Translated material
Critical days
The object of criticism in Russia can soon become only a criticism of power
Photo: Dmitry Azarov / Kommersant
18+. This material (information) was produced, distributed and (or) sent by the Levada Center foreign agent or applies to the activities of the Levada Center foreign agent.
Far behind the era of publicity, when any person could criticize any instance and authority. She was replaced by fears that the era was different, when any one, also any, can pay for criticism. We are somewhere on the road between these two eras, but how close to the second and how far from the first we tried to find out the “Levada Center”* and the laboratory of the future “Novaya Gazeta”.
In March, we asked the Russians a few questions about the right of a person to express a negative opinion regarding such instances as the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the local authorities and the United Russia party. The following answer options were proposed:
1. A person must have the right to express this negative opinion:
Everywhere, including publicly at meetings, on the Internet and in the media;
only in written complaints, in statements in the prescribed manner;
Only in private conversations in the family, with loved ones.
2. A person should not have the right to express this negative opinion in any way.
The results of the study showed the attitude to freedom of speech in different groups of the population and the measure of authority of these instances in the eyes of people.
The desire to prohibit any criticism is expressed from about one sixth to one third of the respondents. At the same time, it is possible to publicly express dissatisfaction with the local authorities, 40%are considered possible, 38%in relation to the EP party, 33%in relation to the government, and 32%in relation to the president. In these four cases, this is the most common answer. In relation to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, 28% give such an answer, but a more significant number - 31% - believes that no one has the right to express a negative opinion about the Armed Forces at all.
The willingness to resolve criticism of the authorities of different social categories is different: among women - less often than among men, among the rich - less often than among the poor.
People aged 45–54 years are most inclined to resolve freedom of criticism, and those who are over 65 years are ready to resolve it much less often.
We especially note the positions of the youngest people. They are usually thought of as the most freedom -loving and critically thinking, but in our study it turns out that they less often agree to resolve criticism of the supreme authorities.
It is not surprising that the most polar positions of people who evaluate the path of Russia as the right or, conversely, are wrong, approving or, conversely, do not approve of the president.
Among those who believe that Russia is on the right way (as well as among the president’s activities) who are ready to resolve open criticism addressed to him at least. But those who believe that Russia is moving along the wrong path, tend to resolve criticism of power and authorities much more willing. Even more actively (most actively) for open criticism of the first person and government, as well as local authorities and the ruling party, are those who do not at all approve of Putin’s activities as president.
Most often, the armed forces of the Russian Federation want to protect from any criticism of the respondents. The greatest tendency to prohibit criticism of the army, president, government, as already mentioned, showed people 65 years old and older: to protect the army from any criticism requires 41%, to protect the president - 35%, which are more than ready to resolve it in a public format.
The most freely public criticism is people aged 40–54 years. Almost 40% in this group allow public criticism of the president and government, and even more - criticism of local authorities and the ruling party.
Again, we note that young respondents, and especially those who are studying, in all cases most often offer to refer to criticism in the form of statements and written complaints. Probably, this generation, which was born and grew under Putin, has lost faith in the formats of publicity and public criticism (it supports it one and a half times weaker than the older generations), but at the same time, probably, in Russia, the bureaucratic procedure is effective (after all, young people are twice as often as generations of their fathers and grandfathers).
The thesis is known that to respect the authorities is our national tradition. The survey really shows that only 32%are openly criticized by the president, and the local authorities allow to criticize 40%. Talks about the intimidation of the people are also confirmed: a quarter or more respondents advocate that no one does not criticize anyone at all. The ideas are also known that the Russians are afraid to publicly criticize the president or the government, but they indulge this in private conversations, "in the kitchen."
It turns out that it is not entirely true. About a third of respondents are considered to be possible to criticize the highest power, and only one fourth respondents, or even less, consider this criticism among “their own”. Only 10%prefer to discuss with “their” local authorities or “United Russia”, while about 40%publicly offers to do this.
In different ways, they are criticized in different areas of the country. The Far Eastern District is the most free attitude to this: 40% of the Far East support the right to publicly criticize the president, 42% cost to criticize the government, 44% for criticizing local authorities.
In the Urals, less often than others advocate criticism of the highest authorities, but more often than others - for criticism of local ones.
The survey was conducted exactly on the three -year anniversary of the beginning of Water. It is known that the military from criticism, which will be considered unfounded, protects a fairly severe law. As already noted, in general, more than 30%, and among the older generation people, more than 40% insist that no one has the right to express a negative opinion about the army under any conditions. You can understand the desire to interviews in this way their sympathy and support. But it is precisely in the fear of people of any criticism, their very rights to criticism are developing malignant processes, destructive both for them and for society as a whole.