“Our psychology has got the scoop complexes”

The fear of ordinary people before those in power in Russia is fertile ground for all sorts of prejudices and stereotypes. It dates back to the Soviet Union, with its concrete vertical of power and is associated with the education of unanimity in all the vast territories of the country and even with the presence of underground oil and gas. So says social psychologist and political consultant Alexei Roshchin, who participated in many election campaigns, and is now studying the psychology of the scoop. “Ribbon.ru” I asked him why are we still hiding in the subconscious fears of the 20-, 30 – and even 50-year-old and is it possible to live with it.

“Ribbon.ru”: fear, which, according to you, we are governed, cultivated on purpose or was the product of a policy of communism?

Alexei Roshchin: I think the reason may be that Russia itself — initially a rather loose education, it is in connection with the large distances, due to the fact that different parts of the country are poorly linked, so it’s always a country built on occupation principle. The territory depended on the center, and the center controlled them to a large extent power.

When we arrived the communism — all of the worst traits of the Russian Empire manifested itself repeatedly. The same over-centralization and a complete denial of democracy. However, they are still superimposed that led the country is not of the Royal dynasty, and a power that was inherently nameless. Some, as Stalin said, the order of the sword. The order built a completely sealed, strictly built on the principle of “top-down” management system to which the ordinary person was not selected.

That is, without the use of harsh methods to deal with the country, the Communists would have happened?

Yes. Logically, the distant land was supposed to be Autonomous, and ultimately some of them had to separate from the mother country. This scenario is anticipated and in fact always feared.

If we evaluate from this point of view all the latest policy since 1991, we will see that one of the main underlying fears, which existed among the leadership of our country, the fear of loss of integrity. It is in a symbolic sense is reflected even in the fact that we have a major party called “United Russia”. If we were talking about the person, not the country, it could be called the splash of the subconscious according to Freud.

That is why in the USSR, and now any manifestations of independence at the level of regions, cities and so on strongly clamped. Educated during the Soviet era psychology largely spilled over into the psychology of the Russians, with all the fears and complexes of the scoop.

What kind of fears and complexes? What is the psychology of the scoop?

Clearly talking about some clear desires of the masses and the clear aspirations of a larger population — it is wickedness. Because the system of governance that existed, in reality, people do not have much options to Express their opinion. This entire system as a whole and aimed at the destruction of any of the methods microobjective and output to the macro level.

It is assumed that a chain of the state that permeates the whole country from the centre to the bottom, and there is an amorphous mass around it, which has no forms at all. Thus, you can find a voice and something to Express only if you got inside this vertical. But when you got there, you too really can do nothing, because be under the direct influence, and just that — you’re thrown back into the amorphous mass.

During the Soviet era, even those enterprises which were at the stage of primordial soup, overwhelming and completely impossible. Grassroots self-organization were a terrible threat to the state, it struggled with it — even with the innocuous interest associations. If they were not forbidden, were included in a structure. When the companies stamp enthusiasts, book lovers, motorists, they were included in the structure of the society of philatelists, bibliophiles and motorists of the Soviet Union and became its regional division. The leadership of these societies had to be in Moscow. All gosudarstvenoi and this was a deliberate policy. It turned out that you were not in your organization, and joined the others, with tiered leadership.

In the country so far — how many years have passed! — no independent trade unions. They were some time and even developed, but in the beginning of the process went full bump. Legislation regarding the establishment of trade unions remains rather liberal, but in fact they do not. Self-organization of people is still very scary.

The same can be said of various subcultural movements — bikers, Cossacks…

Yes, the subculture is also included in the vertical structure with the center in Moscow. Or at least try to enable. All the rest are already marginal.

What is all this? People constantly felt the pressure from the top?

Including. By itself, a voluntary organization, as a rule, must be sufficiently Autonomous and self-governing. We have a so-called Leninist principle of democratic centralism, which we still were in school. Students almost from the first class taught that a proper organization should be built on this principle. Taught that the Mensheviks and other bad people tried to impose on the party the wrong principles, but Lenin insisted that centralism must be democratic, that the highest authority is the law for inferior people.

In our country almost all vertical organizations are still based on this principle, and in them people have a feeling that they are at the bottom of the hierarchy. And because people can really unite to protect their interests, born of constant stress, the feeling that you can do anything.

There are two consequences. First, you really are in a state of stress, because you’re helpless, on the other hand, there is a second paradoxical consequence: your only hope — it is the state. The very thing you fear.Education of unanimity

As for us today, reflected the Soviet policy?

One of the key traits of our people — is the lack of empathy.

You of the rejection of the weakness of others, which attribute to the Russian people?

No, it’s more of an unwillingness to take anything for the other person, including weakness. Empathy, i.e. the ability to feel the suffering and pain of another, is not only in humans but even in animals. We have it, in my opinion, is artificially suppressed, although in the Russian society there is a tradition of sympathy for the persecuted.

It began with the worst times. In his famous letter to Stalin Sholokhov wrote about the peasant children. Then all the diverse practiced torture against the kulaks, and one such torture was that people with children were driven from their homes and forbade them to enter, they were not allowed to burn bonfires and strictly forbade the other villagers keep them under your roof. Described symbolic picture: the people are gradually froze to death, women were moaning, children were crying. Neighbors heard it, but were afraid of punishment and not helping.

A baby crying in General is a strong incentive to respond to accept and try to help. But this was impossible. It was a direct cruel social experiment at the gap of empathy.

It continued in 30-40 years, when it was necessary not only to expose the enemies of, say, the Komsomol or the workforce, but also to punish, to stigmatize and everywhere to drive. Many realized that after branding man could be imprisoned, and even shot. While the Soviet government it was necessary that the citizens could come to a meeting where the offending brand. Absent for the meeting was seen as a manifestation of loyalty. It was not enough and just come — inculcated, that it is imperative to speak personally to break all ties with him. And then you had to vote.

That is, to legitimize it all.

Yeah, and in Soviet time, it is not encouraged non-participation in voting. Here is an example. Ideological diversion was considered even the simple desire to read, for example, “Doctor Zhivago” Pasternak. For this you can depart from the Komsomol and, therefore, from the University blacklisted. To expel, convened the meeting. It was impossible not to go. Do not go — so unreliable. And came — to speak out and vote, and this was followed carefully. To vote against, and refrain it was also an ideological onslaught. I had to vote “for”, almost smeared in this state.

People understand it or not?

In principle, periodically, someone refused. It is known, for example, that the poet Yevgeny Yevtushenko was proud that at a meeting at which some of his friends were excluded, he heroically not called in sick to school. This really is then perceived almost as a feat.

Such an education were put on stream starting from oktyabryatskoy stars. Almost from kindergarten, taught that there must be unanimity, there should be no factions and individual opinions. Then continued in the pioneer organization — and so on. In the apotheosis, in 50-60 years, the pioneer organization engaged all students. Not to be taken to the pioneers was outcast. This child was treated as an inveterate bully.

On the one hand, why do we need an organization that includes all? “All” is synonymous with “nobody”. But, it turns out, the meaning of this was, and were it not that the pioneer was ahead of everyone. Can’t all be ahead of everyone. Meaning — “I want to be like everyone else, want to be a Soviet child.” These organizations total membership was raised by unanimity.

But the Octobrists and pioneers in that form is long gone. And the point of their lives?

I want to emphasize that in the later stages of the Soviet Union, these rules — to come, to speak, to vote, certainly unanimously — no one should have to explain specifically. People perceived it as a way of life, do not understand how could it be otherwise.

Inheritance of this structure occurred nongenetic. You may recall one experiment, which is not known whether they have been actually, but very good in philosophical terms. This is when a large paddock live six monkey, and one day in the corner cells appears stand with a beautiful and juicy fruit. But the monkeys are forbidden to touch, and those who are trying, scare, watering. One by one the monkeys are replaced by others, and ends with the fact that it already absolutely other six monkeys who are not trying to get closer to the fruit, because “so accepted.” Though they were not doused with water.

This is what I? When I was told about Sholokhov and about how people who tried to protest and resist, sent to the GULAG or shot on the spot, it is similar to the tale of monkeys, even this experiment was not.

Now you can look at our members and how they vote on relevant issues. Decisions are taken almost unanimously, even if they can go with a much smaller number of votes. Party discipline in the best Soviet traditions. The solution will pass and so, but the main thing is that everyone was involved.

This has an impact not only on the organizers and participants of the vote, but on us?

Of course, it has long been substantiated by experiments of social psychology and famous experiments on the theme of conformism. For example, lines of different lengths, or the Soviet experiment about the sweet salty mess.

Meanwhile, there were further experiments, for example, with lines. If in the original version, all but one participant was a dummy and told a deliberate untruth, and the percentage of cases when the subject took the absurd has sometimes reached 70 percent, then checked what would happen if one of the dummy parties do not agree with their opinion. How, in your opinion, decreases the percentage of incorrect responses in the subjects?

I can only guess half or more?

The critical percentage drops, three times-four times as soon as the subject receives minimal support just a single person, confirming that he and so eyes.

What this shows us?

Shows that unanimity is actually very important. It has a subjective effect on people. If they all say the same, individual man in the street agrees with any game. But if he hears the voice of at least minimal minority that says otherwise, he is released from confusion.

Therefore, the unanimity of our members betrays the fear of the violation of the unity. Even a small violation.Three fear of the Russians

Why don’t we understand that the officer — employee?

There is a dual thing. On the one hand, people are afraid, and with another — look at the main slogans of the higher officials, deputies. It’s just a struggle with a terrible official. It is now the most fashionable slogan.

Therefore, I am inclined to assume that people are afraid of is likely not the officials, and the authorities that followed them. The government and officials of different things, but we perceive them as a single unit. In fact, even these formulations are evil: “do Not be afraid of the officials because the officials are older.”

On the one hand, encouraged the complaints, get exemplary punishment, periodically put the governors and mayors over the last 15-20 years has planted about 300 people. This has become such a suicide mission. On the other hand, when you complain — you complain the same officials or the opposition parties, which especially do not believe. They are not officials, and then officials of the Council will not find.

But the state with its all-powerful officials — not only the fear of ordinary Russians?

After 1991, when we went to the so-called freedom, the number of multiples of fears has increased. It so happened that the state remained alien and an end in itself, but there are additional threats to the layman. To the officials as to the threat added bourgeois (or grow rich) as well if to speak politically correct, Naci — a strange, alien people. Of course, the collapse of the USSR led to a large increase in migration.

The official threat because he was from the government vertical, which is always over in the street; the bourgeois is dangerous because he has money, and money he can bribe officials, hire thugs, and so on, and the national minorities have always blamed the narrow-minded level is that a lot of them and they have a solidarity organization. Everyman — one, and they have a terrible Diaspora. What happened is unclear, and this is even worse.

The fears experienced by the Philistine against the officials, the rich and the Diaspora, in such a situation cannot be eliminated. People can only rely on the state, and in addition to the ruling, there are three conditional parties — the liberals, Communists and nationalists. They offer their ways of solving problems and receive feedback.

They touch on those fears.

Speculate. Playing on these three keys, the layman can be kept in subjection to the vertical.

And how it is being decided which key to press?

It all depends on the current stage of development of the state and what of the frightening actors in this moment increases. A simple example: the beginning of 2010. It was a massive fear of migrants, which even led to riots on Manezh and a few small towns, there were (now-banned) motion Belov-Potkin against illegal migration and so forth.

And then everything disappeared. In 2014 the theme of migrants ‘ recall is very rare. On the one hand, a spin valve, but it became valid less.

What about the other two fears?

Liberals traditionally act as saviors from the tyranny of officials, and dissatisfaction with the bourgeoisie included in the “red” agenda. There is a rather persistent older electorate from the Communists. Until recently, people perceived that the government itself is quite successful fights with the bourgeoisie, and it was approved. The same rhetoric of United Russia is that the oligarchs have to return back, must return the money. That by itself, the business shall be accepted by the people is actually positive. When business people run and scream how bad everything is, for the layman, this means that everything is done correctly. The more restrictions for business those people calmer. “There are a lot of problems — it means less attention will turn on us.”

The feeling of helplessness in front of a business we’ve not only exists objectively but also is constantly fueled by mass culture and mass pop products. Almost all of the domestic serial production is not showing a positive image of the businessman. It is always arrogant upstarts who waste money and harass common people: discourage a girl from a good but poor character, and when he tries to return he finds himself in prison because a businessman who should have to pay extra. It’s not even the image and the archetype. And no protection to the common man there but the only positive character of our mass culture — the policeman, the employee of power structures. It will save and all will marry in most series.

The archetype is in fact very old. How is it that so much time has passed, a new generation grew, and fears and archetypes remain?

This, of course, a philosophical problem. Her out what did not derive from the climate of Russia, and from the fact that we have scarce resources, and that we, on the contrary, the richest country in the world.

The gist, apparently, is that this state, which binds Russia and allows it to exist all the same immense, — it’s both Russia and binds. So something has changed globally in the country, you have to unleash the initiative: allow to create, to try, to err, to do something. But it is necessary to loosen the ties. And that really was for this condition, you need not to obstruct the self-organization of people.

But if you weaken ties of the country will begin to disintegrate. Output — only stability.

Do not covered in this crisis, or can you call such a model is working?

Of course lies. In the crisis and unstable in nature. For total containment needs resources, but once the country’s resources run out — and there comes the bankruptcy. Russia would have long ago collapsed if not for the natural resources that belong to the center. Due to such additional income is obtained to reduce the flow rate with the loan. Statistics show that this leads to the fact that more and more people become employees and begin to live even in quite poor, but ration from the state, with rations from the oil and gas resources. And risk not even the depletion of resources and serious price fluctuations.

People are made to political infantilism, and he in Russia is extremely underdeveloped. People get used to the fact that they always tell the top exactly what to do. Rock the boat by yourself it does not need, and indeed our own peril. And at the heart of this infantile fear.

But the end of the 80s has shown how the state has run out of money, and everything rapidly falls apart. When it could happen again? In principle — at any time.

What did people rely on?

In principle, people can rely on the organization that they themselves created. Such in Russia. Hence comes not even the fear and the feeling of chronic helplessness.

Man needs the support of friends — in order that he could influence government officials, without the help of other officials. It can run in the election — and even before all the election. Associations of voters is, again, no. The idea is that the classical organization of voters called a party, but we have all the conditions that parties did not arise. There are 500 parties, but they are in fact fake or even mocking, and creating them is extremely difficult. No parties — no influence.