As if not

Extremism as a destructive social phenomenon in certain manifestations exists more or less everywhere. And each state, every society seeks to counteract it. This, as they say, is a saying.

The fairy tale lies in two difficult to perishable, and therefore usually ignored issues. The first one. What exactly should be considered extremism and what kind of social behavior should be considered extremist? And the second applies to forms, techniques, methods of this opposition.

Our lawmakers, performers and their zealous propagandists, whose mental processes and logical constructions are in a steadily schizophrenic state, with manic monotony claim that “abroad is not a decree”, that we have a special path, our own pride and although not formulated, but terribly strong and aged spiritual and moral traditions. But at the same time, adopting various punitive-prey laws and putting them in practice, at every opportunity they refer to international experience. “And you’ll try in your beloved America ...” they say smally. “And in Germany there is also such a law! And nothing here ...” - they shout in response to the tactless questions of the reporter. "And in France for such words ..." Well, and so on.

The point here is not even the extent to which their fantastic ideas are sincere, but to which they deliberately simulate clinical idiocy and innocent-landing ideas about the realities and principles of the city world. The fact is that they subconsciously understand: their movements, gestures and actions are not legitimate enough without references to the adult world. "So what, what I wrote in the bath! Dad does so too, I saw. No, I didn’t go!

Yes, our state is also fighting extremism. Like adults. But they have, in adults, this is somehow wrong, but we have as it should. And there is nothing here!

The events of the very recent time serve as fresh, and therefore a particularly vivid illustration to everything said.

In the first days of the New Year, a terrible tragedy happened in France. Armed terrorists broke into the premises of the editorial office of a humorous magazine and killed several people - journalists and police officers.

Terrorism these days is a phenomenon, unfortunately, is not rare. Terrorists kill people and blow up bombs in houses, in airplanes, trains and buses, motivating it with a variety of reasons, through terror, trying to attract the attention of society to everything that they interpret as "injustice". I personally do not know people who publicly justify such ways to achieve justice. But I am sure that there are such people and there are many of them. Otherwise, terrorism itself would have been impossible, as a theater without a public is impossible.

It was some kind of special terrorist attack. Special for the modern world, who suffered and won his sacred right to freedom. And above all, to freedom of statement. Any - smart or stupid, noble or vile, delicate or tactless. There is a right to a statement. And there is the right to speak out about this statement. This is freedom.

This attack was a direct attempt to freedom. And a society that sensed the threat of the basis of its human, and not an animal or plant existence, accepted a challenge. There have been no such large -scale manifestations , such a massive manifestation of solidarity, empathy, anger and grief for a long time.

A society that has long and stubbornly reproaches in the fornication of thoughtless consumerism, in atrophy of the instinct of self -preservation, in pampers and willingness to give its positions to world barbarism, in these few days clearly demonstrated its vitality. A person can and even sacrifice many, the society clearly declared. But not freedom.

It so happened that the society itself, the state power, and the police were in their determination in those days to resist extremism.

In our country, whose notorious identity is usually expressed in the fact that everything is just like everyone else, but on the contrary, in a country where the main and all -pervasive “cross” is the immortal, estimated formula “stand, be afraid!”, Also, there is a fight against extremism - and you thought?

In recent days, for example, an extremist, a deadly and completely law -abiding person who held a poster with the inscription Je Suis Charlie , turned out to be a deadly extremist for public health. And what does it matter to what a few days ago under exactly the same poster near the heads of European states modestly, but with dignity was the Minister of Foreign Affairs of our country. So there, and then here! Compared too. There is something. And here they may be in earnest any gentle feelings of some collective Kadyrov, and here it is no longer a joke-they do not like jokes there. Anyway - Russia is not Europe, have you not remembered yet? Have you been told this yet?

Extremism here means precisely the desire for freedom and for civil dignity, and this is almost not hidden. Is it because for the sake of counteracting extremism against several hundreds of absolutely peaceful citizens who went for a walk to one of the squares of their native city is an entire army of armored ambals?

And is it not for the sake of countering extremism that crowds of outright punks are driven out, ready under the guise of "government representatives" to break and trample anyone they indicate. Extremists, of course, are not those who burst into cafes and clubs and arrange a formal pogrom there. Of course not. Extremists are those who are sitting at tables in these cafes and calmly talking to the topics of interest to them.

And whether extremism should be considered a hasty creation of some kind of ineffective and objectives, and therefore, especially dangerous for the social calm of Antimaydan .

There was also Anti -Maidan in Kyiv. But in accordance with the classical, and not sovereign logic, it arose nevertheless after the Maidan itself arose. Here, where the Maidan is not visible even on the horizon, “antibody” preventively arises. And it cannot exist just like that.

Why is he, this "anti -Maidan"? Apparently, nevertheless, in order to resist the "Maidan"? Okay, let's say. And where, sorry, "Maidan"?

Where, where ... we will find where.

Two boys are walking along the street. They have some kind of face ... like a "Maidan"! There, there is a musician there on the stage of something like that. I have not heard this before. "Maidan", probably. Let's figure it out. And why is this a man yellow pants and a blue sweater, huh? Dill flag, or what? "Maidan", yeah. Let's go talk ... Maidan, in short, will not pass.

And if the "Maidan" here is still "passing", if it happens, then only thanks to the existence of "Anti -Maidan". It is him, and not the mythical overseas "cookies". Free people, even if there are few of them (and, in general, not as few as it seems), sometimes they suddenly discover the ability to self-organization, unexpected for themselves, to active resistance to aggressive rudeness and stupid lawlessness.

If for some reason it suddenly seems to anyone that I am calling someone here for something, then this is in vain. Yes, and who I am to call someone to something. I see neither such capabilities, nor such a right. Just if a person claims that any action always gives rise to opposition, then this indicates only that he is at least superficially familiar with the most elementary laws of nature. And also about his confidence that road traffic cannot be adjusted with the help of one red traffic light and "bricks" hung everywhere. And also that he, as a conscious and responsible citizen of his country, to the best of his modest forces tries to counteract extremism.