My principled position is to never comment on the initiatives of fellow deputies, so

 I will not discuss

the so-called bill on combating denunciations .

Moreover, I haven’t read the proposed text either.

The question as a whole seems important to me.

However, first of all, we must stop speculating on terminology, which is always emotionally charged.

The word “denunciation” sounds negative to our ears, “report”, “informing” - neutral, “crime prevention” (an analogue of the Soviet “voluntary assistance to the police”) - positive.

And the word “denunciation” can have different connotations.

Pushkin has a bitter diary entry: “The magazine “European” was banned due to denunciation.”

And from him: “Denunciation of the villainous hetman / to Tsar Peter from Kochubey,” that is, rather a report.

A few letters - and look what a difference in perception!

We are all brought up in the paradigm “Don’t be a sneak!”

To spot a reckless driver on the road and to call the police on a drunk neighbor seems awkward and indecent.

But I will add: not a single phenomenon exists in isolation from time.

Today, when people come to me in comments on social networks with aggressive anti-Russian rhetoric, I immediately send the materials to the Prosecutor General’s Office.

Not because this vile chatter is really dangerous.

But because a person with such a position may subsequently decide to commit serious illegal acts and endanger someone’s life.

I will say more: if stopped today, the person himself (perhaps having become a victim of professional provocateurs) will not cross the last line, will not commit something irreparable.

We need to discuss the essence, not the words.

For many years, in liberal circles, it was customary to label as “denunciation” any word spoken against.

The situation has reached the point of absurdity: a journalistic investigation, a critical article about a film, performance or exhibition, a statement from a politician about the inadmissibility of some actions or statements - “Denunciation, denunciation, denunciation!..” Although everything happens in the public field, openly, with the opportunity to respond .

Is there another extreme, the opposite, in our time?


Because “life swings to the right by swinging to the left.”

So she swayed.

But you are unlikely to deny that the country today is undergoing a process of purification of the humanitarian sphere.

A process that is in demand and approved by citizens.

And when there is a lot of cleaning, dust is sure to rise.

Expecting that everything with complaints will be reasonable, moderate, sterile is ridiculous.

It doesn't happen that way.

Both distortions and kinks are guaranteed.

We, deputies, face these distortions every day.

Some are trying to settle personal scores, others persistently fan out appeals, and so on.

Yes, it's tiring.

Yes, it's unpleasant.

But I want to note that if it were not for the constant signals from the public, not for the cohesion of civil society, our culture today would be much more slowly cleared of various harmful and pernicious elements.

Even if these appeals are not always competent (we do not have the right to demand from every person that he has educated taste, is well versed in art and literature), nevertheless, the majority of our fellow citizens are characterized by a developed sense of justice and truth.

It is obvious to the people that this person can no longer be called their people’s artist.

But books by this author should not be sold in bookstores, and even placed in the most advantageous positions.

And there is no need to hold a concert of this performer in the city.

The country is conducting a military operation, our guys are risking their lives on the front line every second, and this is not the time to release dubious characters on stage so that they sing funny songs and collect royalties.

And based on this internal, intuitive sense of truth and justice, people turn to government officials with a request to respond.

And then everything depends on the authorities - different branches and levels.

We must take responsibility.

If some social activists are clearly going too far, a clearly communicated position is needed that such behavior is socially condemnable.

If a person writes to everyone because he doesn’t know exactly where to contact (and such situations happen at every turn), you need to create something like a one-stop service, where specialists will redirect requests according to their competence.

At the same time, abuse of rights must be blocked normatively and technologically - this is much more effective than inventing punishments.

Something will require legislative regulation.

After all, if people constantly ask the same questions, make the same claims, the point is not in their inertia, but in our shortcomings.

We, representatives of the authorities, must involve experts in our work as much as possible - professionals and, at the same time, patriots, in order to always have the opportunity to hear and broadcast to the public a competent assessment of this or that phenomenon.

Public councils and expert councils should become the norm of life, and an actively working norm.

This advice is very helpful for our committee.

This is the breakwater that extinguishes excessive manifestations of the elements, provides dialogue, reasoning, discussion, and removes contradictions.

In any case, it is important that our citizens maintain firm confidence that their opinion is significant and that their word will be heard.

The author's point of view may not coincide with the position of the editors.