Good afternoon Elvira Baryakina and the Writer's Handbook are with you.
Today we'll talk about the "hot topics" that always spark discussions on the Internet.
It's no secret that in any society there are “pain points”. They become painful because there are several polar opinions on a particular topic, and, having encountered the opposite point of view, people begin to defend their vision of the situation. They want the world to be “like this” - convenient for them personally: otherwise, an inevitable catastrophe will occur.
So let's see what these "hot topics" are:
Policy
Migrants, refugees, national issue.
One of the hot topics is migrants, refugees and the national question. Some believe that migrants should be welcomed, others that they should be expelled from the country. On one side of the scale is safety, on the other there is a shortage of labor at reasonable prices.
Progressives vs. conservatives
There are people who defend the ideals of global peace, and people who are close to more conservative values. Some call for reforms, others for a return to basics. Everyone can be understood - everyone has their own comfort zone, but it is impossible to please everyone.
Great power vs. “Everything is bad with us”
Some people say that “We are already the coolest and have defeated everyone,” others write indignantly that no matter where you look, we have shortcomings. The eternal theme: the glass is half empty or half full
News
Heated discussions can be sparked by discussing news. Let's say the author read something in the news feed and gave his comments on this or that event. At the same time, he posed the question in such a way that you just want to argue with him.
Interpretation of statements
What did significant people say: President Putin, President Trump, etc.?
Natural disasters and terrorism
We show our reaction, discuss who is to blame, what to do, where to run, how to help.
Science news
Here we can talk about a variety of topics: admire the latest achievements of mankind, condemn them or doubt their usefulness. The main thing is not just to report this or that news, but to express your opinion - then there will probably be people who want to add something to the above.
News from the lives of celebrities
The whole range of emotions is manifested here - from admiration to outright hatred. A blogger can discuss a star's outfits, actions or statements... The shape of her nose, the shape of her dog's nose, the shape of her airplane's nose. Comments can be obtained by asking readers questions or deliberately challenging them to debate.
News from animal life
What happened at Melbourne Zoo? Who had a baby in San Diego? We show photographs and tell touching and/or interesting stories. If you have quality content, many will start sharing it.
Release of new interesting products
We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of new gadgets, films, programs, etc. Comments will appear from those bloggers who bring benefits to their readers, as well as from those who deliberately tease them.
Family
This topic has enormous potential for discussion - because it concerns everyone without exception.
Child safety
Disputes on this topic always evoke a lively response: what can be done and what cannot be done? Is it okay to hit children? What are the dangers of religious education of children? What about secular? Giving your child more independence? Don't let him leave you even one step? Intercede during conflicts? Or let him solve his problems himself?
Relationship between adult children and parents
This is a pain point for many people, so if you tell a story about this topic, give advice, or simply express your opinion, you can generate a significant reader response.
Love and romance
Who can you love and who can't? What is romance? Rose petals on a pillowcase or something else? What are relationships in marriage and before marriage? How to find the girl of your dreams or how to find the young man of your dreams? What about gifts? How to show your loved one that he is infinitely dear to you?
Divorce and division of property
How to survive a divorce? What about parental responsibilities? Who needs a plastic bathtub, and who needs a tea strainer? What to do with the children? Personal stories generate comments like “Thanks for sharing” and stories about their situation. Advice, especially categorical advice, often causes controversy.
Homosexual
On the topic of homosexuality, transvestites, etc. You can also argue until you are hoarse. This question doesn’t bother some people at all, but it infuriates others. And those who are tolerant of people of unconventional orientation can be driven to white heat by injustice towards gays.
Society
Interpretation of history
Some people remember the USSR with nostalgia, while others think that “under Sovka” everything was terrible: if it weren’t for the bloody KGB and Comrade Stalin, we would have lived like in Finland.
Feminism and gender equality
Some people are of the opinion that men and women should be given equal rights, while others believe that women should stay at home and men should earn money.
Believers vs. atheists
We discuss whether God exists or not. This also includes disputes over various Churches and denominations.
Education
Charity
There are some things that are clear: sick children need to be helped! But there are issues that cause fierce debate among the people. For example, some people think that it is pointless to spend effort and money on disabled people with severe mental retardation, while talented children from poor families cannot receive a normal education.
And then there are the problems of homeless people, drug addicts with deep and irreversible personality deformation, and the problem of criminals who need to be somehow adapted to life in society. For example, is it worth or not to do charity work for rapists? There is clearly something to argue about here!
Behavior in society
What is acceptable and what is unacceptable? Can only good things be said about the dead, or is the truth more important? Is it possible to criticize the Motherland, especially “in a difficult time for the Motherland”? What should you do with someone else’s child if he is hurting his younger brother in front of your eyes, but his mother doesn’t care? Social norms are constantly changing and what was normal yesterday now looks like barbarism - and here one can argue endlessly.
Health
Alcohol and smoking
You can find any opinions on this topic on the Internet. Some people ardently support the culture of winemaking, others believe that any alcohol is poison. Some people cannot stand tobacco smoke, others smoke like a locomotive and are indignant when non-smokers impose their lifestyle on them.
Fitness
Which exercises are beneficial and which are harmful? This topic causes heated debate, because... A huge number of dropouts and outright charlatans have proliferated on the Internet, who clearly do not have a special education. At the same time, who is who and who is right and who is wrong is often also determined by amateurs.
Plastic surgery
“Girls, where did you get such cool Botox? Your face looks like a doll’s!” Firstly, you can argue on the topic “Whether or not you should fight the natural course of time,” secondly, you can discuss various means, thirdly, you can ask questions and exchange recommendations, etc. You can also discuss the results - with yourself and with the stars.
ethnoscience
We discuss and apply the treatment methods that our grandfathers used.
Alternative medicine
We discuss and apply treatment methods such as homeopathy and acupuncture.
Abortion
Is the embryo already a person or not yet? Does humanity need to multiply if there are already 7 billion of us? Does the state have the right to decide whether a woman should have a child or not?
Nutrition
The topic of nutrition is not just an exchange of recipes, but also heated debates about the benefits of foods, the correctness and incorrectness of cutting dill, the secret of the “true Olivier”, etc.
Healthy lifestyle
We discuss what is harmful and what is useful. If you provide reliable, scientifically based information, then honor and praise to you. If you specialize in pseudoscientific information, well, that’s also an option, why not?... Some people are attracted and pleased by this.
What is youth from the point of view of modern science?
From the point of view of modern science, youth are a social group of people who are from 16 to 45 years old.
2. What are the features of youth socialization?
As a rule, young people are involved in the learning process: at school, university, and also in work. That is, we can still talk about primary socialization, when a person continues to assimilate norms, values, ways of life, and so on.
3. What are the characteristics of modern Russian youth?
The main feature is that the period from 16 to 45 years accommodates at least 2 generations of people. That is, youth consists of people of different ages who belong to different generations. Modern youth know their rights and freedoms, defend them, lead an independent life, strive for a successful career and self-knowledge.
4. What is the attitude of modern young people towards politics?
Young people have completely different attitudes towards politics: some are politically active, while others are apolitical. It is necessary to take into account the peculiarities of the country in which a person lives, the level and type of his education, origin, and so on. But as a rule, students, like all young people, are the most politically active, because many of them are unemployed, and many are in a marginal position.
5. How do young people behave in the face of social change? Which aspect of behavior resonates most with you?
Again, in different ways. It all depends on whether young people support these social changes or not. The aspect close to me depends on the nature of the changes: serfdom - I am against, but the introduction of a progressive school of taxes, expansion of the middle class and reduction of social inequality - I am for.
6. How is youth extremism expressed?
Extremism is translated as a state of extremeness or adherence to extreme views. Accordingly, youth extremism is a commitment to extreme views: the physical destruction of a group of people, murder, executions, chaos through terrorist attacks, and so on.
7. What are the causes of youth extremism?
In social insecurity and lack of real social mobility.
8. What role should the state play in the formation of progressive youth in our country?
The state should only care about social protection, compliance with laws, the rights and freedoms of young people, economic growth and so on, but not about the formation of progressive youth. It will be formed when there are conditions for this, and not through propaganda and coercion.
9. What are the features of the youth subculture? What are its positive and negative features?
A subculture is a part of a culture that differs from the majority in appearance or behavior. Youth cultures are formed from “fandom.” And one more feature: they are formed from certain interests of people.
10. Conduct a discussion on the topic “My attitude to youth problems.”
Please do this in class.
Modern science considers youth as a socio-demographic group of society, identified on the basis of a set of characteristics of social status, socio-psychological properties, which are determined by the level of socio-economic, cultural development, conditions of socialization in society. Youth usually refers to people aged 16-30 years. This is a generation going through the stage of socialization, acquiring (and at a more mature age - having already acquired) educational, professional, cultural and other social functions. A relatively more homogeneous part of the youth, both in terms of age and social characteristics, is represented by secondary school students and students, whose main activity is study and preparation for future working life. The socialization of youth is characterized by a large role of educational influence. Therefore, in almost any society, socialization has a pronounced educational character. Society’s refusal to purposefully implement the educational function leads to deformation of socialization, the dominance of the adaptation process in it, i.e. adaptation to the social environment. This trend is especially dangerous for the socialization of young people in a transitional type of society, characterized by the loss of clear social guidelines and norms. One of the most important aspects of individual socialization is political socialization. It exists in all modern societies. Political socialization is understood as the totality of those forms of activity, as a result of which an individual or group assimilates political culture, becoming a political subject. At the same time, the political socialization of youth, in particular modern Russian youth, has its own trends and characteristics. The attitude of modern youth towards the existing authorities in Russia is neutral. The younger generation treats politics and power as an objective reality that evokes neither delight nor sharp negative emotions. This gives grounds to talk about the apoliticality of Russian youth. This situation has a negative content. If in a stable society the priorities of private life are logical and natural, then in a situation of a systemic crisis, the social indifference of young people is fraught with irreversible consequences for the future of the country. No less dangerous is the excessive politicization of certain groups of youth, which acquires the features of political and national extremism. According to a sociological study conducted among high school students in St. Petersburg schools, “participation in political life” took last place (6.7% of respondents). Only 16.7% of respondents are interested in politics. The political apathy of young people can be explained by the fact that the reforms being implemented in Russia have hit young people the hardest, and also by the fact that over the past few years there has been no meaningful policy towards young people as an independent socio-demographic group. As a result, a total alienation of young people from power is formed, which can develop into active rejection of it. On the other hand, a certain part of young people have fit into the new conditions of life, and their non-participation in politics is due to the fact that they do not see the need to radically change anything in the current way of life and find more promising ways of self-realization. However, a more detailed analysis of the data obtained does not provide grounds for an unambiguous conclusion about the apoliticality of young people. They indicate that the apoliticality of young people is not universal. More than half (52%) of young Russians follow events taking place in the country, 18% constantly read newspapers. In addition, the results of the study show that as people grow older and accumulate social and life experience, interest in politics grows. Thus, at the age of 24-26 years old, twice as many young people closely follow politics as those under the age of 20. Interest in politics is also increasing due to rising levels of education. Certain social and professional groups show a particularly keen interest in politics. These are primarily young military men, entrepreneurs, and representatives of the humanitarian intelligentsia. And the lack of such interest is typical for young workers, trade workers, rural residents and, oddly enough, students. The deterioration of the situation in the country in the late 1990s. has led to the fact that the vast majority of government institutions have completely lost their authority in the eyes of both the population as a whole and young people. Currently, in the minds of young people there is a mainly negative view of the current state of Russia and its future. Only 8.8 % of young people believe that Russia will become an economically developed country in the next 5-10 years, 12.6% - that it will become a democratic state. At the same time, young people have not yet decided what political system they would like The formation of an opinion about politics as an alien sphere and far from the interests of young people is greatly facilitated by ideas about the low professional and moral qualities of those who are in power today. However, such an opinion is not evidence of a generational conflict. The majority of young people believe that now a new young nomenklatura is in power, which has money, but little political experience to govern the regions and the country as a whole. One of the fundamental issues that has been increasingly discussed lately is the question of the possibility of radicalization of modern youth. Moreover, those who are ready for active methods of protest are not only poor elements, but also a significant part of those who consider their financial situation today to be quite prosperous. That is, under certain conditions, those young people who already “have something to lose” may resort to radical methods of defending their own interests. Nevertheless, even with a deterioration in living standards, the likelihood of a sharp radicalization of a significant part of young people is relatively small, primarily due to the extremely low level of their self-organization. However, this does not mean that the entry into life of the current and especially the next generation of young people will occur without conflict. Increasing requirements for education and qualifications, a noticeable decrease in demand for labor in finance, business, trade, i.e. in those areas that are preferred by the vast majority of young people, is already beginning to have an impact, causing young people to worry about their future. In moments of serious upheavals and turning points that periodically arise in the development of any society, changes in values, living standards, unclear life prospects and aggravation of social contradictions, extremism poses a particular danger to society. The dissatisfaction of young people with living conditions in the country leads to the fact that many dream of going abroad. For another part of the youth, who do not have such a perspective, negativism in relation to the current situation gives rise to the desire to change their lives by any means, including extreme ones. Youth extremism as a phenomenon of our life, expressed in disdain for the rules and norms of behavior in force in society or in their denial, can be viewed from different positions. It can be associated with changes in the political and economic state of society, and with the ongoing radical breakdown of patterns of behavior that have developed over centuries and are sanctified by culture. In the second case, we can say that modern youth extremism in Russia is a reflection of a sharp transition from one type of culture to another. Changing cultural eras entails changing norms of behavior. In the current situation, young people are well aware of the discrepancy between the cultural norms imposed on them and real life, and at the same time they refuse to understand and accept the entire traditional culture. This conflict can manifest itself both at the conscious and behavioral levels. Extremism is often identified with fascism, chauvinism, and radicalism. In reality, all these phenomena are only parts of the broader phenomenon of political extremism. Signs of political extremism are defined in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. These are public calls for a violent seizure of power, the commission of actions aimed at a violent seizure of power, organizing an armed rebellion, an encroachment on the life of a statesman or public figure. However, political extremism in its pure form is rare. Compared to the extremism of older generations, youth political extremism has some significant differences. It is less organized, spontaneous and does not have a serious ideological basis. Young extremists are not inclined to compromise, while the overwhelming majority of their older “colleagues”, when a critical situation occurs, can partially change their political position and negotiate with a stronger enemy. As a rule, young extremists do not yet have sufficient experience to carry out their actions, so many of their actions turn out to be ineffective and ineffective. But the actions of young extremists themselves are more active, cruel and decisive than those of older and more experienced ones. This can be partly explained by the fact that, due to their age, young people are less inclined than adults to be afraid of prison, death, or physical injury, so they are ready to take the most risky actions. Their lack of fear of danger is reinforced by a sense of impunity. In addition, many young extremists, as it turns out, cannot be prosecuted due to their young age. Typically, young extremists tend to group around some well-known extremist organization (association). Moreover, at first a young man who comes to an organization of this kind may not be an extremist; he becomes one in the process of participating in the activities of such an organization and gradually assimilating its ideology. Currently in Russia there are parties and organizations that fall under the definition of extremism. In terms of their ideological orientation, these kinds of extremist associations are of both the right, left, and religious persuasion, and in each of them there is a certain group of young people who do their best to contribute to the activities of such an association. One can name a number of reasons and factors that give rise to youth political extremism. The first of the factors influencing the development and emergence of youth political extremism is modern living conditions, which have significantly worsened over the past few years. There are a huge number of young people in Russia who are not among those who succeed. They realize with horror that they are doomed to vegetation, that no one needs them, that they will live much worse than their parents, and that the uncertainty of the situation existing in the country at the moment will last for a long time, which means they have no future. This forces you to look for some way out, gives rise to discontent, pushes you to revolt, to oppose the existing political system, authorities and society - i.e. directly to opposition-minded organizations. Among these organizations, the most attractive to young people are far-right and far-left extremist organizations - organizations that provide a sense of risk, romance, the opportunity for active action and do not place emphasis on the moral qualities and mental abilities of a young person. A small part of young people join the ranks of officially recognized opposition organizations, mainly leftists. But only a few can stay there, since in these organizations there is discipline and clear, firmly observed moral principles and ideals. Another reason that influenced the surge in youth extremism, primarily right-wing radical and fascist, was the war in Chechnya. It caused colossal damage to national policy in Russia and gave rise to the idea of Caucasians as enemies of the Russian people, the Orthodox faith, and as Islamist fanatics who use the most extreme measures to spread their faith. The youth thus “found an enemy.” Another factor that has exacerbated extreme nationalist sentiments among Russian youth is the intensification of migration processes associated with the resettlement of large groups of people, primarily from the regions of the Caucasus and Central Asia. The consequence of the unprecedented decline and crisis in all sectors of production in Russia has been unemployment, especially among young people. Therefore, the influx of migrants further aggravates this problem. In addition, some newcomers began to engage in criminal activities. Ethnic criminal groups are being created that engage in thefts, robberies, commit violence, and murder, mainly against the indigenous Russian population, often leaving local criminal groups far behind in the cruelty and scale of their actions. Finally, insufficient attention of the state to youth problems of leisure, cultural development and moral education also affects the emergence of youth extremism. Poor care for young people’s leisure time, useful pastime, the lack of free discos, creative clubs, and sports clubs force young people to fill their leisure time on their own and often push them onto the path of hooliganism, vandalism and extremism. And extremist organizations are doing everything possible to attract as many young people and teenagers as possible into their ranks, taking advantage of their desire to have fun and fill their free time with something. Mass culture had its influence on the development of the preconditions for extremism among Russian youth. Its models, copied from inferior Western standards, bloody action films and thrillers, as well as television programs that cultivate cruelty and violence among young people, lead to the fact that a significant part of young people, morally, spiritually and mentally crippled by mass culture, grow up aggressive, unspiritual and cruel. The current state of the youth subculture in Russia is characterized by the following features. This is the social alienation of modern Russian youth, which most often manifests itself in apathy, indifference to the life of society, figuratively speaking, in the position of an “outside observer.” Intergenerational alienation is worsening, including a wide range of rejection - from the destruction of intra-family contacts to opposing oneself to all previous generations. This opposition is especially clear at the level of cultural values of young people - youth fashion, music, communication - that are different from their parents. It is at this level that the subculture of the younger generation acquires noticeable countercultural elements: leisure is perceived, especially by youth, as the main sphere of life, and the overall satisfaction with the life of a young person depends on satisfaction with it. General education for schoolchildren and vocational education for students fade into the background before the implementation of economic (earning money) and leisure (interestingly spend free time) needs. But leisure often turns into “doing nothing,” while the cognitive and creative functions of leisure are not realized. However, the youth subculture is a distorted mirror of the adult world of things, relationships and values. One cannot count on effective cultural self-realization of the younger generation in a sick society, especially since the cultural level of other age and socio-demographic groups of the Russian population is also constantly declining. There is a tendency towards dehumanization and demoralization in the content of art, which is manifested in the increase in scenes of violence in cinema, theater, music, and television. All this is contrary to popular morality and has a negative impact on the youth audience. Screen violence reinforces the criminalization of modern life, with a particularly detrimental effect on children, adolescents and young adults, who constitute the main audience of cinemas and video stores. As you know, crime among them continues to grow steadily. Russian youth have always been distinguished, on the one hand, by radicalism, and on the other, by a rational understanding of reality. In modern conditions, the process of socialization of an individual has become more complex and lengthened, and accordingly, the criteria for its social maturity have become different. They are determined not only by entering into an independent working life, but also by completing education, obtaining a profession, real political and civil rights, and financial independence from parents. The action of these factors is non-simultaneous and ambiguous in different social groups, therefore the assimilation by a young person of the system of social roles of adults turns out to be contradictory. He can be responsible and serious in one area and feel and act like a teenager in another. Family, school, and university play an important role in the development of social maturity of young people. All of them perform an educational function, and it is at the present moment that the work on educating young people must be strengthened. But it cannot be fruitful without the constant support of the state, which must create the necessary socio-economic and political conditions for the formation of a comprehensively developed and responsible personality and block the way to all manifestations of extremism. Questions and tasks 1. What is youth from the point of view of modern science? 2. What are the features of youth socialization? 3. What are the characteristics of modern Russian youth? 4. What is the attitude of modern young people towards politics? 5. How do young people behave in the face of social change? Which aspect of behavior resonates most with you? 6. How is youth extremism expressed? 7. What are the causes of youth extremism? 8. What role should the state play in the formation of progressive youth in our country? 9. What are the features of the youth subculture? What are its positive and negative features? 10. Conduct a discussion on the topic “My attitude to youth problems.”
about the project
This is what we briefly call the network project of the International “Memorial”, which has been carried out by one and a half dozen memorial organizations in different regions of Russia since 2007. The essence of the project lies in the creation of a public discussion space through the formation of civic educational platforms on the basis of memorial organizations.
What was the reason for its occurrence? With the visible diversity and combined plurality of intellectual forces capable of inducing a thinking public to publicly discuss certain current civil, social, political, economic, and cultural problems, today in most regions there is often no space where these people could meet. This is due not only and not so much to the lack of discussion platforms as such, but rather to the underdeveloped culture of “intersectoral” communication, to the habitual self-isolation of public figures, scientists, politicians, journalists, and broad layers of the professional humanitarian intelligentsia in their professional environments.
One of the main problems of modern Russian society is that individual social groups in the regions, relying on democratic values in their daily work, exist in completely different spheres, move independently of each other, do not rely on each other in any way, and, accordingly, do not strengthening each other.
Today, when the space of freedom and democracy in the country has narrowed, anti-Western rhetoric is returning, when the search for external and internal enemies has again become popular, and history has again become a means of political struggle, the consolidation of thinking and socially active forces at the regional level is especially important.
In these conditions, the Memorial Society sees one of its tasks as creating “points of interaction”, junctions between different social worlds, productive “exchange zones” in which the atmosphere of freedom and independence will be preserved and strengthened, coalitions of independent NGOs, democratically oriented political forces, free intellectuals, student groups. In addition, the systematic holding of public events by regional organizations participating in the project contributes to the involvement of active people who today are outside civil institutions in public activities.
The substantive basis of the project is the holding of public events, and their central link is discussions on current topics of acute public interest. Taking into account the specifics of “Memorial”, some of the discussions often take place under the banner “Lessons of the past - experience of the present”, that is, all the unique intellectual baggage accumulated by “Memorial” is used, associated with historical memory, with “casting bridges” in the problem of human rights from the past to the present and from the present to the past. In addition to discussions, other events are held: meetings, seminars, lectures, book presentations, film screenings, etc. These events are also largely controversial. Memorial attaches particular importance to exhibitions on current topics. Exhibitions are extremely effective for discussion and attract many people who have not traditionally been in the civil activist sphere.
Events are most often carried out by Youth Memorial in partnership with other independent NGOs in close cooperation with various democratic institutions in the region. Moreover, in 2009, our organization went beyond its borders - events were held in Kirov, Elabuga (Republic of Tatarstan).
Discussion project events in 2009
In 2009, Youth Memorial, together with other public organizations, held several diverse events in Perm and the Perm region, reflecting the main objectives of the general memorial discussion project - the inclusion of regional network organizations in the discussion of pressing problems of our time at the local level, expanding the social base and increasing the popularity of Memorial "
Below is information on some of these events.
Discussion “Youth extremism: you can’t fight to cure”
On April 14, at Perm State University, with the support of the Department of Political Science and the Perm Electoral Support Center, a discussion “Youth extremism: you can’t fight to cure” took place. The discussion was moderated by an employee of the Youth Memorial, Sergei Ponomarev.
About 30 people took part in the discussion, mostly students of political science, lawyers and teachers. Their main task was to find answers to the questions: What is meant by youth extremism? How dangerous is he really for modern Russia? Who are the young extremists? What should society do with them? Etc. During the discussion, two videos were presented to the audience: a fragment from the film “American History X” and a photo report of recent unrest in Moldova.
The conversation turned out to be difficult. The very concept of “extremism” has caused a lot of controversy. Some insisted on a legal definition, others meant any type of political violence, and others were ready to classify almost everything as extremism, including strikes and jaywalking.
One of the definitions we settled on is the following. Extremism means commitment to extreme, predominantly violent means of achieving goals. He is characterized by uncompromising, action on the “all or nothing” principle.
Assessing the scale of the phenomenon has also proven challenging. There is either extremely little analytical information regarding youth extremism in Russia in regular media, or it is extremely biased. On the one hand, polls show that the majority of young Russians do not see a big problem in the existence of radical movements in the country. On the other hand, more and more people are ready to support radical nationalist slogans like “Russia is for Russians!”
Thus, according to surveys by the Levada Center, the number of people wishing to implement this slogan “within reasonable limits” increased from 31% in 1998 to 42% in 2008. The number of people who believe that it is high time to openly implement such an idea has remained at approximately 15% all these years. You can always argue about the methods and figures of statistics, but this will not cancel the problem itself. Extremism, alas, is the reality of our lives and various communities and groups are beginning to resort to it more and more often: from young skinheads to pensioners, if we recall the monetization of benefits.
Another question is how does society feel about this? Part of the audience was inclined to view youth extremism as a manifestation of youthful maximalism and a thirst for extreme sports. One of the main reasons for its occurrence was said to be the resentment present among young people today, the difficulties of socialization, social stratification, the desire to restore justice of the type “it’s a shame for the state!”
Other participants in the discussion tended to view modern radical movements as a kind of normal phenomenon for any type of society, reflecting differences in people's views and forms of achieving their goals. They called for a more serious attitude towards these organizations, for their study, analysis and for constructive counteraction to the ideology of hatred, hostility and intolerance.
The participants were especially excited by the question: “Under what conditions are you personally ready to become an extremist and pick up a cobblestone?” Someone said that in case of extreme despair, a direct threat to life, or when there is nothing to feed the child. Others, on the contrary, convinced that it was because of children that extreme measures should not be resorted to. Still others said that under no circumstances should one resort to radical actions and that an agreement can always be reached. Still others suggested that they try to sit down at the negotiating table with Hitler or the cannibal...
It is unlikely that there can be a single correct answer to what to do; everyone chooses for themselves depending on the situation. The past discussion achieved its main goal - increasing the interest of young people in this problem and the awareness that we need to try to avoid simple solutions in our very difficult times.
Discussion “Modern memories of the history of the 20th century: war or competition? Is dialogue possible?
From April 10 to April 14, 2009, 8 volunteers of the German organization “Actions of Redemption - Service for Peace” (abbreviated as ASF) became guests of the Perm Youth Memorial. Such meetings in Perm have already become traditional. Participants in discussions and excursions are young people who are concerned about overcoming the totalitarian past in Russia and Germany, about forms of preserving memory, teaching history, civic education, and developing volunteerism among youth.
The idea of holding the discussion belongs to the German side. ASF volunteers, currently undergoing a “voluntary social year” in public organizations in Moscow, St. Petersburg, Perm, Voronezh and Volgograd, are keenly interested in the history of our country. And especially the so-called Stalinist period (1930 - 1950s). They show no less interest in modern Russian society. How does it perceive its difficult history today? Have any conclusions been drawn from the tragedies that befell him? How is memory stored?
The questions are very relevant, given that recently in Russia there has been an increasingly clear tendency to once again revise national history in the spirit of “heroic achievements and exploits”, justifying political repression and sacrifices. We are witnessing the return of sovereign-patriotic terminology, myths about the “strong hand” and the good “Master”. In this regard, it is clear why the idea of holding such a meeting met with warm support at the Youth Memorial.
On April 11, a joint excursion of Perm residents and Germans to the Memorial Museum of the History of Political Repression “Perm-36” took place. It set the stage for the discussion that took place the next day, April 12. The topic of the meeting was “Modern memories of the history of the 20th century: war or competition? Is dialogue possible? The formal reason for the discussion was the anniversary of the publication of the appeal of the International Society “Memorial” entitled “On national images of the past (20th century and the “war of memories”).” This document provided a brief analysis of the conflicts of national memories (collective images of the past) that exist in Europe today. Moreover, special mention is made of conflicts associated with today's interpretations of the events of the 1930s - 1950s, the heyday of totalitarian regimes in Germany and the USSR.
The value of this document also lies in the fact that in their appeal the memorialists proposed a way to solve this difficult and extremely complicated problem - the way of an honest and impartial dialogue, a large pan-European and universal discussion.
But a year has already passed since the release of the appeal. And so far there is no adequate reaction and serious steps in this direction, both from individual states and communities. What is this? Reluctance to take on the burden of responsibility? The desire to preserve “heroic images” and the desire to “not get dirty”? Or is this proposal from the Memorial Society premature? That generation of people has not yet passed away, the wounds have not yet healed... Or maybe the world community will never be able to agree on what happened and how to treat this history?
The voting preceding the discussion showed that the majority of Perm participants consider the most dominant (popular, widespread) assessment of the national history of the 20th century in our country as heroic. At the same time, they themselves tend to evaluate it rather as a tragic story. German volunteers are not so categorical in their assessments, believing that German society has a very complex and contradictory attitude towards the history of the 20th century. At the same time, almost all participants in the discussion agreed that today there is a split in both German and Russian societies regarding the understanding and assessment of the history of the last century.
The organizers of the meeting invited participants to discuss issues of differences in interpretations in collective memory using a specific example, a historical event. Those gathered were divided into four small international groups of five to six people, approximately “Poles”, “Russians”, “Ukrainians” and “Germans”. Each group discussed the issue of today's attitude to the events of September 17, 1939 (the USSR attack on Poland). In a short time, they must decide how a given people today interprets this period of their history, what arguments are used and why. Shortly before the presentation of the results of the discussion in small groups, all participants in the discussion were also asked to find the most acceptable ways to reduce (or resolve) the conflict with the memory of this event among other peoples.
The task turned out to be not as simple as it seemed to the young people at first. I had to temporarily become a representative of another people, look at things from a different perspective, defend someone else’s view, often different from my usual one.
As a result of the discussion, it became clear that there is much more negativity towards Russia, as the successor of the former USSR, than towards Germany, in whose society the awareness of the tragedy occurred a long time ago and at a deep level, and whose steps towards reconciliation are well known. The claims of the “Poles,” who perceive themselves exclusively as victims, boil down, first of all, to the fact that the “Russians” have still not apologized for the crime committed in 1939 and in the subsequent period. This circumstance is aggravated today by the fact that “Russia continues to be closed to us and does not perceive us as partners.” The last circumstance is also a matter of grievance for the “Ukrainians”. Disrespect for their independence and their own view of history leaves a significant imprint on the overall attitude towards Russia.
The opinion of today’s “Russians” regarding this event is completely opposite: the attack on Poland on September 17 is regarded as an insignificant event, and guilt is recognized exclusively by the Stalinist leadership of the USSR. Today's actualization of this issue in the media is seen, first of all, as the desire of the Polish side to use this tragedy for political purposes.
Further general discussion was built around proposals for resolving such national memory conflicts. The Russian participants in the discussion see a way out of the impasse, first of all, through improving the education system (joint international projects, destroying the stereotypical consciousness of Russians through historical teaching, creating new institutes for training teachers). In their opinion, education is possible only if archives are opened and the field for discussion is expanded, especially in the media. For German participants, personal communication between representatives of different nations and the opportunity to discuss issues of history and modernity at a variety of levels and forms (Internet forums, new youth clubs) seem important.
Assessing the past discussion, it is worth noting the positive fact that all its participants, albeit partially, were able to overcome national complexes. For them, in the end, what was important was not so much the arguments justifying the actions or actions of a particular country THEN, but the opportunity to listen, perceive, and meet another point of view TODAY. Thus, young people proved to themselves that such a Dialogue is possible.
Presentation “Youth volunteer programs and projects in the Kama region: what, when and why?”
On April 28, 2009, as part of a civil expedition in the city of Tchaikovsky, Perm Territory (the expedition is organized by several well-known public organizations, the leading organizer is the Perm Civil Chamber), Youth Memorial held two events aimed at attracting young people to discuss and participate in various forms of civic activity. In particular, a presentation was held for a youth audience, teachers, representatives of public organizations, and journalists from Tchaikovsky entitled “Youth volunteer programs and projects in the Kama region: what, when and why?” A record number of people for this kind of event took part in the meeting - more than 80 people. The presenter was Robert Latypov. The discussion was not only about the existing programs and projects of the Youth Memorial (primarily volunteer ones), but also about the problem of youth participation in civic activity in general. The speech was clearly a success, since it caused heated debate in the audience regarding the opportunities available for local youth for self-realization (there are both all-Russian and purely local problems here), and also because Memorial’s connections were established with new youth organizations. And two articles were published in the local press, which reflected this meeting and the subsequent discussion.
Discussion “Youth and politics: who is dancing who?”
There, at the Tchaikovsky Youth Palace, on April 28, a discussion “Youth and politics: who is dancing whom?” took place. Since the time difference between the events was significant, the audience that came was somewhat different. In addition to youth leaders of student and school associations, journalists, the so-called “working youth”, as well as young parliamentarians, predominated here. During the discussion, footage from the films “Election Day”, “All the King’s Men” and “Hipsters” was used. 32 people took part in the meeting. The course of the discussion was somewhat similar to the discussion held by Robert Latypov and Sergei Ponomarev in the city of Berezniki on March 13, 2009, but it was noticeably livelier, more energetic, and sharper.
Press conference before the play “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich”
One of the most notable cultural events in the Perm region in 2009 was undoubtedly the premiere of Alexander Tchaikovsky’s opera “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” based on the story by A. I. Solzhenitsyn. This event in itself could not pass by the Perm “Memorial” - and so it was. Not only did the Perm Opera and Ballet Theater issue 100 free tickets for the premiere to Memorial members (mostly former repressed people were the audience), but the theater also held a joint press conference with Memorial with a presentation of an exhibition dedicated to the history of the Bolshoi Terror" of 1937-1938 in the foyer of the theater. All this took place on the evening of June 10.
The press conference on the occasion of the premiere of the opera was attended by the chairman of the Perm regional branch of the Memorial society A. M. Kalikh, the co-chairman of the Youth Memorial, R. R. Latypov and the chief conductor of the orchestra A. A. Platonov. We were not able to track all the publications and stories on local television, but we know for sure about at least two stories regarding the opera itself (very flattering reviews) and the press conference. As for the exhibition, we used paper materials from the memorial exhibition “1937 - Great Terror - 1938”, as well as materials from the funds of the Perm “Memorial”. The theater's technical staff helped us create it. In total, more than 500 people were able to see the exhibition materials.
Public lecture “Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn: together or apart?”
On June 16, 2009, as part of the series of Perm public lectures and debates, held for the second year by the Perm Civil Chamber and the Center for Civil Analysis and Independent Research (GRANI Center), a public lecture was held at the Art Club of the Ural Hotel by Alexander Mikhailovich Kalikh, Chairman Perm regional branch of the International Society "Memorial". The topic of the lecture and discussion based on it is “Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn: together or apart?” It was revealed through consideration of the following questions: The eternal and irreconcilable dispute of the opposition about the future of Russia: “soilers” and “Westerners” - who is right? Or is the truth different? Do the “lines” of Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn continue today? Who are the “soilists” and “Westerners” in Russia and Perm today?
Alexander Mikhailovich offered the assembled public a retrospective analysis of the history of the relationship between Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn in the period 1960 - 1990, the fundamental disputes between the two thinkers and the evolution of their views. Through the analysis of individual, but most striking documents (appeals to the authorities, memorandums, open letters, draft constitutions) written by Sakharov and Solzhenitsyn, Alexander Mikhailovich tried to show, on the one hand, the greatness and indisputable civil feat of each of them and, on the other, the deep difference in their understanding of reality and, therefore, views on how to improve it. It was sadly stated that today the legacy of both thinkers and public figures is practically not studied, not used, and they themselves are practically forgotten. The subsequent two-hour discussion only proved the correctness of this thesis.
Among the audience (more than 40 people) who came were representatives of public organizations, politicians, officials, journalists, students and university teachers.
You can read about the essence of the lecture in the article by Alexander Mikhailovich Kalikh “Subjective about the objective.”
Discussion “Forget the Gulag?”
The discussion was held on July 26 as part of the International Forum “Sawmill” on the basis of the Memorial Museum “Perm-36” (Kuchino village, Chusovsky district, Perm region). Given the size of the Sawmill and its location, we hoped to attract a diverse range of participants to the discussion. Including ideological opponents. Unfortunately, our hopes were not justified, since by the time the discussion took place the bulk of the “Sawmill” spectators had already begun to leave (this was the last day of the forum, just before it closed), and the site itself, assigned to us by the forum organizers - the volunteer camp - was located in away from the main and famous sites. However, the discussion still took place. And although it was attended mainly by “our” people, it turned out to be no less lively and instructive.
The main organizer and moderator of the meeting was Andrey Suslov, Doctor of Historical Sciences, head of the Department of Russian History at Perm State Pedagogical University, director of the Center for Civic Education and Human Rights. The meeting participants were volunteers of the youth shift “Changing the World” at the Perm-36 museum, students and teachers of PSPU (30 people in total). The conversation focused on the topic of what prevents Russian society today from remembering state terror. Very quickly, the meeting participants came to the conclusion that one of the main obstacles was not so much the state as the missing “request” for such memory on the part of society itself. The state, seeing this indifferent attitude of society, builds its policy in the field of national history in the spirit of its glorification and retouching of all negative pages of the past. During the discussion, a variety of possibilities were raised to reverse this situation, to make the memory of the tragedy relevant and discussed. As one such example, a summer school was given, which was supposed to take place from July 27 to August 8 in the Perm region. It brought together German and Perm students who wanted to explore existing memorial sites and museums dedicated to the topic of political repression in the USSR.
By the way. This project was successfully implemented by Youth Memorial and the Institute for the Study of Eastern European History (Bremen, Germany). As a result of her work, a video film “What to do?” was released. and a brochure with articles by school participants is being prepared for publication.
In conclusion, it must be said that although there were no separate publications on the discussion itself (the above-mentioned mistakes of the organizers affected), in general, the coverage of all Sawmill events today was at a decent level. Consequently, the information component of the discussion project was partially completed.
Presentation “Why is it profitable and interesting for me to be a volunteer?”
On October 7, 2009, as part of a civil expedition in the city of Kirov (similar expeditions are organized by several well-known Perm public organizations, the leading organizer is the Perm Civil Chamber), Youth Memorial held two events aimed at attracting young people to discuss and participate in various forms of civic activity. In particular, a presentation of the projects of the Perm Youth “Memorial” took place for a youth audience, teachers, representatives of public organizations, journalists of the Kirov region entitled “Why is it profitable and interesting for me to be a volunteer?”
A little more than 30 people took part in the meeting. The presenter was Robert Latypov. The discussion was not only about the existing programs and projects of the Youth Memorial (primarily volunteer ones), but also about the problem of youth participation in civic activity in general. The performance was a clear success, since it caused heated debate in the audience regarding the available opportunities for local, Kirov youth for self-realization (there are both all-Russian and their own, purely local problems). It was also a success that Memorial established connections with new youth organizations.
Discussion “Youth and politics: are we really that far from each other?”
There, in the Regional Youth Palace of Kirov, on October 7, a discussion “Youth and politics: are we really so far from each other?” took place. Since the time difference between the two events was significant, the audience that came was already different. In addition to youth leaders of student associations and journalists, young politicians (Yabloko members) predominated here, as well as members of the Youth Parliament of the Kirov Region. 18 people took part in the meeting. The moderator of the discussion, Robert Latypov, offered the audience the following questions for discussion: Why is the older generation today more politically active than young people? Does the low political activity of young people mean that they have no problems? Are the current elections in Russia opening up access to power for young people? Do young people not want politics or are they not allowed into politics? Why do young people need democracy if they don’t use it? Does that “youth potential” really exist? If yes, then why is it not visible? What should young people do to force the authorities to take them into account? Prospects for self-realization of young people today - where and what are they?
The discussion, due to the relatively greater preparation of the audience, turned out to be lively and energetic. The discussion of local and regional problems, especially those related to the relationship between youth and the state, was particularly acute. Some of the speakers (conditionally “pessimists”) prefer to see young people as the most conservative and apolitical layer of Russian society, the gravediggers of any civil initiative. They suggest that in the near future we should not count on young people as a serious ally in positive changes in the country.
Others (“optimists”) believe that young people today, although they have few tools to influence the surrounding reality, still have potential. But it is important to “wake him up”: with direct appeals, delegation of powers and status (regional youth parliaments were cited as an example), direct state support in solving problems of education, employment, and leisure.
An unexpected result of the discussion was the general agreement of the majority of the audience that today there are more myths around young people than an objective and adequate representation of what they are, what worries them and where they would like to go. And that the state and society today actually treat it as a problem that, if the opportunity arises, is better to forget.
Discussion “Civil society: who needs it in Russia?”
A discussion under this title took place on October 25 at the Youth Palace in the city of Berezniki, Perm Territory, as part of the training seminar “Creative Volunteer Workshops.” Such seminars are regularly held by Youth Memorial for activists of youth volunteer organizations. The 23 participants in the meeting were asked to reflect on the following questions: How does government and society interact today? Are civil organizations the “third” power in Russia? What hinders and what helps young people today to show their civic engagement? 
The discussion did not quite work out, due to the age of most of the participants and little experience in participating in such events. However, the very fact of updating the problems of local youth justifies our efforts. Not to mention the fact that for all participants, Memorial has ceased to be associated with an organization that deals exclusively with the past, and exclusively negative ones.
The discussion on October 27 turned out to be in many ways similar to the event in Berezniki. The meeting was also held as part of the training seminar “Volunteer Creative Workshops”. Only this time the Youth Information and Resource Center of Tchaikovsky became its platform, and a larger active audience gathered - 35 people, leaders and activists of public organizations and municipal institutions for working with youth. Participants were asked the following questions for discussion: What do we want, but what do we not have? (analysis of the situation with youth activity), Volunteering today is the path to Success? Are young people a reformer or a gravedigger of civil initiatives? 
The discussion was lively. The conversation quickly turned to an analysis of existing successes in attracting young people to various forms of civic engagement. A big controversy arose around the concept of “state youth policy”. What is this myth, imitation or a combination of real actions and forms of support from the state? Oddly enough, the first one turned out to be closer to the majority of participants (note that these are mainly “municipals”). In their opinion, today you can only rely on yourself and local resources.
Round table “Civil society in Russia: who needs it?”
On December 25-26, 2009, Youth Memorial held regular on-site “Volunteer Creative Workshops”. This time the venue was the city of Elabuga (Republic of Tatarstan) on the basis of the project “Practical Academy of Social Management”. The goal of the academy is to attract Elabuga youth to socially active activities and train leaders of youth public organizations. The workshops were traditionally led by Robert Latypov and Sergey Ponomarev, who conducted a series of educational events. It is worth noting that these were already the tenth visiting “Creative Workshops” in the past year, a kind of record for our organization. We try to organically introduce discussion events that reflect the goals of the general memorial project. 
On the first day, January 25, there was a presentation of Youth Memorial projects and a round table “Civil society in Russia: who needs it?” The conversation at the round table turned out to be quite frank and multifaceted. Various aspects of civil society were touched upon, the main players in this field were discussed, and the contribution of voluntary organizations to the development of humanitarian values in Russia was assessed. Of particular interest to Elabuga residents was the critical attitude of Perm residents towards the authorities and the state in Russia. It would seem that, according to the residents of Yelabuga, it is impossible today to overcome centuries-old traditions, established stereotypes and practices in Russian society - but no, for Perm residents you can look at everything differently. For example, from the point of view of a simple consumer. Why doesn't the government do what it promised? Why don't we control the actions of the state and its institutions? Is our state really that strong? Maybe he needs to be helped not only by our calmness and indifference of the average person, but by real actions, advice, and sometimes pressure?
It cannot be said that all questions have been answered. Probably, this was not expected from the beginning. However, the fact that the very posing of these questions aroused at least thoughtful reflection and debate can be regarded as a success.
Discussion “What story do I want to remember?”
The workshops ended on December 26 with a discussion about the problems of historical memory: “What kind of history do I want to remember?” It is worth special mention, since serious differences were revealed between the worldviews of the representatives of Elabuga and Perm. According to Memorial residents, modern history is more than ever full of myths, the danger of which lies not even in the fact that they give a distorted idea of the past, but in the fact that they actually deprive Russians of the opportunity to pose difficult questions and look for answers to them. The myths of Russian history (about the Great Empire of the USSR, about the effective manager Stalin, about the Great Victory and others) give such answers right away, you don’t even need to think about the cost of these victories and their consequences... But what for Permians already seemed self-evident, spoken more than once and in many ways even banal, it turned out to be unexpected and explosive for the residents of Yelabuga. According to the organizers of the workshops, the public was simply not prepared for such a frank dialogue, which probably should have been approached gradually.
The more you perform at different venues, the more you understand that each region, each city, has its own specifics that need to be taken into account. Russia is an amazing country in the sense that each region is like a separate state, with its own political regime and culture. Plus, the difference between the practices of a metropolis and a small city plays a role. Everything is different - a different attitude towards the authorities, towards others. Not worse or better, just different. The province has its own questions and its own answers. Clear and organic for her and so amazing for us.
Discussion “Volunteering in my city: are there any prospects?”
On January 25-26, 2010, similar on-site workshops took place in the city of Saransk (Republic of Mordovia). At this time, a republican school of volunteerism was held here. Its organizers, in addition to the Youth Memorial, were the State Committee of the Republic of Mordovia for Youth Affairs, the Mordovia Republican Youth Center and the public organization “Association “Mercy”.
As part of the workshops and at the request of our Saransk colleagues, Robert Latypov and Sergey Ponomarev held a discussion “Volunteerism in my city: are there any prospects?” The venue for its holding was the Mordovian Republican Youth Center. It gathered a large audience - 42 people, leaders and activists of public organizations and municipal institutions working with youth. Participants were asked the following questions for discussion: What do we want, but what do we not have? (analysis of the situation with youth activity), Volunteering today is the path to Success? Are young people a reformer or a gravedigger of civil initiatives?
The discussion was lively. The main passions flared up around the state-implemented volunteer record book, which should reflect all the steps in a volunteer’s life (see Robert Latypov’s article “The Administrative Renaissance of Volunteering” about this). Opinions were polar and the debate went on for a long time about whether it should be implemented or whether this initiative should be abandoned. But, ultimately, the majority of the audience agreed that although the state’s initiative as a whole is positive, the very practice of its implementation suffers from ill-conceived, unprofessionalism in this area and contains great reputational risks for the entire institution of volunteerism.
Instead of a conclusion
As can be seen from a brief acquaintance with the project’s activities, Youth “Memorial” is trying to organically combine several areas of its activities: historical and educational, educational, methodological (especially in the field of development of the volunteer movement) and the discussion project itself. In our opinion, this association contributes not only to the education of citizens and the consolidation of independent NGOs, but also to the attraction of new people to active civic activities. Not the least important role is played by the task of strengthening and developing Memorial itself, and, consequently, the entire “memorial” network.
We see one of our main tasks as activating in Perm, the Perm Territory and other neighboring regions a significant layer of people who understand that modern society cannot be built on a statist monoidea, without the priority of democratic values, without the active participation of civil organizations, without the participation of active people who are ready to at least morally support the activities of non-governmental structures. Our other task is to destroy boundaries, partitions between the community of civil activists, intellectuals, politicians, students, journalists, and businessmen.
March 14, 2012 in auditorium 81 of the Faculty of History of KSU named after. Nekrasov held a discussion on the topic: “Youth in the information society” among students of institutions of higher and secondary vocational education. The discussion was organized by the Youth Public Chamber of the Kostroma Regional Duma. This discussion became an analogue of the parliamentary hearings held in the State Duma in 2010.
The 21st century is often called the information century. Scientific and technological progress is confidently moving forward, creating new information technologies and means of communication every day. On the one hand, such a situation means new development paths for the country, including for young people - this is how unique opportunities for self-education have appeared, and the education system itself has become more efficient, new technologies make it possible to reduce the time of searching for information, find unique information without leaving home, and offer a number of other benefits. The advantages of information technology include the possibility of free communication among people in one or another risk group.
However, there is also a flip side to the coin. “In modern youth culture, developing under the strong influence of globalization and information, one can observe a tendency to abandon complex cultural information in favor of simpler and easier, superficial and entertaining ones.” This conclusion is confirmed in empirical studies. The Public Youth Chamber under the Kostroma Regional Duma conducted a social survey on the topic: “Youth in the information society.”
During the study, respondents were asked about their interests and the most popular topics for discussion. The results showed that the most interesting topics for young people to discuss are films, sports, future careers and politics. The topics of study and new books scored the lowest percentage. Thus, one can see that the structure of interests of modern youth is formed primarily under the influence of mass culture and the media.
Another question was asked to specify the sources from which respondents receive the most important and useful information. The answers clearly show that the priority sources of interesting and useful information for young people are the Internet and television. The book as a source of relevant and useful information is significant for no more than 1/4 of the respondents.
It is known that screen and book heroes often serve as idols and role models for young people. In the study, members of the public youth chamber tried to find out where young people get their role models from. Participants in the social survey were asked to name their favorite films and programs. The results showed that the greatest interest among young people is caused by films, mainly of the comedy genre, with news in second place in terms of interest in viewing.
The social survey confirmed that the media and information received from often unreliable sources play a huge role in shaping the worldview of young people.
In this regard, an organized discussion on the topic: “Youth in the information society” has the goal of teaching young people, and mainly students, to work with information, distinguish the degree of its reliability and importance, and analyze it. The motto of the discussion was the statement of the modern thinker A.A. Zinoviev: “Think, think and think again.” During the discussion, questions were raised: How to correctly analyze information? What are the sources of information? What information is considered negative?
In addition, in preparation for the discussion, members of the public youth chamber monitored legislation in the field of information. The discussion participants were presented with a list of bills that can protect against the impact of negative information, as well as protect information that is intellectual property. This list included:
1. Order of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1447 r dated October 18, 2007;
2. art. 13 Federal Law No. 114 “On combating extremist activities” dated July 25, 2002;
3. Federal Law No. 436 “On the protection of children from information harmful to their health and development” dated December 29, 2010;
4. Art. 14 Federal Law No. 124 “On the basic guarantees of the rights of the child in the Russian Federation” dated July 24, 1998;
5. Federal Law No. 3266-1 “On Education” dated July 10, 1992;
7. Federal Law No. 149 “On information, information technologies and information protection” dated July 27, 2006;
8. ZKO No. 29 “On the guarantee rights of the child” dated November 11, 1998;
9. Order of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1815-r “On the state program of the Russian Federation “Information Society (2011-2020)” dated October 20, 2010;
10. Resolution of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation No. 843-III State Duma “On state policy in the field of television broadcasting and radio broadcasting” dated November 24, 2000
At the end of the discussion, the participants decided:
1. Develop leaflets with hotline numbers for departments that monitor information security;
2. Make the list of bills in the field of protection from negative information and protection of intellectual property publicly available;
3. Consider the option of creating a youth information portal.