Manual control of horror

Why terror is an economic bankrupt and political suicide

“Terror” translated from Latin is just “horror”. His recipe is old, as a world: by a demonstration of extreme cruelty, he, in theory, demoralizes and paralyzes the disagreements. However, in this new normality of repression, we cease to navigate when we use the previous tools of understanding - categories of morality and law. Terror must be understood outside moral and legal assessments - it is coldly calculated effectiveness: "banality of evil."

The author of this design, Hannah Arendt , the deepest researcher of Nazism, who experienced him in full and in his own skin, notes somewhere in passing: “If we can’t do anything, we can at least understand.” That's the motto. The ashes of her cigarettes in the photo of 1969 are about to fall, but does not fall: the thought is performed leisurely and thereby self-preserving himself and us in the face of horror, when the first impulse is to close his eyes and run. “Look, don't be horrified” (Matt. 24: 6).

None of the judges, investigators, prosecutors and jailers are hatred of Alexei Navalny - otherwise for himself, he only annoys them. He sat down voluntarily and so far as for life, holds on with courageous dignity, but, judging by his last post, ceases to understand the terror. Based on moral categories, he offers to be distracted by the corruption of the 90s, which, of course, needs such an assessment, but now we must keep him in the focus of his own, Kara-Murza*, Evgeny Berkovich, Novoseli in a pre-trial detention center-Grigory Melkonian and an already impressive crowd of other people who are also rationally politically repressed.

“Not horrified”, we must maintain the same composure as the operators of repression - we will stand up not higher than them, but not lower.

A legal assessment of these “deeds”, taking into account everything recorded in their materials, will once be given, it can be previously formulated now, but this will not add anything to the existing knowledge and will only make us fall into a stupor again. “The court should not eliminate terror, but to justify and legitimize it without falsehood and without embellishment,” Lenin taught in a note to the project of the 1922 Criminal Code. You can’t say more clearly, but, performing the covenant of Ilyich, it remains only to clear today's terror of quasiiuridic “falsehood and embellishment”. Many other smart people thought on this subject, and we will use their non -legal approaches.

Michelle Foucault noticed a close connection between power and knowledge: whoever appears to be knowledgeable, is trusted with power, but who possesses power, formulates knowledge and appoints those who know. On this basis, Foucault developed the theory of "biopolitics" as a modern form of coercion:

A power that cannot (in any case, for now) directly control the “knowledge” of subject, tries to capture their bodies with the help of various “disciplinary practitioners”. Navalny is an extreme case of capture of the body, and our children, whose bodies are forcibly dragging the “lessons about the main one”, is another edge of the continuum.

Mobilized with washed brains somewhere in the middle, and we are still closer to the children's land: we can speak out (aloud, that is, bodily), but not without fear. The threat of violence is also violence, and the effectiveness of terror consists in this: only one who does not recalculate the authorities can be relatively confident in its safety.

The ideas of Foucault are developing Georgio Agamben , according to which the paradigm of any state is not a “city” with free citizens, but a concentration camp as a “exclusion space”. The “outcast” in the concentration camp is excluded from the relationship of morality and law, he graciously left only the defenseless “naked life” - this is a bulk. But Leviathan can get to everyone. Agamben gives examples, including those associated with terrorism and pandemia, in confirmation of his concept, and as an antidote sees a certain anarchism - we sympathize with him, but we don’t understand where he would come from this world, where conformism is the main necessary evil.

The ideologists of the “Russian world”, including Dugin, whose columns are published on the website of the Government Agency of RIA Novosti, prefer Ivan Ilyin to the complex Foucault and confused Agamben, who is simple. The essence of the views of this philosopher, who welcomed the 30s of the Nazi regime in Germany, is that the Russian person has a special moral instinct, and therefore the right to force others to the corresponding behavior by “forcing” them.

The director of the Orthodox Radio Radonezh on the SPA channel openly proclaims that those people in Ukraine who resist the fraternal “force” do not deserve a Christian attitude: only the Old Testament, but not the new one extends to them. It must be understood that in the same position, from the point of view of the Russian Orthodox Church, there are those who think differently in Russia.

These philosophers, abstracting from moral assessments, describe a certain reality of coercion, outwardly close to legal - as in the novel of Kafka . But the formal law cannot be built on such a basis: the ideas of free will and proportionality are based on any right, not to mention the criteria of clarity. Here, “disciplinary practitioners” come to the aid of Leviathan, on which Foucault focuses on, and we call them a diverse set “wrong”.

In the inverted world, the policeman becomes wrong with the central figure - the court blinds his eyes to those of his practices that go beyond the limits of legitimate violence, and the legislator adjusts the right standards for these practices. The endless punctures of Navalny are based on prison practices, and not on the law; amendments (procedurally - one “amendment”) to the 2020 Constitution were carried out contrary to it itself with the help of sophisticated practices; When, after the start, her police grabbed that she lacks tools for repression, the Duma adjusted the courts urgently amendments to the Code of Administrative Offenses and the Criminal Code on “discrediting” and “fakes”. From the standpoint of law, this is “kafka”, but practically works like terror.

This is not a “police state” in which there is a reverse hierarchy: the actions of a police officer are limited by law, and illegitimate violence is suppressed by the court. But this is not complete arbitrariness -

The current terror is normative, only a chosen minority is horrified. Its normativeness is made into the area of ​​"concepts". "Act by law!" - The president always confidently answers questions regarding the fate of specific characters. Are you p'el - no?!

Operators are wrong to be able to navigate in a complex and now -fixed logic of “concepts”. It is laid down in archaic patterns, which the behavior of individuals Homo sapiens followed over millennia before the emergence of the right with its certainty. This docative code, the logic of strength and wrong are recorded and remain in the minds of each of us, and it is only necessary to configure the individual consciousness of the operators in such a way that it turns to them, bypassing (but not completely ignoring completely) modern written right.

An important role in this is played by the mechanism of recruiting operators, wems, selection and training. So, most of the judges today are appointed from their assistants, who over the years of preparation or manifest themselves as “understanding” and advance up, often receiving, along with new positions and salaries, access to quasi -l. Similarly, police and investigation personnel are formed.

Why has it been created for years “wrong” and what does it support? The same thing for which a legally meaningless amendment was introduced to the Constitution about "the ancestors who conveyed to us ideals and faith in God." Everything is for the sake of creating a picture of the world in which the “great”, but not historical, Russia finally defeats the evil West, and its ruler saves the world.

The authorities thus force us to strictly defined “knowledge”, and when new textbooks and general propaganda becomes not enough for this, guillotine is connected to the TV.

Why can't this situation exist for a long time?

Firstly, the seemingly rational terror crosses the border, beyond which it becomes irrational-this is the current law, but already historical.

Secondly, as the canonical Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya says: "You do not outweigh everyone."

Thirdly, not “the revolution devours its children” (Danton, 1794): it only resumes the constitution and law, and “its children” (rather-fathers) devour terror unleashed on this basis. It is impossible to control horror. Economically, he is bankrupt, politically - not only the killer, but also the suicide. But this is the last stage that we have to observe, having stored with composure, like popcorn.

Empires collapse - a person is being. But being is only such a reality in which it makes sense.

* Recognized by the Ministry of Justice "Inoagent."