Elena Fanailova: We are rooting for our

This text will have to express several unpleasant things. I will not touch the obvious, for example, that the authorities will use the St. Petersburg terrorist attack to twist nuts regarding the freedom of assembly and the press, as well as for the new consolidation and mobilization of society, for a start through anti -terrorist rallies. Here it will be necessary to recall that in France, the United States and further, according to the list, people went to rallies of solidarity with victims of terrorist attacks without any sanction from the authorities and demanded vigilance from their states and improve the work of special services. In our case, the authorities clearly asks for solidarity with her, with her security forces and repressions against all, since counter -terrorism operations imply limiting rights and freedoms.

Russian citizens passed a series of terrorist attacks in Moscow, in North Ossetia, in the North Caucasus in general; The last loud terrorist attack (more precisely, a series) is the New Year's Volgograd 2013. All these tragic events were associated with Islamic terrorism in its various modifications and with operations in Chechnya and Dagestan. All of them, I dare to say, united the company for an extremely short time of mourning experience and very sluggish requirements for the authorities to ensure the safety of citizens, since in general there were almost no complaints about the actions of security for Russian Islamic regions in the tenth years.

At the cost of federal trenches and the tears of local people invisible to the world, Moscow was spared from the fear of explosions and the capture of hostages. Then followed the period of the “Crimean spring” and the East Ukrainian campaign, during which shells were torn and machine guns burst (all this continues), which is comparable in the strength of a psychological attack on a nation -wide consciousness with a terrorist attack extended in time. For this period, emotions and experiences of citizens were canalized by federal television for patriotic mobilization. Then Russia joined the Syrian campaign, in general, there is little understanding people. Perhaps hence the split, double reaction to the explosion of aircraft in Egypt and in Sochi, with the artists of the ensemble Alexandrov and the philanthropist Elizabeth Glinka. Citizens did not understand what happened, and the authorities were in no hurry to recognize these disasters by terrorist attacks or to indicate the connections of such disasters with a terrorist threat; It all ended with sluggish grunts in social networks and personal depressive experiences. Then, for the first time, politicized comments were discovered such as “we ourselves are to blame for why we climbed there”, and they emanated from conditional patriots and conditional opponents of the Kremlin policy of the last four years.

It is embarrassing to write, but this is a bit like the experiences of football fans: we are rooting for our

The terrorist attack in St. Petersburg outlined a new turn against society to the problem of terror (again, I will not affect the versions of the president’s stay in the city and about “who is beneficial”). This is a terrorist attack in the second capital of Russia, in its second heart, in the city of three revolutions, a model of high culture and, most importantly, in the city that survived the blockade. The last circumstance was the reason for the numerous posts in the spirit of “Petersburgers must unite, because we have experienced the blockade, and our pride will not allow us to be inclined before the threat.” And again, as in the last stories with airplanes, such texts come from people of different political views. This is an extremely interesting moment. I already had to write that the current Petersburgers for the most part are “who came from” after 1945, and their injury is historically constructed, indirect, and speaking the language of post -tetotalitarianism, secondary retracinatization. Residents of modern Peter have an extremely mediated attitude to the blockade. I can only assume that the “victory” of recent times in many ways affected even the brightest St. Petersburg minds, the mind of those who are sincerely trying to figure out what was actually happening in the blockade Leningrad. There are such honest research , but they are known, unfortunately, in narrow academic circles.

The reaction of sympathy for the St. Petersburg through spinning (love for the city and its romantic image) is also a plot common in social networks. I even entered the dispute if there was a network reaction to Volgograd-13 as active as on Peter-17. According to my observations, there are no: rare local patriots in 2013 risked calling for the image of Stalingrad defenders for anticaucasian and anti -Islamic consolidation. The sympathy of Peter in the country is of the nature of the selective and symbolic: the great city, national pride. It is how to sympathize with Elizabeth Glinka , but to exclude the entire plane and a peaceful Syrian population from the zone of compassion. And to displace from consciousness the terrorist actions of their own power in the east of Ukraine.

If we talk in general about the folk reaction that the Kremlin intercepted, then it looks like French and American, in the sense of calling to unite on the basis of national honor and pride. It is embarrassing to write, but this is a bit like the experiences of football fans: we are rooting for ours. The difference is that national consolidation in Russia is doubtful due to the crisis of confidence in power, which is also clearly visible from the protests of recent weeks and conspiracy the versions of the explosion.

And if you are upset that Paris and Berlin did not bloom the Eiffel Tower and Brandenburg gates in the colors of the Russian flag, start small: ask the administration of your cities these days to raise Peter's flags over the main city buildings. It would be a very cool national flash mob.

Elena Fanailova - journalist, host of the Freedom in Clubs program

Opinions expressed under the heading "Law" may not reflect the point of view of the editorial office