The moral abyss of the Russian Liberoids

Blessed is he who believes in the new Russia — and in vain, or once again about the mental castration of Russian liberal-liberates

True thought requires clarity, not noise. And therefore, speaking about modern Russia, it is necessary to discard illusions - both external and internal. For too long, the world has allowed us to call a lie "opinion", meanness - "position", and moral decline - "in a special way". This text is not about politics in the usual sense, but about the moral geometry of a society that has lost the ability to distinguish between good and evil. About the mechanisms of self-destruction that are disguised as arguments about "democracy", "patriotism" or "alternative Russia". There will be pain, sarcasm and merciless precision - everything without which it is impossible to tell the truth.

Before talking about specific figures and phenomena, it is worth understanding what intellectual environment they come from - what exactly is called "democracy" there today and who calls themselves its custodians. That it was clear what kind of relationship they have with democracy Russian "oppositionists".For example, to prove the "necessity" of one initiative (let's call it "B=A"), they use such an argument - "in all the leading countries of the world, this is the case." (Katz heard this argument twice, Shulman heard it five times). There is also an argument about "scientifically recognized" and "scientifically proven that B=A"...

For example, the Nobel Prize for the "invention" of lobotomy in 1935 was awarded to its "discoverer" Egash Monysh in 1949, when its low level of effectiveness and huge negative consequences had already been clinically proven. And before its ban in 1951, many lives were broken because of the belief in the exceptional "science" of this procedure and "it is in all the leading countries of the world." In the USA, up to 5000 operations per hour were performed. It was prescribed to war veterans with PTSD and recidivist criminals as a condition of parole. And here - hundreds of thousands of crippled lives under the slogan "in all the leading countries of the world it is" and "scientifically proven". This is because both spells cannot be an argument in any matter.

Having discussed the false arguments of the "democrats", it is logical to turn to one of the most representative figures of this circle - Ilya Yashin, whose statements expose the deep self-deception of Russian liberalism. Yashin said, "Putin is not Russia, Russia is us." And this is just a lie. What is wrong with the words of Ilya Yashin and everyone who repeats them. There are several of them here.

False 1.«The war is being waged by Putin alone," he asserts. The mass of Russians obeys his orders. Most of them do it with satisfaction from the feeling of "fulfilled duty". They receive payments and bonuses. They brag about their crimes. I am sure that low-level crimes such as murders of civilians and robberies are committed on "own initiative", and not at all on Putin's order. This is not Putin's war personally, this is the war of tens of millions of Russians. From the generals of the Armed Forces and special services who make a career out of persecuting those who are against the war, to the famous "seamstress from Ivanovo" who sincerely believes in television, and even more her salary, which has increased 5 times on military orders. Finally, those who are against the war in prisons are not questioned by Putin personally, but by hundreds of thousands of employees of law enforcement agencies. There are many supporters of the war. They have all the resources and opportunities to implement their position.

False 2.This is a pure refusal to recognize the obvious - that "Russians" are the same "Russia", without any reservations and specified. Instead, the liberal mythology invents a kind of "Shvabrostan with a human face", where the "second Russia" supposedly lives - good, peaceful, with European manners and conscience for hire. As if she has her own "will" and "subjectivity", independent of the one who bombards her neighbors. And everyone who spoils the picture, like Putin, the army or the enthusiastic "seamstresses from Ivanovo", are simply expelled from this fantasy, like unwanted characters from a cozy dream.

If we discard the feigned seriousness, the scheme is ridiculously similar to the theological scheme: there is a certain "holy movement" - invisible, pure, "true", and there is a fallen, carnal one, with a television and a military enlistment office. This is almost like the Christian dogma about the Church, where the sinner falls away, and the righteous belongs - even if formally outside. Only Christians have faith in God, and liberals have faith in an imaginary Russia that loves them and will surely see them someday. The only difference is that God really exists and rules the destinies of this world, but this "alternative Russia" lives exclusively in telegram channels and on the pages of morally tired prophets-outcasts and Toskuns in God-abhorring Mordor.

I don't know whether Ilyushka Yashin has created a new religion where "Russia" is the deity who informed him that Putin and all his supporters were expelled from among the "Russians", and demands from Yashin how his "prophet" communicates this information to the human race. Then Yashin's words are at least true, albeit inadequate. But it seems that Yashin himself does not notice how he constructs a certain separate essence of "Russia". From the fact that Putin and his zombies speak and act as if "Russia" is some kind of deity, and Putin himself is an "infallible" "prophet and high priest", it is impossible to conclude that this should be "mirrored". We must strive to see the collective essence of Russians - "Russia" as it is, where for every opponent of the war there are hundreds of thousands of its supporters and beneficiaries, starting with "seamstresses from Ivanovo" and black widows who make a living from grave goods. And this is a fact that needs to be understood, and not to invent the fabulous essence of the second "Russia". 

False 3When Yashin says "we", who does he mean? Everyone who is against the war? I would like Russia to be a peaceful and free state, and not a country-concentration camp named after Beria and Putin, but I did not give any authorization to speak on my behalf. Does he mean himself and a couple of thousand of his followers? But what is this against at least one "seamstress from Ivanovo", whom hundreds of thousands and millions of believers watch on TV?

I could accept his statement "Russia is ours" if he and his supporters could at least do something. For example, agree with the government of any European country to recognize them as a "government in exile" and recognize, for example, temporary documents issued by them. Or the creation of a centralized support structure for Russians who are really opposed to the war, and real and socially significant support, and not just blah blah for the sake of sprinkling money. That is, if they had at least some political subjectivity.

But there is nothing to this, only the gibberish of Ilyushka Yashin, who broadcasts with empty pathos that "Putin is not Russia, but Russia is us", according to which there is no reality at all. Unlike Volodin, who when he says "Russia is Putin/Putin is Russia" is telling a fact. Because behind his words stand not only rockets, bombs, airplanes, but also millions of sincere believers in this slogan. But behind beautiful words there are concrete practices - what happens to a person when state lies become the norm. And nothing expresses the degradation of the system as vividly as the attitude to torture.

Meanwhile, the Russians do not understand what is terrible and shameful about the torture of prisoners. I omit the shame, because "the dead have no shame" (the dead are not ashamed - Church Slavonic). And the conscience of the majority of Russians died a long time ago, and I realized a long time ago that to appeal to the conscience of Russians is meaningless.But about the danger, I can explain what is terrible here, in the hope that there is at least some reason left there. The practice of torturing prisoners directly originates from the system of torture in the law enforcement agencies of the Russian Federation. The practice of torture, which has de facto turned into a legal custom (normatized), in itself destroys the legal field and one of the most important security systems - the criminal law system. It happens like this. Employees of law enforcement agencies, instead of conducting investigations normally, grab anyone and torture them to confess guilt and falsify evidence. Moreover, it is very noticeable that the evidence is being falsified more and more clumsily. Finally, there are facts when, as evidence, the court accepts statements about the alleged existence of evidence. 

The first. A real criminal avoids responsibility and is ready for new crimes. It is practically impossible to explain to a Russian citizen that the punishment of the innocent is bad and a crime in itself, but the fear that the criminal is free works. The criminal felt impunity, get ready to meet him.

Second. Employees of law enforcement agencies get used to manipulating the law instead of work, and a huge field of corruption opens up before them. One of them looked at your dacha or business, get ready for him to give them away. They themselves became criminals with the opportunity to satisfy their sadistic inclinations with impunity. In turn, service in law enforcement agencies becomes attractive for sadistic perverts. (Why do you think so many reports of rapes and forms of torture have a pronounced sexual character, because practically everyone who asks is a sex deviant, pervert - negepact). Get ready to be in the zone of their interest. So, what forms the law and order in society, the connection between "crime" and "punishment" is liquidated. And the number of people who commit real dangerous, not imaginary crimes with impunity doubles.

The third. Destruction of the concept of "crime". The system in the Russian Federation follows the scheme of rejecting one of the main presumptions of criminal law. Only what is directly prohibited by law is criminal. Therefore, it is impossible to say that it is a crime and that it is not. Many new "laws" introducing new types of criminal liability are deliberately formulated vaguely and incorrectly. To create a brush against those who disagree, but everyone is already being beaten with this brush.

In order to understand why such a system does not collapse by itself, it is important to look into its social foundation — into the psychology of those who make the dictatorship stable. This is where the difference between fanatics and conformists emerges. When they say that Putin's dictatorship in the Russian Federation is not a dictatorship, because it is not based on fanatics, but on the hypocrites and accomplices, then they overlook the fact that all dictatorships, both Stalin's and Hitler's, and even the dictatorship of the Wilayat-al-Fakih sect regime in Iran, relied precisely on hypocrites and accomplices, and not on fanatics at all. Because there are not many fanatics. They are always a minority. Active, but a minority.

Fanatics can present claims to "leaders" because they believe not in leaders, but in an idea. Because of the fanatics, the leaders have to conform to the ideology, even where they don't want to. Fanatics easily go to the opposition. And in the opposition, they are also fanatics, they can kill someone and are prone to terrorism. Fanatics do not believe if they are lied to. Fanatics are effective only at a short distance. And then they burn out, cool down and get tired.

Adjudicators are the loyal majority. They are always loyal to leaders, not ideology. They are not disappointed because they are not charmed. The accomplices do not join the opposition. The accomplices also do not believe if they are lied to, but they do not believe at all, and they know how to lie convincingly as if they believe. The devices are effective over a long distance, do not burn out, do not get tired. Because they don't burn.

The real support of the totalitarian dictatorship is precisely the propagandists. And fanatics are even harmful. Then Stalin destroyed the "Leninist guard", Hitler - the leaders of the stormtroopers. And even Khomeini's rabbi quickly declared all those who brought him to power "enemies of the Islamic revolution." The support of the CPSU is not an ideological zombie who has actually read Marx and Lenin, but someone who solves crossword puzzles at party meetings, but always votes "as needed". The support of any dictatorship is precisely the fitters and hypocrites. "My-house-from-the-edge" and other "wise sandbags". And fanatics are rather a burden.

Having dealt with the reasons, one cannot help but look ahead. The logic of degradation has a sequel, and what seems like a nightmare forecast is actually a natural consequence already started processes.

I think that I can model the future that Putin has (Putin is not a person, but "Putin" as a metaphenomenon of political power in the Russian Federation) cooks for the Russians.

1. In the near future, a new Gulag, mass repressions, the abolition of the moratorium on the death penalty. Introduction of "Cheburnet". Lack of anonymity on the Internet.
2. After the defeat in the war against Ukraine - a new wave of repressions. Introduction of the concept of preventive repression (as in Stalin's Criminal Code-MS), horizontal responsibility. Will probably appear and a new article of the Criminal Code "innoagent subscriber", or something like that. Of course, defeat in the war will open a "window" of opportunities, including for continuation of the fifth wave of emigration. The "wind of freedom" will probably appear, but the Russians will not climb into it, because they are afraid of both freedom and drafts.

And most importantly, Defeat in the war will be tried to hide through the introduction of the narrative "the war continues" and "this is a pause, the decisive Battle is yet to come", "we must stand firm in the name of Victory", and all "unreliable" are prescribed to wear a collar in which a built-in electric shocker is remotely activated "in case of something" by the decision of the judge-prosecutor on duty. You forgot to cross yourself on the portrait of Putin - you will receive an electric shock. And in some cases, an ampoule with poison is activated.

3. The introduction of an analogue of the "social rating" as in China and the DPRK, where it is taken into account who your ancestors were before the Second World War. And even with a greater degree of invasion of privacy. The type of pricing for time spent in showers and the right to the first night in favor of "SVO veterans". All oligarchs and officials will automatically become "ZVO superheroes" with maximum social benefits. And the rest of the mass will finally turn into slaves who go to the toilet in their apartment by fingerprint, and have no right to complain that the collar rubs and shortens when wet.

And in the background of all this, in Berlin will be with the intonations of the Soviet excellent woman/"good girl" old pseudo-professor Katya chirps Shulman, about what in new light Shvabrostan there are no repressions and this regime is not "totalitarian", because this new regime does not correspond to the scholastic formula from the old textbook. And Yashin and other liberals will diligently sing along to her, like a prostitute under a red light.

And now let's move on to the final cut. What remains for society that has lost faith, conscience and the ability to take responsibility? And does he have at least some way to redemption? When they say that "Russians are disappointed in democracy", this is simply a lie. There has never been a democracy in god-awful Mordor. In order for democratic institutions to be recognized as established, a change of power should take place at least twice as a result of transparent and fair electoral procedures. And no "successors" and "appointees". In Shvabrostan, one dictatorship simply replaced another, and the institutions of a democratic state did not arise.

It is necessary to state that he is praised by many so-called Slavophiles and other scumbags from real science ordinary people And ego "liberals" are not opponents, but mirrors of each other. One shouts "Glory to Russia", the other whispers "Russia's freedom", but the meaning is the same - Shvabrostan must remain so that someone else is responsible for everything. The people demand a khan-pahan, a liberal - a decent ruler; The people are asking for miracles, the liberal is asking for a grant. They share roles in one play: some create darkness, others explain why it is so cozy.

A liberal is the same slave, the son of a slave, the grandson of a slave, only with a diploma of conditional "higher education" and a sense of his own "enlightenment", but actually corruption. The people pray for power, the liberal prays for idiotic "decency" and god-awful conformism. People run away from freedom, liberals run away from responsibility and initiative.

Different masks, but one physiognomy: eternally offended, eternally "innocent", like an old prostitute who has fallen into amnesia, eternally confident that someone else must fix everything. And here they go - on two roads to the same cliff, each carrying his own flag, but with one mark on his forehead: "we just didn't want to think." People will be led there by slogans about a "great state", liberals by faith in the "European choice". And there, at the edge, they will inevitably meet: some with flags, others with quotes, but with the same gaze into the infernal abyss. After all, both roads are paved with the same material - the inability to recognize oneself source of evil and fight it.

If the Russian society does not remain unpunished for their crimesя, he has no future. It is experiencing a catastrophic state these days mass moral degradation. If it wants to survive, it is necessary to get out of the pit of pleasure with abomination. Not a single Orthodox priest recognizes this fact. Therefore, the path so far lies only to further degradation and death. But... of the more or less prominent Russian-speaking ones, only Dmitry Bykov speaks about this, and even he gradually slips into the apologia of the scoop. For example, instead of studying classical culture, which was close to the European level, he, as a typical post-proletarian intellectual of the second generation, even with an ethnic component, suggests studying the Soviet heritage. And thus becomes at the same level of aesthetics as Putin. The classical heritage of Ukrainian culture, for example, is healthy and alive, including as an alternative to the scoop, both in Putin's version and in Bykov's version.

History does not forgive those who pretends not to see the obvious: (Shvabrostan today is not on the edge of the abyss - it is already in it) continuing to discuss the beauty of the fall. And if humanity is still capable of being born from these ashes, then not through "democratic reforms" and not through "new prophets", but through bitter recognition of guilt and repentance, real, not ritual. Each era requires its own words of truth. Eta - requires them to be pronounced, even when there is no one to listen. Because silence in the face of evil is already participation in it.

Martin Skavronsky, Russian scholar, for Newsky