Question of the day: how does the protest differ from the pogrom?

Question of the day: how does the protest differ from the pogrom?

4 June , 12:04
Social networks are wondering in which country it is more efficient to live: where there is not a single showcase broken, but the authorities spit on peaceful protests, or where the cars are burned, shops are smashed, but the authorities are ready to take into account the demands of the protesters?

Social networks could not resist the temptation to compare the situation in America with their native Russian one, and draw far-reaching conclusions from this comparison. Frankly speaking, not in favor of Russia.

So, journalist Anna Narinskaya is confident that our situation is much worse than in the United States:

“What blown stupidity is this gloating over what is happening in America! Yes, completely fair and peaceful protests (of which there are many, but which, of course, are not widely covered by the press) unfortunately are accompanied by riots. Yes, robberies reduce the idealistic pathos of protests against racism. Yes, Trump is acting wisely (to put it mildly). But! Riots will settle down (as has happened more than once). Trump will not be re-elected. And their independent institutions (courts, local government, etc.) will remain independent. And moreover, most likely changes will be introduced into the algorithm of police actions - that is, that horror that now will not be in vain. American police, albeit slowly, are changing: the sight of the kneeling cops in Miami is simply an unforgettable sight. We shot a man suspected of stealing a couple of rolls of wallpaper. And nothing. Today, people who went on a solitary picket against the unlawful detention of journalist Ilya Azar are now roughly detained daily. And nothing. We have not won a single lawsuit against the lawlessness of the police, but you sit down at the empty plastic bottle thrown at the police officer as cute. Well then, let's gloat that we are not there. Here, it’s just not at all there, what really ... "

Publicist Mikhail Makogon warns that police violence only works when there is no particular need for it:

“Police violence, using the American example, is a generally speaking phenomenon.

So far you have a Russian situation: one and a half tens of thousands of students from prestigious universities took to the street or a municipal deputy stood up in a single picket. When there is no need for police at all, when the limit of aggression - a paper cup - is very easy to show the bestial grin of the state.

To drive into the center of the city an armored infantry division, to roll out the Punisher, completely randomly, with pleasure and a guy, to beat up people who do not show resistance at all, having crowned it with a big criminal case.

When a roasted rooster, under whose meeting excessive police forces are kept and special equipment is purchased, does it come when crowds of rioters roam the city - well, what will you do with them?

They will respond to rubber bullets and water cannons with stones and bottles of gasoline. And shooting civilians in a cramped city is a lottery.

Not in the sense that under the distribution can fall completely uninvolved. They do not “can,” they will certainly fall. You can’t start shooting at the same time in the city and avoid big headlines with the certainly very cute 4-year-old girl who wanted to stroke the puppy, but got a lead charge.

The fact is that politicians and officials who issued such an order and at times more tolerant of violence often ended badly, not to mention ours, where human life is a new religion.

The phenomenon is that police violence works smoothly until absolutely unnecessary..."

The publicist Alexander Hotz considers this situation from the point of view of collective psychology:

“Riots or protests?

Today, much is said that protests and pogroms are not the same thing. That looting, broken shop windows and arson of cars - "not our way." ("Wrong bees, and their honey is wrong".)

They especially like to emphasize that over the years of protests of our opposition, not a single window was broken.

Indeed, there is a topic for thought.

Social temperament is so arranged that one or another percent of rapists and rioters “sticks” to the angry masses. Is it about “yellow vests”, about burnt cars in Paris, about a black community in the States (not too socially equipped), etc.

If the police “screwed up” and disappeared from the streets, then “there is no holy place” - and there the gopniks go out.

But is it worth confusing the picture of protest (its cause) with the costs of rebellion? Yes, the costs fall into the television coverage, there are many and eagerly talk about excesses, emphasizing the destructive nature of "riots and revolutions".

Indeed, the burnt car, the store and the police station are the same “riot” that Pushkin called “meaningless and merciless”. There are elements of chaos and injustice in rebellion. This is an outburst of accumulated social aggression. Not necessarily targeted and logical. But let's clarify.

The wise Blok, responding to those who were surprised that they had burned his estate, replied that this was a response to centuries of violence and arbitrariness - let him not from him, but from the neighbor where they raped, sold serfs and flogged at the stable. Blok perfectly understood the meaning of "collective responsibility" that the Russian elite as a whole suffered.

We may not like the riots of prisoners very much (sometimes overseers are killed there), but in any case it is a sign of despair and a neglected problem that can be solved only by a surge of general violence.

So let's answer the question: do we want, "like in Paris," when the authorities begin to negotiate with the "pogromists"? Or do we want, like in Moscow, where not a single window has been broken, not a single tire burnt, but do peaceful protesters break their legs, hammer with sticks and screw single pickets?

Let’s realize that it’s not a matter of “right” protests (or “wrong” pogroms), but a matter of social temperament as a whole, of society’s ability to social aggression in principle.

Blacks in the States and even European "leftists" - these traditions are alive. Therefore, power does not “lose the coast” and is more sane.

In other words, Parisians and blacks (sorry for my French) have these “eggs” when they respond with a blow. When hatred and indignation are "channelized" outside, not inside a person, destroying him from the inside and paralyzing the will.

This is a type of social reaction (which, of course, has traditions and history). For Russians it is one, and for free Europeans or Americans it is different.

Before bad “pogromists and looters” appear in the indignant crowd, we must have the crowd itself, which will go outside and burn the police station to hell.

Only after this, the authorities will seize their heads and run to correct mistakes, the governor will be “horrified”, and the police authorities will arrest the rapist.

If you ask me what’s more effective: to live in a country where not a single window is broken and power breaks legs, spines, gives out false “badges” to police officers and spits on peaceful protests - or where shops are burning, cars are destroyed, but the authorities ready to respond to your social temperament and take into account your requirements, then I choose the second.

I repeat once again: the problem is not in the "pogromists", but in "going out to the square" (as Galich once sang). A nation that is able to keep its own power in tension, which is ready for massive street action and has an “explosive” temperament, has a future.

Otherwise, this is not a nation, but a "rag" with which you can do anything. But the windows are intact - and on the street, after thousands of angry protesters, there remain several crumpled glasses..."

Found a typo in the text? Select it and press ctrl + enter