So the time has come for everyone to pour slop on presidential candidates in Belarus. You can douse it with anything. Although every voter understands that the future leader of the country and the future leader of the opposition goes the most, it is hard to believe that someone will then be held accountable for slander and dissemination of false information. Agree, it is not the last figures in any state that get it.
Everyone knew that this time would come. Prepared and saved up these same slops in nooks and caches. We saved up everything. Anyway, after the elections, no one will remember any accusations of opponents, about some mortal sins, which were told by "knowledgeable people". The one who wins will be euphoric with victory, and the one who loses will start a campaign to discredit the elections. Everything will be wrong for the loser!
In short, a situation familiar to any adult who has ever experienced an election campaign and elections of any level. Anything that will lead to victory can be poured into the ears of voters. And then there will be "even a flood after us", "after a fight they don't wave their fists" and other folk wisdom that justifies the deception of this very people. Some of the issues that were raised by my interlocutors, I want to talk today.
Why Belarus is now similar to Ukraine
Do not rush to reproach the author for not knowing the material. How can it be that Belarus and Ukraine become twins? And then there are many examples of the differences in life in these countries. I agree in advance with all your arguments. Only now it is necessary to consider not the current state of the country, but the problem of the upcoming elections. How and for whom the people of Belarus will vote.
Many of those with whom we have to communicate on the issues of the Belarusian elections have already realized that the country has been very cleverly driven into a trap. A very beautiful combination, a kind of zugzwang, which, whatever the outcome, will lead to a deterioration in life. Moreover, it turned out that those who organized this trap did not even have to invent anything. The elections will be held in exactly the same scenario as the elections for Zelensky in Ukraine.
Belarus, like Ukraine more recently, is split. One part is in favor of the current president as the guarantor of the continuation of a not rich, but rather calm and measured life. A guarantor of the preservation of, albeit difficult, but friendly relations with Russia. The guarantee that the government will not allow civil war.
The other part of the population is much more radical. “Stop sitting in a swamp”, “Belarus must become a modern democratic state” and so on. These are people who sincerely hate the current head of state. Ready to vote for anyone. The main thing for them is that the incumbent president does not become president again. They don't need a program or a plan to get out of the crisis. This is secondary.
Remember: wasn't that the case in Ukraine? Candidate Zelensky voiced his political, economic or at least some kind of program? Not. Moreover, the obvious shortcomings of Zelensky's candidacy were then called merits. Never managed anything significant? So that's good. I didn't get bad from officials! Not involved in politics? Also good. Will be out of politics! International relationships? So good that I was never interested in it. Will learn the best on the go!
Very good work of the enemies of Belarus. It is like placing two deep holes on a high-speed section of the track so that the driver has a choice. Fly into the hole with the left or right wheel. The result is still known: an accident. But the choice was ...
Who is this people?
This question is probably the most frequently encountered in conversations about political parties, presidential candidates or MPs. In general, during the pre-election campaign, a person feels himself to be the center of the universe. Or a central figure in the state. All candidates sing the praises of the people in unison and promise to solve all their problems.
Has anyone seen a future deputy who would declare in the program that he would make the life of an ordinary person unbearable? And have you seen a corrupt official who would never talk about the need to fight corruption? So how do you tell them apart? How do you identify a good candidate?
In fact, many already know the answer to this question. Just don't know what the answer is, sorry for the pun. Remember the anecdote about the granddaughter of the Decembrist and her surprise that the revolution stands for the fact that there are no rich in the country? Here is your answer.
Humanity has been trying for thousands of years to solve the problem of poverty. The state minds of antiquity understood perfectly well that it was property inequality that gave rise to anti-state sentiments. How many attempts were made to divide everything equally among everyone, so that everyone would be happy! And how did it end? Very quickly, someone became poor, having sold everything, and someone rich, having bought everything.
And this did not come from the meanness of human nature, but from the differences between people. One is smarter than the others, the other is more skilled, the third is stronger, the fourth is more cunning, the fifth ... Even the desire to work plays a role. Someone agrees to work day and night to achieve the goal, and someone only their eight hours.
Probably the only solution to this issue that mankind has come to was various versions of War Communism. Economic equality for the poor. The division of income is not according to the principle "worked more - received more", but equally for everyone. Only now the incentive to work well disappeared. This is well remembered by summer residents of the Soviet era, who, on their 6 acres, achieved harvests many times larger than on collective or state farm fields.
Let's go back to modern times. We are offered several options for solving the problem of people's poverty. Again, these are old options in a modern interpretation. No more.
First, a variant of "War Communism". Take everything away from the rich and honestly divide it among everyone. Probably the most popular option among people with a "very secondary", and sometimes with a "very higher" modern education. How many times has each of us heard this? What will happen in the future when this option is implemented, I wrote above.
Secondly, to create conditions and opportunities for people's self-realization. Make a person become a businessman. To create a multitude of almost rich people, the same middle class that was talked about a lot until recently. Alas, everyone cannot become businessmen. Scientists have proven that a fairly small percentage of people can actually run a successful business. Simply put, talent is needed. This means either a collapse for the majority, or huge investments in useless "initiatives" of pseudo-businessmen.
Third, simply stop patronizing people "unnecessary" to the state and use all means to improve the life of the middle class. True, in this case, the middle class means everyone who has a job. A kind of theory of the division of society into different people.
There are also other options for solving the problem of poverty. But they are all just imitation of work. In fact, it is impossible to make everyone happy. How, for example, to solve the problem of the homeless. Impossible simply because there are people who just like to live like this. Therefore, you just need to provide the poor with such a standard of living that corresponds to the title of a person.
Probably, in my opinion, those who propose just such a scenario are for the people. But the choice still remains with each person. Independent choice.
Can corruption be defeated?
Probably, anti-corruption issues are traditional in any country in the world. There are no countries where this phenomenon does not exist in different forms. Even where harsh regimes exist, corruption is not uncommon.
Any candidate in his electoral program necessarily declares his future fight against this very corruption. And he quickly forgets after being elected. All the struggle and all the hatred for this shameful phenomenon is manifested when law enforcement officers catch someone by the hand. By the way, this applies to any of us.
But at the same time, each of us has a friend, acquaintance, school friend, classmate who can solve some issues without unnecessary red tape. Fast and the way we would like. Quite small questions. Which we would have already decided. We just do not have enough time, we do not like to sit in lines, we have more important things to do ... So we have to call a friend.
Isn't this where corruption starts? Are we not its source? Are we not bringing our friend that very bottle of cognac as a "thank you"? And then, when a friend is successfully moving up the career ladder, are we not offended if we refuse a “small” request? Aren't we telling our acquaintances how conceited this former friend became when he became a big boss?
You have to beat corruption in your own head. Not in someone else's, but in your own. And those who are now being caught on multimillion-dollar bribes, on kickbacks, simply on plundering the state budget, are just thieves! It was the thieves who were caught late.
Instead of a conclusion
Today I feel sorry for the Belarusians. What a pity for the voters of any country where there is a pre-election struggle for a seat in the executive or legislative branch. I feel sorry for the Americans, whose heads are now being fooled by Democrats and Republicans. It's a pity simply because in the USA this crap has already caused several deaths.
Indeed, it is difficult to understand where the truth is and where the lie is. It is difficult to believe or not to believe the facts or supposed facts reported by the press. Some have lost confidence in their own choice. We, the Russians, have also gone through this many times.
I do not think that an adult who already has experience in political struggle can change by becoming a presidential candidate. He can play a role, as the artist Zelensky did in Ukraine, but he is unlikely to change. He can become "promising", but he cannot change. Therefore, it is necessary to choose not from those whom we see after all the slops poured on their heads, but from those whom we knew before the election campaign.