Mihail Pojarsky/Collective guilt

Now we can talk a little about collective responsibility, which has been discussed so much lately. To begin with, we need to understand where responsibility comes from and what moral obligations we have. Imagine a situation: you go and see that some evil is happening - for example, someone is beating a woman. Do you have an obligation to intervene in what is happening, or is it enough just not to hit anyone yourself? If you intervene, then the question arises: how to intervene? Is it enough to use the procedures - for example, to call the police? Or do you need to engage in battle with the aggressor, risking your own life (let's imagine that he is armed)? You can complicate the task a little more: imagine that you do not see what is happening, but only hear vague screams in the next apartment. And you cannot understand what is happening there: involuntary abuse or voluntary intercourse. Do you have to find out what exactly is going on in order to intervene?

There may be many options here. Let's say hardcore libertarians will argue that it's enough to "do not violate the NAP" and we have no positive moral obligations. The conventional wisdom, however, is rather that we have a duty to intervene in clear-cut situations, but no duty to risk our lives or obtain information where the situation does not seem clear-cut. If a vigilant citizen hears screams in a neighboring apartment, begins to find out what is happening, and then rushes to save the victim, risking his life - he will be considered a hero. However, if he does not do this, no one will blame him. In general, we have a duty to intervene when a) we have the resources b) we have the information.

Everything seems to be clear about personal responsibility, but when the conversation turns to the level of countries and states, then magic begins: invisible umbilical cords appear that connect people with their governments. No matter how informed you were about what was happening, how much you could influence - moral responsibility passes to you through an invisible umbilical cord, simply by the fact that you have a passport and the fact of being born within certain lines on the map. We do tend to think in terms of "communities." However, this kind of thinking is dangerous. Firstly, because guys with the letter Zu on userpics are now trying to sell us the same scheme, posting Bodrov about supporting "their country". It doesn't matter what you're trying to sell - collective guilt or collective delight - what matters is that you share the premise "we're all in the same boat." In this sense, the position of the conditional Strelkov does not differ from the position of the conditional Epple. Collective repentance is not a way to "work through the trauma", but fuel for revanchism, ressentiment, theories of the "knife in the back" format. After all, the collective essence is already established - it is enough just to change the dominant emotion. Second, collective guilt dilutes responsibility and makes it difficult to identify who is responsible individually. Hannah Arendt wrote about this. If everyone is to blame, then why is Eichmann being tried?

Therefore, it is better to follow the approach described at the beginning. The responsibility lies with those who had the resources and information. I believe that most of the population of Russia does not fall under this criterion - these people do not have truthful information about what is happening, and if they do, they do not have the opportunity to influence the government of the Russian Federation (except for attacking the National Guard with their bare hands). But on the other hand, various “Western partners” fall under this criterion of informed responsibility, who, at least since 2008 (especially since 2014), could not help but understand who they were dealing with, but continued to conclude profitable deals with the Putin regime while refusing to supply weapons to Ukraine. Now all these people, who have made economic and political capital on cooperation with tyranny, will talk about the collective guilt of Vasya from Uryupinsk, who prefers to believe the TV instead of laying down his head under the batons of the Russian Guard.

Mihail Pojarsky 2022-03-16