Survival versus life: why evil triumphed over good

Alina Vitukhnovskaya, writer

For the reason that the values that were formed in it are at least fake. My claims to pseudo-humanism, especially in its post-Soviet execution, boil down, in essence, to the fact that even the assertion of life within it is not an assertion of true life. Sheer hypocrisy!

If life were absolute good for you, you would strive for life, not for survival. You would build here a civilized world of a free economy, with beautiful cars, skyscrapers, comfort and robots. You would not deny AML and sacralize cheap, unproductive labor. You are not praising life, you are praising the surviving self, surviving in impossible conditions, but at the same time legalizing them as normal. And what's most dastardly, you legalize them for your kids.

Alexey's supporters, apparently, do not really want the release of their leader. And as a leader, they don't seem to see him anymore. How else to explain this lowering of the bar? Compare Daria's speech to the EU and Navalny's letters from prison. Heaven and earth. As I have written many times, politics is a bullish game. From "macho" and "hero" they made a sacrifice. A photo of Alexey at a sewing machine is a verdict for FBK image makers. Or provocateurs?

Russian love for victims is crafty. Victims are sacred and loved as long as they do not interfere. They justify the way. Enrich suffering. But victims are not brought to the throne. Whoever lost, he lost. In the story with Navalny, everything falls into place. The customers just dumped Alexey. First, calling to Russia under false guarantees, and then, finally discrediting the image.

Soon the Russians will have two choices - to write each their own personal "Loser's Diary" or to start a blog on Yandex-Zen. We are not talking about the third in the Russian jurisdiction. On Zen, too, the authors (but more authors) of their "Diaries". But there is no politics, no sex, no Henry Millerism. Continuous calculations in the spirit of "how to live on a hundred square meters."

If earlier it was fashionable to inject recipes for exquisite dishes into hudlit, now, probably, they will dilute reflections on life with a list of prices - in a column, or as the soul falls. Take a look at Yandex-Zen, there is a deep people as they are. Offhand, this is similar to the life of our parents in the same 1970s, when they lived at 120 re. And even worse. By the way, outwardly, these ladies resemble our parents. That is, if the middle class fell under positive infantilization (sic!) And people look 10-15-20 years younger than their passport age, then the deep people live by Soviet standards. There are 40 - that's 40 Soviet. That is, death, coffin, grave, Olivier, Asian carpet, irony of fate, that's all.

As for the "Diary of a Loser" itself and its author, they somehow did not touch me. Well, at first they touched, but at the age of 26 they already started to annoy. I remember that it was at 26, because then I wrote a column in the "New time". About the fact that Limonov is outdated. Outdated as a writer, but as a political activist - he is a pure marginal provocateur.

When, discussing Bolotnaya, adults seriously recalled Limonov's technical advice, they just wanted to regret their (hopefully done) naivety. An advisor on the methodology of the revolution from the bunker, where the police station was located opposite the party branch! Funny? In my opinion, very much. For the post-Soviet gop-educated people, Limonov, alas, is not outdated. I really can't imagine two thousand women who would be seduced by a patented loser, albeit with literary talents. Well, except that Baronov and Mironov. One style. People who have not lived to the present day, slammed into a dusty Eurasian chest.

Representatives of the opposition, the conditional liberal wing, delegate human rights functions to the systemic Sobchak. That in no way improves the fate of the persecuted, but profanes the very human rights and liberal themes.

The liberal intelligentsia, alas, are people of habit. What makes them in common with the man in the street, whom they also despise. But in order to understand the sequence of political events, one must operate with logic, and not use emotions. Most LOMs are designed for the emotional, not the logical. But specifically in the case of Sobchak, it is obvious how you start to service the system, allegedly contradicting it.

How romantic idealism and purely Soviet cunning, presented as prudence, are combined in people is a rhetorical question. All these years, the conventionally opposition environment has pushed only “its own”. Remember how you ran around with Grishkovets? Now you blame the system as a kind of "absolute evil". Underfoot are the Krasovsky rivers, the Sobchak banks, and the porridge from Grishkovets. Watch out, don't slip.

There are a lot of people with prescribed senses. If you take everyone's word for it, the impression is that it is not postmodern, even the revolution is not today or tomorrow. But I don't take their word for it. The combination of logocracy and hypocrisy, multiplied by inertia and a complete lack of understanding of the moment, is a breeding ground for a dictatorship. In essence, the modern Russian dictatorship is exactly the perfect coincidence of inertia and bureaucracy.

The assertion that there is “God” in relation to the current situation is tantamount to admitting one’s own political non-subjectivity. Simply put, if God exists, then you are not.