Deși conferința de presă anuală a Marelui Satan mi s-a părut destul de anostă, am reținut următoarele:
(cineva întreabă – n.m.)
On December 15, you chaired a meeting of the Council for Culture [and Art] at the Constantine Palace. All the questions asked there were very good and correct, including about drug addiction. But Andrei Mikhalkov-Konchalovsky asked one of the key questions, and I would like to follow up on this issue after thinking it over.
He said that Russia now lacks an ambitious national development idea. The Russian Empire had the following triad: Orthodox Christianity, autocracy and nationality. The Soviet Union had the moral code of the builder of communism. Today, it is unclear what kind of society we are building, but it looks more like the amoral code of the builder of capitalism.
I came up with a triad of my own, and I would like to ask you to get our federal television channels, including Channel One, NTV and Rossiya, to hold a nationwide discussion of what kind of country and society we are building, after all. So, I suggest the following triad: nature, motherland and the people. Its three component – nature, motherland and the people – cannot exist without one another. And that is why we now watch shows about who left whom and who cheated on whom. That is, there is a kind of media lawlessness. And if we raise the issue of all television shows …
Dmitry Peskov: What is your question, please?
Sergey Lisovsky: Yes, is it possible to create a television show on strategically important issues related to Russia’s long-term development?
Vladimir Putin: It is always very interesting to speak with Andrei Mikhalkov-Konchalovsky. He is very insightful. He has his own opinions, which he is not afraid to express, whether you agree or not. He is not a conformist, and he speaks his mind. He is an insightful person.
I have repeatedly discussed whether we have an idea for building the state, the country – the foundation on which to build. I believe that patriotism in the best sense of the word, rather than the basest, simply has to be the foundation for strengthening our state in the broadest and noblest sense of this word.
As for our many channels on television and online that probably are not worth the air time they take up, you know, Daniil Granin (I believe that I mentioned this some time ago) discussed the matter at our last meeting.
We had a long private conversation, and I never saw him again, he passed away some time later. He said: “Look, you have to do something about this.” I asked: “What are you talking about?” “We are all tired of it,” he replied. “What do you mean?” I asked. “All the television channels are telling us about people who stole money, how much, how they did it. I am really sick and tired of it. Are there really no happy and positive events in life here?” I said: “Well, that is their programming choice.”
As I see it, things are actually gradually changing for the better, to some extent, the information is becoming more balanced perhaps, although I don’t go online or watch television very often just because I don’t have enough time.
I try to keep an eye on the media environment, and I get the impression that there has been some improvement. But there would certainly be no harm in discussing what you have suggested. I will need to speak with my colleagues.
They can hear you now, and I hope that they will respond.
Și:
Question: Mr President, society strongly demands social justice. According to Levada Centre, 66 percent of respondents feel nostalgic about the Soviet Union. And here is my question: do you think that a restoration of socialism is possible in Russia?
Vladimir Putin: I think this is impossible.
I believe that the deep changes that have taken place in our society make restoring socialism in the sense you mean impossible.
There can be social elements in the economy and the social sector, but expenses will always exceed profits, and as a result, the economy would be at a dead end.
But the just distribution of resources, the fair treatment of people who live below the poverty line, and a state policy aimed to lower the number of people who have to live like that, to provide the majority of people with healthcare services and education in acceptable conditions, if this is the socialism we are talking about, we are holding to the very same policy. Our national programmes that we talked about in the beginning of this meeting, are mostly aimed at all this.
Prin urmare, “ideologia” la care se gândește Putin, este patriotismul. Problema este că atunci când auzim acest cuvânt, în general, el nu are un conținut palpabil. El este contextual (ca și conținut). Este definitoriu patriotismul pentru Stalin? Desigur! Dar Stalin nu a făcut din patriotism o ideologie. Patriotismul este un fel de a fi, nu o ideologie, care să dea sens societății în ansamblu. Cred că aici Putin are un mare minus. De ce respinge socialismul? China nu l-a respins. Și China nu s-a prăbușit economic. Dimpotrivă.
Nu știu. Deocamdată ideologia pe care o avem este cea a dezideologizării.
(Impresia pe care o am despre Putin este că a ajuns în poziția de țar fără să și-o dorească, și, cu atât mai rău, fără să fie pregătit pentru ea. Învață, cum se spune, “la locul de muncă”. Deși partea bună este că învață, cu succes, partea proastă este că lumea din jur nu “așteaptă”. Este poate cea mai mare provocare pentru Putin.)