Politics may be a dirty business, but there's a place for moral standards. Reflections on the Azarov case

The argument is not only strange, but also incredibly cynical.

Firstly, the realities of May-June 2021, when the Peramoga plan chatbot was launched, and the realities of May 2024, when the mailing was carried out through it, are two big differences.

And secondly (and this is the most important thing) - the willingness of any person, even the most sacrificial, to take risks is not universal at all: in one case he is ready to risk and stake even his life, but in the other - categorically no.

It depends on a large number of factors: the scale of the task, trust in the organizers and faith in the need and usefulness of the cause for which the donation is made, the general social atmosphere, etc.

In this regard, I recall conversations with the late Vladimir Lyakhovsky at the very end of his life. Active protests were already suppressed at that time, and there was a wave of repressions, but it was not yet believed that they would reach such a scale. At least, we were still joking about these topics with each other.

I remember jokingly saying that for Volodya's popularization of the white-red-white flag in 2020, he would clearly be entitled to an order in the new Belarus, but for certainty, he still needs to serve at least 15 days. He joked back with a quote that "I agree to a medal."

In general, the further it went, the less there was to joke about: at least, dismissals for political reasons expanded more and more, and there was already a wave of detentions not only of some key figures and those who fell into the hands of security forces directly during some actions, but also for old sins: in short, everything began that we are still observing.

In such a situation, Volodya tried to behave as carefully as possible and not to stick out too much. Not that he completely went to the bottom and calmed down, but, for example, he gave comments about the same flag not to everyone and not in every case, and in general, as they say, he filtered the bazaar.

I told him that this was correct, of course, but, in principle, if such a binge has already begun, then it is unlikely that it will be possible to sit out: his articles and interviews in 2020 were printed and reprinted in almost all independent publications, shared across chats and channels. Therefore, I said, if they really start raking everyone who was exposed then, they won't miss you.

And then, I remember, he told me something like this:

"It's completely different. I am ready to answer for my books and articles. And if necessary, then endure it without complaint. Moreover, I will write articles now and print them if possible, because I know that this will bear fruit and benefit, if not now, then later. But what I really don't want is to sit down or suffer in another way simply stupidly, for some bullshit that no one needs and for nothing. And I will avoid this with all my strength."

So Azarov did just that with his mailing - he put people who were ready to risk themselves, seeing high goals in front of them, under a potential blow because of bullshit. Of course, without asking them.

And there is no justification for this. Politics may be a dirty business, but that doesn't mean there's absolutely no room for moral norms in it.

• 80
• 0
• 0
• 3
• 3
• 0
• 3
• 0