The great migration: the emigration of treason
Why do people in the modern world often want to change their country of residence.
The number of Russians aged 18 to 24 years willing to move abroad for permanent place of residence, the highest over the last five years. At the same time, the vast majority of Russians would not want to leave Russia.
According to sociologists, on average, the share of those wishing to leave abroad for permanent residence unchanged since 2011 (10-13%). Whether these citizens as potential “fifth column”, and even the candidates “traitors”?
In Soviet times, in fact, moving to permanent residence abroad and was considered something akin to treason. But if in Stalin’s time it was called escape and treason and was punishable, in the case of restraint, is strictly up to the shooting, then later, “vegetarian” times “only” was selected apartment (apartment wasn’t in private ownership), sometimes forced to pay for higher education (in the Brezhnev era, but then such a requirement is canceled). Discouraged, although not prohibited, even marriages with foreigners, this could easily be expelled from the Komsomol and especially from the Communist party.
But times change, becoming more “vegetarian”. Gradually changing the attitude to move to another country. Public opinion in Russia about this somehow “calmed down”. At the political level, of course (and the country in which the policy will be encouraged to leave the country?), such behavior is not welcome, in slogans like “where was born — there and handy.” But the appeals of the Soviet sample, example, “here and go to your Israel” — are no longer considered politically correct. The apartment is also longer taken.
However the people with dual citizenship and residence permit are now required to register under threat of criminal penalties for evasion.
These Russians were about 6 million — most have citizenship and countries of the CIS and other post-Soviet States. These people have limited opportunities to work in the civil service. However, such practice is common in many other countries.
On the other hand, the Russian government would like to turn compatriots abroad in a kind of “soft power”, if not “agents of influence”.
Such a policy, in theory, would be welcome. However, it is very inconsistent. While strangled by bureaucracy and formalism. With “soft power” in this regard, as it is not very specified. The program of resettlement of compatriots is still functioning with difficulty. And the program of granting citizenship in the simplified procedure to Russian language and culture does not work at all.
Actually, the last is significant: the more closed is the state even in relation to those considered compatriots, the higher the number of those who will say that would like to change such a state on more open and free.
The statement of sociologists intention to emigrate is often not so much a demonstration of readiness to implement such plans, how much showing relationship to existing economic and social order.
According to the same poll, the majority of people declare their desire to leave no concrete plans. 44% reported that they did not know when it can happen, 41% said that did nothing to fulfill their desires. Only 26% of those wishing to leave said that he started collecting information about the country (which also means nothing), 22% engaged in learning a foreign language (emigration as a “dream” can only be a reason/incentive), 21% consult with have moved abroad (this may be only gossip about life there), 19% save money on their plans (and can spend them on something else).
It can be assumed that before the practical implementation of the plans it comes only every 8-10 th of the number of allegedly “planning to leave”.
Among the reasons of emigration in the modern world, usually called factors such as economic hardship (or the desire to live a more comfortable and environmentally friendly conditions), political repression, or simply “freedom”, the different types of discrimination, the desire for security, for better education for children and medicine for their elders. All of these factors remain valid. And in the case of, say, third world countries or war-torn countries (like Syria), we are talking about emigration of the “old model” — the people fleeing from hunger in the literal sense of the word, from war and destitution.
However, in today’s open world there are new motivations for the move. Despite the fact that by itself, such a move is now often not regarded as before, — “to leave”, having broken all ties with the homeland. Leaving, especially from the relatively prosperous countries often do not break off ties with their homeland, live in two countries, even apartments do not sell. Having lived and worked abroad, often return back.
In our country now there is famine and war, the level of political freedom with all the known shortcomings of our democracy, perhaps, for all time of existence of Russia. So many, stating its intention to leave and calling even the traditional occasions, actually mean simply new opportunities for self-realization.