What changes have taken place in the public consciousness after the election?

Society members: Director, registered in Lithuania Belarusian Institute for Strategic Studies Vitaly Silitski and methodological Vladimir Mackiewicz.

Vitaly Silitski

Vladimir Mackiewicz

Valery Karbalevich

As the events of December 19 impact on society?

Valery Karbalevich"What impact on society presidential campaign and especially its finale? Strong politicization of society accompanies his split. Some speak of a quiet civil war, which is in the country. But the split in what proportion? Sociologists say that the electoral structure of society is stuck, it has remained unchanged since the mid-1990s. Or something changed last event? "

Vitaly Silitski"It is difficult to answer this question without having sociological data. Maybe it's too early to draw definitive conclusions. Of course, elections, especially their dramatic finale, politicized society. But I'm not sure that this politicization continues six months after the election.

The election showed that the number of those who disagree with government policy is much more to this ignore officialdom. For example, the events of 1968 split the Czechoslovak society. And this divide the country lived two decades, until it exploded in a different political context. So what are sometimes divided society stable. "

Vladimir Mackiewicz"Indeed, we do not know exactly the electoral structure of the society before and after the elections. Emotional explosion, shock arising after December 19, affects more sense, moral and ethical terms, rather than some rational explanation.

Need an organizational principle, to guide the emotional mood in a positive way. While it is not.

Emotions and political sentiment — two different things. Emotions quickly go away. Significant changes can occur when the emotional shock will be fixed by some rational concepts and proposals of action. Need an organizational principle, to guide the emotional mood in a positive way. While it is not. "

Karbalevich"But moral judgments, moral isolation are even more important than the political isolation."

Mackiewicz"It is, under certain conditions, which we do not have today. It is necessary that the crystallization was dissent. Citizens can not even come together for solidarity. So how to resist the power of their propaganda, which creates doubt. "

Why was the main question is: who broke the door to Government House?

Karbalevich"Who is it that is not the main issue was the subject of public debate: who broke the door to Government House? It was the opposition or the provocateurs? Do not you think that this fact alone shows that society is unprepared to profound changes? After all, when a society has matured to the revolution, the broken door — it's a small thing. "

Silitski"People are invited to the area for the sake of a peaceful protest. Most of them were not ready for the type shares the breaking of the door. A violent action so people would not work. Select the game you are playing.

On the incomplete readiness of society to profound changes evidenced most amount of people that came out to the street. It was a little young students, in contrast to the protests of five years ago. On the area was dominated by the new middle class, who was born and raised in the last 5-10 years. This protest was bourgeois. "

This protest was bourgeois.

Karbalevich"And what would be a protest against the left, egalitarian regime?"

Mackiewicz"There is no evidence that the heartbeat of glass held the opposition. See detained more than 600 people. And the area of the damaged door indicates that participated in literally a few people.

And this was an important question because we live in a culture of mass media, when the picture focuses on the attention far more than thought. Analytical findings that have already been made, do not fall into the audience's attention. "

Why they were on BT?

Karbalevich"How do you explain the fact that so many iconic people began to repent, to act on BT? This was not there before. It is a reaction to the force, which has demonstrated the power? Or both? "

Silitski"First, I do not know what you're talking about. If you mean Romanchuk and Dmitriev, it can be said that the opposition against the unprecedented measures have been applied pressure, and some people are broke. Not all players who participated in the company (in the beginning it was called the carnival), hoping that it will result in such bloody carnival. Let's not make any analytical conclusions about the fate of those people, until we visited their skin. This is simply incorrect and dishonestly.

I was surprised not that many people began to repent — they are few — and the manifestations of human solidarity, which were much more visible than in 2006, when the opposition was much more marginalized in public opinion than it is now. Representatives of the Orthodox Church came to the office BNF to help arrested. In solidarity actions including small and medium businesses. I would have concentrated on that. "

Mackiewicz"I would call the four causes of these phenomena. First, it's the shock of the unexpected deployment events. In such a situation, people do not always behave rationally, what would later be sorry.

Second, the violence and the pressure that is committed to them. Third, cheating the state media, which narezvali mantazhavali and pieces they need. Fourth, the intrigue of people who thought about their fate as politicians. The steps seemed to them the most rational, that is clearly not the case. "

Tags:

elections

Like this post? Please share to your friends: