Modern Russia: the painful search for patriotism
Collage of frames from the Soviet film "The Tale of Malchish-Kibalchish" (1964)
Stunt frontmen
The idea of this article came to me in the first minutes of the new 2023, when on the air of Channel One I saw a certain performer with the pseudonym Shaman, or rather, even Shaman (Ya. Yu. Drones), who sang the song “I am Russian” with pathos.
Of course, I came across information about the existence of this composition, but it did not arouse my interest, since I decided that the guy just “hyped” on a topical topic, and one can hardly expect anything very outstanding from a performer who claims that he is Russian, but at the same time a “shaman”. If he really wants to be Russian, but not Orthodox, then he could, at least for the duration of the performance of this composition, call himself some kind of Magus, or even Svarog - why be trifles. And now I saw this Mr. Dronov with my own eyes. It turned out that although he was a shaman, he had a cross on his chest.
I must say right away that I didn’t expect to hear some incredible and outstanding folk rock, but I hoped for at least a small fragment in a stylized folk style or a break with a reference to Soviet classics: they say, of course, I’m a “cool rocker” (or how he positions itself), but I remember and honor traditions. Alas, I did not wait: such an ordinary little-memorable "Central European" melody. On the other hand, I saw something similar to African dreadlocks on the head of this “Russian patriot”, and narrow leather pants on his legs, which caused obsessive associations with the LBGT movement.
However, it was this Shaman who unexpectedly became the frontman of our patriotic bohemia. And this is very sad, but not surprising. Against the background of many others, he really stands out in a positive way. Here it is just right to recall the words of Athos:
"And it's one of the best!"
Could it be otherwise?
After the start of a special military operation, many were unpleasantly surprised that not only modern Russian, but also some Soviet "stars", who were presented to us almost as the "conscience of the nation", suddenly fled Russia very quickly, not forgetting to pour mud on their homeland. However, those of them that are “smarter” are pouring mud on the Motherland without leaving it and continuing to earn on the Russians.
Meanwhile, there is nothing to be surprised here: for many years these small people were identified with the real heroes they portrayed on stage, or with the lyrical heroes (or heroines) of the songs they performed. However, it was just an acting game - acting for money. An actor who plays in patriotic films can be a liberal with deep contempt for Russia, a performer of heroic roles can be a miserable coward. As an illustration, we can quote a line of a song from an old foreign film:
"I'm not a hero, just a trickster."
The ability to "keep the fig in your pocket" is a very ancient art. And Talleyrand did not invent, but only clearly formulated the well-known aphorism: "to betray in time means to foresee."
"Breadwinners" and "breadwinners"
Unfortunately, it must be admitted that some Soviet actors and pop performers, being rather stupid and poorly educated people, considered themselves not jesters and buffoons (which they really were), but the elite of society and deeply despised people who gave them flowers and bought tickets for concerts and performances. Fees, bonuses, titles, apartments, elite sanatoriums and rest houses for representatives of the Soviet bohemia were a mandatory item, this, as they say, take it out and put it down. They did not feel the slightest gratitude to the state and society for all this, which is clearly seen in the example of L. Vaikule, who told us about how she and Pugacheva "fed the USSR."
Such “breadwinners” and “breadwinners” did not speak, but “broadcast”, considering it their duty to “express their civil position” at any convenient and inconvenient occasion, of course, at first, cowardly - a hint or even a half-hint. But with the beginning of perestroika, they became bolder, and then even came to the State Duma - along with professional athletes who did not even have the slightest idea of \uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbreal life. Both those and others importantly “puff out their cheeks”, not understanding their role as “button pushers” and “wedding generals”. But when voting, the buttons are pressed obediently and “as it should be”, especially since their level of competence is zero, they still do not understand either foreign and domestic policy issues, or economics.
In this photo, for example, actress M. Kozhevnikova:
Her main role is "Allochka" from the first three seasons of "Univer" (an extremely unsuccessful attempt to copy the American TV series "Friends"). She also has 5 fully nude photos in the September 2009 issue of Playboy magazine. In 2011, at the age of 25, she became a State Duma deputy from the United Russia party.
I have nothing against M. Kozhevnikova as a person. She's not a great actress, of course, but she's probably just as good as the others of her age. However, what talents and abilities allowed her to claim a seat in parliament at such a young age? Broad knowledge in the field of international relations? Maybe she is a child prodigy and by that time she managed to receive a prestigious award in the field of economics? Has rich life experience?
However, 25 years is not a record. In the State Duma of the previous convocation, 21-year-old (!) V. Vlasov worked from the LDPR, and 22-year-old G. Arapov from the New People party is working hard in the current one.
Currently, there are 18 former professional athletes among the deputies of the State Duma, 17 of them are members of the United Russia party. And if we add to them people with education related to physical culture and sports, they will be about 7% of the total number of deputies. Isn't it too much?
And now there are as many as 5 former cosmonauts in the State Duma, without whom, apparently, it is impossible to do in solving vital issues of international relations, the country's economic development, education, and healthcare. However, in the USSR, after all, weavers and machine operators were also “elected” to the Soviets at all levels “according to the order”. But this is hardly the Soviet experience that needs to be copied.
In Soviet times, many "artists" loved to cry about their own unfortunate fate of a brilliant creator, deprived in the totalitarian USSR of freedom of expression and realization of his grandiose plans. But now the system of Soviet censorship collapsed, and what masterpieces did the recognized “Soviet classics” give us?
The result turned out to be simply depressing, our masters suddenly somehow forgot how to make a good movie all at once. The most striking example is the creative degradation of E. Ryazanov, who, having lost his guardianship, shot two absolutely not funny, but terribly vulgar and vulgar films - "Promised Heaven" and "Old Horses". Involuntarily, you begin to think that Soviet editors and censors were actually brilliant producers.
It is likely that it was thanks to their help that it was possible to create great films that modern artisans cannot even re-shoot - each new attempt at a remake turns out to be worse than the previous one.
1979
Meanwhile, in 1979 alone, among others, films were released: “Pirates of the XNUMXth Century” (the highest-grossing film in Soviet cinema), “Moscow Does Not Believe in Tears” (second place in the list of highest-grossing films), “Crew” ( sixth place), “The Same Munchausen”, “Little Tragedies”, “Father Sergius”, “Autumn Marathon”, “Garage”, “Stalker”, “Glass of Water”, “Ah Vaudeville, Vaudeville”, “Wooing a Hussar”, "The Bat", "D'Artagnan and the Three Musketeers", the first two episodes of the film "Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson", "Three in a boat, not counting the dog", "The Adventures of Electronics", "I ask Klava K. to blame for my death. ”, “Breakfast on the grass”.
Genres for every taste: world classics, drama, operetta, vaudeville, comedy, science fiction, adventure film, disaster film, detective story, wonderful films for children and teenagers. Impressive? And now we will continue.
In the same year, viewers first saw the cartoons "Flying Ship", "Big Secret for a Small Company", "Kitten named Woof", "Magic Ring", "Tale of Tales" (repeatedly recognized as the best cartoon in stories), and work was completed on the last four (10–13) series of The Adventures of Captain Vrungel.
This is how, it turns out, Soviet directors worked under the "cruel yoke of party totalitarianism." In the entire post-Soviet history in the entire post-Soviet space, perhaps, fewer good films have been made than in one year in the USSR.
We see an example of the successful work of Soviet editors and censors, for example, in the film “The Diamond Arm”, when the house manager, performed by N. Mordyukova, was not allowed to utter a stupid phrase:
"I wouldn't be surprised if your husband secretly attends the synagogue."
And why should anyone be surprised by visiting not an underground, but quite officially functioning synagogue? And for what reason should this statement have made such a heavy impression on Semyon Gorbunkov's wife? She does not seem to be a devout Orthodox fanatic to react so violently to the news of her husband's possible conversion to Judaism. And what was she looking for in this case, when in a panic she frantically rummaged through her husband's things? Really, Zionist literature?
A certain number of dissidents would probably chuckle voluptuously at this point, but our children and grandchildren would absolutely not understand this episode. But the phrase: “I won’t be surprised if your husband secretly visits his mistress” is for all time, no questions arose from the first viewers and does not arise from the modern audience. The Soviet censor actually saved this wonderful film from perishable topicality.
But the magnificent parody episode with the boy “walking on the water” and Andrei Mironov walking behind him to the sounds of the church hymn was abandoned.
I still remember the reaction of my daughter, who first saw this film meaningfully from beginning to end, as an elementary school student, where, as it turned out, she had already been brainwashed a little. At this point, she looked at me in surprise and asked:
“And in the USSR, believers were definitely persecuted”?
Blacken the past
Some Soviet directors managed to denigrate not only their contemporary "reality", but also the past of our country.
Here, for example, is a rather well-shot motion picture by A. Mitta “The Tale of How Tsar Peter the Black Married”. With an unbiased and impartial analysis of the plot, it can be seen with the naked eye that this is a ready-made script for a Russophobic Hollywood film. For some reason, the Soviet director decided that it would be very funny to present the “Arap Hannibal” as the only “intelligent person in a non-intelligent country” (these are the words of the leading actor - V. Vysotsky), and all Russians as lazy savages and barbarians, constantly deceiving their progressive tsar .
V. Vysotsky as A. Hannibal
In this case, perhaps, it is possible and necessary to recall Gogol's famous phrase:
“Alexander the Macedonian hero, but why break the chairs?”
Why was it necessary to smear with shoe polish not only Vysotsky’s face, but the whole of Russia, which at that difficult time was painfully entering a new period of its historical development, with great losses and sacrifices? It is not surprising that this film was sharply criticized by Mikhail Sholokhov.
What ideals and behavioral stereotypes have been quite successfully introduced by such "artists" and Russian cultural officials since the 90s into the minds of new generations? You may have heard this joke:
“From Russian films, we learned that Prince Vladimir is a sadist and rapist gorged on fly agarics, Stalin is a maniac and paranoid, Beria is a pervert, Yesenin is a drunk, Vysotsky is a drug addict, and only Kolchak is well done.”
It is difficult to count the number of anti-Soviet and anti-Russian projects that we have seen on central TV channels since the early 90s.
Modern filmmakers do not hesitate to stoop to outright meanness.
Outright meanness
A vivid example of the cynicism of the Russian cinema community and the stupidity of Russian cultural officials is the slanderous anti-Russian film Leviathan, which A. Zvyagintsev managed to shoot with budget money. The script is based on the real story of American Marvin John Heemeyer, from whom the city authorities took away the auto repair shop and the land that belonged to him. Unable to get justice in a US court, on June 4, 2004, Heemeyer bulldozed his former workshop and 13 other buildings, including city hall and a library. Valiant American cops opened fire on him, but failed to hit. When the bulldozer stalled, Heemeyer committed suicide. However, Zvyagintsev moved the action of the film to Russia, and forced the hero to fight not only with the city's secular authorities, but also with the church.
Modern "bourgeois" honestly give the "bad boys" the "barrels of jam and baskets of cookies" they deserve: Zvyagintsev, who slandered his country, received several prestigious international awards, including the American Golden Globe, the Cannes Film Festival prize for the best screenplay, the prize for the best foreign film in Munich. And (attention!) Russian film award "Golden Eagle".
Producer A. Rodnyansky (recognized as a foreign agent in 2022) and director A. Zvyagintsev receive their 30 pieces of silver
You can also recall the scandalous film "Bastards", which told about the Soviet sabotage group, allegedly formed in 1943 from death row ... teenagers (!). This film in 2007 received three MTV RussiaMovie Awards in the nominations "Best Film", "Best Action Scene", "Breakthrough of the Year". Vladimir Menshov, who was then supposed to present the awards, opened the envelope and threw it on the floor with the words:
"To present the best film award to this film - rather vile and dishonoring my country - I would ask Pamela Andersen."
Since the authors of the film claimed that their picture was almost documentary in nature, a commission was created in the FSB, which conducted an audit and issued a statement about the absence of sabotage schools for minors in the USSR. But it turned out that such schools for "children aged 8 to 14 from the criminal-hooligan element and the homeless" were organized by the Abwehr, but 99% of their "graduates" immediately went over to the side of the Soviet army.
However, the budget money has already been "used", and from time to time this film is shown on one or another Russian federal TV channel.
I must say that many modern Russian films from those that seem to be recognized as "patriotic" are also very doubtful.
A striking example is the 9th Company: the filmmakers are trying very hard to convince us, on the one hand, of the senselessness of the feat of the Soviet paratroopers, and on the other hand, of the remaining unpunished criminal negligence of their commanders, who allegedly did not provide these heroes with timely assistance. In fact, about 400 Mujahideen attacked Hill 11 12 times in 3234 hours, which was defended by 39 paratroopers of the 9th company of the 345th regiment under the command of senior lieutenant Viktor Gagarin (it seems that only one platoon of this company). During this time, the paratroopers on the battlefield lost 5 people killed, another one died in the hospital a day later. Then scouts from the platoon of Alexei Smirnov came to their aid and the Mujahideen retreated.
Agree, the situation is absolutely opposite. If American soldiers fought like this, Hollywood would make a bombastic blockbuster where their rangers or marines would look like the new Spartans. And our filmmakers presented the obvious victory of the Soviet paratroopers as almost a defeat and forced them to die without exception (with the exception of one person). The finale of the film makes a very heavy impression, leaving the audience with a feeling of bitterness and hopelessness.
So spoil the epic heroes
The creators of seemingly harmless modern cartoons about the "three heroes" also distinguished themselves. The level of mental development of these heroes, according to the writers, clearly leaves much to be desired: against their background, even the horse Julius looks like an intellectual. Bylinny Alyosha Popovich is a cheerful, dashing hero, “more cunning than brave, more resourceful than strong” (A. Belinsky), and sometimes even treacherous.
And here is how we see him in the Soviet film "Ilya Muromets" in 1956:
It's just the perfect fit. Now take a look at what a simple-hearted half-moron he is presented in the Russian cartoon of 2004, and, as they say, "feel the difference."
This is the wise Dobrynya Nikitich seen by the audience of the Soviet film.
This is the most educated and intelligent of the Russian heroes. And for Russian animators, he unexpectedly turned out to be a narrow-minded martinet.
Parody of Dobrynya Nikitich in a Russian cartoon
Ilya Muromets, for whom there are no authorities in epics and who considers every prohibition, both direct and indirect, as a challenge, in the cartoon is suddenly petty superstitious.
These are completely different characters that have nothing to do with epic heroes. The scriptwriters did not have the slightest right to call them the names of popularly beloved heroes, but they decided to speculate on pseudo-patriotism.
A real ideological sabotage was carried out by the creators of the sensational film “The Last Hero” (the first in the trilogy): they presented Dobrynya Nikitich as a villain and traitor - our “knight without fear and reproach”, “cross brother” Ilya Muromets, he had the highest moral authority and on his reputation was not even the slightest flaw. In this case, we are not even talking about blurring, but about the actual substitution of the cultural code of the Russian nation. But it was possible, without any damage to the plot, to give this character any other - a neutral name. And in the second film, "The Root of Evil", they made fun of another Russian hero - Finist-Clear Falcon.
unattainable lies
But a special and, probably, simply unattainable cynicism was demonstrated by the creators of the shameful and absolutely mediocre film-making called "The Legend of Kolovrat".
Evpaty Kolovrat is without a doubt an epic hero of the highest level, any country would be proud of him. If he had been born in England, an incredibly beautiful and pretentious film would have been made in Hollywood - no worse than Spartacus or Braveheart. Yes, and the French or Spaniards would also try to do something very worthy.
And our "masters of art" did not come up with anything better than to expose the national hero as an incapacitated and socially dangerous disabled person who wakes up every morning, remembering nothing about the last years of his life. Such a place is in a distant monastery, but not in the squad of the Ryazan prince. Even if we assume that he somehow miraculously retains the skills necessary for service, who can guarantee that one morning he will not be informed that he is a Kyiv (Chernigov, Novgorod, Tmutorokan, etc.) saboteur sent to kill a local prince?
But this, as they say, is still a saying, but what happens then? Together with the son of the Ryazan prince, Fedor Yuryevich, the cinematic Kolovrat was sent to the camp of the Mongols, who approached the border of Russian lands. The princely son Fedor, provoked by Batu Khan, bravely fights and dies in an unequal battle. And his retinue, led by the boyar Yevpaty, runs away, leaving the guarded person to the mercy of fate.
Apparently, realizing that Prince Yuri Ingvarevich would hang everyone on the nearest aspens for such deeds, Fyodor's unlucky companions and bodyguards hide in the forest for several days, waiting for the fall of their city. And then the coward who abandoned his master suddenly turns into an epic hero and almost breaks the entire Mongol army. And, probably, he would have smashed it - if at the decisive moment the "Orthodox" bear had not "deserted".
In fact, Evpaty Kolovrat was not then on the territory of the Ryazan principality, and the companions of Fyodor Yuryevich did not flee, but died with him at the headquarters of Batu Khan. Fedor's wife, the Byzantine Eupraxia, in a state of passion, threw herself from the roof with her young son in her arms.
Prince Fyodor Yuryevich of Ryazansky and Eupraxia in front of the Mother of God
Ryazan fell, and Evpaty Kolovrat, who came from Chernigov "with a small squad", without any hope of success, attacked the rearguard units of the Mongols - probably somewhere between Kolomna (the last city of the Ryazan Principality) and Moscow (the first city of the land of Suzdal). And he died in an unequal battle.
Evpatiy Kolovrat, a monument in Ryazan
By the way, the story of Fyodor Yuryevich and Evpraksia in 1960 was retold in the American-Yugoslav film "Tatars" (even the American director Richard Thorpe was impressed). Compare Mongol khans. This transvestite was introduced by our incompetents:
And this is "foreign":
Thorpe's "Cranberry" turned out, of course, notable. Fedor is the “Russian Viking” Oleg (apparently, it is assumed that the Russian princes are descendants of Rurik, and in the XNUMXth century they sacredly honored Scandinavian traditions). Eupraxia is called Helga.
Helga in the film "Tatars": it is immediately clear that we have a Byzantine princess in front of us, bananas and grapes, probably delivered by mail balloon directly from Constantinople
But, in my opinion, it's better to shoot heroic films this way - but not according to the crazy recipes of I. Shurkhovetsky and D. Fayziev. Moreover, by giving the main characters other names, the filmmakers demonstrated their detachment from the real, real story.
The Russian creators of all these libels are deliberately or foolishly trying to recode the national consciousness, replacing the correct works with fakes. And, unlike their Hollywood counterparts, they lie in the opposite direction - belittling the heroes, and not extolling or exalting them.
Until very recently, the history of our country was laughed at, mocked and thickly smeared with black paint on its pages. But even this was not enough.
Dirt is the norm
For 16 years, our youth has been corrupted by the stupid reality show Dom-2. And someone, after all, quite recently pulled out of oblivion into the light of God and "untwisted" as an example to follow the infantile freak Danya Milokhin and his ilk. For many years, our TV bosses have been quietly airing all kinds of “stand-ups”, both male and female, many of whose participants earn shameful money by telling nasty things about their husbands, wives, parents and even children - to the joyful laughter of a corrupted public that is already beginning to perceive this dirt is the norm.
After all, in 2010, someone awarded the scandalous group "Voina", from which "Puski" came out, the State (!) Prize in the field of contemporary art "Innovation" (400 thousand rubles, nomination "Work of visual art"). The award was presented for the hooligan trick "Phallus (actually, another word) in captivity of the FSB." This same phallus measuring 65 by 27 meters was painted on the drawbridge of the Liteiny Bridge opposite the FSB building in St. Petersburg. At night, the flight with the phallus solemnly rose above the city. The Royal Mail of Norway even issued stamps dedicated to this "epoch-making cultural event". And these hooligans were nominated by the Kaliningrad branch of the State (!) Center for Contemporary Art and the Yekaterinburg agency "Artpolitika" (yes, it turns out that not only the Yeltsin Center is working against Russia in this long-suffering Ural city).
Some of the old videos are just scary to watch, because it becomes clear: before the appearance of our own Conchita Wurst, we were literally half a step away. In one of I. Saltykova's songs, for example, it was about a woman's love for a man, and on the screen the audience saw a homosexual male sadomaso.
On the children's "Voice" girls are dressed up and made up as adult women and forced to sing adult songs, sometimes with very strange and more than doubtful lyrics for their age, and even in foreign languages that they clearly do not know and therefore simply do not understand, oh than they sing. And the host of this supposedly children's TV show (which is not at all in childhood) until recently was D. Nagiyev in the form of a sweet and charming gangster Foma from Fizruk and the "holy nineties" - another new "hero of our time.
Do you remember how our boys massively played "Brigade" and "Sasha Bely"? This gangster was replaced by the stupid and cruel Danila Bagrov, who spoke in monosyllabic phrases and was stuck in his development at the level of a 13-year-old teenager. In all seriousness, he is already being declared a positive character. And some of those in power, after all, allocated money for the promotion and popularization of "thieves' romance." On the shooting of films that glorified criminal "authorities", "teams" of all stripes and romantic thieves "Sonek-Golden Pens". Someone encouraged and financed the festivals of "blatnyak", completely unreasonably called "chanson", provided prestigious concert venues and allowed broadcasts on central channels. And then we were surprised (and continue to be surprised) at the wide distribution of the asocial movement AUE (banned in Russia) among adolescents.
And what was the official ideology of post-Soviet Russia?
Earn more money, either honestly or dishonestly, and, following the example of Mrs. Nabiullina, quickly transfer them to foreign bank accounts? The US Treasury Department, by the way, claims that in October and November 2022, the Russian Central Bank again increased investments in US government securities - I don’t even know how to comment on such reports, and whether they even need comments.
And yet, the Federal Law of June 28, 2021 No. 223-FZ “On Amendments to the Federal Law “On Currency Regulation and Currency Control”, is still in force, allowing you to leave foreign currency earnings abroad. And according to the SWIFT system, through banks that have not fallen under sanctions, it is now possible to transfer up to $ 1 million a month abroad. And against the backdrop of the ongoing special military operation, the withdrawal of capital abroad paradoxically did not decrease this year, but increased several times.
But on February 24, 2022, the quiet life suddenly ended and it turned out that not only the thieving Russian “businessmen”, but also the bohemian party serving them, had no Motherland. And in a difficult moment, Russia turned out to be betrayed by many of those who in peacetime were considered the backbone of power and the social system built by anti-communists and anti-Soviet people.
High-ranking officials, “businessmen” favored by the authorities, and wealthy bohemians, who were afraid of being cut off from their foreign real estate and money placed in foreign banks, quickly moved abroad to their children, wives and mistresses. Against this background, should we be surprised at the flight of hundreds of thousands of young men, for whom, for the entire time of their conscious life in “free and democratic” Russia, none of those in power and money have bothered to set an example of real, and not ostentatious love for the Motherland. But the lessons of hypocrisy were taught quite a lot.
Why, for example, in Crimea solemnly accepted into Russia, Russian state-owned banks do not operate even after 8 years? And only in January 2023, Sberbank announced its intention to open its branches there. And no one can explain why the super profits from the trade in the richest natural resources still go into the pockets of a handful of crooks who robbed the country during Yeltsin's privatization?
Why, while the oligarchs are fattening, state employees are counting pennies in supermarkets, choosing goods with an expiring shelf life?
Why hasn't a progressive taxation scale been introduced for the super-profits of oligarchs and "effective managers", but the contributions of ordinary citizens have been imposed with a new tax - even pensioners who have been collecting their "coffin savings" for a penny all their lives?
Why is there no money to index the pensions of working pensioners, many of whom work in low-paid positions - nurses, kindergarten nannies, librarians and others. Although there is still money to support the US economy by buying the debt of this country. Currently, underpayments to working pensioners reach an average of XNUMX rubles a month. Apparently, soon this amount will reach a critical point, when it will no longer make much sense for many pensioners to go to work, and then our country will face a collapse in a number of industries, especially in the public sector.
The Exodus of the Bad Boys-Chubais
Why do 100 of the 40 richest Russian oligarchs have foreign citizenship, 57 have not lived in Russia for a long time, 68 have taken their families abroad? And why did only 5 vice-premiers escape from Russia: A. Kokh, I. Klebanov, A. Dvorkovich, A. Khloponin and, finally, the unforgettable A. Chubais? Apparently, they worked so “well” for the benefit of our country that they were very “tired” and decided to “rest” from it? Should Putin keep these people in such positions?
I suspect that many potentially mobilizable young men have asked themselves these questions before deciding to leave the country. And they asked themselves if they were ready to die, for example, for Mr. Medvedev, who advised teachers to "go into business"? Or for Mrs. Nabiullina, who for many years (since 2013) as the head of the Central Bank bled the Russian economy, transferring huge funds abroad and eventually lost half of them? For the Yeltsin Center in Yekaterinburg? For the monuments to Judas Solzhenitsyn in Moscow (this one was opened personally by Putin), Belgorod, Rostov-on-Don, Kislovodsk, Vladivostok and commemorative signs in other cities?
But the same questions are now being asked by people who have remained in Russia and are honestly working for the good of our country, or fighting for it on the front lines. And more and more often they are thinking: what will happen after the end of the special operation? Nothing will change, and everything will return to normal again?
For the authorities, the exodus of hundreds of thousands of young men, who are by no means prospering now in a foreign land, turned out to be even beneficial, because they managed to switch the righteous anger of society to them, hiding from it the officials and oligarchs who quietly “faded” and renounced Russian citizenship.
Yes, these fugitives from mobilization do not evoke sympathy, because the Motherland must be defended like one's own mother - whatever she may be, even if there are some grievances. But here, for example, Yuri Milner, whose fortune, according to Forbes, is estimated at $ 7,3 billion, proudly reports:
“My family and I left Russia for good in 2014, after the Russian annexation of Crimea. And this summer we have officially completed the process of renunciation of our Russian citizenship.”
He promised to donate 100 million dollars to the fund for helping Ukrainian refugees (those in Europe, of course). How many have even heard of it?
Or Timur Turlov, who made $2,4 billion in Russia. After receiving citizenship of Kazakhstan, he stated in June 2022:
“It breathes freely here, and I believe that Kazakhstan, thanks to its peaceful and hospitable policy, will be able to build a new, richer, more efficient, fair state.”
Oleg Tinkov ($0,86 billion), having left the country, "opposes Russia's actions in Ukraine and does not want to be associated with what is happening." Calls for other oligarchs to follow his example.
Ruben Vardanyan ($1,3 billion) urgently wanted to make Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) "strong, secure, developed and happy, one of the world centers and the center of Armenians."
Nikolai Storonsky ($7,1 billion) did not make any loud statements when he left Russia, but his company Revolut closed Russian offices after the start of the special operation and offered their employees assistance in “relocation”.
And Igor Volobuev, the former vice-president of Gazprombank, who also headed the press service of Gazprom, even claims that he joined the ranks of the Kyiv territorial defense:
"It's like repentance, I want to wash off my Russian past."
Question to the top
At the beginning of this article, you saw a collage made up of frames from the film "The Tale of Malchish-Kibalchish." I was not too lazy and made another one, look, are they similar?
The director of this film, Yevgeny Sherstobitov, said in an interview:
“Time has shown that the Bourgeois have triumphed, and the main Plokhish, in my opinion, is the grandson of Arkady Gaidar, Yegor Gaidar.”
I would like to ask our rulers: have you already understood where these and other bourgeois have led us? And the bad guys who served them - the Chubais, Klebanovs, Khloponins, Kokhi, Dvorkovichs and others?
Now, when the question is already about the existence of Russia as a single independent state, our rulers and leaders of the country must finally make a choice - with whom are they? With corrupt "effective managers" and greedy oligarchs? Or with the people who, the only one, can protect and preserve our country?
Information