In general, the national consciousness of every nation (called "mentality", although Ekaterina Mikhailovna Shulman denies its existence) there are certain dogmas absorbed with mother's milk (well, or hammered in by police sticks) dogmas, the inviolability and correctness of which are not questioned.
Otherwise, what else to believe?
For the North Caucasian peoples, for example, this is unconditional respect for elders. The Chinese take care of their parents. The Germans have punctuality and commitment. For the Greeks, on the contrary, let the whole world wait, we have already done enough for humanity.
For a post-Soviet Russian person (and even a pre-Soviet one, that’s already there), one of the fundamental characteristics of the universe around him is departmentalism. A Russian cannot be without authority. The agency is impersonal and merciless. Moreover, "department" is, of course, a conditional concept. It can be either a state office or a private enterprise. Yes, just the day before, a photo from one of the central streets of Moscow was posted on social networks: a sign with the inscription "Parking for committee members only." And that's all. There were no signs indicating any committee nearby. Beer for union members only. Member? Member, member. Member of the trade union of mental labor proletarians.
The department in Russia is omnipotent. Even if this is the office of Horns and Hooves. The department is almighty, however, only before the prosecutor's office draws attention to it. But while the prosecutor's office (which is also a department) does not pay attention (no need to shine) - the department is impregnable. And his credentials are beyond doubt.
The ridiculous scandal that happened the day before with the price list for rescuing drowning people on a paid beach at the Sochi hotel "Pearl" is a vivid proof of this.
For half a day, the journalists called this very "Pearl" and asked questions about 800 rubles for the rescue.
And at the same time, no one (no one!) Asked, but on what grounds does this paid beach exist at all.
Just because the Zhemchuzhina hotel has existed for a very long time and how can you imagine that it did not have its own beach?
The Russian person has no doubts about the simple fact that every beach is someone's.
Although this directly contradicts Russian legislation.
This is what the Water Code says:
“A strip of land along the coastline (boundary of a water body) of a public water body (coastal strip) is intended for general use.
The width of the coastal strip of public water bodies is 20 m. "
And here's another:
"Every citizen has the right to use (without the use of mechanical vehicles) the coastal strip of public water bodies for movement and stay around them, including for the implementation of recreational fishing and the mooring of floating equipment."
This means that if you have a piece of land on the seashore (public water body), then you are great.
But 20 meters before the water's edge, all your fences should be finished.
And every citizen (and it is written in the law: "every citizen") should be able to walk along the seashore, nowhere having obstacles.
What we, in fact, see in those countries where the law is treated more respectfully than a Russian person treats the department.
Yes, you can charge money for renting sun loungers, for example.
For umbrellas and even for an insipid shower, if you have one.
But if a person wants to lie on the beach without umbrellas, sun beds and without a shower, then you cannot take money from him, because this is his legal right.
And the funniest thing is not even that no one asked on what grounds the Zhemchuzhina hotel arranged a "paid beach" for itself.
The funny thing is that taking money to save drowning people may be immoral.
But perfectly legal.
Since the staff of the Zhemchuzhina Hotel is not at all obliged to save anyone.
Rescuing is the task of the relevant department (sic!).
Well, or the drowning themselves, if we recall the classics.
This innocent aberration is a direct consequence of the very deformation of national consciousness with which I began this column. Taking money for salvation is not by concept. But to fence off a piece of the coast of the sea, which belongs to everyone, is quite a concept. Because Colonel Colt has made people equal where we are not. And where we are, those who are under the authority are more equal. And who just like that - let him pass by. I haven't received it yet. Choi even wrote a song about this.
No need, of course, to think that I am the only one so clever and that I am revealing to you a secret secret.
No, about the fact that a little less than all Russian departments and owners put on the Water Code, it has already been written and rewritten hundreds of gigabytes of different texts.
Nevertheless, the fences continue to go into the water, and what is there - in some cases, even block the rivers (!).
And those shameless people who do this will always have convincing arguments - documents, permits, references to "cases provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation and the legislation of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation."
However, clause 8 p.
6 of the Water Code is absolute and does not allow any additional interpretations: “Every citizen has the right to use the coastal strip of public water bodies for movement and stay”.
And if someone (whether a department, a rich person) does not provide this right, then he is subject at least to administrative responsibility.
Well, it would also be good with candelabra.
The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editorial board.