Kirsan Ilyumzhinov: Why are officials so rude?

Frankly, I did not want to start a conversation with my readers on this subject. I was hoping that after the first hype subsided, such discussion would be more thoughtful and useful for everyone. But the problem would not seem to recede.

After the head of one of the regions was removed from office having done an absurd and ugly trick, many political scientists started talking about the advent of a new era. The reason for this conclusion was the wording of his resignation, namely “in connection with the loss of trust”, which had previously been applied to officers who went too far, that is, stole too much but for some reason it was impossible to apply more stringent measures against them. This wording has never been used before when firing officers for making shameful statements or stupid actions.

I would very much like to believe that a new era has really begun in our country, when the vertical of power will begin to demand from its officials not only to implement decisions of higher authorities, but also to monitor their actions and statements. Look, every other month one of the more or less high officials somehow abuse the people of Russia.

And I am not talking about open rudeness, when an official pushes visitors out of his office, or uses his fists in an argument with a journalist, or threatens police officers who caught him drunk driving. It is clear: stay away from people if you can’t control yourself.
Was it too rude when the head of a region held the key to a new service car of the Ministry of Emergency Situations up so high in the air that an employee was forced to jump to grab it? Moreover, they tried to dismiss this incident as a “joke”. They said that the ex-head and the employee have known each other since childhood so they are used to tease each other. Perhaps it is so, but doing that while others are filming it? In addition, what the Emergencies Ministry officer was thinking when he allowed to be mocked at like that?
So that excuse can’t be accepted and that official received a wolf ticket putting an end to his political career. However, there could be more mild cases. What do you think of the following text? “macaroni’s prices are always the same ... And kefir? Everything is very cheap. Do you know how much is a kilogram of chicken? You can cook a huge number of dishes with chicken. For example, I am a good culinary specialist. No problem! We will follow the principles of healthy eating. I can even make you a balanced but dietary menu. You will look younger, more beautiful and slim."
If any ordinary housewife would say it then those around would consider her not a very smart woman, maybe they would laugh and that’s all. But the trouble is that the author of these words was the former Minister of Labour and Employment of one of the regions. Moreover, she refused to be on such a “diet” herself because “her status does not allow her to do so”.
So why do completely innocent words and actions, which in another situation could cause only laughter, cause so much indignation if they come from officials? According to US official Eric Hoffer, "Rudeness is the weak person's imitation of strength." And their impunity complements it as Sergei Dovlatov said .
The public consciousness feels this relationship and reacts sharply to it. Nobody wants to face a stupid official capable of just ruining everything. This was especially vividly demonstrated by one remarkable athlete who turned out to be a useless official. When answering parents’ question about financing children's projects, she suggested that children rely more on their parents, because "the state did not ask you to give birth to them." All would be fine, but she said it exactly against the background of the state campaign to increase the birth rate, which has been going on for several years. It is simply impossible to illustrate better the connection of rudeness with professional unsuitability.
Therefore, the optimism of some political scientists about the fact that now any impudent official can be fired without the right to return is understandable. Politeness is recognized not only as an integral part of such a “moral code of a bureaucrat”, it becomes one of the markers of stability of the public administration system.
However, we are now facing new challenges. Immediately after the resignation of the region’s head forcing an official to jump for the keys to the new car, a new scandal on the Internet and in the press was launched. This time, the regional minister of culture was accused of having closed the state gallery of contemporary art in Kazan for her daughter’s wedding. Isn’t it a shame that mere mortals were deprived of access to the art?
Not at all. The practice of renting museum premises for private holidays is a common thing. This helps maintain the museums ‘budgets - it is so inexpensive that anyone can afford it. To do this, it is not necessary to be a corrupt official.
But here's the thing: it is obvious that the accusation of rudeness can be used as a weapon. Moreover, President Putin demanded that officials be punished for such tricks more severely than ordinary citizens.
The question arises: should sanctions be applied to boorish officials automatically or is this possible in manual mode only? And in the latter case, who should do this and how to avoid abuse? And what is considered to be a pure, unalloyed rudeness? For example, if a governor has an unpleasant conversation with his subordinate this can also be considered rudeness. In the end, any, even the most sensible person can be put on edge, especially by an expert.
Everything will fall into place if we consider the well-being of those people who depend only on their authorities. After all, an official is nothing more than a specialist employed by society to organize certain areas of its life. As practice shows, rudeness begins when an official forgets about it or does not cope with his duties.
Trust me, nobody is interested in the thoughts of an official about the dietary value of pasta with chicken or the need to rely on their own resources without state support. The society is not ready to have fun, watching how an official in front of the cameras cheerfully plays with his childhood friends in “come on, take it away!”. All that is expected of him is a report on the work done. And, preferably, done well.
If he has nothing to say about this, let him just step aside. Let them make room for those who can do better.