Forum

In my opinion, many people are tired of the lawlessness of those in power, namely: officials, courts, corrupt police, and other corrupt officials. They are simply tired. But not everyone, and not to a fatal extent. For now...

I communicate with many people, and for some reason, they almost exclusively talk about the lawlessness of those in power in relation to some distant people, saying something like, "I heard that." There are relatively few people who have personally suffered from this lawlessness (and not from their own stupidity or an unfortunate accident). That is, they exist, but there are few of them. For example, when it comes to corruption, if you ask anyone, they will say that it exists; the more intelligent ones will mention Transneft or Sobyanin's subsidiary. But if you ask them to provide an example from their own experience or at least from second-hand sources, they will pause and not mention anything. That is, this is largely "media" corruption, the result of an escalation of hysteria in the media on this issue. In reality, less is stolen and abused than in the early to mid-2000s, and much less than in the 1990s (as a percentage of turnover). For example, if you ask for examples of the lawlessness of those in power in the 1990s, most people over 30 will still remember many episodes, both personal and involving acquaintances. Or take the theft of budget funds. Putin recently said that about 10% is stolen. The opposition cites figures slightly higher, around 20-25%. The truth is most likely somewhere in between. Let's say 15%. I don't have exact figures for how much was stolen in the 1990s, but it was clearly more; they didn't really hide it back then. Those same IMF loans were almost completely embezzled. It's just that there wasn't a media agenda back then, so it wasn't widely reported. A similar media agenda existed earlier regarding the army, hence all these high-profile campaigns about hazing, the sensationalization of individual tragic episodes (which have always been and will always be, there are many idiots), and presenting them as a trend. But if you sit down and calculate, for example, the number of deaths per year per 1,000 people among men aged 18-20 in civilian life and in the army, you will find that civilian life has a much larger number. That is, on average, it is statistically safer for a young man to be in the army. Or, for example, civil aviation is one of the safest modes of transport (only railways are safer), but if desired, it is easy to create media hysteria and irrational fears among the population. It's just that no one really needs it right now, so they don't escalate it or escalate it slightly, as part of the general chaos. What people are actually dissatisfied with on their own, and not under the influence of the media, is the national question. Therefore, this card is being played very cautiously and gradually. But what they write about the lawlessness of those in power today, they write something else tomorrow, and the day after tomorrow they don't write anything at all. This is a sure sign of a media bubble.