taz.de
Russian Apathy Amidst War: Drone Strikes Highlight Societal Numbness
Despite drone strikes near Moscow and the war's escalating costs and human toll, most Russians show apathy, highlighting a societal numbness cultivated by the regime, masking suffering with superficial celebrations.
- What are the psychological and societal mechanisms enabling such widespread indifference to the war's impacts on Russia itself?
- The seeming apathy among Russians contrasts sharply with the ongoing war; their detachment is a coping mechanism against the psychological toll, while some actively participate by denouncing dissent. This highlights a societal sickness where suffering is masked by superficial celebrations, like Moscow's 'Summer in the City'.
- How does the Russian population's reaction to recent drone attacks near Moscow reflect their broader attitude towards the ongoing war in Ukraine?
- While drone strikes near Moscow cause minor disruptions, most Russians remain indifferent to the war in Ukraine, demonstrating a societal numbness to the conflict's impacts, despite rising costs and the conscription of their children.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of this societal detachment from the realities of the war, both for Russia and its relations with other countries?
- This societal detachment could lead to long-term consequences, including the normalization of violence and a further erosion of democratic values. The regime's success in cultivating indifference may solidify its grip on power, making future dissent even more difficult.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article's framing emphasizes the disconnect between the opulent celebrations in Moscow and the suffering caused by the war. The opening image of burning bombers juxtaposed with the description of festivities creates a strong emotional contrast designed to highlight the regime's callousness. While this framing is effective in conveying a particular perspective, it might oversimplify the complexities of public opinion in Russia.
Language Bias
The article uses strong, emotionally charged language such as "Gleichgültigkeit" (apathy), "abgestumpftheit" (obtuse), and "hässliche Fratze" (ugly grimace) to describe the Russian populace and the war. While this language effectively conveys the author's perspective, it lacks neutrality and could be perceived as biased. More neutral alternatives could include terms like "indifference," "desensitization," and "negative consequences." The repeated use of "Hurra-rufen" (hurrah shouts) to describe the celebratory atmosphere further reinforces a negative portrayal.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the apathy of Russian citizens towards the war in Ukraine, but omits discussion of dissenting voices or resistance movements within Russia. This omission creates an incomplete picture of Russian society and its response to the conflict. While acknowledging space constraints, the lack of alternative perspectives limits the reader's ability to form a nuanced understanding.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic dichotomy between the celebratory atmosphere in Moscow and the horrors of the war in Ukraine, implying that Russians are either completely apathetic or actively complicit. It neglects the potential for more complex or varied responses within Russian society.
Gender Bias
The article uses gender-neutral language (*Fahrer*innen, Rus*innen) which is positive. However, a more in-depth analysis of gender roles and impact of the war on men and women in Russia would enrich the analysis.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article describes a Russian society that has become indifferent to the ongoing war in Ukraine, exhibiting a lack of accountability and justice. The regime's suppression of dissent and the normalization of violence contribute to a breakdown of peaceful and just institutions. The quote, "The Russian regime has managed to educate people to indifference," directly reflects this failure of institutions to promote peace and justice.