The Putin regime is suffering a historical catastrophe - a defeat in the war on the battlefield, on the territory of Ukraine, in an aggressive colonial war against Ukraine, against the entire Ukrainian people, the Ukrainian political nation.

Firstly, the scale of the human losses of the Russian Federation is comparable to the losses in the Russian-Japanese and Finnish wars of the Russian Empire and the Stalinist Soviet Union. Along with this, the relative losses among the combatants are unthinkable, exceeding the losses in history. As bad as now no one was in charge. The army "bleeds out" and, in fact, is unsuitable for a modern war with an equal opponent (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Total losses of the Russian army on the territory of Ukraine

Of course, these figures are indicative. But if we compare the losses, in dynamics the result is inexorable. The Russians began to die 2 times more actively on average (per month) the first quarter of the war to the quarter, or 2.3 times since August, "going for a record." Putin's managers and generals appear to be determined in their ignorance.

Russian defense is burdensome. No forces. Difficult to defend.

Secondly, the rate of loss of heavy offensive equipment, without taking into account breakdowns in combat conditions and in the rear (at least about a third of the equipment used breaks down), cannot be made up for by the capacities of the Russian military industry. On average for the year, the Russian army lost up to 280 tanks, 550 armored combat vehicles (AFVs) and 236 artillery systems monthly. Or, for example, according to the results of the quarter of the war in 2023 (as of May 24), in the conditions of “aligning” the tactics of using equipment after a year of fighting - 143 tanks, 275 armored combat vehicles, 357 pieces of artillery. Whereas …

Along with losses. RF produces, in pre-invasion production rate estimates, 20 tanks, 50 AFVs, and 5 artillery systems, respectively. Removal from "storage" is also a considerable challenge. Since July 2022, the level of production in the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation has increased by only 30%, but it is not clear whether in money (increasing the price of products), or in quantity, or some individual types of weapons (for example, cruise and other missiles). However, the efforts of the military-industrial complex do not cover even critical needs. The industry needs years, but there is no more than half a year, or even less, as luck would have it (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 Losses of heavy military equipment by the Russian army on the territory of Ukraine

The army is critically lacking equipment. The overall replacement rate is 5-10 times lower than losses. In addition, as the Kharkov experience showed, the Russians lose equipment due to a careless attitude to it 2-3 times more than in direct combat clashes.

The Russian offensive has no means, no prospects. It's hard to get on.

Third, there is a limit to the hope of the Putin regime and its generals to pelt the Ukrainian trenches with the bodies of Russian soldiers. The modern Russian Federation is not the Russian Empire and not even the USSR, especially in terms of human resources and their quality. The total number of men of mobilization age (20-39 years old) in the Russian Federation is about 23 million people, including more than 4 million Muslims from different ethnic groups. However, given the so-called. "social diseases" and other reasons, there are no more than 5 million men fit for service. Let's say study and other things are not a hindrance - 7-8 million men (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 Mobilization reserve of the Russian army

Thus, the Russian Federation may try to use the reserve in the amount of 25-40% of those who are registered with the military. This reserve is more than the reserve of Ukraine by one and a half times (somewhere like 1.6:1). But, the war is remote. Russian military observers loyal to the Putin regime estimate that 80% of Russian soldiers die directly from artillery fire. The optimistic for the Russian Federation loss ratio of the NE of the RF Armed Forces to the APU is 5:1.

In a long war, by and large, there is no one to fight. It's hard to pass the time.

And, in addition to the above data, the experience of mobilization on the territory of the Russian Federation showed that the Putin regime (and the army) was not ready to organize mass mobilization. There is not only equipment, but also the necessary ammunition for combat units in full. In addition. There are no instructors to train the mobilized. There are no mid-level officers (for a squad, platoon, company, battalion) to command in the field, in the order of battle of the troops. And this, without taking into account the problems with the military registration of reservists and / or the campaign to find volunteers for military service.

Gathering someone "in a bunch" and showing them the direction where to run is not that.

The main thing is that there is no motivation for soldiers and society to fight. According to the totality of the results of sociological surveys, it was with the beginning of mobilization that the socio-psychological state of Russians reached the highest level of stress and anxiety, incl. from the sensation of approaching defeat. 88% of citizens express concern. What propaganda reacts to in order to be better perceived by the population. Symptoms of depression are especially acutely felt by 67% of men of mobilization age.

Conclusion. Relatively healthy and psychologically ready to serve reservists may be no more than 2.64 million men, and they still need to be found, caught. Thus, they serve, died, and also received significant injuries, in fact, at least 20% of Moscow’s subjects fit for service in the infantry (up to 0.7 million people) or 10% of those who could potentially fight. One in ten fit adult able-bodied males, or one in five mentally tough men, was included in the fighting.

Recall that Ukraine has about 5 million men in reserve and 1 million already in the defense forces.

Yes, many estimates are mostly conditional. There is a war, but still. The counting is also underway. The factor of availability of primary resources for war is decisive. And the worse the Putin regime understands their border, the worse it is for him. We will talk about this below. For now…

Who will be responsible for the war? Regime or all Russians?

Responsibility for unleashing a war determines the nature of the war and the aggressor.

An aggressive war between states is an armed conflict with the sole goal of physically eliminating political opponents, their groups, for the sake of power over another state (overthrowing the government, etc.) and the resources of the victim country (capturing and plundering the country, its wealth, annexation, etc. .P.). A single greedy interest in "power and money" on the scale of states and peoples. Others are speculation. We always look at the result.

One indisputable fact. The Putin regime officially announced the annexation (joining the Russian Federation) of the territory of Ukraine, which is the territorial-administrative units of Ukraine, as a unitary state. Units that do not have an independent or other political, legal or even economic status, etc. The robbery of the country as the goal of the war and nothing else. The Russian Federation is waging an aggressive war by definition.

By the way, a just (defensive) war is the last way to defend one's political will, observing the conventional rules of warfare in order to protect the sovereignty of the state and, as a result, the territorial integrity of the victim country. At the same time, the state that is defending should not have the intention of destroying and / or destroying the aggressor state, as well as the ruin of the enemy’s country (robbery, unjustified reparations and annexation of territory in its favor, etc.).

Sovereignty, in short, is the ability and ability to act independently.

In general, aggressive war is a way of imposing political will by the armed force of one side of the conflict on another with a very high level of uncertainty of the result. Success is not predetermined by design due to the limited possibilities of political maneuver with the outbreak of such a war. At the same time, the scale of the defeat demonstrates both the weakness of the political (and military) organization of the regime and the failure of its will in political exercises.

For a state with an authoritarian government, with a regime, the people and the regime are not one and the same. Actually, in an authoritarian state there are no citizens as equal political actors, there are only subjects. Regardless of how they are officially called. The subject does not make political decisions, does not act, does not have a conscious interest in ongoing events. Nothing depends on him, he can do nothing. It depends on someone, on something, and so on. …Reminds me of nothing?

The subject is ready to fulfill someone else's will, decisions of "authority". Consciously or not, it doesn’t matter, because, as a rule, a person in a subordinate position, in oppression (softer, in subjection), depending on his simplicity and following the example of “life success” before his eyes, will subconsciously strive to acquire the position of an oppressor in relation to to others, to others - he cannot understand himself and realize the situation around him. Or he will live in the form of a “victim” to avoid responsibility, first of all, responsibility to himself, and only then for the actions of others with or without his participation in various forms. So, in the current situation, an ordinary Russian is for the most part an “accomplice” in a crime, but not a doer of evil, not a villain.

The responsibility of the villain and the guilt of the accomplice of villainy are two different things.

The regime determines the conditions for society and, then, the behavior of a person in society.


The Putin regime is not the Russian people. The people are a different element, not a subject, not a nation.

But how, why? What about Russian society with its diseases, what about it? This is often an ambiguous question. However, in general terms, it is not as complicated as it seems.

Answer. Populism in politics as the cause of acute "diseases" of the social organism. Populism is the desire for vanity and conservation of problems. Populism is “simple solutions” to complex problems, playing on the whims of the crowd, its fears, playing on chronic social diseases, in order not to solve the real problems of development. Recall Italy, Germany, etc. in the 30s. twentieth century and beyond. Examples are uncountable. And where, where, but in Russia there is something to play on.

Russian society has a complex of problems, first of all, at the basic level of social relations, at the horizontal level. What can be described as "the enmity of all with all." Etatism (the so-called "statism"), migrantophobia and ethnophobia (in the form of xenophobia), deformed collectivism and traditionalism, also isolationism. These are decisive features in the response of the layman to the conditions of life in Russia. It is based on the diverse personal egoism of a person as a reaction of survival.

Actually, the egoism of Russians is presented for the most part in the form of egocentrism, in the “thinking of a child”, due to the lack of full-fledged socialization in society as such, the lack of clear moral (and ideological) guidelines and values.

For example, belonging to the Orthodox community as a bearer of Christian values ​​in the Russian Federation is stable, indicated in opinion polls by more than 70% of Russians. But, at the same time, 40% are familiar with the text of the Bible, and about 20% observe the basic rite of confession and communion. According to Russian religious scholars and sociologists, in total, the social support of Orthodoxy is about 11-14% of the population of Russia, of which about 3-4% deeply believe and observe all the canons. Other "Orthodox" - imitate.

It is typical for Russia that 51-61% of Russians believe in prejudices (damage, evil eye, etc.) and religious miracles. It is quite comparable with those who fancies themselves Orthodox. Priests of the Russian Orthodox Church are no exception. What is the popularity of imposing all sorts of official and everyday anathemas (curses) objectionable. You can't say right away that people know what the Bible says. Prejudices and curses from Evil.

As a result, according to sociologists, belonging to the Orthodox denomination, like 100, and 200, and 300 years ago, for the majority of the inhabitants of Russia is a blurry fixation of their ethnicity (like Russian) in its pre-modern understanding, and not an understanding and adherence to Orthodoxy . Russian Orthodox people are not, more - under the cultural or attributive (ritual) influence of Orthodoxy.

The vast majority of Russians do not pay attention to the essence of Christian teaching and, as a result, to humanistic values ​​in Christian reading (we do not talk about Muslims and others in this essay), they did not perceive it in everyday life, they do not know it. But they attach practical mystical significance to its form, the performance of a (magical) rite with a material purpose. Outwardly, the conserved dual faith of a pagan, which is naturally inherent in his motives for behavior in real life.

The “peculiar” mental organization of Russians is that the materialistic approach to the perception of life is built on the basis of irrational ideas and actions. Namely, the Russian acts and evaluates the consequences of the action based on his emotional perception at the moment “on intuition”, what is “good” and what is “bad”, without any preliminary action plan or algorithm for assessing his behavior and its consequences.

Such behavior is based on subconscious perception and attitudes, solutions are sought spontaneously and already in the process of activity, which in the subconscious understanding of a person firmly protects him from criticism of his own motives for behavior and the need to think about his actions and his previous experience. I'm not I. At random. "We will win because we will win." Because before, in the past, they did the same. They performed the same rite around the fire. If we “we won’t win,” it means that they didn’t light enough candles in the church, next time we’ll take a larger candle and a louder priest.

It is interesting that the Russians had the same features of the worldview in the middle of the 19th century.

In other words, the Russians, for the most part, were not and did not become Christians in the understanding of faith. They accepted Christianity as a new pagan cult. Or, more precisely, not everyone (not the majority) had time or not had time to accept the postulates of interaction or behavior and Christian thought due to their, in general, late Christianization. And those methods weren't very good either. Mostly through violence.

At the same time, unlike, say, following the example of the British, Germans and Scandinavians, the Russians failed to formalize their native Christianity as a unique Orthodox "Protestant" teaching on a local basis. They did not develop it, they could not formalize a new cultural tradition.

On the contrary, the Muscovite kingdom diligently began to adopt the "Kyiv Church Reforms" for Orthodoxy in the hope of the Patriarchal See of Constantinople for the local patriarch, in the hope of the Kievan and Roman (Byzantine) inheritance for the Tsar. Very modern for the Middle Ages and not only motifs. Not greedy desires at all, everything is exactly according to the Bible. Irony. Third Rome and all. There were enough such applicants then, just have time to get in line ... so to speak, will you be third?

Fortunately, to help the “New Rome” there were a lot of Kyiv guys who also wanted something, they wanted to spread the “Kiev” influence. Probably also from personal motives and hopes. Yes, not everything has grown together as planned ... somewhere they miscalculated their hopes. And now, Kyiv does not have time to fight back, time after time, from the daughter of the mother of cities.

Of course, modern Ukrainians denying modern Russians that they are Slavs (meaning Rusyns) and, as a result, not Russians somewhere, is the same as if the British refused to call the Americans the heirs of the British, even if they live fully in captivity of the Mongolian system of government, oh sorry, the French ideas of the Enlightenment about the state. Even if their elites, ruling families and oligarchs all had British roots. But still, let's be honest to the end, Americans are not English, although they mostly speak local English.

And this, not to mention the fact that the meaning of the self-name "Russians (people)" is not so straightforward. As you know, this concept of the twentieth century, invented by the Bolsheviks to replace the “great (u) ssa” in the ethnic (national) context, and stems, first of all, not from the national ethnic base, but from the religious meaning. As people of the Orthodox (Greek) faith or in the popular Kievan version of the "Russian" faith. Then the Serbs, Romanians with Bulgarians, Macedonians, etc. can be safely considered Russian in the understanding of the Middle Ages.

Or let us dwell on the fact that the proper name “Great Russians” and, later, “Russians” is the Christianized name of the inhabitants of the lands that were mastered and colonized by the Slavs from the north (Baltic) and south (Ukraine). We remember the Greek division "Little Russia" - the metropolis, Rus itself (or Rusia), the place of residence of the Rusyns (now they are Ukrainians), and "Great Russia" - the colonies, the place of residence of the Great Russians, descendants of the colonists and local people (Russians). This is also, frankly, "stretched" by the Greeks "for nothing" in their political circumstances of the XIV century. Anyway.

At the same time, of course, we here specifically simplify everything very much for the “picture”. The process of ethnogenesis (the formation of peoples) is not as simple as it seems at first glance. About political formations in different eras - and go figure it out.

But, if you please, it would be foolish to call any descendant of a colonist of quite distant and hard-to-reach lands by the name of people who remained “at home” more than 45-50 generations later. Are you seriously. Here, the New Zealanders also sincerely call themselves Europeans in the Pacific Ocean, which almost recently sailed there, but no one believes in it to the point of hoarseness in the throat. After all, with this approach, the French are not French at all, but primordial Germans. It's time to return Paris to its "native harbour" ... or not, wait, somewhere this has already happened ... it seems recently, in the twentieth century ... right?

For the brightness of the allusion to "Russian" (man). The play on words is similar to how individual authors compare the consonant appeal "Me (and) Ryan!" Russian Orthodox Church, in the meaning of "parishioners" and, at the same time, residents of the territory around the city of Moscow, Vladimir and Suzdal - representatives of the annalistic Finno-Ugric people assimilated by the Slavs in the interfluve of the Oka and Volga rivers - Merya ("Meryane!" As residents of the land of Meryan). The name of the people disappeared from books in the X-XI centuries, in fact, in parallel with active colonization and missionary Christianization in this territory.

So, as some Slavs became Bulgarians in the Balkans, while others became Hungarians on the Danube, and still others became Romanians. Here, at the beginning of the Slavic colonization, there could be a community of Finno-Ugric pagans “meryans”, who were about to begin to accept Christianity (before the split of the Church) under the “requests” of the princes and nobility of the Russian sword and fire, and very quickly they all became “Russian (Orthodox)" people. Just for some 50-100 years. Strange, isn't it. But, let's leave these rather distant and contradictory research of an amateur to historians.

Something, carried away by the retreat. Sorry. Go ahead.

In general, the modern Russian layman is irresponsible and distrustful, arrogant and infantile egoist, unsure of himself and his own abilities. Together, the Russians are a closed irrational community of people with an inherent so-called. "feminine" type of behavior (infantility, irritability, compassion for the grief of one, but neglect for the grief of many, etc.). Conditionally, the behavior "on emotions" and the current Russian women, and - men.

No offense to Russian women, but only Russian men are able to throw such tantrums and complaints worse than other people in an appeal to their “husband” (to the Tsar, to other people), to the same very anxious Russians - they satisfy their inner emotional needs, as they were taught Mother. In all TVs and social networks of the vast motherland. This is a fairy tale and a true story in it.

If serious. “Female” due to acute chronic demographic problems in the structure and dynamics of social roles in society, primarily as a result of upheavals and significant losses of the male population in wars and from the victims of the social breakdown of society in the 20th century. For example, in World War II alone, more than 20% of the men of the Great Russians of the RSFSR (excluding disabled people) died, or, estimated at least 35-40% of men of reproductive age. By the way, here without taking into account the male builders of socialism imprisoned in the camps. Slaves are needed everywhere. Greetings to the "genius" of Stalin in war and civilian life. Now the social role of the peasant "prove that you are not a Deer" dominates.

A Russian, first of all, feels like a completely defenseless person. Humiliated and extremely depressed, but does not admit it to himself. Only double faith and doublethink. As a result - personal and collective subconscious reflexive aggression - a reaction "out of the corner".

Together, - the total depressed state of a person and society (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4 The psychological state of Russian society (approximate portrait)

The desire to seem, but not to be, dominates. Depression compensation.

Lie and they will believe you, do not be a sucker - the motto of a Russian. You know, the best lie is the one you believe yourself. Solidarity or the initiative of others often causes irritation in fear for oneself, because they unite not just like that, but for the sake of some narrow benefit. So he thinks. In a state of defenselessness, the Russian seeks salvation from various "authorities" and "bosses" from the church, the state, or others. He hopes for the state as the highest "authority" by God's grace or instead of God. As it seems to him (the Russian), the “state” is the Tsar. The king can do everything, he is a living God.

The king, as the supreme deity, will definitely take care of his slaves. How else.

He will certainly take care, if only he would not be disturbed by all sorts of smaller kings and various "Pindos" and "Khokhols". Also, all sorts of "chocks" crawl under your feet. Here and there. Everywhere. Everywhere enemies. But the King will do everything for you. Such a good guy. The main thing is not to forget to light a candle ... mmm ... sorry, throw the ballot into the ballot box under the vigilant "royal eye". After all, the ritual is more important than faith and trust. The irony of fate, but from fate, as is known from authoritative shamans with and without crosses, you can’t run away. By whom he was born, they will sing to him, if, at all, they do not tap the tambourine. Servant of God. Irony.

Here is the game. Make a person defenseless, and he will support the next tyrant king.

Of course, among the Russians there are exceptions and considerable ones. But still. This sometimes happens with all people when a person first enters an unfamiliar or aggressive environment without preparation, when the environment of interaction changes. But for Russians, every day is like the first, year after year. Groundhog Day. Don't break out. Chronic social depression and stress is about life in modern Russia, about Russians.

In such a society, what is valuable is what is not or is not enough already now (under threat). Among the masses, basic material values ​​completely dominate: only material wealth, one's own health and/or family health, a strong (and traditional) family, and the well-being of children. This is a society of "narrow circle" of interaction, at best. Or as the Italians would say: different "cosa nostra" here and there. Everywhere has its own mafia (children, brothers, sisters, godfathers, close friends, matchmakers, etc.).

Along with this, the basic model of behavior in society is interaction within the framework of archaic semi-criminal ideas. So. At the moment, more than 30% of prisoners in all of Europe are serving sentences in colonies in Russia, and this is 10 times more than in Ukraine. In general, in Russia every tenth citizen (up to 10% or up to 14 million people) has been in prison at least once in his life, or this is every fourth man (25-30%) of mobilization age, with an average length of stay in prison of more than 5 years, which, for comparison, on a scale, is equal to the entire rural population of Ukraine (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5 Number of prisoners and/or convicts in Russia (thousand people)

Every year, up to 50% of all convicts are jailed for the first time, more than 93% of prisoners are men from 18 to 55 years old. 76% stay in places of deprivation of liberty for 3 (three) or more years. Every year, 1.5-2 million men of reproductive and working age serve various penalties (and records).

Thus, “prison” or, more precisely, “camp” archaic ideas about interaction in society (rigid hierarchy, the right of the strong, each for himself, etc.) often act, in fact, as an “ideal” in the culture of the Russian layman. If only because the carriers of such a culture are adult men of working age, a significant part of them in society and the constant “conscription” of “recruits” to prisons, which allows for the second generation as, only in the Russian Federation (without prisons and camps in the USSR and serfdom in Empire), reproduce (fix) "new" practices.

Prison subculture with different shades is reproduced by society as a whole.

At the same time, such practices of interaction have two opposite sides. The first is the romance of “everything is allowed to the strong”, take what you want - everything is yours. Another, after all, not everyone was at the top of the prison and / or criminal hierarchy - lower your head, you will be more whole. Hate, but listen to the boss, your camp and / or the one who will be stronger. You are under surveillance, respect the "authority". This is a cultural highlight.

Entire generations of Russians have a broken will to make meaningful efforts, to act in their own interests. Like a drug addict after coming out of withdrawal. In this regard, do not forget that in the phrase "great Russian" (culture), the words are written together "Great Russian" (Moscow / Russian). And today in Russia (if not always so among the people), it is exactly the same, where "Vladimir Central, the north wind ...". Mass culture of exiled colonists. Here are just the colonists not to new lands, but to military labor camps. Something like this.

"Traditional" values ​​and "concepts" are what define mafia structures.

The army, police and camps are the school for educating a “real man” in the Russian Federation. Russian society is driven into chronic depression by mafia and semi-criminal practices. And then, due to the combination of various factors, there is mental exhaustion, narrowing of the habitat and accelerated physical extinction.

First of all, the titular ethnic group, the Russians, is decomposing (extremely low birth rate, high mortality, especially among men, fragile marriages, etc.). The data of the new census (2021, with Crimea) show that already 71% (it was 80%) of Russians call themselves Russians, or 10 million less than in 2002. After all, now you can’t run away into the forest, as before. "If you want to live - know how to spin."

Or ... find salvation in the war in death (kill yourself not by yourself or by yourself) or, as “Mr. Chief”, throw out aggression. After all, you are nobody, an empty place at home. And somewhere out there in the distant kingdom, you can catch the Firebird by the tail, when, of course, you find the Humpbacked Horse to help. If you still haven’t managed to catch magic pikes at home.

Estate society. Without other social elevators except for personal (as well as family) ties, without complex practices of social interaction. A set of simple hierarchies. Hit - lucky, not hit - know the place. This was typical, first of all, even for the so-called societies. "natural states" (and empires). Everything we love. The simpler the better to manage. Society "at the bottom" of development. Or maybe at the start? But something suggests that the presence of mafia practices is not at all about the “start”.

To marvelous parallels and subconscious symbolism, for example. In the USSR, there were three classes according to the type of activity and status in society: peasants (symbol sickle), city workers (hammer) and soldiers (star). Hegemony, judging by history, was behind the soldiers, behind the security forces. Militarism. If you look closely at the flag of the USSR, you can clearly see the "pyramid" of the hierarchy. Well, this is so - for the way of thinking.

Estates and the "proletarian" cult of power. And a kind of hierarchical “party” of the ministers of the triune cult of “the witnesses of Marx, Engels and Lenin”, a single social lift for a simple layman to personal success, which fastened and fixed the named estates among themselves and in the same place each. And side by side - labor camps for those who do not fit into the "simple scheme" of the dictatorship (force) of the new masters. The rudiments of prohibitions on the transition from the estates persisted until the mid-1980s of the twentieth century (the origin of a person, registration, restrictions on higher education, etc.).

Once in the party apparatus or the state apparatus, or in prominent security officials - do not be shy, use the entire range of benefits, the privileges of a master without borders and a gap of conscience. There is no law. Accomplices don't leave their side. Just keep your eyes open and nod so that you don’t fall out of the “party line” (authority) on the way to your personal “bright future”, find your place in the hierarchy of masters.

The party (lat. pars, partis - part, group) is a representative of a part of society, but here, it is a certain group of usurpers of power who called themselves "communists". As a result, the “new nobility” (the highest military service class) with the “Tsar” and around the tsar, which almost immediately, without a hitch, grew together with the state apparatus of the Russian Empire. As a result, it offered the world its “bestowed by God's grace” dictatorship, the so-called. "dictatorship of the proletariat". The dictatorship of the slaves that became slave owners.

The party in its entire history and with might and main used only the left populism of the late 19th - early 20th century, imitating equality in society and social justice in calls for unity. The usual reaction of the newly-minted feudal nobility. Substitution of concepts and actions. As before, everything in the country belonged to the Tsar, so, in the USSR, to the people. And now we know exactly which people. And, state terror instead of tsarist terror (the so-called instructive flogging of the peasants). Ordinary fascism with a local Russian flavor - the "left" developed feudalism of the industrial era.

And in general, what to talk about, what kind of class struggle is in the country, if you can seriously take the conclusions about class, and not about professional or class consciousness in feudal Russia. Even if the "icon" - Lenin, it is difficult to call a proletarian. Lenin is a typical enlightened petty nobleman with leftist views who never worked in the field or “at the machine”. In addition, with the experience of a novice landowner. No doubt, he is a political philosopher, no matter how they evaluate him in this, a talented populist politician. A revolutionary who acted "according to the situation." So in Russian.

It is possible not to remember Stalin. A declassed element (lumpen, the social base of any fascism) with a suspicion of sociopathy, with a dubious education and a penchant for cruelty, a conductor of semi-criminal norms of behavior. In fact, the founding father of the clan system of government in the USSR and Russia. At the time of the infamous “beginning Austrian artist” (Hitler), with a talent worse, but “beginning Russian self-taught journalist”. Two, well, very, very progressive "socialists" of the industrial age of the twentieth century. All as we like, in Russia.

About other "workers" of the party. As you know, exceptions only prove the rule.

But if not representatives of the proletariat or the unfinished progressive nobility, then who ruled the USSR? Just don't talk about the peasants. We know their fate: starvation and hard labor for working days on a collective farm or for rations at a factory in the city. Logically, the tsarist bureaucrats (their pupils) and careerists from the new mafia, from their clan, ruled. Often, under the guise of lumpen with a certain charisma of a "leftist" figure - a populist.

feudal tradition. And don’t ask now why the USSR died when citizens became a little bit richer, acquired their own interests, and life became calmer without regular hunger and mass purges of people with this very interest, once every ten years. And, this is not counting the suppression of various uprisings of the proletariat (in factories) and slaves (in camps) in the USSR due to poor, even unbearable working conditions in a “proletarian” country.

A true struggle for access to resources, for the status of a nobleman and kingship. It's true.

The party is unclear whom it represented, what class, but with a bunch of privileges. Recall that members of a single party of "communists" accounted for no more than 7% of the total population of the USSR before its decline (on January 1, 1989). And applicable to the territory of modern Russia - 4.6% in the RSFSR. Less than the electoral (passing) barrier in the Russian Federation, in 2021, to the State Duma (5%). The reactionary dictatorship of the minority on bayonets.

The new time (or Modern) in the USSR ended before it even started. The pagan greed of the inmate is our everything, we will come up with an excuse. The "communists" immediately tried to jump into the Postmodern, where the main thing is not clear actions and results, but "everything is not so simple" and "visibility is the best result." Another regular "jump" imitator. No logic and rational actions for the development of society. That's right, thinking out loud for a discussion about culture.

Yes, perhaps someone dreamed of something different at the start of the USSR, but populism is not the best foundation.

The given example is rather harsh, but for the sake of clarity, the comparison is the only way.

The functioning of any social system, in the first place, is determined not by the flag hung over the society, but by the internal structure of its organization. Although we will not argue for nothing, the flag is also important if it really corresponds to the content. Symbols, as a concise expression of ideas, are indisputable for acceptance by the masses of people with different depths of understanding themselves and the World.

By the way, even the phrase "red flag" may not be what it seems. Everything depends on the context. After all, red can mean both color and quality. Red as wonderful (good, beautiful), impossible, never seen before. Something attractive is impossible, like a red (chernozem) field for a plowman.

Therefore, red is not scarlet (banner). In this reading, the flag of Holland, France, the USA, and maybe the European Union are red flags, because they began to mark different revolutions, a qualitative change in the organization of human life. At one time they were the first to be raised as a sign of new phenomena. However, they are not red (scarlet) in color. But the flag of the USSR and China - the flags, according to the results of events, are simply scarlet, they do not mean anything fundamentally new ... or do they? A rhetorical question.

Let's continue. A society where social justice within communities is seen as nothing more than "to eat for the future" and/or "to rise up". Everything would be fine. But in this situation of tough “egoism”, the Russians inevitably do not trust, save and have mercy (!), even on Him - the State, as the supreme oppressor, and they suspect something about the “father” Tsar. Suspect "God" in excesses. Oh those unbelievers! They only strive to “fear of losing”, because they may want another “God”, but they can’t. No way, blasphemy!

The real King, like a pagan deity, must be charismatic and fearsome.

That's why. The defeat of the Putin regime in the war against the people of Ukraine is neither a defeat nor a victory for Russian society. This is just the loss of "charisma" by the current Tsar, his "terrifying face", an opportunity, as the whole history of Russia shows, for the emergence of a new cult in an irrational society. What is worth, the worship of the idol of the "Eternally Living Lenin" in the tomb instead of the "Living God" in the church.

Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin) would roll over in his grave several times if he could. He would probably be “delighted” that they made a stuffed animal of him and show people as a dead pheasant in the local history museum of Ulyanovsk. Especially if you imagine how guts were gutted out of it and wax was allowed through a delicate place. So to speak, according to tradition, they humiliated and desecrated the body of an already dead leader. No one seriously thinks that Ilyich just lay down to sleep. Without irony.

If the "icon" of communism is a scarecrow or a scarecrow, then who are his followers - the Russian "socialists" and "communists". Just a laughing stock. Yes and only. Not to mention the fact that, having raised a person, his views and talents into a cult, it is difficult to develop his efforts, because based on the cult, only his ideas and views were correct, frozen in eternity. So, his business died as soon as he was pumped with wax.

Distracted a little. About the cult. The fall of the present cult in the society outlined will certainly give rise to a new cult. And it’s better that this new cult be a healthy way of life and, subsequently, the rejection of any cult at all, and not every new time of “coming out of drug withdrawal or rehabilitation after removal of a cancerous tumor” chemotherapy with unclear prospects.

This Tsar may have exhausted himself today, but the organized (albeit badly) criminal group “Russian Federation Limited Liability Company” warms new hopes for, as it were, its own “new past” instead of the future. He is waiting for the new Tsar of Moscow, "the owner of the Russian land" and the serfs attached to it.

Thus, all Russians are to blame for this war. But not everyone is fully responsible for it. A sick (crippled) intimidated teenager is difficult to judge, he must be protected from healthy people and sharp objects removed from him nearby. "Electricity" is not required. But, it cannot be ignored. It is necessary to gradually return to life, because he is still growing, he also has talents and virtues. But it is possible and necessary to judge those who undertook to be his attending physician. Even if in this hospital the doctors "grew up" in the ward for the especially violent. After all, “everyone understands everything” and wink at each other. If not Catherine II, so Peter I or Ivan the Terrible. Go figure it out.

The measure of guilt and responsibility must be relative to the century in which the patient lives. If the Russian society did not come out or rolled back in the Middle Ages, to the beloved feudal system, then it means that it should be punished in the same way as in the Middle Ages. Otherwise, they won't understand. It will continue to mow down like an imbecile and dream of "noble" pagan revenge on Christians, or simply - about killing and robbing neighbors, as always. Of course, if you look from the outside, there is a place for mercy. For the time being, for the time being.

As Scripture teaches us: “But I say to you, do not throw yourself at the offender. Whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn your left to him as well” (Gospel of Matthew 5:39). That's right, get one cheek, offer the other. If a person did not understand that it was impossible to do so - and tried to hit a second time - hit yourself and do not stop until he understands the essence of the teaching "On love for one's neighbor." True, there was something else “About a kind word” there. But this is nonsense. How do we, the Russians, remember: "beats - it means he loves." So. Healthy Christian Relations in a World of Developed Feudalism. Again. Ironic, isn't it.

Separately, for the sake of completeness, we can also mention something else. About poverty and material dependence of an ordinary Russian on the state. At the end of 2022, according to official Rosstat surveys, 7% of people belonging to the middle class remained in Russia (by 2014 there were no more than 27%, by 2022 - no more than 13%). At the same time, only 2% of the country has income from small business or self-employment, 34% income is completely dependent on state payments, including 20% ​​live on social assistance, another 20% are dependents (children, disabled people, etc.). Also, up to 36% had a salary at enterprises and organizations related to budget spending. Only 10-14% of Russians received income that had nothing to do with the state directly.

To the mentioned, according to the UN estimates of multidimensional poverty in Russia (2021), up to 25% of the population of the Russian Federation (or more than 35 million people) belongs to people who live in poverty. For comparison, in Ukraine before the direct invasion of the Russian Federation, up to 1% of citizens arrived in poverty and about 4% suffered from unconditional poverty, depending on the state of the household (together 1.9-2 million people). In sum, in poverty and relative poverty, in different ways, in Russia and Ukraine - 60-70% and 40-50%, respectively.

The difference between salaries of employees (10% with high to 10% with low) was in Russia and Ukraine before the invasion - 14.1 and 5 times, respectively. More than 50% of working Russians, in terms of purchasing power parity for the country, received an income of 2 rubles. below the average salary of an employee in the Kherson region of Ukraine, where this is the minimum wage in the country.

And, this is without taking into account the “shadow” (in Ukraine, 2 times higher) and incomes of labor migrants. According to various estimates, 1.5-6 million Ukrainians worked abroad from time to time, or this is from 9 to 34% of the economically active population of employed (15.6 million) and officially unemployed (1.6) in Ukraine in 2021. Not to mention the fact that, according to the conclusions of Ukrainian sociologists, Ukrainians, according to a long-standing local tradition, tend to “come to shame” about their financial situation. They are all so cunning, they are looking for their interest, these “Khokhols”, everything: “like everyone else, but so that the house is better than that of a neighbor.” But today is not about them.

Also, the average Russian, according to various estimates, gives 25-40% of monthly income to repay loans, and not the average (in Russian regions and national entities) from 60 to 90%. Or, more than 60% of the economically active population of the Russian Federation depends on various loans. About 27% of Russians had any savings before the invasion.

Conclusion. There is nowhere to sculpt the sign of "greatness" on the Russian layman and society.

Mafia society - mafia state. Simple, even archaic in behavior. For the most part, an extremely poor, suppressed pre-modern (medieval) society, but already in the scenery of early capitalism in the country. With authoritarian egocentrism (the so-called "childish thinking") or, in Russian categories, with the autocracy of the Middle Ages in its purest form, wherever you can go unpunished, where there is no punishment by force. The ideas of humanism of the Renaissance and rationalism of the Enlightenment have not yet entered the mass consciousness of Russians.

There were no such epochs of formation of society in Russia in general. And those individual samples of European culture that were reproduced in the Russian imperial culture of the 19th century were very well cleaned out in the USSR, along with their carriers. "Soviet" culture, in general... what is it? Socialist realism? That is, an ideologically colored copy of what, ... elements of the culture of the frozen long 16th - first half of the 19th centuries (classicism, romanticism, and the gag of the leader). An absurd gluing of everything with everything. Just like the ideas of Russian nouveau riches of the 90s about aesthetics.

Nationality, ideology, concreteness (principles of socialist realism from the leaders) - how did it work? Isn't this our beloved “Orthodoxy, autocracy, nationality”.

You need a good connoisseur of art to understand without strong words.

Actually, the result of a high "Soviet" culture is visible to the naked eye at the preferences of Vladimir Putin and his friends. Why, people like it too.

Everything is like a child's drawing. It's nice to look at the enthusiasm of a little creator, that's all. How can there be a meaningful and understood self-interest, individual, group or public, if Russians are anticipated by drawing new and new children's pictures in their heads. Here, everything is not so clear.

For five centuries it has not been unambiguous ... one parody. Yes, irony helps.

A society deeply traumatized and driven into a terrible corner by chronic stress, depression and semi-criminal forms of terror, incl. under the banner of law. A “raped” society, where the rapist stayed in the same hut with the victim and constantly tells her about his great love for her and the romance of greatness (domination, over her) on hungry cabbage soup. And waiting for love in return. Directly the picture "About daughter-in-law". How not to remember here, a saying: “Are you well, Mashenka? Oh - good, sir, good!

The rapist each time looks for a new victim to satisfy the needs of his injured "ego" and involve the "old" victim in accomplices in the crime, he wants to make her a villain in order to avoid punishment for violence against herself. Life in a constant mutual fear of revenge (punishment) and the rapist and the victim.

Don't believe? How else to understand that the Putin regime stubbornly does not call the war against Ukraine a war? ... Okay, okay, you. After all, we know ... but how - planning, preparing or unleashing an aggressive war, as well as waging an aggressive war, according to Article 353 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, is punishable by imprisonment for a term of 7 to 15 and 10 to 20 years, respectively. Who cares.

Probably, someone is not quite sure that he will win, or what?

Maybe the death penalty in Russia should also be returned to the criminal law, as the Secretary of the Security Council of the Russian Federation (D. Medvedev) asks, ... so, something is alarming - you yourself would not get on the chopping block. After all, who knows, maybe the good executioner has already polished the “hammer-axe”, the devils are heating the “bathhouse” in the Underworld, waiting for “dear guests”.

The defeat of the Putin regime in the war is just a chance for the revival of the Russian state and society, Russian culture, and the culture of the peoples of Russia.

How not to miss this chance, once every 100 years, this fifth time since the founding of the Kingdom?

How can the next generation of Ivans get away from the rapist, not become Mashenkas, ... or here, as you know, one at a time does not count? “Like it, don’t like it - be patient, my beauty” (V. Putin).


The way out of depression (depression) is always the same - a change of scenery and environment: or applicable to the state and society, this is a new structure of interaction in society and the state, new algorithms of actions different from the previous one. Actions.

From the point of view of management, there are only two approaches to change the internal structure of the organization and the rules of behavior in it: evolutionary and revolutionary. The first is the gradual quantitative accumulation of positive practices (changes) due to the formation of new and new conditions of interaction, as if with small steps, society is approaching a certain line, a new quality of itself. A gradual transformation is taking place. Contradictions are smoothed out by complicating the interaction or "frozen" until new knowledge appears. Problem situations in the organization are solved. Depressive symptoms are treated.

The second is the relatively instantaneous introduction of new qualitative transformations, which make it possible to apply new practices as a result of creating (designing) new conditions to eliminate existing or potential contradictions, based on the use of new knowledge. Revolution. Root problems, causes of problem situations are solved. The source of depression or depression as a disease is treated until complete recovery ... if you are lucky with the medicine.

And if you are not lucky with the medicine, there have been no clinical trials, or worse, the doctor is stupid. If there is no new knowledge from a pharmacologist (pharmacist) and / or a doctor. So there will be no revolution, no evolution, and so - a rebellion, as a reaction of the immunity of the people's body to the disease. Or a coup, when a newly-minted, if not self-proclaimed, doctor will more quickly declare himself a pharmacologist instead of a clumsy doctor. And with the energy of a dropout, he will begin "clinical" experiments on the people's organism right up to his death or until the next reaction of immunity to "progressive" treatment.

A populist doctor - just take care of your veins, maybe you can put them on a “needle” (oil too). There is another analogy. Multidirectional experiments and subjective desires of the populist leader in the style of "I'm an artist, I see it this way" (voluntarism). At its best, the changes work smoothly while the artist draws. No artist, no drawing.

As a result, there is no new knowledge in both the first and second cases - a dead end of development or a rollback to the old forms of interaction known to all, about which there is an understanding of the use by the participants of the organization in one form or another. Worse, falling. Simplicity.

And oddly enough, this property of knowledge has been known for a long time. Again, let us recall the common eternal Book: “In the beginning was the Word (Greek, logos - the word as knowledge), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (Gospel of John 1:1). Moving on to philosophy and theology. But it's at your leisure. Not here. Other analogies and coincidences are random, of course.

The above approaches with a different set of methods of application in management for the development of an organization (society) are often mutually complementary, especially in a situation where certain political, economic, social and physical barriers arise. You can approach a qualitative line in the way of evolution, but take the first step towards a new one - a revolution. Example, scientific and technological revolutions.

In an authoritarian state, the formation of new conditions and the need for new practices - in fact, knowledge about social interaction and about the transformation of the structure of the state and society - are widely ignored.

After all, everything is already known. Anyone can be the coach of a football team. What, no?

After all, everything is already wonderful for “our” populist and his friends, but what. Much more. Who needs it, to transform the old structure. For what. Everything is great. There is me, there are slaves. Simple, clear and understandable. There are exceptions, but they are not so unambiguous in their root causes for change. Everyone loves Singapore and the Republic (South) Korea, for example: they changed in anticipation of war and fear of death. And so, you can sit in a swamp forever, which actually does the vast majority of states (and societies) of the world, the world of colonies and (almost former) metropolises. The stories of really success and breakthrough in development are rare. And even for different eras.

Meanwhile, both the first and second approaches are determined by the nature of the redistribution of resources in a certain organization, in society, taking into account the interests of its various participants, their incentives and motivation for transformations, for actions. The fewer resources, the fewer different participants - the less interests, the less need to change something.

Both the accumulation of resources (their generation) and the emergence of new participants (new interest groups), in general, depend on the level of labor productivity, on the emergence of new socio-economic relations in society.

Therefore. For authoritarian (feudal) power, the goal, not always realized, is to divide “brotherly” what is at the time of gaining power, gaining access to the available resources of a limited group of responsible “business executives”. And when new resources appear, to prevent the emergence of new “hangers” from the people, often those who generate these resources. After all. Look what!? They will also want yushki for bread. We must be simpler, live more modestly. A king or a smaller king will take care of you, and so, do not be distracted from work. Or - "kill" friends-competitors.

Dry tongue. If you are a king and do not want evolutionary change, rebellion, upheaval or revolution. Your task is to make the population either slowly get richer, or slowly get poorer, or perceive "stagnation" as the norm. If the population is rapidly getting richer or rapidly getting poorer, or sees that stagnation is not the norm, expect trouble. Troubles for someone who, in general, is a good, kind and caring old man, "nothing to do with it", just "The owner of the Russian land." Or someone who just came for one or two terms, or before building socialism in a five-year period, so much so that a couple of times, where each previous term and / or five-year period “does not count”. Well, you know what it's about.

While holding power, away from trouble, with a general increase in prosperity in the country, it is necessary to simplify the level of social development of society: to maintain the dynamics of growth of industrial / social relations; and/or neutralize the entry of new players into the game through political restrictions and/or terror. In general, limit any competition in the political, economic, social and physical (life support and security infrastructure) plane.

But there is a problem here too. Both the first and the second cannot be done at once, at the same time. Otherwise, a revolutionary situation may arise - an aggravation of the inertia of the previous foundations and / or the growth force of the perception in society of new norms as a new tangible good. You need to tighten the screws and physically eliminate (kill) competitors gradually.

For example, the struggle of Joseph Stalin for power in the early USSR against the backdrop of a positive increase in civil liberties, national and cultural construction in the republics and the post-war (World War I and Civil War) economic recovery in the newly assembled Romanov empire. In the context of the multiple expansion of tasks for the implementation of the pre-revolutionary long-term plans of the tsarist bureaucracy regarding the so-called. "modernization" or, correctly, Westernization of the Russian Empire.

It is important to note here that in the course of the struggle against fellow party members, Stalin focused precisely on Westernization in view of the desire to obtain sole (personalist) power in the USSR. And the start of construction, for example, of the military industry, was already, in many respects, on paper. Nothing needed to be re-invented. All the same tasks of the war, the mobilization economy of the First World War. There is no need to think about management, economics and social development, the main thing is to shoot all the “enemies of the people” (your personal enemies) and become the “king of the hill”, and then there will be a miracle. Dad can do anything.

Westernization is a way of using progressive technologies and institutions, for example, the conditional West "without accepting them." The state tries to imitate or, rather, copy technologies (engineering) and external attributes of institutions developed in all respects for their time states and societies or development concepts, without understanding their functioning and interrelations in the development of society as such. Cargocult - blind outwardly similar and hope for the best.

In this case, you don't even need to study your own society. What is there of that society, it's cattle. We will build communism in 5 years. Well, maybe not in 5 and not communism, in 15 years and socialism. Does not work? Well, not completely socialism, but in general. Who will figure out what it is. Let's choose the right words. And so it will! People like sheep in the mountainous part of Georgia, the small homeland of the leader, do not expect much. Here to fit with a stick, here to feed bread from your hand - the people are affectionate cattle. And everything is ready. Does it kick occasionally? The main thing is not to approach from behind and not to frighten him for nothing until he is overgrown with fat. It is good to feed the shepherd and drive away the shepherds from the neighboring mountain. All that, nothing! A line of irony.

Such transformations are usually done without discussion by populist imitators.

At the same time, the mentioned imitators in their work constantly make reference to some samples that work (or should work), or to authorities, and / or use the services of narrow specialists from other countries to embody copies of something that is associated with a high level of development. socio-economic relations in other societies and, accordingly, the functioning of a new culture based on modern values. But without the adoption of the new rules of the game due to the lack of readiness to accept them, the lack of understanding that social ties are not built on the personal and common interest of the leader, the personal interests of a certain group of the leader’s followers, etc. ... In general, yes, a copy is not an original. No new rules, no new game. Only decorations for the old one.

First of all, this unavailability will lose access to resources and privileges. Namely. Both in the first and in the second case, we are talking about an attempt by copying to gain legitimacy in front of the layman, if not a "sucker" (as the Soviet fairy tale says), legitimacy for one's actions, to avoid accusations in narrow group interests.

Like “but it’s the same with Americans”, “it’s worse abroad”, etc. After all, those for whom this is said will never be able to verify these references due to, incl. objective difficulties for the average person in pre-modern society, and not only in society, physical remoteness, often immature norms of behavior in a country where modern practices are copied, etc.

Thus, we can rightly assume that the entire so-called. The “Soviet project” on the territory of the former Russian Empire, carried out, conditionally, by the collective Stalin and others after him, is an attempt to westernize, in fact, the Russian Empire. Yes, this is directly full-fledged industrialization with natural consequences in the form of the necessary rapid urbanization, universal education, the development of natural sciences, etc. methods of wartime mobilization economy. Which, as the textbook teaches, inevitably leads to the depletion of social resources. Squeezes the "juices" out of people.

In some ways, such a “Stalinist” attempt is very similar to attempts at Westernization in previous eras. That's just the gap in the "distance" is different, it was necessary to change not the rules for the nobles, service people and the army, but for the whole society. Moreover, the new government of half-educated people destroyed, expelled or severely limited the rights of those people who accepted new non-medieval norms, those who were used to acting. Stalin abruptly turned the USSR into the archaic of feudal social relations. Everyone in the stall. "To our bright past." Engineering technologies forward, let's copy - but serfs were and remain serfs. Very progressive, in Russian. As Peter I and Catherine II bequeathed.

The traditional Japanese and Chinese succeeded later, but it is better to "go to the West."

So. There was an attempt in Russia that did not imply the modernization of society in general. Society remained where the imitation began. Slogans - remained slogans. But the trouble is, with the subsequent complication of other societies and, as a result, the generation of new technologies, the closed old-new “Soviet” society simply lost the ability to copy new models, not to mention other prerequisites for the crisis in the development of “simple” empires. Don't believe? You can safely ask about the methods of searching for breakthrough Soviet models and about the level of technological lag among the engineers that worked at that time, in the year 1975 and beyond. And now, too, among the post-Soviet.

The ability to read does not mean understanding the Word read.

It follows from this that after the fall of the USSR, Russian society returned to a certain norm. Which is typical not only for Russian, but also, for example, Hungarian, Polish, Romanian, Ukrainian and other Eastern European societies. As in general for any society in the world, in countries where not new internal norms and rules of interaction (institutions) worked, but force and violence to some behavior. True, different societies were at different levels of development even before the Soviet “freeze” or rollback to the Russian developed Middle Ages. The difference is not big, but still.

However, continuing the topic of redistribution, the main task of the authoritarian regime is to maintain the current level of redistribution of resources, regardless of the growth or decline in welfare in society, maintaining a balance of interests in the development of a private environment for interaction. As if in the "elite", between the private interests of those who have seized and / or hold power, control over the state. And, as a result, the transmission of the “sanctity” of private interest, private property, private privileges, etc. to society. Life "beyond the fence".

Whereas, for a democratic order, for a general example, the task is to ensure the growth of welfare of various origins (not always material, not in money) for all fellow citizens, regardless of the redistribution of resources in the country, the development of a collective (common) environment. Formation of conditions for the emergence of new and new participants, competition. Achieving a common interest. Life without a fence.

Private and general (not the sum of private) interest are two different things. The common interest must take into account both those participants and their interests, who are not. Future.

Plus to need, for an authoritarian regime. There is a need to expand the apparatus of violence and methods of using terror of various origins to reduce the number of participants in the political struggle for access and redistribution of resources, either with an increase or a decrease in the prosperity of subjects. And so, the eternal swing. If not a dull stagnation. The autocracy of the Romanov dynasty, unlike the regime of Stalin and the grief of the re-constructor Putin.

Main. private interest. Or you will destroy another participant in the game, or he will destroy you.

As a result, in a centralized authoritarian state, in the Russian Federation, only a revolutionary approach is possible. The massacre is real and / or political in the conditions of the “loss” of authority by the supreme power, the ruler of the souls of Russian serfs. War of annihilation. Such is the autocratic (egocentric) political culture. Or the alternative is to find a new “distributor” (an arbiter between semi-criminal groups) in view of respect for the camp’s traditional “family” (mafia) values, so that no one “unleashes” along the way in the country. We sit quietly ... Someone like Putin. Here.

But still. The application of a revolutionary approach does not necessarily mean, as it may seem, a revolution. More likely is a rebellion or a coup without replacing the established norms of interaction. The whole history of the Russian State is in front of us. Only the members of the division change. Russia is a country of popular revolt and a coup in the elite (“leftist” too). Without knowledge, without a clearly understood general interest, and private too.

Without self-knowledge and without a mechanism for its search. However, what is there to stick out or humiliate the past and present of the Russians. All people tend to reproduce what they are familiar with, which brings them back to their "comfort zone", nothing...nothing new.

Only an irrational belief in a miracle, a messiah (will do for you) and prejudices.

Belief in a "bright future" as in the "kingdom of heaven" after death. Maybe we'll live.

Until then, you can be patient. How much you need, so much to endure. The king knows how much.

Stop! What kind of thoughts?! Ah, come on!

In the present, for the sake of the future, we look with optimism, with a gleam in our eyes. General welfare is closer than it seems. A revolution in the name of the common interest, its true understanding, begins with a fairly simple and understandable goal for all people - building an equal representation of current (and future) members of society, their interests in making decisions "about" and "for" their lives, in the state and society . Formation of a universal democratic form of organization of society with the gradual adoption of truly democratic norms and rules of interaction.

At the same time, a revolution can be completely bloodless or ... almost bloodless. After all, no one will cry for the oligarchs. Society will survive, well, maybe, then it will realize the excesses and erect nice monuments to those who died "For the Tsar". He will lay wreaths, it will be beautiful and everyone in the next world will be pleased. We remember: "everyone goes to heaven." Only something is not visible in the queue of willing courtiers. And how beautiful it sounds from the podium. Anyway. There is always a way for a revolution on the strength of the treaty, but not the bayonet.

True, here one still needs to understand whether to consider the shed blood of Russians and Ukrainians in the war of the Putin regime against the people of Ukraine as the blood of the revolution. Why are Russians dying? Though not "just like that"? … not for 30 silver coins. Or, at random, it will do. We know what the Ukrainians are fighting for. And, for the most part, we Russians are not interested.

Will there be those Russians who want to come to an agreement between themselves and other similar revolutionaries, to whom our dear rapist quietly and gently creeps up from behind, just plush all the same as the Tsar-native. Do not forget about irony for mood. Who will honorably adhere to the agreement, and be content with the Word on the way to the Revival of Russia?

Depression won't go away on its own. Only in action and overcoming their shackles.

A decent life can start now. For each.

Down with the shackles! Revolution!


It is not an easy task to follow the path of a progressive people's revolution. Revolutions in Russia - overnight, and doubly difficult task, and easier than ever. Here's how to see. In countries with an authoritarian regime, things are different. To organize a movement of the masses that is in opposition to those in power is a considerable effort and a risk to the life of the participant, organizer and / or leader. But, once started, such a movement is difficult to keep both the authorities and the opposition. The transition of a protest into a riot, and a riot into an organized movement towards a revolution or coup, as a rule, is accompanied by spontaneous violence or as a result of its provocation by the authorities.

It is known that starting a rebellion, becoming a participant in violence - the subconscious animal fear of a slave to be punished for him by the masters without taking into account any law and rights that he does not have (in Russian, “out of lawlessness”) will not allow the rebellious slaves to stop until physical destruction punisher-oppressor or until the defeat of the rebellion. For example, we clearly see this in the motives of that part of the Russians who are not against the war with Ukraine and are not shy about it, in order to avoid punishing them (Russians) by the “world” masters, as citizens of the aggressor state. In a simple society, everything is simpler than it seems from afar.

Crime and Punishment. Everything has been known for a long time. Especially, about Russian representations.

The people's Russian rebellion is the element of people's fear and omnipotence. To stay on its waves, you need to understand the current and the wind: how to put up a sail of political slogans to gain power, how to stand "at the helm" of the revolutionary movement. Vaughn Lenin what a fine fellow. Meanwhile, everything starts small. With the readiness of the population to protest and the level of organization of the protest movement.

Actually, the citizens of the Russian Federation, who consistently declare their readiness for political and / or economic protest, no more than 8-12%. That's a lot for any society. But declaring readiness and acting are two different things. In the best case, in reality (according to the experience of Ukraine and not only), based on internal feelings and motives, no more than 3-4% of Russians or a little more than 6 (six) million people can be ready to start a protest. Among them are people of different, often sharply opposing positions. At first glance, this is not enough for the success of the opposition movement.

Recall that in the revolutionary events of the past, no less than 5-15% of residents in different countries actively defended their views and became participants in successful coups or revolutions. And, predominantly adult young population. Russia is no exception. But, Russia is a sprawling and rather loosely connected country for the purposes of mass protest group mobility. Moscow is more compact as a capital, a "country within a country" and a certain point of accumulation of an active and young population from all over Russia. A place of active people of young and middle age. Or another big city.

Therefore, we have.

First. Conventionally, to start a revolution in Russia, it is enough to include in the active street movement every tenth young (and / or middle) age of an adult able-bodied Muscovite or from 650 thousand or more people, provided that the majority of citizens tacitly support the protest or apathy. Is it a lot or a little. This is at least 4-5 p. more participants than in the so-called. "Swamp Revolution". Now imagine on a national scale: more than 7 million people, if not more.

Means. We need the participation of ordinary Russian inhabitants. Both in the capital and separately outside its "rings". It is necessary to form a positive and clear protest agenda, both social, regional and other at the same time. Clear and accessible to everyone, regardless of their views. Agenda, the implementation of which opens up opportunities for everyone who wants change or feels "uncomfortable" now. This, overnight, should be a kind of "holy" protest. As a ritual, the performance (belonging) to which is good.

The protest is such that it will allow an ordinary Russian to think that in this way he will personally escape punishment (and, by and large, will escape), will find the culprit in all troubles.

A multi-faceted goal, so that everyone sees something for themselves in it, he finished it himself. And I didn’t just finish drawing, but I felt that this goal is very real and close. Here it is, it will be.

Second. Based on the state of Russian society, its simplicity and depression. What is important is an appeal to a certain general morality in the space of the “Russian world”, to concepts that are understandable and close to people about the world around them. Today, the appeal to the morality of Russians is equal to the appeal to the “morality of slaves” (here, slaves are oppressed people with a psychological impotence complex). Namely, the desire of a slave to fill that feeling of inferiority in life (from its quality), oppression, helplessness and hopelessness - in fact, an appeal to a “symbolic” action from which you (personally) will not suffer, will not be punished. How to put a candle in the Church.

There is nothing to be offended by the "slave", it happened to everyone. After all, we know that we will “catch up and overtake” everyone and “there are no analogues in the world.” If you are self-sufficient, you do not have to prove anything to anyone. But this is not about Russians… we will prove everything to everyone… that we are not as pathetic as everyone thinks of us… it means that a Russian, both in power and among the people, feels inferior. Who is in front of the "West", who is in front of his local "master".

Defective. Why so? We already know - chronic torture and humiliation in the country.

Means. It is necessary to replace the virtual and safe compensation of a slave like “let's write an appeal / prayer to the Tsar - he will figure it out, no matter how” with “let's go out into the street with a cheerful company and make a wish out loud”. What is said three times will come true. And no, you need to call more friends. So to say, God is high, does not hear.

A simple collective more spontaneous action, when no one is responsible for anything. But everyone feels their own power, the power of personal action in the real world.

Third. Now, and earlier in history. The Russian, like a slave, is implicitly trying to equate himself, or better, to elevate his everyday poverty and weakness with others who live well, and, therefore, based on his situation, with the oppressor masters, their culture. It will rise by virtual representation of some "greatness" of its very "traditional" values ​​and "concepts" about survival. Virtual "moral superiority" of life in poverty as a way to heaven after death. As it were, he has “high spirituality”, and, therefore, he is “chosen one” and there can be no other chosen one.

We need an enemy or a stranger or another, external to the person. After all, you have to rise. Otherwise, you are not “chosen one”, but simply “tolerated”. Without an external enemy, you can go crazy from impotence. Do not blame yourself beloved. Sleep to death. The best enemy is the one that does not pose a threat. An enemy for whose reproach the Lord will not punish you.

All Russians, as all Russians know, go to heaven. Because they are “chosen” only because of the fact of their weakness, and God will surely forgive the commission of crimes for the chosen ones. And nothing else. The lower he fell, the brighter the halo. But don't forget to light a bigger candle... But you don't want to die at all and right away.

Eventually. The success of the deployment of a mass protest movement among Russians is based on three pillars: 1) a positive general ritual. A clear and understandable slogan that the authorities cannot replace; 2) collective simple (in one step) action without the risk of punishment. First of all, at the beginning of the protest; 3) and some non-personalized internal enemy, which everyone knows about. Like corruption or oligarchs or whatever.

At the same time, at first it is not necessary to go out with the goal of revolution, you can go to the city park, as a "club of book lovers" in a small group in an open space for others. In nature, read and talk about your favorite works. different. Or arrange to watch a movie with different themes. We will talk about this and other (above) further.

Location - convenient for assembly and dispersal in Moscow and / or a chain of cities around the country. Better chain, for "stretching" the attention of repressive organs. They don't fit everywhere. Time - some good date with general mass celebrations, for example, Russia Day (June 12) or National Unity Day (November 4). But any other is possible. The target participant is predominantly young and/or middle-aged men and women, as a rule, with part-time employment (the person is studying or considers himself unemployed) and, accordingly, has time to reflect on his future.

To be fair, you can't say no. There is another way - the rebirth of the Russian Federation through the "enlightenment" of the Putin regime. Yet the Tsar, like the revolutionaries, also wants the same thing - the common good. Or not? What is good for the slaves is good for the master and the profit of the owner, ... but let's not talk about the sad experience. The king is good. You can't laugh.

And of course, if you need an amorphous enemy to start a protest, then the leader of the protest must also be amorphous. Like the struggle of the “proletariat against capitalism” (it’s not clear who is with whom, but it’s nice to repeat). The eternal dichotomy of the struggle under the "left" corner of the XIX-XX centuries. But how can this be achieved in Russia today?

It's good that in our century people can hide behind their "avatars" in social networks, blur the image in a parallel reality, form a "network leader". Let us turn to the modern experience of "network revolutions". So what do we know?

Based on the research of a group of Spanish scientists and social experimenters (Sandra González-Baylon et al., 2011), we can state three key positions for the success of mass protests and, in fact, the mobilization of citizens for any protest using social networks.

Firstly, as before in the past, interconnected people in real life (friends, acquaintances, colleagues, etc.) remain the motor of protests. These are small groups (3-5-10-12 people). It is they who provoke and expand the protest movement of the “street”. Social networks, in this regard, play the role, first of all, of a coordinator, a means of communication. This means that individual performances have their limits. The limit is limited by direct or indirect common interest, or level of friendship.

Secondly, statistically, the inclusion of each new participant in the protest as it expands is determined by a certain “fashion”. What does it mean? A person, as a rule, makes a decision that he should take part in an action (protest) only if more than half of his friends in social networks said (indicated) that they would go out to protest. Even if previously the person had no interest in the protest. Especially when it comes to when a particular person does not belong to the core of the protest group and / or among the people (friends) on the network, the majority of those who announced their participation are unfamiliar people, “friends of friends” and like-minded people in groups.

Thirdly, in the absence of a real common problem and / or a common goal for a significant part of the whole society, which forces them to protest, as well as the absence of errors of power (provocations for aggravation), the protest fades on its own due to the difficulty for the protesting person to constantly be in a cocked psychological state without a purpose. Follow-up actions are needed to actualize the goal, which will keep a person “in good shape” until the moment when the need for “adrenaline” (courage) becomes an end in itself for him or there is a situation of a threat of “reprisal” from the authorities in case the protest actions are stopped. Next - the element of "fear of punishment."

In general, a clear picture of the “prerequisites-result” relationships is emerging (Fig. 6)

Fig. 6 Generalized causal matrix of popular movement for Russia

And what now. How does it all work together? Let's look at a single example.

Long way from the start. Let's say. You are a resident of Moscow, St. Petersburg or Novosibirsk, a senior student, you have two close friends who trust you and two more people who trust you for other reasons (brother, sister, colleague, etc.). They are all or your like-minded people, or at least they are ready / able to support you in some harmless adventure. Ready to listen. A different way to start, a little more complicated, but has a number of advantages of a common local space for supporting each other - this is communication with neighbors without any cross-contacts among your friends on networks with them. But the algorithm is saved. Let's continue about the students.

Each of them also has (except you) two more close friends and colleagues, others. And now, together, through “one handshake” you are 13-21 people, etc. Each of you has more than 100 friends online, in different groups, neighbors, classmates, classmates, from the same sports section, etc. But you don't know each other well enough to respond to every call for something. You need a mediator (friend).

We form a nuclear group without intermediaries. For a close acquaintance, expanding the circle of friends, you can organize a party in an apartment, in an institution, in an open park or square. For example, for a collective game of "crocodile" or "mafia", "monopoly" or "chess", "tea gatherings", discussion of various books, watching movies / anime, etc. At worst, a subbotnik with active neighbors in the yard at home, cleaning the playground, or some other joint and harmless action. As a "barbecue for the company" for the May holidays. Agree with friends to invite 3-4 people. Most likely, 7-12 people (out of 21) will come to the event. Hold 3-4 meetings (activities), at least once a week.

The number of participants will change, but the level of trust between you will increase.

As a result, there will be a group of leaders and active participants. There will be a habit and discipline of participation. Chat on various topics, including political jokes and games. And so. Together - it's you and people outside your immediate family, with whom you or your friends can talk about any topic, exchange thoughts without fear of a "sloppy" word. You form a heterogeneous, but well-coordinated group in the real world, without obligations about something and “on trust”.

By the way, more than 13 people in an active group, most likely it is better not to gather. Due to the peculiarities of human behavior (his psychology), a larger number of participants will cause squabbles, each in the process of discussing initiatives for action will be “on his own wave” or form his own group in the group, his own dissenting opinion, which will destroy the unity of interaction. It is necessary to form a network of small active groups, in the real and/or semi-virtual world.

Each of the new leaders can organize their own groups and coordinate.

Well, then. You don't need much. It is enough to agree, to submit an initiative for a simple joint action of groups and / or groups. Through well-known advertising and / or "challenge" to participate in a "flash mob" of friends through the social networks of each member of the group. Launch the snowball. Just go outside at one time and in one convenient place (park, street) at first without slogans "for fun", without insignia and the like. Repeat the action to assess its dynamics and correction. And now you are no longer 13-21, but 500-1000 and more participants for each small group of enthusiasts.

Are you preparing for the Revolution in Moscow or St. Petersburg? Create your own group, one of the 500-1000 small independent online groups needed to win together. At the same time, it is not necessary to know about the existence of others and / or maintain any personal connection, especially at first, until the “who-is-who” is clear. Or make do with contacts on distant topics, about the tournament in the game. Just do your own thing.

If you fail to enter the revolution, you will always have experience and new friends.

The main thing, for starters, is not slogans. Constructive actions are important. It is important to gain self-confidence and see ownership of some pleasant action without punitive consequences. Feel what a collective action it is. Reinforce the feeling of "I can marry the company." True, let's be honest to the end, without a high protest idea and dissatisfaction with the current situation in the state and the country, such actions will not go beyond a slight emotional discharge. We need slogans.

Which? And what about the common enemy and good?


To begin with, the textbook says: people in the mass never know what they want. But they always know what they don't want. What does not suit them. Therefore, people are prone to simple solutions out of ignorance. A classic example, "if you don't like it, ban it."

Accordingly, the task of a politician, a revolutionary is to convey complex solutions to people in a wrapper of “simple solutions”. Based on this constant and all of the above about Russian society and the new practice of protest mobilization - our manifesto, as an example of the basic positions of the program of the revolutionary movement and its slogans, of course, only for discussion, is as follows.

First. The name, for example (author - we remind you), is "People's Front "Republic". In terms of content, for ease of conveying the position of the movement, you can also use an analogy from the past - this is the new "Union of Salvation", which is more recognizable in popular culture. In reading "Republic", the name can have a very positive perception in many national state entities and among regional elites and ordinary residents who would like to raise the status of their region to a union republic (rise).

The appeal, within the framework of the legislation of the Russian Federation, stems from the current part of the first article of the first Constitution: "Russia is a democratic federal law-based state with a republican form of government." So, it would be strange to see this on federal channels and embarrassing for listeners: “The police arrested a citizen demanding the protection of the republic in Russia, who asked to fulfill the Constitution of Russia, its first article.” Or similar.

Between the lines. Political nations are composed and formed of citizens. People are not born citizens. Citizens become as a result of participation in political institutions and institutions (procedures and organizations) of the state, participation in the decision-making process. Only republican (in fact, democratic) norms and rules of interaction in society and the same organization of the state for their reproduction, legitimacy and effectiveness in the country need constant involvement with each new and new generation of new people, residents of the country, in its political life and activities .

Simply put, any political activity is an activity aimed at harmonizing interests between different groups of citizens. The more citizens in a society, the stronger the political nation and its state - the republic. Hence, the republic as a state of the nation needs to structure the interests of the population, complicate interaction and, accordingly, involve new people in the nation, citizens.

As a result, the development of the strategic and political thinking of the population, the development of education and culture in the country, the cultivation of man and his well-being in the broad sense as the basis for the emergence of new needs and interests, their new structure, is in need and has a primary goal.

From this. We are for the Constitution. Our enemy is not personal Vladimir Putin, not this war, but injustice in general. The Yeltsin-Putin regime as such. We are not against the Russian state, we are against the "swamp and stagnation" in such a state. The solution - a federal republic of Russians - "paradise on earth." Justice is a republic. The common good and a simple solution to all troubles.

One hundred troubles - one answer! Republic! The enemy is injustice. Republic is good.

Justice is a capacious concept, everyone will think about his own, and about his own republic. Moreover, in any discussion with a simple layman, one can easily imagine its absence in a person's simple life. From everyday injustice to the banal question “Name who represents your personal interest in the representative body of the municipality?” etc. Accordingly, show a direct relationship. If no one represents you (as a lawyer, for example), and you do not have the time, desire, etc. deal with issues of public life - you have nothing, well, except for what they write on the fence ... You know ... also such a capacious concept.

Necessarily. The movement must have a recognizable and easily reproducible sign. A sign that at once reflects the primary goal (mission) of the people's association (this is in the name of the movement) and the concept (vision) of New Russia. In our reading for the current situation, such a sign can be a symbol-logo consistent with a reference to the fifth and highest form of Russian organization of space and society in the history of Northern Eurasia. The Federal Republic of Russia, as a union of the republics of Northern Eurasia. A state not like the current European Union and the United States (States) of America. About the vision of the republic on the territory of Russia, author. – see the article: “Russia after the war. Federation or Soviet Union.

Or even more sophisticated, New Russia is a union, the form of organization of which the European Union is only trying to approach (see the so-called draft EU Constitution) and will not soon be able to achieve such an organization due to its internal reasons. Thus, in the case of building a republic, Russia "on the go" makes a swift bid for some kind of superiority in the world on the issue of human development, the organization of life on the planet. The application is pretentious, but still, Russia can bypass the EU and the US "at the turn" of the historical moment. Our sign is the "Star of the Republic" (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7 Sketch of the sign of the fifth State of the Russian "Star of the Republic"

About the sign of protest. Interestingly, a raised hand with two fingers, as a symbol of identification of a like-minded person, or another similar symbol in the form of a "V" can have many meanings, a reference to: "SVO"; Russia 5.0; USSR 2.0; or Pobeda (Victoria), regardless of what is meant by it in the current Russian conditions. Less similar is the symbol of the "St. Andrew's (Russian) Cross", with the double meaning of the cross-rays of the North Star.

Actually, all the ideas are for the safety of the protest. On the one hand, they are completely “legal” symbols in Russia, on the other hand, and who knows for what reason. You can, of course, just raise up and one index finger for distinction - Article No. 1 of the Constitution under the slogan "We are the power here!" or different tapes. Imagination… there is also a scarlet flag. You can think of something different. There are still enough people with a head in the Russian Federation. There are not enough rebels and there are no politicians at all. If you please, based on the lack of competitive political activity in the country. No activity, no politics.

Where are the revolutionaries to take from all this of ours?

Second. Players. Any political group in Russia must understand that the general slogans and positions of the manifesto are aimed at the formation of a new Soviet (or, neutrally, parliamentary) republic. This means that the victory of the movement is a window of opportunity for everyone to build their own party and be represented in the electoral authorities at different levels, to influence the government from positions independent of anyone in the Kremlin.

By and large, it does not matter which, how and on what basis, the political group will support the movement of the people. Through direct "linked" or indirect "by announcement" coordination of street protests and development of their dynamics. Each will benefit for itself. Here you can safely write down various movements of ethnic groups, regional elites of Russian regions, elites of the subjects of the federation.

There comes a time of opportunity for everyone in Russia.

In our opinion, focusing on the previously stated vision of the new order of the Soviet form of the republic (in the author's article above), regarding the election to the councils of representatives who took the first and second positions in the elections, first of all, the prospect opens up for the emergence of two new key ideological (non-populist) political parties (forces).

The first party, on behalf of the Popular Front, conditionally, by analogy with the landscape in the USA, is the “Republican Party”, as a conservative party with different shades of the right, including red-brown (left guards), in the internal party discussion. The second one is the “Democratic Party”, as a socialist party with leftist of various shades, including “liberal”. But both of them are for the republic, as a guarantee of their activity. The first for progress in the form of “let's not rush” or “but what about the braces”, and the second - “here and now” or “forward!” to a bright future.

Others - as the citizens of Russia are active. For example, political groups of various guardians, monarchists and social chauvinists in the "brown" tones of United Russia, or without them, can form a "third force", as a "third way", and achieve the desired success of "strong" business executives and front-line veterans in the soviets. Even if someone does not like it, but people of such convictions will probably remain a part of society for quite a long time. Until the moment of widespread pluralism in the country.

If here with a common mission and goal for everyone figured out. The vision of a personal successful future for active groups of citizens with political and other ambitions is known. So ... what are the goals and objectives - what are our slogans for the masses, good fellows?

What are the calls to action?

Third. Based on the rubrication of the vision of New Russia (again, a reference to an earlier article) and the peculiarities of the mass consciousness of the Russian layman, it is necessary and important to use a simple scheme for a set of slogans that are well kept in the memory of a person not experienced in politics. It's like known things. But, next to it, there must be a firm link to the result in order to eliminate the threat of substitution of slogans by the Putin regime. "Said - done" or "Condition - Result". Simple linear connection.

For example, as a result (Fig. 8):

Fig. 8 Manifesto (short program) of the Popular Front "Republic"

  1. The Republic is Your government. For the Constitution. The government must always hear the voice of the people. Execution of the current main articles 1-3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Formation of representative bodies of power according to a new principle (as new councils), in three levels of direct voting "municipal formation - subject of the federation (new republic) - federal republic (union)".
  2. The Republic is the Power of Russia. Union of the strong. Treaty between allied entities. Formation of relatively balanced union republics - subjects of the federation. Broad civil rights and rights for the peoples of Russia. New fifteen union republics instead of all current subjects (regions). Good management in Russia and the superiority of Russia in the whole world.
  3. Republic - The success of the workers. Good job at home. Project economy based on multi-level management and start-up savings. Formation and implementation of medium and small projects for the development of municipalities as a result of comprehensive budgetary decentralization in the new state. Savings state accounts for children and youth. Everyone is a "shareholder" of Russia.
  4. Republic - Respect (honor) of a working person. Decent pension and social assistance. Redistribution of state reserves. Increasing the median pensions and assistance by 2 (two) times since the formation of the new state. Indexation in the next 5 (five) years is at least 2 (two) times higher than the official inflation due to the optimization of military spending after the end of the war.

  1. Republic - Support for everyone. "From scratch". Zeroing the debts of citizens by paying them off at the expense of the old state, in view of the formation of a new one. Payment to citizens who do not have debts of a fixed remuneration relative to the median individual debt in the country. The second capital in Krasnoyarsk to support the least developed territories.

The Republic is your power, strength, success, honor and support!

How to achieve?


OK. They left. We went out into the street, everyone was inspired. What's next, where to go? Then there is only one single political demand. The main political demand for the civil front from all of the above, as if in a mild form, if the protest did not grow into hard antagonism, is the convening of the Constitutional Assembly (hereinafter referred to as the Assembly) on the basis of the current Articles 134 and 135 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in order to change the foundations of the constitutional order in the country legally, almost evolution. If Moscow-Kremlin-Putin did not hear the will of the Russian people, you need to ask differently, more actively and more massively. After all, the goal is clear and understandable to everyone.

Note that, according to Article 134 of the Constitution, the right to take the initiative to consider the development of a draft of a new Constitution in the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, regarding the foundations of the constitutional / state system (Chapter 1 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), already now, in addition to the Government and the President, has (can contribute ) and others.

First of all, now it can - the total number of deputies of the "opposition" parties in the State Duma or the legislative (representative) bodies of any subject of the Russian Federation separately. Even the legislative body of the federal city of St. Petersburg, even the Leningrad, Kaliningrad or Kemerovo regions, even the Republics of Dagestan, Kalmykia, Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, even the Krasnodar, Khabarovsk, Primorsky Territories, even any other ... it doesn’t matter.

Demand from local parliaments to raise the issue of the Assembly can be safely everywhere in the field, but what really here, at the decision-making centers of local authorities and the subject of the federation. Demand the Assembly and the Republic at least in the capital of the subject, at least at any gathering of residents of the municipality, incl. with legal fixation of the will of the residents of municipalities and the region as a whole.

At the same time, since there is no Federal Constitutional Law “On the Constitutional Assembly” (hereinafter referred to as the FCL) in the Russian Federation, its election, in fact, can be carried out according to any procedure, based on the adoption of a political and legal decision to convene it and a new procedure in the decision itself Parliament of the Russian Federation, or go through a pure legal path - voting in a "package" of the decision to convene the Assembly and the KFZ on the procedure for convening it and holding the corresponding special extraordinary (as an exception to the general rules) elections.

In our opinion, it is necessary to hold the corresponding elections of the Assembly without delay, two weeks after the announcement or introduction of the decision and the law into force. The elections should not be delayed due to the need to pre-empt the influence of the Putin regime on their outcome. Also, the term of office of such an Assembly should be limited (for example, no more than six months) to prevent the usurpation of power by the Assembly or the formation by each representative of his own greedy interest in the course of the Assembly's activities.

Elections to the Assembly, in this regard, should be held according to a different formula from the one that is currently in force and / or can be considered as more in demand for the new constitutional order. We can consider a rather simple and transparent option for accelerated implementation in the existing electoral infrastructure of the features of the electoral procedure. Namely.

Elect 3 (three) delegates to the Assembly from each current constituency. Candidates from the parties that took the first, second and third positions based on the results of direct and secret voting of citizens for the local "open list" of political parties (organizations, etc.), their blocs. Three each because of the need to represent the vast majority of voters in the district and the country, as well as the difficulty in such a situation to influence the outcome of someone's vote.

Thus, for example, one representative from a recolored or not “party of power”, one from the “Republicans”, one from an association of a national minority, or one other (remember the third path of the “patriots”) can go to the Assembly from a particular district. Equal voice. One constituency, three different votes. Together they will (may) represent more than 80% of all voters. Conditionally, because it is difficult to predict the elections, the Assembly will be attended by a third of the current government, a third of the Republicans and a third of all the peoples of Russia.

Or the Republicans will go in two columns: “right (liberal)” and “left”. And they can win the majority of votes in the Assembly. The options are different and all interesting as never before. It smelled like the wind of change.

The voter can only vote in favor of one party, which offers 3 (three) candidates on his list per constituency. A political or civic organization has the right to withdraw or replace a candidate to serve in the Assembly. Conventionally, each of the three winning parties has one vote in the Assembly, but three different people can represent it. Under this condition, these three people develop a common position within the party, and the possibility of pressure on one of the representatives is also sharply reduced. A person under pressure or embroiled in a scandal can step aside without prejudice to the common cause, he will be replaced by another from the list.

Candidates on the lists in the district should not have previously held any position in local and state authorities, including an elective one on the territory of Russia. Together, 675 delegates can be elected, which have whole teams of active citizens behind them and another 1350 “reserve” delegates for an unforeseen event, anticipation of pressure from the authorities or for participation in the Assembly in shifts.

The agenda for the Meeting, due to the number of its participants and the limited time of functioning, may consist of only three items. The decisions of which will be behind the set of norms of the preliminary constitution of the federal republic.

First. Proclamation of a new state through the development and adoption of the First constitutional political and legal act, for example, the name, “On the foundations of the state system and the transitional government in Russia” or, more specifically, “On the proclamation of the Federal Republic of Russia”, which should become the basis for developing the Constitution of the new state in the future, by its parliament (councils), to determine the powers of the interim government by the time the new representative bodies of power begin to operate on the territory of Russia.

As a result of the decision, it is stated that the new constitution will be developed on the basis of the constitutional acts adopted by the Assembly in the form of a union treaty.

The second question and the second high act. On borders and elections in new administrative-territorial units. On the formation of union republics and elections to new representative bodies. Proclaim an obligation to harmonize powers, ownership, etc. in a new union treaty between the union republics after the formation of full-fledged governments of the republics. Also recognition/establishment of the status of "disputed" territories for a new union on the territory of the Russian Federation, including those in relation to which there are expectations of their transfer to a third jurisdiction.

The result, the proclamation of new territorial republics - subjects of the new union.

The third is security. Announcement of a unified army and unified security forces throughout Russia. And a unified foreign policy for the new federation. Also on the right of the interim government of the federation to negotiate and make decisions on the external borders of the state, to conclude agreements on peace and border security with neighboring countries and other participants in international relations. The right of the government to independently promote the emergence of states outside the union (allocation from the territory of the Russian Federation with an indefinite status/disputed status) and / or the exchange of territories, taking into account the interest of the union and the rights of residents of such territories.

As a result, the exhaustion of external territorial disputes. Weapon control.

As a result of the work of the Assembly. Constitutional acts can be submitted to a national referendum with three questions. Do you support? (Not really).

However, remember that the above is just an example. The future, as well as the agenda for political discussion on the territory of Russia, depends only on the Russians.

For the Constitution! For the Assembly! For the Republic!


Modern Russian elites turned out to be incapable of acting, they failed to find and offer society nothing better than a repetition of the project for the development of the estate society of the medieval Moscow State, as edited by OOO RF, if not the state of emergency of RF for three friends or a little more. Driven society into poverty and chronic depression. We know and see that it is necessary to change not old faces for new faces with a narrow personal interest at the trough, but the decision-making mechanism in the state to achieve a common interest.

The new time comes not from the fact that the old norms and rules between people suddenly disappear, but from the fact that a new order / organization of interaction arises (constructs), which in a competitive environment makes the old norms and rules not viable for achieving human well-being and happiness.

Everyone who at least once in his life was in the forefront of mass protests, where the future and consequences are not defined, the risks are high, knows and remembers. He remembers that feeling that is incomparable with anything. When, after the first blows of police shields opposite you in a closed line, the voice of adrenaline tells you - there is no turning back, comrades are standing next to you and behind you, shoulder to shoulder, there is only one choice - forward! And it’s good if at this moment there is an intelligent leader nearby who will make it clear to you in a form that is accessible to you that “forward” does not always mean “on the forehead”.

The fight is different and quite exhausting. Therefore, it is better if you yourself are well prepared in advance, have a general plan of action for different situations, have trained safely, found a team of like-minded people and know this “forward” and “head on”, strive to be a leader for others. However, always, always, you need to take the first step to be in the front row. To raise your new banner!

Not everyone can and is worthy to raise the banner ... to raise the banner of the Russian Republic, the banner of the New Age, to start the Russian Renaissance ... and not everyone ...

But, if it was much easier for some (in the past) to raise their banner of the Republic, they threw off the external enemy from the shoulders - an external and often enlightened monarchy, or a monarchy for one, for the most part, mono-ethnic people of subjects. We, the Russians, have had either a chance or a lot to throw off our shoulders, the autocratic internal reign for a huge multinational people, to step on our own ego, to offer a new future for everyone and everyone. Good luck, it is for us, for the first time in the world, to raise the banner of the Federal New Republic. Show strength, in full growth.

It is in this strength that there is the greatness and potential of the country, its Spirit, the spirit of every Russian and Russian revolutionary, much more than that of the Dutch, French and Americans in the old days. A new challenge to overcome with new efforts. Together!

No passaran! They won't get through! As the Spanish Republicans said.

Fly like fires blue nights!