Тег: protest

Direct Action Stocks: Division of Labor

Bitarch posted a note on VKontakte about risk-free struggle against the state. In short, the idea is to anonymously hire non-politicized members of the public for real-world actions. The methodology is quite obvious; it is a standard division of labor. But, of course, such technology requires infrastructure for widespread implementation — secure platforms where one could post orders and expressions of readiness to fulfill specific tasks. Bitarch writes about the darknet, which is rather vague, and without certain qualifications, this tells an inexperienced political activist practically nothing. However, to develop a taste for this, one can start by using simple, makeshift services.

For instance, the friendly channel Anarchy+ recently launched a service called Protest Action Exchange, where you can place an order for an action, ask for donations to implement your idea, and so on. Although the channel is anonymous and all communication goes through a bot, it is still far from true security, but the risks are modest enough because the exchange does not accept orders related to violent actions.

So, if you have ideas, take the opportunity to find performers. If you have the strength, take the opportunity to get involved. The project is non-commercial, and although it was started by left-wing anarchists, they have no prejudice against libertarianism, so no ideological screening is expected.

The Stylistics of Protest

I heard an interesting thought from Ekaterina Schulmann last night—that the difference in the style of protests in the US and Russia is not related to some special “slave mentality” of Russians, but simply to what is customary. Russia, in her words, is more similar to Scandinavia in this sense: in both places, people protest modestly, expressing a gloomy silent reproach, without all your outbursts of anger, shouting, and arson. If you go out to protest against injustice, you are a decent person, and decent people do not scream on the street, and they do not beat people.

Similarly, rallies in Russia are not intended for listening to whoever is rambling on stage. The speakers talk for YouTube, meaning for those who didn’t come to the rally, but want to feel the atmosphere and leave a like. But the people came to socialize with one another and to be happy that many like-minded people share their position. They certainly understand that, formally, they have formulated demands, and that pressure must be put on the authority to make them fulfill these demands, but they will not go storm the Kremlin, because decent people do not do things that way. They would rather sign a resolution.

This is precisely why Russian agorism takes on some characteristics of AUE. Agorism is not so much about the state dying of starvation, but about a moral choice. By avoiding interaction with the state and especially avoiding payments to it, a person simply feels morally cleaner.

That is exactly why any calls to chip in to help people pay their finesy are so infuriating to me. How can you consciously call upon people to get dirty by making payments to the state, and moreover, voluntarily act as the state’s tax agents? You go out to the street to express your reproach to the state, you unfurl a banner, you get detained, you get a summons to court, the court imposes a fine. Well, express your reproach once more and refuse to pay right there in court. Let them replace it with arrest or carry a wardrobe out of your house. They will wreck your house at any moment anyway, as soon as they want to, especially if you choose the tactic of open confrontation with the regime.

Russian libertarians are now pushing the hashtag and holding single-person pickets against the extrajudicial killings committed by Russian security forces. I support this hype. But when in a week they start collecting donations for the fines of detained activists, I will be spitting in their direction. Just warning you in advance.

I will not condemn liberals who value the institution of the state itself, as something that brings law and order, for paying their fines. For them, this is an element of law and order. They will legally challenge this fine in court, hoping to fix a bad state. These are their rituals for maintaining purity, and this can be respected, although one can still hope for their enlightenment.

“Movement for Equal Legal Rights” instead of anarcho-capitalism

Bitarch’s Column

Recently, I posted a dilogy about “making porridge from an axe.” The second part, about preparing ancap from left-wing ideas, was based on an article that I now want to offer you. Instead of publishing it in its original form, I rewrote it completely, so the presentation turned out somewhat different. Bitarch was dissatisfied, so now I am publishing the original close to the initial text.

Let’s be honest—promoting anarcho-capitalism (Rothbard’s ancap) in its pure form to a mass audience is practically impossible. In the real world, unlike the “pink pony worlds” of libertarian public pages and chats, ancap, along with minarchism, is considered an extreme right-wing ideology that defends the interests of that very 0.1% who are so strongly hated in Western mass culture, media, and universities. In Russia, this is slightly less noticeable due to the remaining memory of the failures of socialism in the USSR, and also a general hatred of the state, which is still difficult to find in the developed world. Nevertheless, the majority of the population, both in the West and here, holds social-liberal (Alexey Navalny, Angela Merkel, Emmanuel Macron) and left-wing (Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn, mainstream politicians in Scandinavia) views.

From my experience promoting libertarianism, I can confidently say that for such people, the conditional “average Joes,” one might as well not try to promote classical libertarianism (ancap and minarchism)—you’ll just waste your time! They only respond to panarchy with an emphasis on socially-oriented ECUs or Svetov’s conservative communities. But it’s not all that bad—if you try, you can repackage ancap into a wrapper that is more attractive to the common person.

If you ask an average American what made the twentieth century remarkable, he will most likely name various civil rights movements and their significant achievements as one of the first points. The last century began with the suffragette movement for equal voting rights for women and men, which achieved success quite easily. Then, in the 1950s-1960s, mass actions took place for equal rights for Americans regardless of skin color (the abolition of segregation – Civil Rights Act, 1964). Almost immediately after success in this area, riots and protests in support of LGBT began (Stonewall riots, 1969), which also proved successful. A bit later, in 1973, after numerous anti-war demonstrations, conscription slavery was abolished.

Similar processes took place in Western Europe, but instead of the abolition of segregation (which never existed there), the youth protested, and they were eventually given rights as well. In the USSR, there were no protests on such a scale due to the totalitarian ideology and the suppression of any dissent, and since all formal rights had already been handed down from above, everything was limited to dissatisfaction with the economic situation and the dissident movement for the observance of human rights.

What united all these protests? The answer is simple—the struggle for equal legal rights (i.e., that very negative “freedom from”)! It was only later that similar movements degenerated into a struggle for positive rights (privileges)—quotas for Black people in universities, alimony for women, bans on hate speech in favor of homosexuals, and so on. Initially, however, all these movements only demanded that the state “not interfere”—not forbid women from voting, Black people from marrying white people or entering public restrooms, not persecute homosexuals for their behavior. And surprisingly—all these movements quickly achieved success when they demanded equal legal rights.

And what does ancap have to do with this, you ask?! The point is that it can be presented in exactly the same way as a movement for equal legal rights. The main argument is that currently some people can do things with impunity that others are not allowed to do. For example, why can some thug with a badge (“tax officer”) take away half of another person’s salary and get away with it, but if I do the same, I’ll go to prison for several years? Or why can men with certain patches beat people on the street with batons and face no consequences, while I’ll be sent to prison even for throwing a plastic cup in their direction? Is that fair?! No, it’s absolutely not fair!

The same injustice can be explained to teenagers who wish to emancipate themselves but cannot do so because the state has completely arbitrarily, on a whim, established the age of consent, the age for obtaining a driver’s “license” (actually—another privilege from bandits), and “legal adulthood” (also arbitrary; a person at 17 cannot enter into contracts, but at 18 they can—isn’t that absurd).

To raise the emotional tone of the target audience, it would be a good idea to appeal to the theory of the stationary bandit, and also to call anyone who considers such inequality fair a maniac and a rapist (because that is how it actually is; we aren’t making anything up).

From all this, it follows that one doesn’t even have to talk about ancap—if people achieve equal legal rights, it will happen on its own!

Tell Mr. Bastrykin: a terrible mistake has occurred!

A criminal case was initiated against Mikhail Svetov over an Instagram post from 2012. Given how keen the interest in him has been from Russian security forces, it is completely obvious that the case was opened when they decided the moment was most appropriate.

I can assume that the moment was deemed appropriate for one simple reason: at the recently held LPR congress, Mikhail Svetov stepped down from the party’s governing bodies. The security forces may have reasonably decided in connection with this that Mikhail had lost public support, and it would be possible to settle scores with him without much of a scandal. They will have to be made to understand that they were seriously mistaken.

The LPR calls for holding solo pickets in support of Mikhail at the building of the Moscow Investigative Committee. This is a good step, but more can be done. Quite recently, Mikhail Svetov visited 30 cities across the western and central parts of Russia with lectures. Thus, literally every attendee of a lecture (or those who wanted to attend but could not fit into the hall due to the zeal of local security forces) now has an excellent reason to also hold a picket at the Investigative Committee building in their own city, with a poster saying, for instance, that they know Svetov personally, consider him a decent person, the case is being fabricated, enough of the embarrassment, stop this farce.

People registered for the lectures via Timepad, leaving their contact details. It would make sense for the lecture organizers to send a mailing to the collected data and suggest expressing support for Mikhail. After all, during the lectures themselves, Mikhail said that he travels to cities not so much so that people would listen to him—they can listen on YouTube. His main goal was for people in the regions to look at each other and realize how they are not alone in their distrust of the state. Well, here is a new excellent reason to gather and look at each other.

Enough people should come out, and then let the worried security forces urgently inform the head of the IC, Bastrykin, that a mistake was made, he shouldn’t have been touched, and it’s better to hush up this scandal before it flares up.

Police Russia of the Present, new season

Yesterday, the state carried out another act of violence against its citizens, raiding Navalny’s headquarters, as well as the homes and apartments of his staff, former staff, relatives of staff, and people who simply happened to be caught in the crossfire.

In general, political life in the country has become very lively. If I were watching this in a series, it would be clear that things are heading toward a climax and then a resolution. And, of course, I would find the series very strange if, after showing events like yesterday’s, I were then told that this had finally broken the spirit of resistance, the leaders had dispersed, the volunteers had returned to their everyday peaceful activities, and the tyrant ruled peacefully until his death, passing the throne to his growing son and leaving his loyal henchman Ramzan as regent. Instead, I would expect that in 2021, highly competitive elections for the State Duma would take place, preceded by a fierce struggle over the admission of non-systemic single-mandate candidates, and as a result, the parliament would acquire a rather diverse look, and with it, a certain agency; then there would be clashes over the repeal of the article in the election law banning Navalny from running for president, it would not be possible to repeal it, and quite unexpectedly for themselves in 2024, with Navalny’s support and to the outrage of the libertarians, Roizman would be elected. Now that would be a plot! Everyone would be eagerly awaiting the new season, which would certainly not be inferior to the previous one in terms of dramatic tension.

And although no one writes scripts for Russia, nevertheless, without satiety and the resolution of major internal problems, there will be no dull police stability here, no matter how much you raid Navalny’s headquarters or declare Open Russia an undesirable organization. Not the century, not the people, not the trends.

Smart Voting showed people that they are not just many, but very many. This means that it is possible to step out of the shadows. So now is the time for the visual capture of space. There is no need for extremist slogans, for it is enough to simply state a position rather than explain it; for explanations, there are internet resources protected from pressure. For example, Professor Solovey suggested mass-producing and selling cheap silicone bracelets with a simple inscription “help political prisoners,” and directing the proceeds toward that very help. Firstly, this benefits the prisoners, and secondly, such a thing is not shameful to wear, but it is shameful to demand its removal, as it is proof that a person personally donated a couple of hundred rubles to help those whom the state persecutes for their political views. Moreover, there is nothing extremist in the inscription. There is no need to try to invent a single symbol of protest—why do we need an alphabet of one symbol? After all, we live in a consumer society, which means there will be competition and a wide choice.

Of course, there will be street protests—how could there not be—but these are one-off promotional protest actions; however, for the “fronde” to become fashionable, people must also wear these conditional neck scarves a la fronde.

Thus, I envision the outlines of the next political season roughly as follows:

  • A continuation of the trend toward the normalization of protest, the everyday demonstration of one’s moods to everyone around in the form of wearable symbols. Protest becomes, if not prestigious, then at least mass-approved.
  • Close attention to the numerous ghouls and few decent people newly elected through Smart Voting. Public support for any correct gestures on the part of the elected, even if they were previously in the “ghoul” category: training implies positive reinforcement.
  • The departure abroad of a number of well-known opposition figures and the formation of permanent teams among them for the information support of “rocking the boat.” This is required by banal tactical considerations. The host of a popular YouTube channel must always be online, not sitting uselessly in a detention center. The studio must work, not be endlessly restored after raids by security forces. The coordination of the network must happen continuously. And so on. There is no longer any need to fear that this will negatively affect the image of the protesters: the myth about the State Department has gone stale. No one cares that something like Meduza is based in Riga, so why shouldn’t Navalny.Live, MBX.Media, and SVTV establish themselves there? One cannot be a generalist in an age of division of labor; street politics and media propaganda must be separated. The street politician should remain a guest on a stream, not a regular host of a show.
  • Media shaming of deanonymized security personnel is bearing its first fruits—rank-and-file employees are starting to resign, superiors are starting to apologize, and orders for the violent suppression of street actions occasionally begin to be executed without enthusiasm.
  • Ukraine demonstrates significant economic growth against the backdrop of Russian stagnation. Russian citizens begin to want things to be like in Ukraine.
  • The long-awaited global economic crisis hits. The regime takes a step that is correct from the point of view of self-preservation, opening the rainy-day fund and lowering taxes—but this looks like concessions to the demands of the opposition and only continues to weaken the regime.

As they say, remember this tweet.

The government always tends to do its manicure with an angle grinder

Juneman. The one who defeated Navalny

Vladislav Zdolnikov and Mikhail Pozharsky posted explanations as to why Navalny was categorically wrong in his support for Zhukovsky and his refusal to support Yuneman…

So, who are all these people, and why am I writing about this here?

Navalny is the Sole Unalternative Leader of the Opposition, who confirmed this title on September 8 during the single voting day by defeating United Russia (I don’t know about you, but the word “united” makes my eyes spin).

Zdolnikov is a former IT consultant for the FBK, who has just resigned from this important post due to ethical disagreements with Navalny.

Pozharsky is a classic liberal, a former national-democrat, and recently a vlogger and lecturer.

Yuneman is an independent candidate in the Moscow City Duma elections, whom Navalny did not recommend as part of the smart voting strategy, but who nonetheless took first place in his district in the offline voting. Quite a few libertarians worked in his headquarters.

Zhukovsky is a candidate from the CPRF in Yuneman’s district, recommended by Navalny as part of smart voting, and is the only Navalny candidate who took a shameful third place (the others took first and second places).

Right now Yuneman, who as I already said won the offline voting, is trying to overturn the online voting results, which clearly appear rigged. It is also known that electronic voting glitched for three hours on the election day itself, does not provide the ability to monitor the authenticity of results, and the decision to implement it was made in violation of the election law. Moreover, electronic voting has an irremediable flaw: it is either open, which allows for administrative pressure on the voter, or secret, which makes it impossible to prevent and prove ballot stuffing.

So, Yuneman defeated Navalny, and now he intends to defeat another extremely harmful innovation: electronic voting. Quite a feat, isn’t it? Navalny should now literally move heaven and earth to defend Yuneman’s victory, in order to make up for his fault toward him and regain the trust of many respected people. As for our task, it is to not forget to remind Navalny of this, which is why this story must remain at the top for a sufficiently long time.

It is not enough to repost this whole story right now. We must continue to be interested in it, spread news about it, and if necessary, take part in protest actions. This is a long-term theme, like the fascinating voyage of the Yakut shaman, leaving rallies behind him and sowing panic among the higher-ups.

Navalny is 43, is starting to lose his grip and lose out to youth like this

Anonymity, protest, division of labor

A post from the Telegram channel “IT criminal cases SORM rossiyushka” is actively spreading across the network about how important it is for everyone to set the correct privacy settings in Telegram, after first updating it to the latest version. The update was made following the outrage of protesters in Hong Kong, who discovered they were being deanonymized by adding all possible phone numbers to the contact list, after which Telegram’s friendly interface immediately gave up the activists’ accounts by phone number. The hole has now been patched, but the old settings are still there by default; they must be changed manually.

Not long ago, I also mentioned a post from the Cryptoagora channel about how to obtain fake bank cards and SIM cards without intermediaries (spoiler: realistic silicone masks are used).

And very recently, Bitarch spoke out regarding the fact that automatic facial recognition systems are inevitably doomed to false positives, meaning that one can not only cover their tracks this way, but also try to feed the opponent members of their own gang: other security forces, odious officials, and so on.

In light of the fact that the Russian authorities are actively purchasing cameras for facial recognition at mass protests, the opportunity arises to provide the press with headlines like: “Zhirinovsky threw feces at a Rosgvardiya officer,” or “Three Putin doubles urinated on a cop.” But—no.

The complication of the protest and the tightening of the screws by the regime currently dictate a clear maintenance of the boundary between legal and illegal actions. During a legal protest, whether agreed upon with the city administration or not, a person limits their toolkit and also expects other protest participants to do the same. Any other behavior will logically be perceived by them as a provocation. At the same time, at other times when the streets are not flooded with security forces, nothing prevents anonymous individuals from carrying out well-prepared actions that discredit the regime, appearing on camera in the images of, for example, Petrunko or Kusyuk.

It is also worth considering in advance which role in the protest suits you best and not striving for versatility. You can sit anonymously on the internet and write articles of a quasi-extremist nature, or you can speak from a podium—but it will be very difficult to combine both functions, as attention to a known activist increases the probability of deanonymizing their persona. You can attend agreed rallies, appearing on surveillance cameras and in cell operator logs, but it will be difficult to combine this with posting flyers or smashing police windows, deanonymized using Russian Elephant. Finally, you can donate to projects you like, although earning money for this may not leave you, for example, with opportunities for serious offline activism.

There will be no post tomorrow; in my offline incarnation, I am going to observe the elections. But if the whim of running for office myself had entered my head, I would have had to hand the channel over to someone else. There is no helping it; every choice entails costs. So let’s drink to the hope that tomorrow we will not regret the choice we made today!

Put on a mask — don’t get caught

What do you think about the July 27 protests?

Do you think that people have started to change for the better? Also, what do you think about protest tactics?

I found one such tactic on the internet, apparently inspired by recent events; it would be interesting to hear your opinion on this:

Action Plan

Before the march begins – initial gathering point for protesters:

1. Protesters split into groups of 5-10 people. People organize into groups using:
1.1. Commanders
1.1.1. The commander indicates the group’s status with their hand – a fist means the group is assembled and waiting for instructions. The number of extended fingers equals the number of free spaces.
1.2. Via social networks, the Briar app.
1.3. On their own (together with friends at the rally)
1.4. Preferably, groups should be homogeneous – groups of women, groups of tall people, groups of cyclists, etc.
2. Commanders are chosen within the groups:
2.1. The commander must use hand gestures (described in point 1.1.1) to identify themselves to other commanders.
2.2. Commanders must have a phone with the Briar app.
3. Commanders with “fists” gather in one place. The groups themselves are free to either stay or follow the commander.
4. Commanders are added to a private group in Briar.
5. Commanders discuss the course of the rally. Specifically, the following are established:
5.1. A “commander-in-chief” is chosen (if necessary)
5.2. Destination point
5.3. Group roles:
5.3.1. Vanguard/Tank-group/Main-Group – positioned at the front. Their tasks include:
5.3.1.1. Ensuring the formation is impenetrable to police
5.3.1.2. Breaking through blockades (if any exist)
5.3.1.3. Other tasks (to be supplemented)
5.3.2. Recon-group. Its tasks include:
5.3.3.1. Detecting cordons, barriers, paddy wagons, patrol groups, rapid response groups, police officers, and other agencies
5.3.3.2. Detecting bypass routes, as well as methods to facilitate the crowd’s passage through cordons and barriers
5.3.3.3. Maintaining direct contact with the “commander-in-chief” (if any), otherwise everything is decided via chat
5.3.3. Midgard-group. Its tasks include:
5.3.3.1. Pushing law enforcement officers back into the crowd
5.3.3.2. Suppressing law enforcement groups that have broken into the crowd
5.3.3.3. Providing medical aid to the main group
5.3.3.4. Supplies of equipment taken from law enforcement forces
5.3.4. Support/Spirit/Passive group. Its tasks include:
5.3.4.1. Delivering equipment
5.3.4.2. Delivering messages
5.3.4.3. Chants/extras/initiative
5.3.5. Communications group (possibly unnecessary). Its tasks include:
5.3.5.1. Delivering messages in the absence of Briar
5.3.5.2. Coordinating groups
6. The march begins

At the meeting point, a new goal and the paths to reach it are chosen.

Ancap-chan’s Answer

The action on July 27, of course, looked quite inspiring. Even if nothing more remarkable happens until the elections, and opposition candidates are still not allowed to run, the pro-government candidates still have little to look forward to in these elections. Moreover, it is quite likely that this will lead to changes in the election law: signatures may be allowed via government services, election deposits may be brought back, the collection threshold may be significantly lowered, or graphological expertise may be abolished — in short, the authorities will have to take measures to curb such scandals in the future, as it is too costly for them otherwise.

So, the Muscovites did well; it is only fitting that, as residents of the capital of a highly centralized state, they show increased opposition — and they did, while simultaneously demonstrating civilized behavior.

Now let’s talk a bit about tactics. Honestly, the provided snippet of the manual reminded me of War and Peace: Die erste Kolonne marschiert… die zweite Kolonne marschiert — the battle plan for Austerlitz. It is impossible to ensure a clear, disciplined behavior of large masses of people without full-scale combat coordination. A conditional National Guard can train for a long time to form their little boxes, run in lines, and so on. For people who have not trained in advance, only the simplest tactics work, such as “let’s go there and block the road,” “link arms,” “move through alleys to such-and-such a square,” and so on.

A person who comes to an unauthorized action can be quite inventive in terms of external representation; they came to create a picture and get impressions, which is what they are doing. They understand the overall goal of the action quite well, are able to identify provocateurs, and are generally very motivated — it is important not to waste their enthusiasm on meaningless nonsense. Using July 27 as an example, it is clear that without leaders, people stirred up the entire city center for several hours, but as soon as the police released the “guests of honor” and the latter began giving orders, everyone ended up localized in one square, surrounded and arrested.

Of course, if the protest becomes multi-day, people will allow themselves increasingly complex coordination and division of labor. Relatively disciplined groups of more or less constant composition and similar things will appear.

If you look at the protests in Yerevan, there was a headquarters, but it doesn’t seem like they dealt closely with tactical issues like “who leads people to which street to block traffic”; rather, they issued general appeals within some kind of campaign plan. In Russia, one cannot rely on the existence of a headquarters, because anyone who sticks their head out will be immediately imprisoned. Therefore, a much more decentralized tactic without hard clashes is forced here, until the security forces are exhausted. Only then can conditional protest leaders be used in that capacity to conduct negotiations.

And, of course, it is important for the protesters to maintain the loyalty of the passive part of Muscovites, because constant street protests in a large city inevitably create inconvenience. A war between the authorities and society is one thing, but an intra-civil conflict is something entirely different, and it is not worth letting it get to that.

looks impressive, but please don’t do it this way

Golunov as a white swan

Journalist Ivan Golunov spent his time demonstrating to his readers how uglily the Russian state operates. He wasn’t very successful: even among the liberal public, many knew neither his name nor, more importantly, what he wrote about.

Later, however, he himself became a living illustration of how uglily the Russian state operates, and it was so vivid that it required no special investigations. After all, who in Russia doesn’t know that cops can plant, and regularly do plant, banned substances on anyone, either to make quick money or to pad their stats. Nevertheless, the stars aligned in the right way, and Golunov became a global celebrity.

Golunov was printed in newspapers, Golunov was printed on T-shirts, Golunov was printed on posters, people went to pickets across the country with Golunov’s name—and the regime wavered. Golunov was released.

That’s it, it’s over, Golunov did his part, and now, as one ancient Greek recommended to another, he could even die, for he can become no greater. Instead, Golunov opened his mouth and immediately caused frustration among those who had fought so hard for his release, because he recommended that everyone breathe out and calm down.

Calm down? What calm down? The regime wavered; at the very least, Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is under attack. Crush it, damn it!

Crush it, damn it!

And the Muscovites went to crush it. Peacefully, civilly, on a holiday. The regime took the bait, and instead of one Golunov, we now have more than four hundred Golunovs.

Excellent, now we need twice as many people to take to the streets tomorrow, even though it’s no longer a holiday, and continue the fun. The Yekaterinburg protest blazed a trail; all that’s left is to repeat it in Moscow. Only increase the numbers, and with each day—new demands. Otherwise, it doesn’t work. Today they demanded the repeal of Article 228, tomorrow they can add the demand to dissolve the Rosgvardia, then activists from the regions will flock to Moscow, and after a month of escalation, Putin will flee to Donetsk via Crimea.

But unfortunately, most likely, none of this will happen. Golunov will not become a black swan for the regime. Simply, of the four hundred detainees, three hundred will receive fines and pay them, assuming that in three years they will sue the Russian budget for compensation through the ECHR. Cosmetic changes will be made to Article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, slightly reducing the sentences and changing, for example, the norm regarding the total weight of the product to a norm regarding the weight of the pure substance. The operatives who planted the bags will be imprisoned. The ones who ordered it will not be touched—you say it yourselves that the police plant drugs constantly, well, Golunov just had bad luck that day, it happens.

Alas, bursts of enthusiasm in Russia are still too short; even successful opportunities do not trigger a chain reaction. For now, the regime reliably controls the situation and is always ready to shove as many control rods into the reactor as necessary. But, as we know, in Russia, even this can sometimes have unforeseen consequences.

Everything is under control

Insult the authorities – earn a bitcoin

A video with an interesting initiative has appeared on the “Dobroum-TV” YouTube channel. Anyone who wishes can, downloading and printing a flyer, distribute it in the mailboxes of an apartment building, verifying this action with a video recording, and then send the resulting proofs via direct message to a specially created Telegram account, and receive a reward in Bitcoin at a price of approximately 10 rubles per flyer.

Of course, you won’t make much money from such work, because small-batch printing will eat up most of the reward. The feeling of moral satisfaction received is far more important.

Those who enjoy this activity can also have fun by pasting anarchist stickers. To do this, you need to contact a special Telegram bot, which ensures anonymous communication. You will be provided with stickers; all you have to do is complete the quest of creatively pasting them in various unexpected places.

Finally, you can also take your own initiative to decorate your city with various creative works, from graffiti to tombstones for Putin, or set up a fund to pay for such activities. The latter is especially convenient if you are physically outside Russian jurisdiction but do not agree to simply passively observe what is happening in your homeland. A government that legislatively prohibits showing disrespect toward it looks especially funny and ridiculous, so why deny yourself the pleasure of having some fun?