Military Review

National dialogue as the only way to prevent radicalization of the Belarusian protest

National dialogue as the only way to prevent radicalization of the Belarusian protest

Everything listed in the article is solely the opinion of the author. Despite the appeal to the tools of formal logic and a certain amount of objectivity allowed in this material, the author does not claim the absolute truth of his conclusions and voiced proposals. The author indicates only one of the possible scenarios, the implementation of which is probable, but not guaranteed. Enjoy reading!

Over the past two weeks, the eyes of all Russian-speaking residents of the countries of the former Soviet Union have been focused on the events that took place after the publication of the results of the presidential elections in the Republic of Belarus. Mass demonstrations that swept the capital of the country - the hero city of Minsk, as well as a number of other large administrative-territorial centers of the country, have become the largest popular protests since the so-called revolution of dignity that took place in Ukraine in 2014, during which the most pro-Western came to power. and overtly nationalist representatives of the Ukrainian establishment. The events of the “Russian spring” and civil confrontation, which unfolded after the indicated reshuffles in Kiev, largely determine the increased interest of ordinary people in all similar events in the post-Soviet space, giving rise to a mass observer erroneous confidence in the common nature of the processes taking place.

However, if in Ukraine the mass popular protests were intended only to legitimize the illegal redistribution of fixed assets between the largest economic entities, then the nature of the events taking place in Belarus today, apparently, lies in a slightly different plane. The key factor that fundamentally distinguishes the protests in Minsk in 2020 from similar events in Kiev in 2014 is not only the rather peaceful nature and the absence of pronounced anti-Russian sentiments of the former, but also the fact that the Belarusian protest does not have a consolidated core, representing is a vivid example of self-organization and horizontal mobility of ordinary citizens. This does not mean at all that the above is a consequence of the fact that there is no big capital in Belarus, which, if desired, is able to organize such protests, this only demonstrates the fact that there is no big capital in Belarus that thinks of itself as a political actor, acting independently and independently. from the jurisdiction of the official authorities. This is not surprising: all large enterprises of the republic are somehow incorporated into a single political system, in essence, producing a successful Chinese experience of an informal collective agreement between the state and society, which consists in the possibility of accumulating significant economic resources by individuals or groups of individuals subject to the renunciation of their political rights. which they completely delegate to the institutions of the executive and legislative power, conventionally embodying the social majority.

The difference from the Chinese model is also great. If Chinese industrialists and entrepreneurs renounce the right to be elected in favor of the Chinese Communist Party, which aggregates legislative and imperative functions within a single political formation, with any decisions of which they oblige to agree and guarantee refusal to influence its administrative and political decisions, at that time as the latter not only provides an opportunity to obtain super-profits, but also undertakes to take into account the interests of the economic bloc when making national decisions, in Belarus, following the bourgeois principle of separation of powers, such a transfer object is the very figure of the president, whose personal initiative is tied to the functioning of the vast majority of branches of Belarusian production ...

What really brings together the Ukrainian experience and the events of the last days in the capital of Belarus is the absence of stable bilateral channels of communication between the authorities and society. The truth of this statement is quite easily verified empirically, for which it is enough to look at the actions of officials and comrade Lukashenko himself both before the elections and immediately after their completion, as well as during the fight against protesters. Let's try to highlight those of them that led to mass demonstrations.

The key of them, in our opinion, was the desire of Alexander Grigorievich to run for a new presidential term, more precisely, how it was presented to the population and what caused it. And the point here is not so much in the personal sympathy or antipathy of the author of this article to the Belarusian leader. The point is different. A candidate applying for any elective post, especially when it comes to the post of head of state, is obliged to present his socio-political program to the broad masses of the population. And the fact that Lukashenka has been holding this position for several years is not a reason for exclusion. Moreover, for him and those like him, this document should have a special meaning, because only thanks to it it is largely determined whether it will be possible to prolong his powers during the election procedures or not. Here it is necessary to understand that the attraction of administrative resources in the realities of the existing Belarusian electoral legislation, which, admittedly, is not much different from similar normative legal acts that have become widespread on the territory of the CIS countries adjacent to the republic, in essence, can ensure the victory of the current government in the vast majority of cases. However, the question of whether it will be possible to “sell” such a state of affairs to the population remains open.

It can be solved only through the formation of a comprehensive socio-political program that suits the overwhelming majority of the population. It should be borne in mind that it is not enough to be limited only to the development of such a program. It still needs to be presented in such a way that every point, every position is regarded by citizens as the only possible and correct option for the development of the country and the state; as an uncontested “image of the future” with which each voter could associate his personal well-being.

This is ideal. In fact, with the formation of the "image of the future" in the election programs of candidates from among the current heads of state in the post-Soviet space, traditionally there are big problems: they are either completely absent, or they approach their content formally. All this naturally gives rise to a sense of deadlock among the population, and the candidate himself begins to associate with stagnation and lack of change, which is unacceptable in the modern changing world.

Alexander Grigorievich in this regard has become a classic example of a politician of this kind. And this is especially offensive, given the fact that at one time he managed to create an image of the future of the country, which was unconditionally accepted by the Belarusian people, having conditioned the more than 26-year career of Alexander Lukashenko as the first person of the Belarusian state. Its essence was to create a reserved corner of socialism from Belarus through the moderate implementation of market mechanisms, preserving the best practices that existed in the USSR and maintaining close ties with the young Russian state. Of course, all this largely stemmed from the place that Belarus occupied in the Soviet socio-economic system, as well as from the very Belarusian self-awareness and, in fact, Alexander Grigorievich's personal know-how, but it was he who became the person who publicly articulated this position , as a result of which he managed to win his first election at that time.

Without going into the assessment of how much it was possible to eventually implement the points of this program, we note that it is impossible to operate even the most effective practices for an infinitely long time, because any idea has its own shelf life, being a product of the corresponding time. The Belarusian experience of building socialism in a single country cannot be categorized as unconditionally successful examples, however, you cannot call it a complete failure either: something worked out, something didn’t. In addition, whether we like it or not, even in the most perfect system, entropy accumulates over time, leading to an imbalance. And the fact that the leadership of Belarus, instead of adjusting the course and making point changes in the chosen paradigm, chose to abstract from the demands of society, is entirely the fault of Alexander Grigorievich Lukashenko.

So, the first major mistake of the Belarusian leader was the inability to form a new or correct the old “image of the future” for the republic, which would be unconditionally identified with the figure of the president himself and would be supported by the country's population. Instead, the people had a feeling that the name of Lukashenka was tantamount to stagnation and degradation, in response to which the authorities did nothing to prove the opposite.

The second miscalculation was the results of the last elections.

The thesis that the election results were falsified is currently not disputed by any outside observer. A completely different question: what real support was provided by the population to the incumbent president? Based on the statements of sociologists, political scientists and ordinary residents of Belarus, it is safe to say that the number of votes cast for Alexander Lukashenko ranges from 55 to 60 percent (of course, we are talking about the number of supporters before mass demonstrations swept the country) ... Agree, these are quite decent numbers, in themselves guaranteeing an unconditional victory in the first round. However, apparently, the authorities of Belarus did not think this was enough (especially considering the fact that the main opponent was a housewife who did not claim anything), and an “order” for an even more “convincing” Victoria was launched from above.

We do not undertake to assert that Alexander Lukashenko personally initiated such an order. On the contrary, there is a persistent feeling that someone from the president's inner circle insisted on the implementation of such a scenario, thereby rendering the latter a real disservice. But what happened happened. The people, deprived of perspective and deceived during the voting, took to the streets. Moreover, this was not done in support of the opposition candidate Tikhanovskaya, as supporters of the losing side will try to present, namely against rigging the election results, and even a little later - against the unmotivated aggressive behavior of law enforcement officials. A reasonable question arises: would there have been such massive manifestations if the results were announced that were closer to the real state of affairs? I guess not. This conviction is based on the materials and posts of the Belarusians themselves on the Internet. Belarusians are trying to analyze the current events. And they all admit one thing: before the transition to the phase of suppressing the protest, 50+ percent of the republic's population supported Lukashenka. And even though these are mainly villagers, factory workers (although not all of them) and pensioners, the regime had support, and, therefore, just the announcement by the opposition of the elections as illegitimate, provided that the votes were honestly counted, it would not seem enough to form a stable protest stratum of the population.

Let's be honest: if the opposition loses, it will always be dissatisfied with the election results, but it is a completely different matter when this dissatisfaction is superimposed on the internal reflection of the masses, which is approximately aware of how many votes were cast for one candidate or another. After all, elections are always a kind of bargaining, only the loyalty of the population is bought instead of specific goods. And when you are sold with a significant markup that you would have bought much cheaper, and even then only due to the absence of sane competitors, this causes nothing but irritation. Thus, it was the falsification of the election results that served as a trigger for subsequent events. At the same time, up to the summing up of the final results by the CEC, the situation could be played in the opposite direction. However, the latter, apparently, ran counter to the ambitions of Lukashenka himself, who worked out for himself one single position: no concessions.

Of course, all of the above are not the only mistakes made by comrade Lukashenko and his inner circle during the election campaign. Other highlights include the legally unsubstantiated dismissal of opposition candidates from participation in the election procedure, attempts to intimidate the electorate by third forces represented by mercenaries of private military organizations, the excessive use of the right to violence by the security forces, etc. However, against the background of the two conceptual errors we have outlined, this looks nothing more than the agony of the authorities, which have lost touch with their own population.

It is worth making a remark here. Such a detailed analysis of the reasons that led, in our opinion, to the political crisis that gripped Belarus, was necessary primarily in order to try to work out on their basis the most rational mechanisms to find a way out of the situation into which the authorities of the republic have plunged themselves and the Belarusian society ... At the same time, the author of these lines deliberately does not consider the options for foreign intervention as the most obvious, but far from so unambiguous action that can bring an unambiguous political gain. Moreover, the author is convinced that the Belarusian society still retains the mechanisms necessary to seek consensus without appealing to various intermediaries, even though it is already clear that none of the parties admits defeat, but, it has become it may be that protests in one form or another will continue.

Today, in the hope that one of the parties will eventually make concessions, the conflicting parties have taken a wait and see attitude. However, no one can guarantee that the confrontation will not soon develop into a more acute phase. In order to prevent the development of such a scenario, which, without exaggeration, will be the most negative for the Belarusian people and the state, it is necessary to take a number of serious interrelated actions already now. And it must be done by the authorities as the most "strong" side of the conflict, as the party that allowed it, and as the only actor with the appropriate resource base. At the same time, no one is calling for political suicide of Lukashenka himself or public repentance on his part. On the contrary. All actions should be aimed at restoring the authority of the authorities, no matter how strange these words may sound today. However, one must understand that this will not be achieved by force. And even though the position of the protesters seems to be categorical: “Lukashenka must leave,” in reality everything may not be so categorical. It is enough for Alexander Grigorievich to make an effort on himself and start talking with his own population.

The first, still timid steps to build a dialogue have already been taken. Recently, Lukashenka announced the need for constitutional reforms, admitted the possibility of an audit of the past voting and met with his electorate, represented by the workers of the Minsk Wheel Tractor Plant. However, while all these actions look scattered and crumpled, they lack complexity, there is no integrity. One gets the feeling that the newly elected president is corny filling holes in the body of the Belarusian statehood, plugging leaks to everyone that comes to hand, which, of course, cannot add points to him as a politician capable of thinking in the categories of the entire country and several generations of its inhabitants.

In this regard, the first and, perhaps, the most important thing that the authorities of the republic should undertake to stabilize the situation is to address the nation with a direct speech. Apply not through the biased media, without resorting to the services of pro-government journalists, but in person - so that everyone sitting in front of the communicator, be it a TV, radio or a monitor screen, gets the impression that the president is talking directly to him. This format is wholly and completely determined by the social base of the protesters, in which absolutely all segments of the population of Belarus are represented, and, therefore, it is necessary to address all citizens at once, not being limited only to a convenient audience of workers of factories and plants. However, the question arises: what exactly is to be discussed with the population? It seems that an appeal to prudence and demands to stop, as the President of Ukraine Yanukovych, who fled to Russia, called for, will turn out to be unproductive. What then should the Belarusian leader fill his speech with? First of all, Alexander Grigorievich needs to state his opinion and his position on the current events, which has been very fragmented so far. But a lot will have to be explained, including the reason why the presidency of the country in this historical the moment of time cannot be occupied by anyone other than Lukashenka himself. In other words, in his address to the nation, Alexander Grigorievich will have to substantiate his position as the head of state, citing as evidence such arguments that would be unconditionally accepted by the majority of the inhabitants of the Republic of Belarus. The banal thirst for power will not suit the people. We need more weighty arguments, which means that Lukashenko will have to prove that he has what we talked about in the first half of our article: an image of the country's future, which takes into account the positions of the overwhelming majority of its citizens. Only in this way will the name of Lukashenka cease to be associated with stagnation, once again becoming a symbol of forward movement, but a careful movement that takes into account previous experience and mistakes.

Let's not hide: for elderly politicians, accustomed to acting within the framework of certain political and administrative patterns, it is incredibly difficult. Difficult, but not impossible. And the proclamation of constitutional reforms for this purpose will fit perfectly, as evidenced by the positive experience of the Russian Federation. Remember the enthusiasm with which the Russian masses perceived the undertakings voiced by President Putin to amend the country's Basic Law, with what euphoria the public joined the process of rule-making and its discussion. At the same time, no one limits the Belarusian president in his ability to go beyond populist slogans designed to pacify the protesters, and to really implement mechanisms that provide for a painless and democratic transfer of power in such a way that Lukashenka's legacy no longer requires his direct presence in the highest echelons of power. For example, the same idea of ​​the State Council, which was never fully implemented in Russia, in Belarus is quite capable of receiving its new interpretation.

Why is this so important?

Let's be realistic: even if the situation in the country ultimately manages to stabilize, for Alexander Lukashenko this will most likely become the last presidential term with which the citizens of Belarus can come to terms, then only a real popular explosion, during which no one will give guarantees of personal security. the former president himself, nor his inner circle. That is why all the novellas voiced during the message must be immediately implemented, otherwise irreparable may happen. We sincerely hope that the Belarusian authorities will have enough political perspicacity to understand this.

Another important aspect that must be reflected in the message to the nation, if any, should be a moral and ethical assessment of the actions of law enforcement agencies to suppress the protesters.

It is impossible to bypass this moment with all the will, because it was the excessive “initiative” of the security officials that ultimately led to an avalanche-like growth of protest. And here you need to be extremely careful in your judgments. On the one hand, the riot police acted entirely within their competence, on the other hand, the measures taken clearly turned out to be disproportionate to the threat that the protesters posed for public peace. However, despite this, any attempts to shift the blame onto people in uniform, in our opinion, should be fundamentally suppressed, because any discrimination by law enforcement agencies to please the protesters in the current conditions is tantamount to declaring their resignation, because if tomorrow there are protests will continue, no one will defend the government that has betrayed its own soldiers. However, it is unlikely that Lukashenka will really follow this path, after all, the example of the already mentioned Yanukovych speaks for itself. At the same time, people on the streets continue to demand justice, incl. punishment of police officers, guilty of abuses, to which, as we found out, the authorities cannot for objective reasons. In this regard, the only possible option available to the leadership of Belarus is an attempt to shift the focus. In particular, recognizing a certain excess of the performer, no one forbids, instead of punishing officials, to provide material assistance to those who suffered damage from the actions of these very officials. Of course, such an initiative can be perceived as an attempt to bribe the “victims”, but it is also an indicator that the government hears the voices of the dissatisfied, understands the reason that prompted them to go out, and also admits and is responsible for the mistakes it has made. And this is what needs to be emphasized in the message to the nation. In the current situation, it would be better than nothing at all.

And the last thing. Declared audit of voting results. Whether we like it or not, the people will need to provide the identity of those who led the country to the crisis. If this is not a figure of Lukashenko himself, not security officials and not oppositionists (for the latter will be unrealistic to prove to the protesters), then why not part with those persons whose services are clearly not useful, especially if Alexander Grigorievich himself already understands that this term will become last for him? We are talking about the highest officials of the CEC. It is on them that you can hang both the incorrect counting of votes and the events that unfolded after. At the same time, in order not to cast a shadow over the entire voting process (after all, the authorities will not go to new elections), this will have to be done in the most personalized way, pointing to specific individuals who corrected the data received from precinct and territorial commissions at the very last stage. To do this, you can even sacrifice an extra 5-10 percent of the votes, thereby bringing the results closer to more or less objective indicators.

Of course, everything proposed is a great crime against the truth, but this very scenario will allow the Belarusian state and the authorities to remain at its head without unnecessary bloodshed, while the people will be able to get a chance to implement the urgent changes. Is it worth it, it's up to them to decide. In any case, Lukashenka today, if he does not want to completely lose power, faces a serious task to form an image of the country's future that is understandable for the population, which would be closely linked with the figure of the president himself. To do this, he needs to restore channels of communication with society, starting a dialogue with all layers of the population that forms him. The only question is whether he can handle it ...
Photos used:, Sputnik / Виктор Толочко
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Odysseus
    Odysseus 23 August 2020 06: 09
    Well, the Belarusian Maidan was successfully suppressed, and, of course, there will be attempts to shake the workers, there will be provocations and external pressure, but the outcome of the struggle is clear. So you can really start criticizing Lukashenka (despite the fact that his socio-economic course is almost ideal and made it possible to create a truly independent country, and even with a social state) He made so many mistakes that just listing them will make an impressive list.
    1) The most important thing is that he went to the polls in general. 26 years in power is more than enough, he is not a monarch by the grace of God, not the leader of a party leading society to a brighter future, his power is built through elections according to the bourgeois-democratic model. her first person needs to be changed periodically.
    2) Carries his youngest son everywhere. This is understandable from a purely human point of view, but it is a gross mistake that makes it possible to promote the topic of the transfer of power by inheritance. The overwhelming majority of Belarusians do not accept this.
    3) It is rejected by the younger generation purely aesthetically. His image of a simple, zealous owner was good when it was necessary to save the country in the mid-90s, but young people do not accept him. The power of images and symbols should never be underestimated.
    4) He went too far with the European vector of his policy and loyalty to the zmagars. Balancing interests between the globalist West and the oligarchic Russian Federation is in itself correct, but the cultivation of zmagars as a convenient opposition is fraught with what we are now seeing.
    5) He cleaned out all pro-Russian and socialist parties, rightly fearing that they are no longer sane nationalists, but in the end it turned out that he had no one to rely on except the state apparatus.
    6) He stopped listening to advice and became somewhat arrogant. This is especially true for issues of ideology and the media. This is generally the weak point of the Belarusian authorities. As a result, a complete defeat on the information front. And this is no less important than the economy.
    7) As a result, he conducted a very bad election campaign, for some reason he put weak competitors in prison instead of forcing them to take away votes from each other. As a result, he received a consolidated vote against.
    8) It is completely unclear why he showed 80%. Of course, there was an attempt at Maidan even at 55%. But at 80, just no one believed.
    9) When suppressing protests, a tough (by the standards of the former USSR) option was taken. This is fine, but requires good communication and judicious use. The first simply did not exist, the second had problems. Why did the OMON chase individual people in the sleeping areas and why did they not think in advance about the placement of the Maidan in the police department, well, etc. In the end, they only made people angry.
    10) I began to take my supporters out of the street a bit late. Actually, if there were no previous mistakes, it was not necessary. But in his case it was necessary.
    Actually, the Maidan proved to be useful in that it opened Lukashenka's eyes to many problems. Now he is trying to forcefully correct most of the mistakes, but I think the best option for him is to calmly prepare a successor and leave in 2-3 years.
    1. depressant
      depressant 23 August 2020 13: 06
      I believe our president will learn from Belarusian history. Or not? He also has his own, ahem ... Khabarovsk. As a local outrage. And Lukashenka has a whole Khabarovsk, only in a much worse version. Gone are the days when you could talk to the population through clenched teeth or not talk at all. Our authorities are drowning for digitalization, trying to take us under full control - this is one of 12 national projects. At the same time, not realizing that digitalization has a downside - full awareness of society, leading to the fact that the imperious lie becomes visible either immediately or in a very short period of time, causing sharp rejection. That proportionally makes it difficult to implement even important decisions.
      1. bandabas
        bandabas 23 August 2020 13: 26
        Yes, ours also has Efremov ... And a gift of half a liter from Sechin with super-duper oil. And, the New Year is on the nose. And a lot of other things. The kings of milk are supposed to be uncountable for their harmfulness.
      2. Odysseus
        Odysseus 23 August 2020 15: 58
        Quote: depressant
        I believe our president will learn from Belarusian history. Or not

        In terms of its socio-economic structure, the Russian Federation is a large Ukraine, it has in common with Belarus only the vertical of power, imprisoned for one person and an irreplaceable President. So there are completely different problems here. Well, plus the Russian Federation is still the bearer of Soviet assets (from nuclear weapons to a place in the Security Council), it is much more significant on the international agenda.
        For Putin (as well as for Yanukovych), the most important thing is relations with the West (for example, the US elections mean much more to his fate than the events in Belarus), and mafia intra-clan fuss. It can easily be merged by their own (as did many of Yanukovych's entourage) because it has become a toxic asset and prevents an agreement with the West. But, for example, he should not be afraid of strikes at all - the Russian Federation does not live from labor, it is ridiculous to imagine strikes by managers of Russian Railways or Gazprom who do nothing. And ordinary hard workers in the oil industry (shift workers or guest workers) will not go on strike.
        But almost the only thing that the current authorities know how to do is to brainwash and promote themselves. This is actually their main occupation. So one cannot look for direct analogies.
        1. depressant
          depressant 23 August 2020 20: 36
          Well, there was a strike at the Chayandinskoye oil and gas condensate field. On the occasion of the bestial attitude towards workers in the story of the coronavirus. As they said! How they booed! But...
          I just watched a report from Khabarovsk. "Give us back our Furgala!"
          How so? He's a criminal! The evidence may be dubious, but they still know, everyone understands everything.
          And the era did not create other leaders, - the answer of the Khabarovsk residents is implied. “The entire leadership is more or less criminals, and Furgal is not the worst of them,” again the answer is implied. - And in general, we'll figure it out ourselves. We are subjects. Not children.
          And here is the worst thing. The era of the depraved consciousness. This is when the people are able to stand for the leader, knowing that he is a criminal, who ordered the murder, which is tantamount to the fact that he is the killer himself.
          And when was the era different?
          Actually, it was. When a crime was committed in the name of a good goal, in the name of a bright idea. And you forgave and even elevated the murder of a man by a man to a feat. If you were not a witness. And even if it was.
          But to erect the most vulgar extraction of dough into your own, and not the general pocket, into a feat, and even through murder? Khodorkovsky ordered mayor Petukhov, but became the banner of some of our liberals; Furgal - some three people, but here ... I can't - build it. And nothing, - people say, - we will endure, even if only slightly, but Furgal will take care of us, he is our choice.
          This is how the era of the big hapka humiliates and insults a person, but he does not even understand this. Or maybe he understands. But the alleged killer, fully assuming that he is not supposed, but real, is elevated to a symbol of disagreement with the era. Being in agreement with her. What is there to do? If there is nothing to make good out of, make it out of evil. Unfortunately, the authorities and the people put the same meaning in the word "good". This is when, albeit not the same, but everyone is hungry - both the government and the people. At the very bottom of the pyramid of needs - everything! And the authorities are especially hungry.
          The Belarusians seem to say: “We don’t need this at all, we are clean,” but they follow the beaten path. Because the alternative was once killed with aloof glances. Everyone. There now, despite the rain and damp weather, 100 thousand people not far from the stele. And next to her are law enforcement officers.
          They will tell me, not about the differences in the interpretation of "Blade Runner 2012, 2049" to go out! And they will be right. This will never happen.
  2. strelokmira
    strelokmira 23 August 2020 06: 45
    14 th
    What kind of dialogue, tanks and crushing the maydanuts, after that for 10 years any such movement throughout the CIS will stall. For the rule is rooted in a dull head - "they pay you from behind a hillock for races in the area, do not blame it and be kind to lie in the grave" hi
    1. Dimy4
      Dimy4 23 August 2020 07: 36
      "they pay you from across the hill for races across the square, do not blame it and be kind to lie in the grave"

      A little nuance: denyuzhka from behind a hillock is a temporary phenomenon, but lying in a grave is already forever. And no one thinks about it when he jumps, because the brains are delusional.
    2. Captivity
      Captivity 23 August 2020 08: 32
      What if you don't get paid? But you're tired of the same face on TV, then what? Endure?
      And what if you get bullied for protesting?
      It is not far from here to become a serf serf. As I see it, some people dream about it.
      1. strelokmira
        strelokmira 23 August 2020 09: 29
        It is not far from here to become a serf serf. As I see it, some people dream about it.

        So you get it, now destroy the enterprises where you were paid money, and after that just wake up serf slaves or pointe shoes laughing
        Just like the land is sold in dill, and you will process it for free
        Although this is the only application for such bio-waste
      2. Motorist
        Motorist 24 August 2020 19: 18
        Quote: Captivity
        It is not far from here to become a serf serf.

        Yesterday I wrote to your colleague - put a hashtag: # serfholop... And more varied, boring!
        1. Captivity
          Captivity 25 August 2020 07: 23
          Do you have any smart thoughts?
          1. Motorist
            Motorist 25 August 2020 19: 54
            Quote: Captivity
            Do you have any smart thoughts?

            Really stupidity overcame ?! recourse I'm not sure if the combustion equation is too tough for you. Although, I could be wrong; but in this case, you can see it yourself in the tutorial.
            1. Captivity
              Captivity 26 August 2020 04: 18
              You rightly said: really
    3. bk0010
      bk0010 23 August 2020 12: 55
      Are you not considering the option to receive a full-scale partisan movement in return?
      1. strelokmira
        strelokmira 23 August 2020 13: 57
        Are you not considering the option to receive a full-scale partisan movement in return?

        This is the same as Assad's ISIS, well, it means they will kill this movement with the whole world)
        And after that, your masters will catch up as in the case of the Taliban.
        1. bk0010
          bk0010 23 August 2020 19: 53
          No, it's like the partisans in Belarus during the Great Patriotic War, Mr. Punisher.
          1. Dante Alighieri
            24 August 2020 08: 05
            In general, ordinary Belarusians have shown themselves to be people with a surprisingly developed feeling of elbows and inner solidarity with each other. In this regard, the following anecdote is more relevant than ever: "Two Jews are a chess tournament, two Belarusians are two partisan detachments, and two Ukrainians are a partisan detachment with a traitor." laughing .
            1. depressant
              depressant 24 August 2020 11: 23
              About the traitors. Some political strategists naively suggest: Russia will soon have provincial elections, so why don't the authorities introduce their people into the opposition movement and lead it where a protest vote against United Russia is planned. The list of such provinces is known and is attached to the recommendation. Let, they say, shout loudest of all, “Down with Putin! Down with United Russia!”, Offer an impossible, but very attractive program for the electorate. And when they are elected instead of the United Russia party proposed by the government, the elected representatives of the people will quietly and imperceptibly merge the protest and will continue to act in accordance with the line of the central government ...
              Well, first of all, such technologies have obviously already been tested. The people were really bought at first, but then they discovered that they were led away. I believe colleagues can provide a sufficient number of examples.
              Secondly, the educated people, preferring to nominate their fellow countrymen, about whom they know everything, as leaders, now they are already keenly looking around. The rig will be revealed.
              Thirdly. There is a risk that the "decoy duck" chosen by the people will begin to play by its own rules, beneficial to her, the "duck," and not beneficial to the Center.
              So, the authorities are unlikely to agree to this. And even more so - in Belarus. And they were late, and Lukashenka would not have gone to the stand because of the above third point - it is painfully cunning and fearful, greedy for personal power, and the country is small. In the era of the Internet, everyone knows everything about everyone leaning out. People would quickly understand what's what.
              1. Pivot
                Pivot 25 August 2020 13: 29
                Of course, they rolled back, in democratic Greece, Alexis Tsipras shouted loudest of all that he would promote exit from the EU, and when he was elected prime minister, he immediately answered the voters' questions about leaving the EU that you guys have never ruined your pants after a telephone conversation with Brussels. So it's a normal topic to put your puppets where necessary, any sane person would do that.
    4. Asad
      Asad 24 August 2020 12: 21
      The orderly's phone was stolen?
  3. Olddetractor
    Olddetractor 23 August 2020 08: 57
    The article is not about the national dialogue, but about the presidential monologue, "as the only way to prevent the radicalization of the Belarusian protest." To address the nation with a speech and make carefully thought-out concessions, actions that you do not want to call a dialogue. Yes, it looks like he is not capable of dialogue, he is only capable of rural squabbles
    1. dauria
      dauria 23 August 2020 10: 10
      The article is not about a nationwide dialogue, but about a presidential monologue,

      It's naive. "Maidans" do not allow dialogue, not the authorities. Everything is clear in the instructions - a peaceful protest about (anyone), the involvement of the masses. When the crowd gets involved - a provocation for a forceful response. Bucha with the demand "Power will be responsible for everything," but nothing concrete and no dialogues until they knocked him down.
      Curators simply will not allow "dialogue".
      And for dialogues, hard workers have strikes. Only this dialogue should take place with the owner (or management), and not with the police.
      By the way, things are not going smoothly in Russia with strikes and trade unions either - and this is a serious omission of Putin and the authorities. Everywhere in Europe there is, but we do not - it means that something is wrong.
      1. Dante Alighieri
        24 August 2020 07: 31
        "Maidans" do not allow dialogue, not the authorities

        Only if there is a consolidated core of protest, in the person of big capital, which pays for all the action. There is no such customer in Belarus, and the trickle that comes from the west, without financial support inside the country, is not capable of providing any significant in terms of the duration of the action of disobedience. And there is a feeling that the collective West is not very interested in Belarus at the moment: on the threshold of a major financial crisis, elections in America and complete uncertainty about what will happen after them. In such conditions, color revolutions do not carry out - their internal opponents would be defeated. With the usual demonstrations, with which we are most likely dealing in Belarus, the participants of which are much closer to the French yellow vests than to the Ukrainian Maidanists, there is always an opportunity to come to an agreement. But for this you will have to work, first of all, on the mistakes made.
    2. Dante Alighieri
      24 August 2020 07: 13
      The article is not about a nationwide dialogue, but about a presidential monologue

      Dmitry, you are not undoubtedly right about the interpretation of the scenario I proposed, in fact, this is really a monologue, but a monologue based on sociology, the demands of the protesters and the interests of the state. Such a monologue, albeit with a stretch, can already be called an attempt to build two-way communication. However, even such a "docked" format would be many times better than what we are seeing now. Unfortunately, apparently in all other respects you are also right and the authorities of the Republic are simply not capable of implementing even such a format of communication with their own population, which is favorable for themselves in advance.
  4. depressant
    depressant 23 August 2020 09: 26
    Colleague Dante, congratulations! hi
    A strikingly balanced and clever article, nowadays you rarely find such a detailed study with the right conclusions and recommendations. I'm ready to subscribe to your every word)))
    1. Dante Alighieri
      24 August 2020 08: 13
      Thank you heartily for the high praise of my humble labors. repeat It is very pleasant when the audience perceives the written favorably. Although I admit that my style of presentation is hardly digestible. In this regard, special thanks for reading to the end. hi
  5. hermit
    hermit 23 August 2020 09: 33
    Someone Yanukovych entered into a dialogue and how it ended for him and Ukraine.
    1. dgonni
      dgonni 23 August 2020 10: 57
      Yanukovych had advisers from the white stone who apromexed their views without adjusting to Ukraine. Everyone knows how it ended.
      Was that business? After the students were beaten and half a lemon came out on the streets, that was all. Remove Lyovochkin from the heads of the apparatus, as the one who gave the command. Remove the minister of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the chief of Kiev. Appoint an investigation, which would then be released on the brakes. Well, and appoint a referendum for the course of Europe or Russia. Parliament that was completely pocket! But no advisers recommended showing character. Well, he showed so that the harun ran faster than a doe.
      1. depressant
        depressant 23 August 2020 14: 24
        Yes, the approximation failed. Ukraine was not correlated with Russia. You cannot sew the sleeve of the robe to the fur coat, the limb will then freeze)))
        But seriously, even though our president, even a Belarusian one, they don't know, they don't understand their peoples. The task of each of them until now has been not to govern, but to establish for the people as an object some rules of life that will remain unchanged until the end of time and forget about it, focusing on their own interests. These interests consist in the most successful integration into the environment of their own kind - the world management elite, the secular society of the highest level, to become equal among equals and even surpass in some way the old members of the elite, to strengthen their position in it. After all, there are no former presidents, it is worth the effort! Assuming that the people do not see or understand anything. Being engaged in the lewdness of pride, our government decided that it was in a closed room. But the changeable joker Clea made the walls permeable to views from outside, and the people with disgust are observing the behavior of the authorities already as a subject.
        1. iouris
          iouris 23 August 2020 15: 10
          Quote: depressant
          Ukraine was not correlated with Russia.

          Right now, for such statements one could receive according to the amendments ...
          Is the Far East still "correlated" in your opinion?
          1. depressant
            depressant 23 August 2020 15: 50
            Colleague, you should have fussed before. The methods of governing the country are tragically outdated. What can you suggest? But this is the inextricable link between the authorities and the people, and not primarily with foreign partners. And then they marry the country, and go to the side.
            Specifically, such organizations as VTsIOM, Levada Center, and others are also morally outdated and do not allow the authorities to be fully connected with their people.
            After all, what do these organizations offer? As far as I know, a paper with a dozen questions. Yes, no, no, yes ... And then they release a report: we went, called, asked, for Putin - so much, against - so much, for Zhirinovsky - ...
            We need a site of the same VTsIOM, which every day will offer topics for discussion on all topical issues, the opinion on which is important for the government and the president. Is there a law? We are discussing! The President said something like that? We are discussing! On the forums, people will propose their own topics, raise important questions for them on the problems of their territory. And a whole staff of analysts must continuously study these forums, make analytical notes, on the basis of which the presidential aides must draw their conclusions and every day, like at a factory planning meeting, make a joint report to the first person on the political and economic state of the country. On the basis of this report, the president instructs his assistants to call one or another governor, or the mayor, etc. It's like an operational headquarters. As in the war. Daily! Because we are at war. They are fighting with us with new methods, and we cannot oppose them with anything. And ... No prosecution for sensitive issues, for the dissatisfaction of a citizen. And a strict demand from those who created the ground for discontent, namely the local authorities. Otherwise, they come to Moscow, a table, chairs, the president, the governor, who describes what he is, the governor, wonderful, and Vladimir Vladimirovich is even better and how he, the governor, is grateful to him for the fact that he exists in the world ... They poked at the camera, parted, everyone sighed with relief and immediately forgot about the contents of the tryndezh. Everything, they say, is good and calm. And then - Khabarovsk. Such a system of feedback with the country is the last century!
            I'm not even talking about any idlers like Trutnev. Me too, sovereign's eye! Where did you look, what did you allow yourself?
  6. iouris
    iouris 23 August 2020 11: 31
    Trying to talk about the topic is the only thing we can do. Neither the president nor the "interim president in exile" has a program. The economic model of independence has exhausted itself. There are no good options.
    Only Baron Munchausen managed to pull himself and the white (from tension) horse out of the swamp from the swamp by pulling the pigtail. The most realistic way out of the situation: "tomorrow the Martians will arrive and solve all our problems."
    If the Martians do not arrive, then there are three options: slow self-expansion (with or without Lukashenko), entry into the Russian Federation by regions (they have already agreed by 50%, but they will resist both there and there), entry into the EU (50% have already been agreed: "opposition" is a consonant).
    About the protest. In Belarus, as in Lebanon: as a result of slovenliness or sabotage, half of the country was destroyed and ... protests, democratization began ...
    1. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 23 August 2020 22: 29
      Why not joining the Russian Federation as a whole?
      1. iouris
        iouris 24 August 2020 11: 51
        It would be better to introduce an article for refusing to recognize Belarus and Ukraine by Russia.
    2. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 23 August 2020 22: 30
      Joining the EU is unlikely. On the other hand, it does not imply deprivation of independence.
      1. iouris
        iouris 24 August 2020 11: 58
        You can try to sell independence ... once. The EU is in crisis and they need to demonstrate that the idea of ​​"European integration" is alive. The Belarusians must demonstrate this. The problem is that Belarus is already dependent on the Russian Federation. Consequently, the question of Belarus is a war between the Russian Federation and the EU. The EU is the FRG. Conclusion ... By the way, the other day Angela received a "dead cat".
    3. Dante Alighieri
      24 August 2020 07: 56
      Trying to chatter is the only thing we can do

      Hello iouris! hi Chatting, as events show, must also be learned.

      Regarding the entry into the Russian Federation or the EU, I believe that the Belarusians are no different from the Martian intervention. Both are different planets for them. Russia, of course, is clearer than Europe, but in the 30 years since our worlds parted, it has also changed a lot. In recent years, of course, an external gloss has appeared, no worse than the European one, but behind this facade there is a lot of defects that the Belarusian society, in view of its isolation, has not encountered so far. This is primarily about ethnic and confessional issues, the focus of the economy on attracting foreign and not its own labor resources, etc. And the negative experience of incorporating certain parts of Ukraine clearly indicates that this path is not worth going. With Europe it is even easier: it does not need Belarusians, from the word at all - since this will only be additional costs for the European economy. Again, the EU internal market has already been distributed and hardly any of the old-timers will be stingy with their field of activity and sales markets to please an unwanted newcomer. Poland is undoubtedly interested in Belarusian lands, but precisely in lands without a population inhabiting them. And her strength is not enough to swallow such a voluminous piece. So there is no hope for Martians, neither with Russian passports, nor with Schengen visas, and the Belarusians will have to resolve this crisis on their own.
      1. iouris
        iouris 24 August 2020 12: 04
        All your "ethnic" and "confessional" differences are artificial differences. Superstructure over a specific economic base. Changes in the baseline will lead to the demolition of these differences. They did not play a significant role in the USSR and do not play a significant role in the EU. In the EU, this will be blurred and destroyed much faster. As for the basis, everything is simple here: the economy of the Republic of Belarus is deeply tied to the Russian Federation and the EU does not need it at all.
        1. Dante Alighieri
          24 August 2020 16: 50
          iouris, I spoke, not about differences, but about ethnic problems generated by the fact that there are no effective mechanisms for the socialization of labor migrants in an environment alien to them, as a result, the most accessible behaviors for these communities are reproduced that are not characteristic of the recipient country. Ethnic crime is growing as a regularity. In addition, all of the above also leads to an increase in the influence of diasporas, which are beginning to replace state institutions. To be convinced of this, it is enough to remember that it was the diasporas who gave the murderer of a Russian guy from Biryulyovo to law enforcement officers. Those. they themselves carried out the investigation, investigative actions and detention, in fact, indicating their right to legitimate violence against their members. Not bad, agree. But all this is relevant for Russia, Belarus is, by and large, mono-ethnic, and its economy is not so dependent on cheap labor force. And the majority of Belarusians are hardly eager to join the rest of the "progressive world" in this regard, having lost their national identity and eroded their genetic code.

          In essence, I agree that changes in the basis are capable of leveling these differences, but this will be relevant for the following socio-economic formations. We live here and now, and therefore we operate with those concepts that are available to us. In addition, I do not agree with the classic in determining the proportions of the base and superstructure. In my understanding, they cannot be less than 60-65 to 35-40, against the conditional 90+ to 10-, as it is described in the original. And therefore, the role of these 35-40 percent of the superstructure on the actions and thoughts of individuals will be higher, which in essence is confirmed by the experience of building states throughout the post-Soviet space.
  7. lapwings
    lapwings 23 August 2020 15: 28

    ... The dialogue is just beginning). Today Minsk. What is not martial law)
    1. Terrible GMO
      Terrible GMO 23 August 2020 23: 26
      Quote: viber
      The dialogue is just beginning). Today Minsk. What is not martial law)

      MI-24 also flew over the city. A number of soldiers were given an RPG at all request
    2. iouris
      iouris 24 August 2020 12: 26
      Better to prevent war by demonstrating the strength and will to use it. For all. If the problem is fundamental, then it cannot be swept under the bench, but it cannot be solved in three days.
      1. Shedko
        Shedko 24 August 2020 21: 40
        The problem is that there were indiscriminate arrests in the first 2 days. They grabbed everyone. There were no beatings in Vitebsk, where I live. There were harsh detentions, but our city is the most habitable in this regard, in order to shatter - it needs something out of the ordinary. BUT already most of those who voted for AG turned their backs on him because of the lies that he carries, but the majority understands that this does not lead to anything good, but to see a person who lies to the whole country for any reason is the same everyone is tired ... But they don't see a way out either ... that's awful.
  8. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
    Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 23 August 2020 21: 33
    Nice publication. Lukashenka is not getting younger and not getting smarter. He is sincerely convinced that everything needs to be dealt with by himself, as soon as you turn your back, they will instantly plunder everything. The experience of a state farm director cannot be spent on drink. And the protesters will surely learn their lessons. The problem is still in the omission of the brains of the population in the information confrontation. By the way, some of the Belarusian youth have incomes that have nothing to do with Belarus, such as IT specialists or outbid, therefore they have a very vague idea of ​​the real industry and agriculture.
    1. Dante Alighieri
      24 August 2020 08: 25
      Good publication

      Thank you! hi
      some of the Belarusian youth have incomes that have nothing to do with Belarus, such as IT specialists or outbid, therefore they have a very vague idea of ​​the real industry and agriculture

      By the way, it is very interesting that the income of these people was largely due to the activities of Lukashenko himself, who introduced an unprecedentedly low percentage of taxation on the IT sector, which, together with the generally preserved Soviet model of education, allowed the country to become a leader in the post-Soviet space by the number of outsourcing and crowdsourcing companies working in the field of computing technologies.
      1. depressant
        depressant 24 August 2020 14: 53
        By the way, the game "Tanks" was developed in Belarus.
  9. 1536
    1536 24 August 2020 10: 17
    What kind of "dialogue" are we talking about? Whom with whom?
    The Belarusians need to decide: either they "go toe-to-toe" to NATO and the EU, give their country to be torn apart by transnational monopolies and all kinds of funds, and gradually (I think 20-30 years will be enough) assimilate in the "friendly environment of European peoples" or they build and develop, together with Russia, a single economy, an army, become a locomotive in the IT industry, in instrument making, agriculture, give the Russian language the status of a second state language, which is recorded in their Constitution. Belarusian youth study in Russian universities, imagine that we have a common history, a common Victory and a common future, they can work in Russia, and the Russian in Belarus. And such things, when they spit in your back, they say "occupier", "this is Russian", "come on, goodbye!" etc., quite simply, will be excluded from the public, political and everyday life of the state. Then the people of Belarus live quietly for another 100-200 years on their land and in their country.
    And with whom to conduct a dialogue on this matter? With bison in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, or what? Or with storks in Polesie? Bison, if they have the opportunity to speak, will say for sure that they will not last long with the influx of hunters and poachers from all over the world, and storks, those, apparently, will fly a little further, to Russia, because the dialogue is where to nest if there is nowhere to nest , they will not lead.
  10. WayKheThuo
    WayKheThuo 24 August 2020 10: 28
    The article is good, efficient, but the following passage:
    And the proclamation of constitutional reforms for this purpose will be the best fit, as evidenced by the positive experience of the Russian Federation. Remember the enthusiasm with which the Russian masses perceived the initiatives announced by President Putin to amend the country's Basic Law, with what euphoria the public joined the process of rule-making and its discussion.

    Adds a hefty fly in the ointment to a good text - either the author is completely divorced from reality, or is a pro-government discoursemonger. Personally, I tend to the latter, but this is not a reproach - just without this pro-government "deflection" the article would have looked more coherent, or something.
    I liked the language of the article - dry, saturated with specific terms and phrases, typical for a strict analytical report rather than for the text in the "Opinions" section.
    So - plus.
    1. Dante Alighieri
      24 August 2020 17: 48
      Thank you for your kind words. I'm afraid not soon my texts will be published in the "Analytics" section. I write rarely and little, and I am, in fact, just an ordinary user, albeit with a "rich" experience on this resource, which, in other matters, does not give me absolutely any privileges, primarily in the publication of materials. Indeed, in fact, for the moderators, I am a dark horse, and therefore a certain time must pass so that they can be convinced of my non-engendering. Which, again, is possible only if I am active.

      As for your comment, I admit that I deliberately limited myself to postulating only the first stage of constitutional reform (or changes? I always confuse these two concepts). The results of this initiative dealt with the main text in a very indirect way, moreover, the article was already quite extensive. There was absolutely no need to describe once again the rehearsals that accompanied this process - everything had already been said by other authors, and more than once. And yes, I really believe that there was a certain euphoria, albeit to a large extent fueled by the media, at the very beginning. So, in my circle, almost any discussion in one way or another slipped into a discussion of upcoming reforms, which, in my opinion, is very indicative. Particularly interesting was the idea of ​​the state. council, which could become a very real mechanism limiting the presidential power and in the long term, albeit very distant, become the basis for a real democratic transition of power. I will note that all this even despite the full understanding of the background that forced the authorities to take this step. And then there was a performance by one former Komsomol member, a former beauty and an astronaut. I suppose further comments are superfluous, but if you wish .... in some ways it was akin to the expectations that prevailed in society at the end of the reign of Alexander II, when the people were waiting for a constitution, and as a result received Pobedonostsev's protective conservatism. But as a recipe for the Belarusian leader, allowing either to gain time, or to really set a new vector for the country's development (it all depends on the choice that a particular politician makes), such an initiative, in my opinion, is the best fit.
      1. WayKheThuo
        WayKheThuo 24 August 2020 19: 56
        But as a recipe for the Belarusian leader, allowing either to gain time, or to really set a new vector for the country's development (it all depends on the choice that a particular politician makes), such an initiative, in my opinion, is the best fit.

        In your opinion, this is the view of a person who, I believe, has not sat in his chair for 26 years and has not created a whole group of especially interested persons around himself - a kind of "team of our youth", on.
        To leave in time, and not only from politics, but even simply from the "bosses" - this is art. You have to feel very subtly that line, that threshold, when your departure will be perceived as a correct, conscious choice, and not a shameful flight under the pressure of circumstances.
        To feel this way about your people, your people, you need to have a special political culture and a corresponding tradition of transferring power, and where will it come from in a country where these empiricisms have been replaced by a covert bureaucratic apparatus-bureaucratic struggle around the royal throne?
        We, the citizens of Russia, were still very lucky that the EBN (well, that one) technically “jumped off”, handing over power to the colonel - Bg enlightened, not otherwise. But how the “successor” will leave is a big question.
        As for Belarus in general and Luka in particular, there will be no dialogue, I believe. There will be jumps with a gun, loud statements and provocations of all stripes, because, like Old Man, only strength is respected. A real, tangible force that does not spare itself or others. Now for Old Man to give back is to pass in front of some housewife who got into this mess according to the principle: "girls, this is cool, right?" As a result, their own will be devoured or floated to The Hague.
        So we stock up on popcorn and watch Venezuela II.
        I think so.
  11. imobile2008
    imobile2008 24 August 2020 13: 27
    Quote: strelokmira
    What kind of dialogue, tanks and crushing the maydanuts, after that for 10 years any such movement throughout the CIS will stall. For the rule is rooted in a dull head - "they pay you from behind a hillock for races in the area, do not blame it and be kind to lie in the grave" hi

    Yeah .. Level of knowledge. Does 1905 tell you anything?
  12. Motorist
    Motorist 24 August 2020 19: 05
    The thesis that the election results were falsified is currently not disputed by any outside observer.

    Is this a new axiom now? How are "beaten students" and "cannibalistic laws" in the 14th?
    1. Terrible GMO
      Terrible GMO 25 August 2020 05: 10
      Quote: Motorist
      Is this a new axiom now? How are "beaten students" and "cannibalistic laws" in the 14th?

      Those. direct evidence from many polling stations, photos, video and audio from election commissions - is it all a fake from Poland?
      Even not posted results are already a sign. Only direct evidence was submitted to the court in 25 volumes.
      True, the court does not work for us.
      1. Motorist
        Motorist 25 August 2020 20: 10
        TerribleGMO, hello! hi Violations are not necessarily falsified.

        Quote: TerribleGMO
        brought to court

        That's right - the court must decide.

        Quote: TerribleGMO
        25 volumes

        I doubt that you studied them.

        Quote: TerribleGMO
        True, the court does not work for us.

        Why so - weekends and vacations?