country has been chopped, and citizens began to formulate claims and save offenses.

Inside the country, there was a habit of critically belonging to everything.

Here, I must admit, the fuse was too strong, and the country did not find the right number of normal "adults" who could take responsibility for creating a mechanism for encouraging. The deficit of approval is constantly growing. As in the process of education after a sharp criticism of the act, it is necessary to give the child something positive that he can lean on, and in the public consciousness after abandoning the old ideology and condemning the past, a consolidating idea of ​​the common good should have appeared.

At the same time, the general negative background grew. It is easy and pleasant to scourge vices and exposure the disadvantages, there is a psychotherapeutic effect in this, since the critic thus distinguishes himself from the object of criticism. Like, if I understand that this is bad, then I myself am not so bad: this is a comforting position.

And now we are not talking about whether there were grounds for criticism (of course, there were) and whether it was possible to find something for approval (of course, this was not enough). But for the development of personality, a person needs to understand that he is good.

The methods of Anton Makarenko today are customary to condemn, because the colonies in which he worked belonged to the Cheka, but, in my opinion, Makarenko was an excellent teacher. In the “Pedagogical Poem” there is a story about Semyon Karabanov, the future pride of the colony, but the hooligan and the thief at that time. Realizing that the boy was ready to take the side of good, but needs support, Makarenko sent him to get a rather large amount of money, while providing a gun. He took a chance and won - the guy brought the money to the colony, trembling with tension, but proud of himself. This pride then became the basis for the revival of his personality.

In the latest history of Russia, there was no more consolidating the act of authorities for the majority of the population.

The foundations for national pride were not laid in perestroika, it did not appear later. The country was not set a single positive task for mobilization - whether to create a national economy (and why, if we have gas and oil and all the few enterprising people can be involved in one way or another?), Whether to find their political feature (from the contrary) ... There was not a single large educational project, not a single national slogan. Even the idea of ​​enrichment, very strong in the intention and, of course, the only consisted - for the level of consumption has grown very strongly over the years - was not thought of a pleasant and acceptable formula that would allow the population, enriching, feeling good people and useful citizens of the country.

At some point, the need for encouraging community was felt at the leadership level. There was talk about the national idea, which considered a variety of options - from Orthodoxy to the search for Slavic identity, Eurasianism, liberalism, regulated market, conservatism ...

All these “young guards” and other Surkov’s social elevators, Mikhalkov’s moral charters, Orthodox relics and a demonstrative presence in church services are unsuccessful attempts to create such a positive image. Yes, all these projects failed. They were originally artificial, among the intelligentsia there was no enough talented inspirer who would be able to revive speculative combinations.

President Medvedev tried to captivate the nation by high technology when he was in this post. The trouble is that he was very late. Under the banners of progress, nanotechnology and modernization, President Yeltsin should have called, but then it seemed to be granted and unworthy of either slogans or capital investments.

One of the last and most successful such “projects with positive filling” is an attempt to create a friendly image for hipsters, that is, for the young middle class, Moscow. But it is obvious that he does not fit the whole society, cannot be consolidating, on the contrary, he immediately found irreconcilable opponents.

The society is too fragmented and not notable, and give all sisters in earrings - that is, to create each part of the population according to its national ideas - well, this, obviously, is already the travesty and a parody.

At the same time, it is more and more clear that without the positive consolidation of society, without a combination of the country in some general impulse, nothing is obtained without enthusiasm and enthusiasm. A pleasant image of an honestly working and honestly vacationer for the intelligentsia, busy solving the problems of his entrance, district, municipality, did not receive folk support. The education of individualism for a country, which has been blowing into the ears about the priority of the community, the team for centuries, could become a common goal, but did not become. And now it’s too late, mobilization resources will no longer be enough for this.

Oddly enough, the Olympiad was the first success in the field of positive technologies. At the time of its opening, after a successful ceremony, most citizens experienced a sense of satisfaction from belonging to something very good. And it became clear that many citizens felt an incredibly acute deficiency of national pride. The joy of victory, multiplied by the enthusiasm of sports competitions, was worried with some kind of feverish passion.

I will assume that if the Olympic Games in Sochi went the way many were expected, without excesses, but even without rise, without much victories, with small but annoying lining - there would be no Crimea.

But the precedent was created, after the Olympiad, the approval signals came from almost all sides. And it is no longer so important that it was precisely the citizens approved, the very fact of positive unanimity was sufficient.

During the period of white euphoria, Putin and his associates received a resource of formal manipulation. For each output of the venerable audience with white ribbons, a much more massive gathering of “ordinary people” with St. George ribbons, state flags and correct slogans was invented.

But this did not deceive anyone - neither the people, nor the intelligentsia, nor power. Everyone understood that this was a staging, but most citizens did not give a damn about it, and the authorities believed that decency was observed. That part of the oppositional intelligentsia, which was unhappy and protested, as it turned out, the authorities easily ignored, and it was completely not interesting to the people. The amount of its heralds is relatively small, so their presence is easy to write off for the machinations of Western propagandists.

The old ideological schemes for the time being worked poorly - but they were the only tested mechanism. Not a single Kremlin ideologists have been invented by Kremlin ideologists for 20 years.

I completely do not share the point of view according to which it was fair to select Crimea from a neighboring state. But I am convinced that in the recent history of Russia there was no more consolidating the act of authorities for the majority of the population.

It is possible that the causing irrationality of this action was one of the important reasons for such complete approval.

Again, I do not think that the result of the annexation of Crimea will be the consolidation of society around the national identity and that this energy is enough to lead the country to the real future.

The action of any doping is short -lived, although sometimes acceleration is enough for moving forward to continue. Crimean euphoria does not promise the fulfillment of the desires that are heated now. The strength and firmness shown in the decision taken against the whole world to violate someone else's territorial integrity should receive reinforcements, but these are not creative emotions, but an offensive property.

Both of the possible scenarios by which public emotions will now be directed is a confrontation with the West and the pathos of collecting the original lands - the military in essence.

However, a real war, as world practice shows, today society does not consolidate. Can power, stimulating the glands of war, direct the energy received to the development of the country? Force to tighten the belts, start working, create your own production, form horizontal ties, sacrifice personal benefits for the sake of public good? It is unlikely that it is forces of different nature.

It is possible that disappointment, which is inevitable after victorious euphoria, will be fatal for Putin's regime.

But the intelligentsia now, it seems to me, you already need to start thinking about what real goals can be for the national unconscious with a real incentive. What the people want? Kisel shores and dairy rivers - this is understandable, but what can be attractive and encouraging an incentive for imminent and heavy tension necessary if the country wants to respect itself? What is the real future to offer her? What is this image of paradise, in which the real kid, a pensioner, a doctor, an oligarch, a peasant, a hipster and a manicure, united by a common dream will sit together?

Actually, to create such a model, society should feed its intellectual elite.