Pension reform: the government “hewn itself”
If among the global decisions adopted in recent years by the Russian authorities try to look for one that is most consistent with the famous aphorism: “This is worse than a crime. This is a mistake ... ”, then the competitors of the attempt to carry out pension reform in our country, perhaps, will not be found. Few, even the most unpopular government measures, provoked such general rejection and friendly condemnation as this strategic miscalculation, which at once “collapsed” the popularity of the authorities. It turns out that the government "carved itself" ...
With all this, one should not forget that the rise of the “bar” for gaining a well-deserved rest can in no way be attributed exclusively to the “cannibalistic nature” of Russian officials. Alas, the upsurge, and quite a significant one, of retirement age, is now a worldwide trend, caused by purely objective reasons common to most more or less developed countries. Mankind is rapidly “aging” and is increasingly moving towards that line beyond which the number of pensioners will significantly exceed the number of those who, with their labor, will be able to provide them with a decent old age. That is, that is, and there is no reason to argue with this.
On the other hand, those who once again decided to bring domestic legislation “in line with the best world standards” made the same mistake that their many predecessors made over the decades. That is, they did not take into account the peculiarities of the national mentality, traditions and way of thinking, in fact, of the Russian people. Respect for old age, respectful attitude to elderly people - this, fortunately, is an integral part of the worldview of the vast majority of our fellow citizens. Allowing to throw in your face: “You are robbing the old people!”, Our “fathers of the people” ensured the receipt of a mark, which is very problematic to get rid of. But this is only one aspect.
It so happened that from time immemorial in the Russian state, people have become accustomed to treat the highest state power (no matter the tsar, the CPSU Central Committee or the president) as the chief arbiter and reliable defender in all critical situations. These are not the countries of the notorious “civilized world”, where, by and large, the mutual obligations of the power and the citizen are minimized. In our country, everyone absorbs the words “I should” almost with mother’s milk and subsequently lives with the firm belief that the native government, if something happens, will not give offense and will help in difficult times. It is not surprising, therefore, that almost everyone (and each) of the inhabitants of our country took pension innovations not just as a blow to their own wallet and life plans, but also saw in them the meanness, deceit and fraud directed against them personally.
One should not be surprised at all that the result was a drop in people's confidence in the authorities, hostility, based, as has already been said, on a deep personal insult, and the increased protest potential of society, in many cases instantly saddled by the cunning opposition public. Leaving aside the economic feasibility and appropriateness of this reform, which are now seriously argued under serious doubt, it is necessary to recognize the main thing: from the point of view of explaining to the people and minimizing the inevitable psychological “negative”, it turned out to be more than a failure.
However, now, in the process of discussing the forthcoming amendments to the Constitution, voices are being heard more loudly about the need, if not a complete cancellation, then at least a certain revision of a clearly unsuccessful innovation. There are also conspiracy theories that something similar was originally conceived - in strict accordance with the clever formula: “Do you want to make a person happy?” First ruin his life, and then return everything as it was ... ”Be that as it may, representatives of the domestic authorities really should use the present convenient moment to“ win back ”the wasted“ points ”of public trust and support. Surely in the future the authorities will still need them ...
Information