Alexey Roshchin: "Bes programs"

“When a conversation comes about anyone else's election program - even Navalny, even Yavlinsky, even Putin himself - is certainly a large number, almost a majority, people who declare:“ Why do we need these programs? Who reads them at all? Programs are all deception! No one will fulfill them anyway! It makes no sense to discuss them and even more so to discuss! ”Etclog. Many directly say that the program of a candidate or party in the elections is like a compulsory program in figure skating; they say it just needs to be done to“ get rid of ”, but more than a program, they say, a politician, they say, it is necessary to roll a more or less solid brochure, and even better to impress everyone, and let's go. Social psychologist in the "Live Journal" .

"At first glance, all such statements look like a frank absurdity, and so ridiculous that it is even uncomfortable to argue somehow. In fact, how can you logically explain that the program is not needed? And to choose then? Based on what?! It seems like a program is something like a labor contract when hiring, if, of course, to consider politicians as a kind of employees hired by voters. In a labor contract. It is written what the employee will do, in what sequence, in what terms, what instruments, how he will observe safety precautions, etc. ”

“People who are screaming that“ do not need to pay attention to the program “with a few exceptions, do not conclude that in this case there is no point in participating in such irresponsible“ elections ”. On the contrary, they have a paradoxical conclusion: they don’t need to read the programs, but you just need to vote“ here for this candidate ”(and poke a finger). Why? And therefore!

Maybe all these people are fools? But why then there are so many?! And again - if you talk with some of these hearts on other topics, it often turns out that these people are quite sane, moreover, something is versed in which they are completely well. And the point here, as usual, is not in the mind, but in psychology. In my beloved "psychology of the scoop". The fact is that we are initially operated on by different images here. The one we talked about at the beginning is about the "employee" whom voters hire is completely alien to such voters. It’s just that they don’t hire anyone and do not want to hire anyone.

Why do such people go to the polls? And they choose ... family member. Their idea of ​​the state is not an inhuman corporation with hired managers -politicians, but a warm lamp family. In which the ruler (as if elected) is a kind of senior relative, that is, most likely, a husband or father. In extreme cases, a caring mother.

They are looking for them in a ballot balloon! Moreover, if at first I was inclined to the image of a girl who was looking for a groom of porodeniki and richer, now I think that everything is tougher: rather, not girls, but orphanages who dream of "good and kind" foster parents who will come and take from the current nightmare. In this sense, of course, no election programs are really needed.

What is the radical difference between these "basic images"? The owner who hires an employee, in principle, knows how to do what he needs - he only needs help. And the orphanage is often not only ways to solve his problems - he does not even know what problems he has, is not able to understand. He does not wait for help - he expects that someone will solve all problems for him. The difference is small, but fundamental. "