Stability of not caring

A mass of petty violations of decorum turns the 2018 elections into one big indecency

Here is an example of news that is not news at all, but which is forced to be reproduced by all the country's media, reporting at least something about politics: "Vladimir Putin's headquarters refused to broadcast federal air for television debates." After all, everyone knew in advance that this would be the case: neither the current (aka future) president, nor even his proxies would condescend to polemics with other candidates.

President Putin's main achievement is stability. Any schoolchild knows this, especially since the government, under the talk about the inadmissibility of drawing children into politics, is increasingly drawing children into politics: the Yunarmiya prepares invalids and veterans of future wars from them, the school prepares faithful supporters of President Putin in the elections of 2024, 2030, and so on. , but for now he uses them as free turnout campaigners.

By 2018, Putin has achieved stability in all areas: the rights and freedoms of citizens are steadily curtailed, their real income is steadily declining, Russia's relations with Europe and the United States are steadily deteriorating. And political stability within the framework of each electoral cycle (that is, within the framework of Putin's next re-elections) looks like a traditional non-compliance with petty decency.

By 2018, Putin has achieved stability in all areas: the rights and freedoms of citizens are steadily curtailed, their real income is steadily declining, Russia's relations with Europe and the United States are steadily deteriorating

Candidate Putin, who at the same time works as president (well, or prime minister, we remember such a case), does not come to mind to go on vacation during the elections. Although, it seems, the position that he occupies at the same time provides a lot of opportunities for using his official position during the election campaign. Not that we suspect him of this, do we have reasons? No, of course, it's just about keeping up appearances.

Another good tradition is that over and over again it turns out that during the campaign, state television channels begin to cover the life and achievements of President Putin with redoubled energy. No, state TV, of course, does not leave Russians in the dark about the achievements of the leader even in peacetime. But during the elections, the television interest in President Putin turns into a real passion. And now, quite by accident, the multi-episode panegyric "Putin" from director Oliver Stone got into the broadcasting network of Channel One.

Here, even the most loyal CEC could not restrain himself - Konstantin Ernst, the general director of Channel One, was made a timid remark: “Offer Channel One to consider the arguments and postpone further screening of the Putin documentary until the end of voting in the presidential elections in Russia on March 18, show the remaining episodes after the election campaign ". And the presidential press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, reasonably recalled that our television is independent, albeit state-owned, and the Kremlin does not have the opportunity to interfere in editorial policy.

By the way, let's note, to be honest: of course, there are endless stories about the exploits of President Putin, but Putin's candidate on TV is even less than the other candidates. He is almost not there at all - only confidants. There is a fine line here, here one must be able to feel the difference - President Putin is not at all the same as candidate Putin. Otherwise, the president would go on vacation before the elections, right?

There are few candidates for Putin on TV, and there will be even fewer - very soon, after Defender of the Fatherland Day, seven candidates will start swearing among themselves on the air. Darlings scold - they only amuse themselves. But the eighth, he is the first, the market will not fall before this. He doesn't need to. Decency, of course, requires the participation of all candidates in the debate, demonstrative competition, the struggle for hearts and votes. But why show something that isn't there? No one competes with anyone, and the seven participants in the upcoming debate know this as well as the eighth who ignores the debate.

Agitators for turnout roam the porches, beaming with happiness and health, young people in commercials tell how lucky they are: now you can vote anywhere. They could sell chewing gum, but they sell turnout

But all these petty violations of decorum - again according to tradition - turn the elections into one big indecency. Agitators for turnout roam the porches, beaming with happiness and health, young people in commercials tell how lucky they are: now you can vote anywhere. They could sell chewing gum, but they sell turnout. Children are forced to question their parents - do they remember that elections are on March 18, will they come, do they know who should be supported? These are the main elections, the most important event in the life of the country, every vote is important - it never ceases to resemble TV.

Maxim Suraikin, Sergei Baburin and other political heavyweights are straining themselves, working out the required numbers. They publish programs (it has always been interesting - do the candidates even read their own programs?), criticize each other, make fiery speeches and cook dumplings. No, seriously, Vladimir Zhirinovsky recently taught the residents of Yekaterinburg how to cook the right Ural dumplings. However, if we remember that Zhirinovsky is the author of the aphorism “mostly morons live in the Urals”, you can even see the logic in his actions: the people of Yekaterinburg themselves, without the supervision of the leader of the Liberal Democratic Party, would not have learned how to cook the main local specialty in life.

And only the undisputed winner of the ritualized elections demonstrates complete indifference to them. He does not care, he has no time to waste time on a boring imitation of democracy, he needs to think about life after victory. Thus, from the violation of petty decency, the irremovability of power grows, which, in turn, allows no decency to be observed.

And this is not only about the choice of words, of course.

* The opinion of the author may not coincide with the opinion of the editors