Are shells torn close enough?

The era of quarantine with the eyes of 25-year-olds

Facebook tape and telegram channels are clogged with experts and examinations: as usual on flat screens, competent opinions are equalized with the opinions of influents, random people and (pseudo) intellectuals, and without good navigation in this sea is difficult to navigate.

There is a feeling that we (especially young people, my peers and around us) have passed the important stage of emancipation by the Internet and freedom of speech: and now to change the need to “find a voice” and express “opinion” must come to the virtues of new ones: moderation in assessments and adequacy in judgments. "Speak!" -It is necessary, especially in the conditions of such a country as Russia-2020, but it is in close to crisis situations that the value of voluntary silence is known. There is always something to say something-the question is what meaning the meaning and to whom it can (if you can) help.

I am 24 years old, and my wave is already a resonance with the wave of those who are now 17 or 18, and the “generation” is always simplification, people are all different, and young people growing in the world of supplemented realities and identities of choice, different three times. But I can name one important and uniting many of us. This is an attempt to live in parallels.

Not escapism, because it involves avoiding unpleasant reality; There is no avoidance - there is its acceptance, a lively participation in it, a game with her and her ironic detachment. Politics, captured by people relatively elderly, divorced from us experience, a system of values ​​and outlook on life, is perceived as something distant, quasiral. Of course, this is a sign of an authoritarian state, cutting off the attempts of the full participation of citizens in the management of a collective fate: instead of entering the political process, we are limited by posts in social networks, rare splashes of physical energy (rallies! Frotuses! Protest!), But it is hardly right to the heart-one of us seriously believes that the country can be changed;

Participation in rallies today is not about the result, but about the process, not an attempt to return the power to the power, but the desire to not lose it themselves.

This is not a participation in politics, but a game with politics: of course, the thing is useful and necessary, because the bets in this game are the lives of people who sometimes, thank God, also manage to save; Nevertheless, this game, and when it bothers or becomes too nasty (from the lessons of OBZh, patriotism and history, news about Ukraine, reading “Mediazons”), you can always go into your real, parallel life.

On the Internet - especially English -speaking; to the community of friends - even if they live on another continent; In their interests, in cinema, in art, in series and scientific, in their news feeds and their “little worlds”; And, if it becomes completely bad, as we think, you can always try to leave - what are our years? Realizing how easily Leviathan can come and destroy our life, we still believed that this would not affect us with a greater degree of probability: and for all that we influence our lives more than them.

The global cataclysm-there was a pandemic, and there could be a large-scale war, even a nuclear, even conventional, at least American-Iranian, even Russian-Turkish-recalled that everything is not so simple. And that even if you did nothing to Leviathan and did not personally contact him in any way, your life is directly dependent on the decisions that they will accept in the top.

I mean not only Russia: it is funny that on the Internet both Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump are called “grandfather”. Many of the world politicians managed to become constant heroes of memes-it is no longer possible to criticize them seriously, everything is clear about them for a long time, we got used to them and laugh at them as relatives or heroes of the reality show, which seems to be always nearby, and yes, we will depend on them, but so indirectly and indirectly, which seems to be no longer ...

And suddenly it turned out that the question of whether the president of the country is able to perceive information critically, think scientifically, objectively evaluating the competence of his advisers - this is the question is no more about whether we and our relatives are alive.

It is not only about the introduction / cancellation of quarantine measures or about the restrictions of rights and freedoms in the name of health and safety, although about that too. We are talking about all decisions that have been or have not been adopted in recent decades: in areas of science, healthcare, international cooperation, economics and finance.

Judging by the fact that the events in the world are now turning around, probably not the worst way, something was still done. However, both I and we all - we clearly see what actually fascinated the politicians and “leaders of the peoples of the Earth” in previous years. Wars, geopolitics, trading, patriotism, again war, markets, national projects, re -election, war, still geopolitics, still markets and more (trade and not only) war.

The amount of effort that humanity spent on nonsense is simply amazing. And I’m not even talking about the immorality of this nonsense (although it is immoral): but even if we agree that the daily death of people in the war is a sad normality (although this is not so), and the Damocles hanging over us a sword of nuclear war is inevitable (although this is not so) - we must still understand the costs of the lost benefit from immense military budgets, not in time not notable for the time Decisions on climate and erosion of real trust at the interstate level.

For me and, probably, for so many of my peers (and not only) these things were both obvious and not particularly interesting for discussion. The question of whether we want to live in a global open world or not is exhausted for a long time: anyone who uses the Internet has actually gave an unambiguous answer to it (even if he himself does not know about it).

We are well aware that the pandemic will not teach the current “leaders”. Those who had previously been in the camp of “conservatives” will refer to the threat of the rapid spread of diseases in the global world and the effectiveness of national states and borders in the fight against them; Those who stood on the side of “progress” will recall the role of WHO and hint that, in fact, we have a real “world government”, it would be easier to stop the epidemic, and it is easier to distribute medical resources to help the sick.

The pandemic will be pulled on “arguments” and will prepare for a new one: instead of looking around and taking care of other, no less terrible, but less (today) noticeable existential threats, by the same nuclear weapons, by the way, the constant presence of which in our life somewhat strewn our vigilance, which made it doubly more dangerous. The thesis that our real problem is not a lack of political will, but in a frightening lag of the level of development of political institutions from the level of technology development, has long become a truism.

The question should be different: they will not learn anything (nothing: except for new methods of control, intimidation and suppression), and what we will learn. To what extent the collective experience of these winter and spring (summer and autumn) months is a general clash with the reality of all successful “millennials” and apolitical “Zumers” in developed countries, will it be deposited in us?

At the rational level, we always understood and agreed that our world is fragile and it must be protected: but deep down, probably, the majority retained some degree of confidence that "everything will be fine." Leaders - politicians - in their place, whatever one may say, not just like that: these are people who have passed a difficult competition with specific skills, still at the last moment, right before the abyss, they will still agree, right? They will accept the right decisions anyway, albeit being late?

Everyone wants the pandemic to end quickly, and we return to our past life. Of course, I also want it too. But, in the end, we were relatively lucky with Covid-19, Bill Gates warned in 2015 about the possibility of a much more dangerous epidemic. And this fact leads me to a heretical thought: have we managed to get the necessary vaccine in reality?

“Wooden” are torn close, glory to the eyelid of information, but still - is it close enough?

Save the world, self -isolating at home, as they are now joking, a wonderful experience of collective action; But still, for generations whose "shocks" remained in the news, it may not be enough.

George Ivanov has such verses:

“... that no one will help us
And do not help ”;

We managed to learn this truth, having learned to hide in the “little worlds”, in (post) irony and in the digital environment, but meanwhile “no one will help us” - right, but “no need to help” - deeply erroneously. And if the “grandfathers” of our favorite memes suddenly do not want to help us, our chances of living a full life will seriously decrease.

The colossal responsibility that people possess on the decisions of which we hardly cannot influence and in which we can hardly look, showed ourselves to us: and when the virus passes, regardless of whether they will cope with it perfectly or on a deuce - it would be nice to remember it and never forget it again. The virus will pass-and wars, an HIV epidemic, spinal-muscular atrophy, hunger (do not laugh, hunger has not been removed from the agenda), torture, poverty and inequality, all-power of the special services, climate change and nationalism, as well as politicians who are always ready to engage in nonsense and live in self-deception-all this will remain with us.

A beautiful picture would be a beautiful world: a disgusting world at a crossroads is faced with a common threat

(depersonified, just like Ivanov:
“Only yellow dawn,
Only ice stars,
Only millions of years.
Good - that no one
Good - nothing
So black and so dead ... "))

- And jointly copes with her! He looks in the mirror and realizes how he lived incorrectly, sings in chorus Imagine and changes. And although the Secretary General of the UN Gaterrish is now calling for the abolition of sanctions, because the humanitarian is higher than the political, I do not believe in this picture. Partly just because we perceive the humanitarian as the antipode of political (“real politics”), although it should be exactly the opposite, and anti -human policy is time to disappear from the face of the earth.

And, even if we (suddenly) we will agree with this, and the collective experience of a clash with reality will be creative - encouraging action, the question will still remain - but to do what? You can’t go to the “Little World”, to remain in the “big” - it is dangerous, difficult, costly, and is it worth it?

Probably, everyone should go on the verge between sad thoughts like those that I described above, and an underlying desire (which, I believe, many people have the end and pretend that nothing special has happened. The years of prosperity and freedom, the best time in the history of human civilization, in which we were lucky enough to live, are not a rule, but an exception. It should not be perceived for granted.

Reality is a pandemic, war, catastrophe, the coming economic crisis - this is not a “abolition” of the future, not a “finish” of history, not a “new” world and not “zeroing” of mankind. It would be nice to understand that this reality has always been, is and will be with us-and something needs to be done with it.