Is there hazing in the military now. What is hazing in the Russian army and hazing? What should be understood by hazing

Today I will tell you if there is hazing in the army. Before answering this question, I will explain what is hazing in the army, and what is hazing.

Hazing in the army- this is the process of training by old-timers (military personnel of an earlier conscription period) or, in other words, by the "grandfathers" of the young replenishment. And hazing in the army is the relationship between soldiers who grossly violate the requirements of the regulations and are usually a violation of the law with all the ensuing consequences.

Hazing in the army today - myth or reality?

As you understand, hazing in the army and hazing in the army are completely different things. Hazing is when young recruits arrive, and the “grandfathers” or the so-called “demobilizations”, military personnel of an older conscription begin to teach them, for example, how to walk correctly, talk correctly, address elders military rank etc. That is, there is a smooth formation of a serviceman and, in fact, from this.

Hazing in the army and hazing in the army

Hazing in the army has nothing to do with what you can see, for example, on YouTube by entering in the search films about hazing in the army. All you see there is hazing in the army.

When you join the army, you are, accordingly, a recruit. You meet half-year-olds - these are the same soldiers, but they have already served half a year, the so-called "elephants". AT common understanding hazing is when the so-called old-timer begins to humiliate physically or morally young soldier.

Useful information for conscripts:

How many days, hours, minutes are left before your demobilization.

But, fortunately, today this problem in the army is generally reduced to nothing. Therefore, if mothers or young people who are just going to the army read me, remember: there is no hazing in the army!

Now the difference between the grandfathers and the new replenishment is only six months. Hazing in the army appears because servicemen in the army live in a male team and, of course, they may have disagreements. These disagreements appear absolutely different reasons, even for household items. So do not think that the whole army is built on the fact that grandfathers show their superiority over young soldiers.

Many people think that this is what hazing looks like in the army. But it's not!

In the general sense, hazing is when an old-timer beats a young soldier (the so-called "spirit"). Of course, a lot depends on people, and in every military team there are such “rotten” soldiers who begin to tell what kind of “grandfather” he is and how long he served.

But in fact, with the current service life, what kind of “grandfather” can he be? He served 4-5 months more than a young soldier. But still, mostly more or less adequate young people serve in the army, for whom honor and decency are not empty words, and, accordingly, they do not behave like that.

Young people, now I am speaking to you, remember, whatever the situation, always keep your head in a cold mind. Do not let your emotions get the better of you, because this momentary weakness of yours (the desire to hit someone) can lead to irreversible consequences.

Consider the moment that military people, in particular conscript soldiers, and all their deeds are multiplied by three. If in civilian life you hit someone in the face, and even if he writes a statement against you to the police, then you will receive a maximum administrative punishment.

In the army, this is all multiplied by three, if you hit a soldier, and he wrote a report on you, then you will be 100% put on the so-called "diesel" - disciplinary battalion(disbat), there you can serve a year, a year and a half or a maximum of two years. And this minute momentary weakness can lead to such disastrous consequences.

Therefore, it is better to send such an opponent to three Russian letters than to bite your elbows later. Summing up, I would like to say once again: there is no hazing as such. There are conflicts at the everyday level and not quite adequate soldiers from the senior draft, who think that they are mega cool soldiers.

Also, what I wanted to say in this article: in the army there is hazing and hazing. Only hazing is good concept, the process of training young recruits, hazing in the army - this is any situation that violates military regulations or laws and can lead to bad consequences.

Hazing in the army in 2016 - myth or reality? Hazing and hazing in the army. What it is? And are these concepts different from each other? Or, on the contrary, hazing and non-Ustavshchina in the army are about the same thing?

Let's dot the i in this article in the analysis of each of these concepts. And, most importantly, we will answer the question, is there hazing in the army in 2016?

To begin, as always, I want to analyze the basic concepts. I am sure that in this way I will be able to clarify the meaning of hazing and hazing. And here everything is not so simple ...

Hazing and hazing

Friends, you won't believe it. But I just looked at the omniscient Wikipedia and realized that the concept of hazing is described there not quite correctly. Wikipedia is wrong. Now I have seen everything in life.

Let me explain my words with concrete evidence. Here is the definition of hazing from.

"Dedovshchina" (analogous in the Navy - "godkovshchina") - established in Armed Forces ah, an unofficial hierarchical system of relationships between lower-level military personnel (soldiers, corporals, sergeants), based on their ranking, "sorting" on the basis of the actual service life of each individual and the discrimination associated with this, one of the varieties of hazing relationships. It has a semi-criminal character and usually manifests itself in the form of exploitation, psychological and physical violence.

Nevertheless, there is some truth in this definition. I agree with the definition right up to the words "... and related discrimination". Because further - substitution of concepts.

The stereotype has already firmly settled in our heads that hazing in the army is hell. Scuffles, grandfathers beating spirits with chairs at night and all such horror.

I want to say that it is not true. And I want to explain the true meaning of this concept, which I met only thanks to my service in the Training Battalion of the VA MTO.

I won't think too much smart words. I'll be brief and as simple as possible.

Hazing in the army is a learning process proper service young recruit soldier last call) old-timers (). As of 2015 - soldiers of the previous draft, since the service life is now only 1 year.

What is hazing in concrete examples? These are extraordinary drill exercises conducted by old-timers, because at first no one can walk in the ranks, a visual explanation of the new rules for addressing comrades and officers, the development of military discipline among the newly called-up personnel.

More than a dozen such examples can be cited. The meaning remains the same. Hazing is a process of helping the speedy adaptation of a newly arrived soldier under the supervision of one or more old-timers. Primarily - junior sergeant, who is appointed by the deputy platoon commander.

In fact, it turns out like this. You are drafted into the army, you come there. And at the time of your arrival, there were still N people of the previous conscription, that is, old-timers, in the unit. It is they who will be engaged in your training in the basics of military service.

Without fights, humiliations and public insults.

hazing is good and useful tradition, and not the scuffle that can be seen in thousands of YouTube videos when querying "hazing in the army 2015".

We had it. We were taught that way. And we will continue this tradition in our battalion. Because in our part the Charter is loved and honored. Now let's talk about those who don't.

It's hard to argue with Wikipedia here. The definition is short and precise.

Hazing in the Armed Forces is a relationship between military personnel that grossly violates the requirements of the charters and, as a rule, is a violation of the law.

I agree 100%. Non-Ustavshchina are the very scuffles, humiliations and mass fights that are also present in our army.

I will not be able to answer for all the military units of Russia, of course. But trust me. Over the past six months, I have talked with many servicemen from different parts of our vast Motherland.

And that's what I can say with 100% certainty. There is hazing in the ranks of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. In many parts, unfortunately.

I can say for sure that we do not have them. Any attempts not only to fight, but also to think about it are nipped in the bud.

Since my service, they began to stuff us with stories about how especially impudent cadets and soldiers fought among themselves, or even simply pushed a comrade, after which the latter fell and cut his eyebrow.

Broken eyebrow and all! You see, what a trifle compared to what happens in other parts? And what is the outcome of the story? The culprit was sent to a disciplinary battalion for 2 years.

After his return, he will serve his term in the army. That is, first 2 years in the disbat, and then serve in the army. Normally pushed, right? Now imagine what thoughts reign in this guy’s head right now, given that he still serves in the disbat? Do you think he regretted what he did?

I think yes. But now it's not about him.

I recently spoke with several of my friends who are also serving in the military now. In their parts there are hazing relationships and are developed quite strongly. Suffice it to say that my question to one of them: “How many times have you fought?” I got the answer: "Lost count."

And I heard similar words from more than one person. Well ... Friends, I will not stretch my opinion about hazing in the army for the entire next half of the article. You will find out at the very end.

My task in this article is to show difference between the concepts of hazing and non-Ustavshchina and, in a sense, restore justice.

So let's sum up and summarize.

Results

The concepts of "hazing" and "hazing" - Different things.
You can not call "hazing" - a type of hazing. Hazing - old good tradition. And she never had any assault and things like that.
Both hazing and hazing present in the Russian army.
I want to note once again: there is hazing in my unit, but there are no hazing.
There are people who consider hazing as an integral part of modern service. There are those who strongly disagree with them. We live in a free country and we are entitled to our opinion.

P.S. Dear blog readers. I sincerely hope that I was able to convey to you main idea for which I wrote this article. In a nutshell, it can be expressed as follows:

Hazing is good. Inappropriate relationships are bad. The Russian army has both the first and the second.

Whatever your attitude to these two features of army life, I ask you for help.

As I said at the beginning of the article, I was seized by a crazy thought before writing it: to restore justice and return the concept of "hazing" to its true meaning in the minds of our citizens.

I ask you to convey my words or the text of this article as soon as possible more the people around us. Personal recommendations / repost / sending an article with a link in a personal message or publication in your own public. I will be glad to any support.

Thanks in advance to everyone involved in this great cause!

With enviable regularity, the topic of hazing in the army, which is commonly called "hazing", pops up in this blog. Every month new readers are added who are too lazy to master the previous entries on this topic, so from time to time they start accusing me of hiding the truth or varnishing reality.
Ok, I'll kill this evening by repeating what I already wrote before, maybe I'll add something new.

First, let's find out the difference between "hazing" and hazing.
Hazing - in the armed forces, relations between military personnel that grossly violate the requirements of the charters. This may be a beating of a soldier by a soldier, a fight between a soldier and an officer, and even the fact that you forgot to give a military greeting to a senior in rank - these are also hazing.
"Dedovshchina". This term has no clear definition. It so happened that it is understood as a demonstration of the superiority of the senior draft over the younger one, which can be expressed in beating, bullying, extortion, etc. But a prerequisite is that the offender is older than the offended one. The source for "hazing" was the word "grandfather". According to the unofficial soldier hierarchy, this is a serviceman who has served for at least a year and a half.

What kind of hierarchy is this?
The hierarchical ladder consisted of six steps (the names may vary depending on the place of service):
1) Smell - a soldier before taking the oath. Usually the oath is taken within two months after arrival in the unit.
2) Spirit - a soldier who has served up to six months. Formally, the "dukhanka" is between taking the oath and the day when 6 months of service are completed, but often it also includes the time when the soldier was "smell". There is also one more point. Every spring and autumn, an order is issued by the Minister of Defense on the transfer to the reserve of servicemen who have served military service. Therefore, the transition to a step higher in the unofficial hierarchy can be considered from the moment the next order of the Ministry of Defense is issued, but ... For example, it was accepted in our country that such a transition is clearly tied to the actual service, i.e. you are a "spirit" until you have served your six months.
3) Elephant - a soldier who served from six to twelve months. The elephant moves to the next step after the next order of the Ministry of Defense to be transferred to the reserve.
4) Scoop (skull) - a soldier who served from one year to one and a half years.
5) Grandfather is a soldier who served from one and a half to two years.
6) Demobilization - a serviceman who falls under the next order of the Ministry of Defense to be transferred to the reserve. He is still considered "grandfather", but a new gradation appears, which indicates that he will soon be home.

How were relations built between servicemen at different levels of the unofficial hierarchy?
It didn't matter who you were in rank: private, corporal, sergeant, the main thing was who you were in terms of service.
"Smells", "perfume" and "elephants" were nobody. They were obliged to carry out the orders of the "scoops" and "grandfathers". Moreover, "grandfather" had an unconditional priority.
The difference between the "spirits" and "elephants" was minimal, the "elephants" were only allowed to steer the "spirits" a little.
"Cherpak" was practically not puzzled by anything (for example, cleaning, running for cigarettes, etc.), he was not pumped, he was not beaten, but he did not have full power over the younger calls.
"Grandfather" was the sovereign ruler, whom everyone had to obey. He did not touch the scoops, but no, no, he reminded me who was the boss in the house. But "spirits" and "elephants" drove mercilessly.
For the norm of things, it was considered regular pumping of a junior call for various offenses, or just like that (“so that they don’t lose their scent”). Beatings, from light beatings to blows with stools on the heads and bed shackles on the backs. Requirements to find a cigarette, cleaning and any work only performed by "spirits" and "elephants".
The "spirit" or the "elephant" could not touch the "grandfather" with a finger, because the "grandfathers" deliberately suppressed such actions together and maintained disunity among the younger conscription.
The authority of the "grandfathers" also rested on the fact that, due to a longer stay in the service, they knew better the intricacies of the army situation, while the younger draft gave in to unfamiliar conditions.

Why is the command law enforcement did not pay attention to such an outrageous situation?
The officers turned a blind eye to the established unofficial hierarchy and tacitly approved of it, because. it was possible to shift part of their duties to the "grandfathers". It was simply convenient for them that one part of the soldiers kept the other in check, ensuring the execution of orders and maintaining visible order in the unit. They also suppressed any attempts to wash dirty linen in public, i.e. report violations to the military prosecutor's office.
"Grandfathers", in turn, cultivated two approaches in the younger conscription:
1) "Are you a real kid? Do you understand that it's bad to knock?" The hammering of this principle into the head, the constant threat of physical impact, the lack of information where to turn to protect their rights forced the younger calls to endure bullying, which was flavored with the following "carrot":
2) "You yourself will become a "grandfather" and then you will serve clover! And the "spirits" will serve you!"
The work of the military prosecutor's office was reduced only to responding to the loudest manifestations of "hazing", when someone from the junior draft was subjected to such a cruel beating that he received fractures, beaten off internal organs and cerebral hemorrhage. Or even died. Then yes, a criminal case was opened against the offender, and he was sent either to the disbat or to prison.

With such a sad state of affairs, our army approached 2006, when the case of Private Sychev thundered throughout the country, who lost his legs as a result of bullying. After that, the ice of indifference broke. From above, a clear TsU was lowered: to put an end to "hazing". The military prosecutor's office began, overcoming the former "blindness" and "lethargy", gradually working to eradicate crime in the army.

So what about "hazing" in the current army?
As you well know, the service life is now only one year. Accordingly, the former army hierarchy collapsed. Now, according to the classics, we have two main gradations in the unofficial hierarchy: "spirits" and "elephants". As you remember, these were the two lowest rungs of the servicemen on the hazing ladder.
Maybe the "elephants" were transformed into "grandfathers" and began to mock the "spirits"? No, that didn't happen. Any military man knows that a conscript soldier begins to feel like a fish in water in the army, just on the threshold between the first and second year of service. It is then that he develops a feeling of significant superiority over a young soldier who has only recently joined the army. But in modern army it is during this period that military personnel who have served 12 months are transferred to the reserve.
So what about "hazing" then? She is not.

But this is a lie, every now and then there are reports that the soldiers are beaten, mocked at them! So there is "hazing"!
Above, we have already figured out what is the difference between "hazing" and hazing, so now we are seeing exactly hazing in the army.

It looks like just a sign change, but the essence has not changed. Everything is old...
Oh no, everything is both simpler and more difficult at the same time. To begin with, let's look at what the current hazing is. I do not take into account the small oversights in giving a military salute, but will focus specifically on crimes in the army.
Now violence, bullying and requisitions against colleagues are by no means carried out by the senior conscription, but simply by physically strong guys with antisocial behavior who do not care how long you have served.
How, basically, does hazing look like on their part? Beatings are not very common, because control over military personnel has been significantly increased (this will be discussed below), so the case is often limited only to threats of use physical strength, but this is enough. Moral pressure drives, as they say.
What are these threats trying to achieve? Basically, doing some dirty work that the offender has no desire to do himself. Cleaning this room classic example. In addition, threats, and even beatings, are trying to achieve another common crime - extortion of one or another property.
Now the vast majority of soldiers have cell phones in their hands, and there are also quite expensive models. Relatives send considerable sums of money to many servicemen. All this becomes an object of desire certain group persons with criminal habits. The case can end in simple theft, or maybe outright extortion, often disguised as the purchase of an object of extortion. So, for example, a cell phone worth 9,000 rubles is sold to a strong colleague after hilling for a completely insignificant amount.

So what is being done to solve the problem of hazing?
As I said above, after the Sychev case, which thundered all over the country, the flywheel of prosecutorial investigations finally began to gain momentum. With the beginning of the reform of the army, the requirements for the effectiveness of the work of the prosecutor's office increased even more. Now any appeal of a serviceman to the prosecutor's office regarding hazing automatically leads to the initiation of a criminal case.
From the officers, the higher command requires the suppression of the facts of hazing and an immediate report on any emergency on this basis.
In each location where the soldiers live, on the information stands there are official and personal telephone numbers of the command of the unit, employees of the military prosecutor's office and the FSB, the chairman of the garrison military court, the Committee of Soldiers' Mothers. Soldiers can report them to their relatives, who, in turn, have the opportunity to assist the soldier in solving problems by contacting competent persons on the ground.
In many parts, physical examinations are carried out for traces of hazing: bruises, abrasions.

If everything is so perfectly arranged, then why does hazing still occur?
As with any business, there are also pitfalls here.
Yes, officers are required to immediately report the facts of hazing in the unit entrusted to them, but they are not very eager to do this. Why? Because according to the established tradition in our army, it is customary to punish the entire command chain of the unit for an emergency. From a sergeant to a battalion commander, and if the case resonated in the media, then the unit commander. Punishment can range from a simple reprimand to dismissal, and from deprivation of a cash bonus to a delay in promotion. So it turns out that the officer, through force, reports the problem of hazing, while trying in every possible way to mitigate it, or hush it up.
The next problem is the soldiers' poor awareness of their rights. Yes, in many parts they are informed about liability for hazing, but no purposeful work states in explaining to future/acting soldiers their rights. In my opinion, even at school, as part of pre-conscription training, young people should be clearly explained the norms of behavior in the army, report on responsibility for committing unlawful acts, talk about possible measures to protect themselves and colleagues from manifestations of hazing. In the army, however, this information must be brought back and consolidated.
A huge problem in the fight against hazing is a false stereotype of behavior, very common among the soldiers: "knock badly." It is an absolutely irrational principle when the offended person does not report the crime that is happening against him, simply because it is not "like a kid." The offender, on the other hand, cultivates with pleasure the principle so beneficial to him, which allows him to commit offenses with impunity. In my opinion, the most stupid situation is when the offended person is afraid to report a crime because his colleagues can condemn him for violating the "knocking bad" stereotype. And when one of these colleagues is offended, he, in turn, is silent so that other servicemen do not condemn him, including the one who was silent the previous time. Terrific legal nihilism, which is revered for valor.
Let me summarize. The main problems in the fight against hazing are:
- vicious practice of punishing officers for incidents in the unit, regardless of the degree of guilt of the punished;
- Poor knowledge of conscripted military personnel of their rights;
- the vicious principle of "knocking not like a kid."

And what kind of fight against hazing is this, if the chief military prosecutor's office constantly talks about the growth of this category of crimes?
With all due respect to the military prosecutor's office, we see a slight manipulation of public opinion. If earlier crimes were often simply not recorded, which gave a favorable picture of low crime, then in recent years, when they stopped turning a blind eye to the problem of hazing and began to practice the indispensable institution of criminal cases, a "miracle" happened: there was a "growth" in the number of offenses. And the explanation is simple, the crimes just began to be recorded. And the coming appearance of the military police, which to some extent will compete with military prosecutor's office, leads to the desire of the latter to defend its positions, by concentrating public opinion on the "expanding" shaft of crime in the military environment.

And the last. The army is not a Utopia Country where, unlike the rest of society, there are no problems. These problems are similar to the civil environment, but have their own specifics. specifics a large number men of one age group, by force of circumstances brought together in small territories, where they will spend 365 days under one roof. Here, as well as in civil life fights, beatings, including with lethal outcome. Here, people can commit suicide, both due to problems that are not related to the service (classic - a break in relations with a girl), and directly related to her (bullying colleagues). They can get hit by a car, or get poisoned by surrogate alcohol. Drown, get sick, whatever. In the army, all this is harder to do, because control over actions and movements is much more serious than in civilian life (any served will confirm this), but problems cannot be completely ruled out.
But one of the main achievements of recent years can be proudly stated: the army got rid of the shameful phenomenon called "hazing". The problem of hazing is quite solvable, but this requires a lot of work on the part of the state, and no less work on each citizen who is to serve in the army.

You can thank the author for the material in the following ways:
Wallet on Yandex.Money - 410011004962308
WebMoney:
WMR - R293614727763
paypal- [email protected]
QIWI wallet (aka Megafon-Moscow number *) - +79269277749
*calling this number is useless, the number is technical.

The activities of the Armed Forces of Russia are subject to the laws of the State. federal laws, Statutes, regulations and directives may not contradict the Constitution of the country. Citizens are obliged to defend the Motherland, and the State, in turn, guarantees every person his rights and freedoms, including the protection of honor and dignity. The army is a heterogeneous collective whose members differ according to national and religious characteristics. different level education and upbringing leads to inevitable conflicts of interest. The difference between a military team and a civilian one is that after the end of working hours, civilians go home, and military personnel can spend time together intended for recreation.

Note! Relations within the military collective depend on the strict observance of the Charter, which regulates the rules of conduct and communication between equal and unequal people in rank and positions.

Hazing between servicemen leads to the disunity of the team, reducing the effectiveness of the interaction of the unit.

The concept of hazing

The team is a complex organism that develops according to its own laws. Close-knit groups of people perform tasks with the greatest efficiency, while internal disunity leads to sabotage of orders, interferes with the passage of signals along the vertical of power, and makes feedback difficult.

The situation in army teams is complicated by the presence of a strict hierarchy, and not only the one defined by the Charter, but also informal, where the leader is a person endowed with physical strength, subjugated more weak people. Any relationship that goes against the requirements of the Charter can be called hazing. The most striking manifestation of the violation of the statutory rules of relations in the army is:

Hazing - discrimination is manifested on the basis of length of service.
Community - implies the creation of groupings within the team on the basis of the territorial basis of residence of employees before they are called up.

The group unites around an informal leader, and the followers on a subconscious level understand that non-recognition of the leader's power will put them on a lower level and lead to pressure from the majority.

Forms of manifestation

Hazing in the army is diverse, their object is the life and health of servicemen, human dignity, property rights and violation of the rest regime.

The most common forms of manifestation of hazing:

beating;
bullying and mockery;
making fun of the features of appearance and physique;
discrimination on religious and national grounds;
blackmail and extortion;
creation of unbearable conditions of service without the use of direct violence, but with threats of such;
physical and psychological pressure;
involvement in work not related to the performance of official duties;
compulsion to refuse food;
illegal seizure of funds and other material assets.

The reason for the unlawful acts is the impunity of the old-timers, the inability of the young men who came to the army from the family to stand up for themselves, the indifference and hushing up of incidents by the neutral-minded part of the team.

Prevention of relations not according to the charter in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation

Responsibility for the state of the morale of the staff of a military unit rests with its commander and military commanders at all levels. Identification of hazing relationships is:

supervision of personnel;
carrying out individual conversations with a risk group with an explanation to the military of their rights and the consequences of hazing;
conducting anonymous surveys;
implementation psychological testing collective;
timely response of management to reports of violations of the Charter.

To prevent offenses, the command of the unit must take measures aimed at improving relations in the team, namely:

constantly monitor the moral and psychological situation in the unit;
have the skills to obtain reliable information about the relationship between subordinates and the structure of subgroups;
have sufficient authority to influence the team as a whole and its individual groups, be able to counteract negative moods;
identify informal leaders, turn their organizational skills and other personal qualities for the benefit of the team;
maintain contact with relatives of subordinates;
distribute the load among all members of the unit, prevent cases of shirking duties and shifting them to other military personnel;
not to allow the predominance of persons of the same nationality or religion in the unit, evenly distributing them among different departments;
to identify persons with clearly expressed criminal inclinations.

All these measures, combined with regular participation in team sports and other team activities aimed at strengthening team spirit, will lead to a decrease in the number of complaints of hazing in the ranks of the Armed Forces.

Legal liability

Responsibility for violation of the Charter in the unit entrusted to him lies with the immediate superior. For each case of hazing that caused harm to a serviceman, an audit is carried out. The investigation not only identifies the person responsible for the violation legal rights military, but also determines the degree of responsibility of each leader.

apply to the medical unit to record the beatings, each case of injury is subject to investigation;
file a complaint with the direct commander;
go with a complaint to relatives or to human rights organizations;
notify colleagues of illegal actions in writing;
call to hotline prosecutor's office, its telephone number must be indicated on the stands of the military unit;
request a transfer to another unit.

For each precedent of the treatment of military personnel, an audit is carried out. In case of establishing the facts of hazing, a disciplinary sanction is applied to the perpetrators. If there are signs of a crime, the material of the check is sent to the jurisdiction. Every person, regardless of his official position, has the right to protect his life and dignity by any legal means.
Share information about morale in the unit. Are there cases of hazing, are they brought to the attention of the command. By what methods the management of the unit suppresses violations. Ask questions in the comment block.

I didn't say anywhere that this is normal.

I would like to be wrong and be happy for Lithuania, but the situation is a little more complicated than it seems. You may have heard of Stanford prison experiment?

Volunteers selected not from criminals, but randomly selected healthy socially arranged adults were randomly divided into guards and prisoners. So a third of the guards showed sadistic inclinations. This is the result of a closed society (barracks in the army) and imposed social role(subordinating soldiers and soldiers, one way or another assigned to control and restore order). Second, i.e. the appointment of "guards" is optional.

In any team (medium and large) there are people who enjoy showing aggression towards others. In any team there are people with a weak will, who find it easier to endure than to enter into conflict.

I asked and talked with my brother-soldiers, so imagine, they also believe that there was no hazing. But that doesn't mean it really didn't exist.

There are two rules. What doesn't concern you, you don't notice. What can torment your conscience, but you cannot change, you do not notice. If the psyche of people did not have such a property, they would quickly burn out emotionally. What happens to those who are professionally obliged to notice. A fact fixed by medicine, not in Russia alone, but everywhere, and initially studied in Britain and the USA, doctors, teachers, policemen suffer from a burnout syndrome.

You do not pay attention, and aggression, pressure on the weak, is everywhere. The fact that people do not notice this in schools, for example, which everyone goes through, is sad. When your neighbor teased a fat weak-willed boy in your class, it was the very thing that later, in the army, would be "hazing".

When criminals began to be drafted into the army in the USSR, this did not give birth to hazing, but made its forms criminal.

As long as it does not take criminal forms, we simply do not notice it and do not understand it. In our unit, for example, no one noticed anything special, and no one believed that someone was doing something criminal. Well, yes, ordinary stupid jokes, ordinary stupid half-joking raids, demands, the strong one will simply smile and send, and then answer Vitas' question - "we didn't have anything, what are you talking about?". And we got a weak one, and everything was bad in his family, he could not stand it and shot himself. It turned out that what was ordinary was criminal.

Regarding history, returning to the criminals and the USSR, in fact, violence as a daily life in the army was born before the Red Army itself. Open the encyclopedia of Russian life " Quiet Don"- how Gregory begins to serve in the army. I think there are plenty of other examples, this is the first thing that comes to mind.