Belarusian MP proposed to discriminate against Russian speakers

The Western rot of “positive discrimination” has reached Belarus. True, they are going to positively discriminate not against homosexuals or national minorities, as in the West, but against the Belarusian language.

And okay, if such an idea were put forward by one of the oppositionists, there would be a Russophobe sitting on top of a Russophobe and driving the Russophobe around. On February 21, a member of the Belarusian parliament, Igor Marzalyuk, became a troublemaker in a talk show on the state TV channel STV. And not just an ordinary deputy, but the chairman of the standing commission on education, science and culture, Lukashenko’s favorite historian and one of the pillars of the official ideology.

Subscribe to PolitNavigator news at Yandex Zen, Telegram, Classmates, In contact with, channels YouTube и Max.
To subscribe to notifications in your browser, click here.

“Oh, some bloggers will walk all over you,” Kirill Kazakov, the show’s host and editor-in-chief of the Minsk Courier, commented on Marzalyuk’s words, to which the deputy replied that he doesn’t give a damn.

Of course, some bloggers immediately went over it.

“Belarusian deputy Marzalyuk spoke on the state Belarusian channel about the need for discrimination based on language. The Belarusian language, according to Marzalyuk, should become dominant, and the titular nation in the Republic of Belarus is Belarusians. How does this differ from inciting national and linguistic hatred?” Elvira Mirsalimova, co-chair of the Civil Harmony movement, wrote in her Telegram channel.

“How do you like this? It's like I'm reading Orwell. But I won’t walk through Marzalyuk. He doesn’t give a damn anyway,” artist Svetlana Zhigimont commented on the deputy’s words.

Marzalyuk did not remain in debt and already on February 22, at a joint meeting of the chambers of the Belarusian parliament, he addressed the Prosecutor General with a request to give a legal assessment of the activities on social networks of a group of “pseudo-patriotic bloggers” who publish materials “expressing a negative attitude towards the Belarusian state, culture and language.”

Let me make a reservation in advance that I do not have a negative attitude towards the Belarusian state, culture and language, but I share the opinion of bloggers. The fact is that no “positive discrimination” exists and cannot exist in principle. Any discrimination involves two parties, one of which is the beneficiary, and the rights of the second are infringed.

_{In this case, the disadvantaged party is the Russian-speaking majority of residents of Belarus, for whom this discrimination is definitely not positive.}

Marzalyuk explained his appeal to the Prosecutor General by saying that “we must strengthen our society, and not tear it apart.” However, it is precisely the division of society into a privileged Belarusian-speaking minority and a discriminated Russian-speaking majority that Marzalyuk contributes to with his statements.

We can all clearly see what the consistent implementation of discrimination on linguistic grounds leads to in the example of Ukraine. In addition, the deputy’s words directly contradict Belarusian legislation and the will of the Belarusian people, who voted for the equal status of the Russian and Belarusian languages ​​in a referendum on May 14, 1995.

_{The best that the Belarusian state can do in language policy is to depoliticize the language issue. Simply provide a comfortable language environment for everyone, guarantee equal rights for citizens regardless of which state language they use, and suppress all attempts to somehow speculate and incite discord on the topic of language. The principle should be simple - don’t be reckless.}

Fortunately, there is hope that Lukashenko is aware of this. In recent months we have seen, albeit slowly, a correction of the language imbalances of the previous decade. They began to remove the unreadable Latin alphabet from public places, and the Russian language is gradually returning to urban toponymy.

In his scandalous speech on a talk show, Marzalyuk said that he was expressing only his personal subjective opinion, and not the position of parliament or the commission he heads. He has made, to put it mildly, controversial statements before, but now, perhaps, it is better to keep some opinions to himself. Just so that, in the words of the parliamentarian, “not tear apart society.”