Matskevich: Protect your leaders

Vladimir Matskevich shared his thoughts "on how leaders emerge" on his Facebook page. The author begins by noting the fundamental difference between sports and political leadership. While in sports, an athlete makes themselves, in an electoral race, the leader is created by voters. However, the average citizen rarely realizes the weight of their vote.

"Everyone who voted made their contribution. One six-millionth part. A trifle. The average voter, the common person, does not feel responsible for having made someone a president or deputy," Matskevich writes. Instead, the person begins to "demand accountability from the one they elevated to leadership, feels they can demand something from them."

In the Belarusian context of 2020, the philosopher reminds us, people voted for a "housewife" and went out to "celebrate" on the evening of August 9th. But instead of a celebration, they were met with violence and shootings. Matskevich reminds us that even the death of Alexander Taraikovsky and the subsequent repressions did not stop people. They went out despite the risk, as Roman Bondarenko did, whose last words were: "I am going out."

Reflecting on the motivation behind such actions, the philosopher asks: what did Roman die for? According to the author, it was not just for a mural on the wall, but for something more – "for his honor, for the civil dignity of his friends and neighbors, those DJs of change who are painted on the wall, for Belarus."

Matskevich emphasizes that in 2020, the willingness to risk for high ideals "was not perceived as excessive pathos." However, here the philosopher poses a "tricky question": "And who was ready to risk for Svetlana Tikhanovskaya?".

The author argues that people were willing to go to jail for inanimate symbols – flags, bouquets, even the combination of colors of underwear and t-shirts hanging on a balcony. But for some reason, this attitude did not extend to a living person, "whom millions of voters made a symbol."

Drawing historical parallels, Matskevich argues that if in the past people went to their death for kings or leaders, this later went out of fashion. However, according to the philosopher, if society turns a person into a symbol, it should be ready to defend them as fiercely as other symbols. For, as the author argues, "unlike a simple symbol, a person has goals, tasks, needs."

The philosopher dedicates a significant part of his post to analyzing the events of the summer of 2020 "in dynamics." The author shows how Tikhanovskaya initially simply took her husband's place ("the place makes the person"), and after the unification of headquarters and registration, remained the only candidate, finding herself "beyond competition."

However, after the elections, the regime set the goal of "depriving the protesting masses of a living symbol." The philosopher explains that it was unprofitable for the regime to kill Tikhanovskaya ("otherwise the symbol would become sacred"). Therefore, according to Matskevich, the authorities began to spread rumors about the threat of assassination in order to expel her, discrediting her with a recorded video with 15 thousand dollars: "They need a discredited symbol."

Criminal mistake: "We don't need leaders"

If the regime had a clear plan to neutralize the threat, then society, according to the philosopher's observations, was trapped in dangerous illusions and its own irresponsibility.

"As for the masses. They don't care. They voted against Lukashenko. It just so happened that these votes against Tikhanovskaya brought her to first place, that is, to a leadership position. But what kind of leader is a housewife! This meme was the main mistake, a criminal mistake. Yes, exactly criminal," the philosopher notes and continues:

"Everyone remembers the phrase from the children's book: "We are responsible for those we have tamed." (...) A good owner won't kick a dog out into the street in bad weather. But we allowed our elected leader to be driven out of the country."

This indifference to the fate of leaders, according to Matskevich, directly influenced the failure of the strike movement. The popular narrative "we don't need leaders, we'll do everything ourselves," which people chanted at marches, played a fatal role.

The philosopher argues that the strikes did not take place so much for economic reasons as because labor collectives could not physically protect their activists.

"The collective can and should protect its leaders and trade union activists," he writes, but in practice, when the administration of enterprises began to dismiss "large and active employees," and the authorities "grabbed and arrested them for days," "the people remained silent."

As a result, as the author notes, "activity faded. None of the activists wanted to come forward in a leadership position, because they knew for sure that the collective would not protect them."

"Labor collectives were beheaded in the first two months after August 9th. And it was in vain to expect help from the revolution from this side. And why? Yes, because of the silly narrative: "We don't need leaders, we'll do everything ourselves." Everyone shouted this, even chanted it at marches, marching nowhere, controlled by no one," Matskevich writes and moves on to analyzing the position of politicians.

Game of Ambitions

If the masses believed in self-organization, then political managers and coordinators, according to the philosopher, were not so naive. They perfectly understood "the function and purpose of that position" to which Tikhanovskaya was brought. However, after her expulsion, "the human factor, or rather, egoism and the game of ambitions" began to operate.

The author argues that someone perceived the vacant leadership position as their chance. Since the main opponents of the regime (Babariko, Tikhanovsky, Statkevich) were in jail, and Tsepkalo had left, a vacuum arose. Babariko's headquarters had only Viktor's "testament" with an "inadequate proposal to create the "Together" party, which could not find a response in the masses."

In this situation, as Matskevich writes, Olga Kovalkova became a leader of opinion "from scratch". It was she who gathered iconic figures (Kolesnikova, Znak, Alexievich) into the "meaningless Coordination Council."

Matskevich argues that this body did not fulfill its main task:

"Instead of a coordinating function, this council became a discussion platform. There was a complete break between the protesters and the potential political wing of the protest. And all because "we don't need leaders, we'll do everything ourselves," we don't need guiding instructions, we don't need leaders, we are wise guys ourselves."

This disunity and lack of strategy allowed the regime to methodically eliminate threats. While politicians were discussing, and the street was shouting that leaders were not needed, the authorities gradually removed those who could determine goals. The arrests of Maria Kolesnikova and Maxim Znak in September put an end to it.

"Everything, the revolution is beheaded. (...) Now the regime has its hands untied, it does what it wants, although it still can't do everything. Protests continue, the people are still strong, but already without a goal and a clear plan of action. The roaming along the streets "from fence to lunch" begins. (...) Yes, the regime cannot hold an open inauguration. But it holds a closed one. And no one can stop him," the philosopher states.

Conclusions of Vladimir Mitskevich from the analysis of the events of 2020

Summarizing his reflections, Vladimir Matskevich offers the following conclusions, which we present in full:

If leaders and leadership exist, then someone and for some reason needs them.

Leaders are not born, and no one has a seal of predisposition to leadership on their forehead. Places for leaders appear as a result of a confluence of circumstances. Nature abhors a vacuum, someone still ends up in this place.

Everyone who finds themselves in a leadership position can be APPROPRIATE and TIMELY. Or inappropriate and untimely, that is, find themselves "out of their element." Because you shouldn't get into a sleigh that's not yours.

The wrong person in the right place is a mistake, delusion, or crime. A kind of Susanin in the dark and blind. Well, or malicious, which also cannot be ruled out.

In acute and crisis situations, high demands must be placed on leaders, and careful selection for leadership positions and places must be made.

But leaders can then, and only then, meet the requirements when those who made them leaders are ready to be responsible for this, and not throw them into the clutches of enemies, or simply leave them to their fate.

• 30
• 1
• 1
• 6
• 0
• 1
• 0
• 0