A coup

This is probably forever. Live at least a quarter of a century - everything will be so. And after a hundred years, when not a single witness of a small civil war in the center of the Russian capital has long been left, the discussions will not stop, having lost only sharpness. This is, in the end, a dispute on an eternal topic: about goals and means.

In addition, a paradoxical dispute. During which people of impeccably democratic beliefs argue that the red-brown hydra, tagged in parliament, can and should be shot from tanks, and people who profess the ideals of red-brown hydra are cursing the killers and rapists who trampled democracy. And between them, citizens will constantly rush about with unstable views on life, such as the author of these lines, who did not and do not have absolutely clear ideas about how to evaluate what happened in Moscow in October 1993.

Victory over the Hydra? But we remember how soon the regime began to degenerate after the final entry into force of Decree No. 1400 and how the tanks firing at the White House reached Chechnya, where we burned out. We know how the era was broken, whose new heroes were the best Minister of Defense of all time and peoples and the best presidential guard in the world, and how Boris Nikolaevich, under the leadership of his selected security forces, placed snipers near the village of Pervomaisky. We guess that Yeltsin, who fastened his friendship with Korzhakov and loved as his son Pasha Grachev, and Yeltsin, who saw the reformer in Putin, you understand, and the successor, is almost the same Yeltsin. He has been different, but also like that too. That is why it is very difficult for us to agree with compatriots, still idle victory over the Soviet hydra.

However, with citizens who believe that it was then, 25 years ago, it was forever ended with democracy and there is nothing to hypocrite, mourning the first president of the Russian Federation and betraying an anathema of the second, we agree even more difficult for us. Here we simply compare them, our spontaneous liberal of the regional committee of the regional committee, strongly drinking a hero who is weakly versed in people, and a small sober gubist from the Dresden residency, who knows how to pretend to be anyone, even an honest servant, even a broom. He had to almost hopelessly get sick, Boris Nikolaevich, in order to stop his eyes in Putin in the feverish search for the heir to glorious affairs. We live inside his illness.

In addition, the imagination is connected, and we, shuddering, seeing Russia in an internal eye, in which Rutskoy and Hasbulatov prevails in the confrontation with Yeltsin. And then they are fighting with each other, without dividing the power and immersing the country in chaos, and, sitting through the basements in the crushed Moscow, we are dreary brothers the murdered Boris Nikolayevich and his clumsy generals. Like, how is it, well, what did you need to fit the tanks and put things in order? No, this plot does not seem inevitable, but realism is not subject to doubt.

And such a thought creeps up: is it unequivocally not good - to protect democracy with non -hemocratic methods? For example, if Lenin, who stood on an armored car and embarrassed immature minds with his incendiary speeches, would have been constrained from there and shot from an armored car - how could this affect the future of our homeland? Would Putin with a mustache and pipe come or the XX century would offer us any other development options - without the Second World War, the Gulag and other excesses?

In short, the red -brown hydra in different guises, from Vladimir Ilyich to Vladimir Vladimirovich, is it written in our family, or are we partially guilty of that, trusting the fate of the country to different murders? And if for salvation from the anarchy and murder, one must break the law and resort to power technologies, then after we are doomed to live in a terrorist state? Or are they doomed to any layout: for the empty Kerensky and decisive Yeltsin with his bribed tankers, we will definitely pay for the establishment of the communist Soviet power or Chekist authoritarianism?

Not everything is clear with the basic law either. There is a point of view that the super-presidential constitution, adopted in December of the 93rd on the fresh traces of the tragedy, has just led to the fact that we have neither parliament, nor normal courts, nor responsible to the voters of governors. On the other hand, under Yeltsin until his last days, we had all this and there was no particularly to complain about the lack of civil freedoms. And the rigid showdowns of the executive branch with the legislative, within the framework of the former Constitution, were just crowned with a small civil war in the center of the capital. And there are not the slightest guarantees that in the beautiful Russia of the future, where the first -person powers will be limited, the president and parliament will not begin to sort things out again with the help of tanks and grenade launchers. For the fact that the culture of peaceful political disputes was not rooted with us either under Gorbachev or Yeltsin. And after Putin, it seems that not a single policy with the experience of such disputes and compromises will not remain at all.

Only this gathering of stupid, but touchy Androids, voting as the Kremlin administration, will remain. And the picture, fixed in the memory of generations: a charred house of tips as a place for discussions that ended very poorly, and this is also true, this is our story, which will cause disputes in a hundred years. And it will always advance on October 5, the first peaceful day after the end of shooting at small people and a huge target on the Krasnopresnenskaya embankment, generating pain, a sense of shame and a sense of relief that the war, thank God, has ended. So they will never come to consensus, cursing the hydra and cursing the one who gave rise to and shot it.

And between them the doubters will rush, like the author of these lines, with their hostility towards the loser and a sense of shame for the winners, that is, both for themselves and their own in the Kremlin, well, for enemies too. For the irresponsibility of everyone who arranged this massacre, not wanting to negotiate. For the missed, as I feel like, the chance to slowly and consistently rebuild democracy in a country that has not seen a century of will and was divided in itself, when it was time to live according to the laws adopted in normal human society.