Posted 23 июля 2021,, 12:24

Published 23 июля 2021,, 12:24

Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Golden toilet for an official: why it's necessary to take it and impossible to refuse

Golden toilet for an official: why it's necessary to take it and impossible to refuse

23 июля 2021, 12:24
Being inside the system they have built, the country's top officials do not feel safe, they understand that too many people from their environment will be glad for any mistake they make.

Russian political scientist and sociologist, general director of the All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion, Valery Fyodorov, responded in his blog to the lively debate on social networks about the lifestyle of the arrested chief of the Stavropol traffic police, drawing attention to an interesting aspect of this collision:

“The newest socio-aesthetic discussion around the golden toilet bowls and the general neo-aracco of the ex-head of the State Traffic Safety Inspectorate for the Stavropol Territory ignores, in my opinion, the most important aspect. Namely, the social environment of the accused and social pressure on him (the post was inspired by discussions with the accused's fellow countrymen).

Let's suppose that our hero is at heart a connoisseur and admirer of minimalism. Well, or hi-tech. Or even constructivism! And he decides to decorate his mansion in his favorite style. Without gold toilets, etc., it is also expensive and rich - but in the style of "inconspicuous luxury". And at one fine moment he proudly invites his friends and comrades-in-arms in the craft there...

Who will his colleagues take him for, finding themselves in a minimalistic mansion? What will they think of a comrade? How will they treat him? Will the usual exchange of services continue? Will they continue to hunt, fish and tear goats together? Will they be called for a friendly booze with a sequel? Will they be invited to a wedding or a solemn circumcision ceremony?

I think the reputation of our hero in our case will be badly tarnished. A strange, exotic, unreliable or even dangerous person. In general - a stranger and a stranger. And with such we do not stand on ceremony! The well-established turnover of corrupt distributions will immediately fail. There will be no roof for him, no protection, no life in general. God forbid, we'll have to learn to live on one salary: (subtly understanding all these circumstances, the officer kept his aesthetic preferences deep inside, stepping on the throat of the song, and with a clear awareness of the need, he used the golden toilet bowl that he had long hated.

Here it is, the great power of public opinion! Underestimated by many narrow-minded people. Do not scold the traffic cop - he did what he should. With wolves - howled and lived like a wolf. Only relentless rock knocked him off the road to success. It's a pity - he could do so much more! "

Responding to Fedorov's reasoning, another well-known Russian sociologist Sergei Belanovsky develops the topic in a very radical way:

“Valery Fedorov writes that the golden toilet bowls are a consequence of“ the social environment of the accused and social pressure on him”. I am posting material confirming this interpretation. The interview is highly anonymous, the respondent was afraid. The title - “ Interview with the assistant to the federal minister” - is conditional, the respondent does not hold the official position of assistant to the minister. I cannot specify the position of the observer more precisely for the sake of confidentiality.

Preliminarily I gave a look at some of the friends who were previously in high circles. One of the reviews said that it is wrong to evaluate people from these circles as complete scoundrels (although the environment is quite cynical). But I just don't see such an assessment in interviews. The word "scoundrels" does not fit. Rather, we are talking about a very specific social environment...

The anonymous interview that Belanovsky publishes could hardly have been composed; the observations that characterize the Russian government were painfully logical and similar to reality were contained in it. Novye Izvestia publishes several of the most characteristic excerpts from it.

On the relationship of senior officials with the "people"

I am amazed at their complete lack of understanding of how ordinary people live. Complete isolation from their world. The person I work for and his entourage live in a different world, different from ours. And I cannot say that their world is better. He's just different. Yes, a lot of personal and other problems in it are solved with the help of money. The kind of money that an ordinary Russian will never earn in his life. But there are much more difficulties in this world than in the life of an ordinary Russian. People in power do not understand what problems an ordinary person faces in everyday life.

Within the framework of the ideology of money, they are trying to unite us with the help of the ideology of war. We are constantly finding an enemy against whom we need to unite, for a while forgetting about our own position. For me, this is about injustice, because they themselves have a lot of money. Owning such money, surviving in this world, they completely forget about us and about the country. They do not seem to understand that without this country their own situation will collapse. The whole world that they have built for themselves will collapse.

About the power pyramid

Based on their ideology, if they hear echoes that something is wrong in the country, they reason like this: money can solve any problem. They give orders and allocate money. They do not take into account that people who are one step lower, who will carry out these orders, live according to the same laws as themselves. They too are ruled by money, status and fear. My leader and others like him do not think about this. They believe that all our problems, the problems of people from the ordinary world, can be “flooded” with money. And they donate money. But at each lower level, this money allows officials to solve the same problems that they have. The problem is to survive. Therefore, not much reaches our world. As a result, they simply don't know how we live. They say: have we allocated money? Allocated. Then what don't you like?

Trust me, they don't want us to live from hand to mouth. It's just that, being inside the system they have built, they do not understand how this system works. Or they do not want to understand that almost nothing reaches the very bottom of the food chain. But they allocate money for us! Therefore, they complain that we are always dissatisfied with something. We seem ungrateful to them.

Personal survival strategy

But we do not understand their problems either. They, like us, have to survive in their world every day. But if our problems often boil down to how to reach the paycheck, buy a new gadget for a child, pay off loans, etc., then their problems are how they can stay in their world and not be thrown overboard. You can't relax. It's hard to trust anyone. They don't feel safe. They understand that too many people around them will be happy about any mistake they make. To some extent, our world is safer.

It is so costly that there is simply no energy left for something else that is not directly related to survival here. In their world, one must think about how to find allies, strengthen ties with them, and prevent these allies from going over to the enemies. A lot is decided by connections. It is the connections that are the most important value here. It is not the value of money, but the value of connections that strengthens the position of people in this world. In our world, money is a reliable support for survival (if there is any, of course). In their world, where connections are the mainstay of survival, they can never be sure of their supports. That is why clans arise, new generations of politicians are literally grown to take over the reins of government. That is why dossiers thrive on every member of their world, because with the help of such dossiers you can pacify those who are waiting for you to be wrong. Personally, I would not want to live in their world.

About maintaining status

Working within the framework of the system requires constantly dodging, strengthening ties, lying. It's hard. The system is built in such a way that it has to survive and it has to be maintained.

It seems to me that it is not a matter of saturation with money. Rather, you constantly need to prove your status, constantly stand out. This one has jeans for 50 thousand rubles, which means that I will buy jeans for 70 thousand. You can only stand out in the direction of greater wealth, otherwise you will be considered a black sheep, your status will be questioned. Plus fear. The system is afraid to let you out, it is easier for it to destroy you (Furgal, Ulyukaev - this is it! - S. B.). Therefore, you are, in some way, doomed to work in the system. All are bound by some kind of agreement, often not too honest. Outside the system, you are much weaker.

The most important thing is to have what no one else has. The original of some painting, for example. As for professionalism... In the world they have created, professionals can be hired. Professionals can be managed. In a sense, a professional is an inferior being. It is not professionalism that is valued; connections are valued. Their strength, their ramification. Awareness is valued. The ability to access a variety of offices is appreciated. This emphasizes the status. And watches, yachts, private jets are just secondary things that they have to have.

I am amazed at the complete absence of any constructive ideology. There is a primitive ideology of survival. In their picture of the world, the country remains behind the scenes. There is simply no strength left for her. You need to constantly prove your worth and your status in your environment. I do not like it. If you are a minister, why don't you think about the country you serve? Why are you needed then? I used to have some kind of naive idea of their world. Something like people who are burning at work, thinking about how to develop the country, or at least the industry they are leading. But this is not the case.