| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia | |
| Other skies. Why the Ministry of Justice expands the list of foreign agents | |
| 2023-07-16 | |
| Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Maxim Sokolov [REGNUM] The more the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation multiplies the list of foreign agents, the more bewilderment grows among citizens. Its cause is rather not the fact that people who are the "mind, honor and conscience" of our era are enrolled in the proscription lists. There is also such a view, but it is shared by very few, and the majority considers those on the lists to be unfit people. If, however, they even know who they are. It includes: a) non-profit organizations recognized as foreign agents; b) mass media recognized as foreign agents; c) individuals recognized by the media as foreign agents; d) individuals recognized as foreign agents; e) unregistered public associations recognized as foreign agents. Directly according to Mayakovsky - "Curly Mitreyki, wise Kudreyki - who the hell will figure them out!". Considering that in the past, when citizens were frightened by exclusion either from PACE or from the OSCE - and everyone confused them, a much more complex scheme with foreign agents is completely confusing. And even more knocks down a cursory glance at the personalities. M. K. Pevchikh* , a British subject, an associate (and, possibly, a poisoner - Shakespeare does not do this) of A. A. Navalny* is also listed, although she is just a gentlewoman in the service of Her / His Majesty. Commercials and the Minister of War of the Kingdom of Ben Wallace fit to declare a foreign agent. However, the Bulgarian Hristo Grozev, who never had Russian citizenship, was put on the list. Of course, a man with a murky biography worked for the Mi-6 and against Russia, but in general he had the right. Also surprising is the appearance in the lists of L. B. Nevzlin, who fled to Israel for 20 years, fearing heavy criminal punishment for wet cases. Now Nevzlin is a wealthy Israeli, perhaps denouncing “fascist Russia”, but why should a foreign citizen not swear when he wants to. But even not so criminal personalities, classified as foreign agents - writer D. L. Bykov, artist B. B. Grebenshchikov * , b. the head of the "Parkhomburo" S. B. Parkhomenko, the hedonist E. A. Chichvarkin* etc., - behind the safe sitting border, they bark like dogs from behind the fence, but they are not at all going to return to Russia. Accordingly, they are neither hot nor cold from the rank of a foreign agent - after all, they are not going to send secret fellows to them. And even if they get together (although such bitterness is extremely doubtful), orders will be given to the good fellows without any coordination with the Ministry of Justice and its lists. And it is not clear what is the pragmatics of enlisting such persons as foreign agents. The fact that they are ugly people was already known. The idea itself was clear and old. Much older than the legal concept of the relevant US laws, which are usually referred to as justifications for domestic practice - “What about us? And we are like in America.” In fact, it's about the design of the nation state. Even in the XVII-XVIII centuries. there was nothing wrong with politicians taking money from foreign ambassadors. Let us recall the bribery practice of the French ambassadors under Elizabeth Petrovna . Yes, and later. The apoplexy of Paul I was organized by the St. Petersburg ambassador of His Majesty, Lord Whitworth. Habitual business. But with the advent of national ideology, the very concept of “nation”, it became indecent to take foreign money for internal political struggle. "Your own males squabble - don't pester strangers." And the dog, taking money from foreign powers, was excluded from the politicum. Such has become the good custom of sovereign nations. But nothing lasts forever. In the midst of great upheavals in political life, when everything starts from scratch, it is not uncommon for politics to become archaic and bribes from foreign governments (more often through the laying of formally independent funds) again become completely acceptable. Recall perestroika and the "holy 90s", when the problem was not whether to take foreign money, but only where to find an overseas benefactor. However, with the sovereignization of the state, bribes from foreigners again began to become less and less decent. In part, they were voluntarily abandoned, in part, the most persistent benefactors like Soros were clearly pointed out the way out. And the foreign clientele began to be pressed more and more. In the belief that sovereignty and foreign money in some cases do not go well together. Hence the legislation on foreign agents appeared. "If you don't want it to be good, it will be not good." You can find an explanation and justification for this, need, they say, forces, but no need forces and cannot force to declare Bykov or Chichvarkin as foreign agents. They have forever chosen other skies and other jurisdictions, well, let them live under them. What is called, "cut slice." Why exclude from the Russian politicum those who have long and openly excluded themselves? Well, the fact that the Ministry of Justice in this matter shows zeal is not according to reason - should we be surprised at that? When was it different?
| |
| Posted by:badanov |