Protest or irresponsibility? Why not all the citizens issue quarantine passes

Protest or irresponsibility? Why not all the citizens issue quarantine passes
Protest or irresponsibility? Why not all the citizens issue quarantine passes
23 April 2020, 18:08
Despite the threats of the authorities to tighten the quarantine regime, many residents of the capital are in no hurry to issue digital passes, since they rightly consider their introduction to be illegal.

Of course, there were people in Moscow - and quite a few - who did not begin to issue mandatory passes, despite the fines that the Moscow authorities threatened. You can call their behavior irresponsible, or you can free, if you take Sweden as an example, in which no quarantines were introduced in principle, and the country, despite this, is experiencing an epidemic quite easily. The only thing the Swedish authorities complain about is that they were unable to provide adequate control over nursing homes, where the most vulnerable population group is located.

In Italy, for example, due to national characteristics, this measure is unlikely to have helped. And nevertheless: real freedom certainly implies a sense of responsibility, and therefore one should not rush to condemn "quarantine violators."

One of these naughty people was the famous journalist Pavel Pryanikov, who wrote on his blog:

“A day later I go out into the street, I went out to a store just now (I don’t want to receive a digital code in principle). There are no people in Zamoskvorechye. Cars too. A few shoppers keep social distance. In fact, Muscovites turned out to be very obedient people. Even amazing. If they are now ordered to go out in the muzzle, they will go, and the QR code on the order and on the forehead will begin to draw.

In this sense, we are no different from Europe, where it seems that the police state, stato and self-control have ingrained themselves in people for a long time and completely. In Russia, it is all the more surprising that society respects order and self-censorship in general without any stato, without material assistance from the authorities to people and business, without police force. Great material will appear to study Russian society ... "

A similar position with the social psychologist Alexei Roshchin:

“The right to exit. I decided not to receive any passes from the principle. In my opinion, it is somehow humiliating to ask about what you already have a right to. It is clear, after all, that the mayor of Moscow, spawning, did not have the authority to allow or not to allow residents to leave their own homes. Therefore, all his "decrees" to this effect are obviously illegal.

Or today - I went into the park, it shows that the entrance was wound up with red ribbons, and there was a big announcement on them - "The park was closed by order of the mayor." Again - how is it? And why would the mayor have such a right to close city-wide entrance parks? It’s also not clear. Besides - neither emergency mode nor emergency mode. What are the reasons for the authorities to restrict people in something? Yes, no.


How can you ask for the right that you already have? ”

Lawyer Nikolai Zboroshenko writes:

“I travel to courts and other bodies, without fundamentally issuing a pass, if only because lawyers conducting cases in the ECHR against the Russian Federation are not required to report on their professional plans to this respondent state. Plus, in general, the transformation of Moscow into a concentration camp does not help to reduce the risk of infection. As for the assessment of this risk - a separate discussion, I am a supporter of the Swedish approach. They will try to stop me and draw me up - the Russian Federation for each episode will get personal cases from the ECHR from me ... "

The same opinion and Elena Makarova:

“I didn’t, and I won’t. Measures are needed, but fumbling on my phone with spyware is not. And put an electronic muzzle on me too. Exactly what the hell to them. I walked and walked. Well, I won’t go to the subway ... "

The blogger Romsha Golos also does not see any sense in the design of the pass:

I do not make a pass and do not see the point. Everyone is already scared enough and sitting at home. Mostly, those on whose shoulders lies the maintenance of the life of the city are mumbling. On the subway, no one obviously goes to barbecue. In addition, I see no reason in the pass, which is issued stupidly without checking purely upon the fact of filing the application, since it is physically impossible to verify the application. In essence, this is profanity. .. "

Journalist and human rights activist Dmitry Borko looked at this topic from a different perspective:

“I know two very different people who do not draw up passes from the principle. One is a "scumbag" and a sociopath who hates too much of this reality, and himself at the same time. He simply roams around constantly about his business, trying to circumvent patrols. I have known the second for many years, as a creature very conformal and fearful in the manifestations of its views. This man also said, “Let’s go, it’s already beyond the bounds!”, But because of its essence, he decided not to show up at all until everything was over, so as not to enter into any relations with the state. He announced a boycott, so to speak. I do not share the reckless irresponsibility of the first, nor the "invisible protest" of the second (although I understand that everything we do is primarily for ourselves). And I believe (I still think) that measures against the virus are necessary.

And yet, every time I press the button "issue a pass" on the website of the Moscow City Hall, I feel a deep shame. And I will not hide it from myself ... "

But the well-known human rights activist Alexander Podrabinek laughed at this manifestation of civil disobedience:

It ’s funny to hear about existential torment when making a pass from people who regularly pay taxes, through which military and law enforcement budgets are formed. And it’s even funnier to hear this from people who voluntarily agree to a police search when they go to opposition-sanctioned actions by the authorities ... ”

And it seems that he is right precisely in the fact that freedom should not depend on circumstances, it either exists or does not exist. As for the comparison between Sweden and Italy, the point here is not that the Swedes are free, but the Italians are not. Just by the degree of freedom, these peoples are unlikely to be very different. The fact is that Italians, not hoping for their own discipline, entrust themselves to the authorities voluntarily, knowing that they will not cause them any harm. While in Russia no one believes the authorities, neither those who draw up the passes, nor those who do not. And how can you believe them after an ugly incident in the Moscow metro, for which they not only did not apologize, but even through the lips of, for example, Peskov, cynically accused the Muscovites themselves of it. So it turns out that some people think that it’s better not to mess with the authorities, while others try to somehow maintain a sense of dignity.

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