understanding of repression
and political persecution
in Russia

How to present repression

1. The key aspect of delivering information is to create a space for dialogue or independent reflection by the recipient. Many note that information about repression is often presented as a fact they can either agree or disagree with, but lacks opportunities to ask further questions or to «partially accept» the reality of repression by agreeing with only certain aspects of the presented case.
    

2. It is important that, when engaging with the information, people understand that they are drawing their own conclusions and do not feel manipulated. Any detail unrelated to the case itself may be perceived as manipulative, artificially steering the audience toward empathy. For example, one respondent noted feeling pressured to sympathise with the case’s subjects simply because it was mentioned that they were musicians. It may be worth separately studying what different audiences perceive as manipulation in the presentation of information about repression.
    

3. The ability to recognise a situation as repressive develops gradually and involves multiple aspects. Therefore, it is crucial either to target materials specifically or to provide the most comprehensive explanation of what happened — what motivated the persecuted individual, what guided the investigation, what the standard penalties for similar actions are outside the context of political persecution, and so on.
    

4. Another approach is segmenting and targeting information about repression based on the type of reader or enabling filtering of repressive cases by certain characteristics — profession (a topic of interest to many), regional ties, family situation, age, etc. Using community networks to disseminate information about persecution (for example, «forward this to your colleagues and other doctors») is also effective. Respondents themselves often expressed a desire to know first and foremost about «their own», which helps foster a sense of connection and reinforces the reality of political persecution.
    

5. For someone unfamiliar with the context, it may be difficult to believe in the innocence of victims of political repression, the unfairness of court rulings, and so on. Therefore, it is critically important to provide them with thoroughly verified information about cases to avoid reinforcing their distrust.
    

6. Less-informed citizens do not always see the connection between a person’s life, moral choices, activities, and the punishment they have received. Additional context helps shape the perception of the case and highlights who is suffering and for what reason. The following components can be included:
   
   a. Life circumstances before the verdict, the reason for persecution, the «lived reality» of the persecuted individual, and their own understanding of justice.
   
   b. The possibility of personal identification with the story — the same teacher, the same mother, a story similar to what has happened in one’s own family in the past.
   
   c. The consequences of the verdict not only for the individual but also for those indirectly affected — increased risks, family losses, etc.
   
   d. The proportionality of the protest that led to the punishment — in the context of ordinary life, for some, a civil war is already underway, and their actions fit within this logic.
   
   e. The disproportionality of the sentence — the severity of the punishment does not align with standard national or international legal practices.
    

7. It is important to highlight not only arrests and verdicts but also victories for justice — even partial ones, if a full legal victory was not achieved. This could include information about the restoration of justice after persecution, or even about «retribution». It is also important to showcase cases of «failed» repression, where persecution did not succeed in intimidating people or preventing them from taking action.
    

8. Using language that does not provoke resistance from an uninvolved audience and/or explaining how certain contentious terms should be interpreted is essential. Particular attention should be given to the following terms:
   
   ● «Extremist organisation», «terrorism», «undesirable organisation» — these may create a sense of danger associated with the accused individuals and justify their punishment in the eyes of both less-informed and well-informed citizens.
   
   ● The term «repression» has strong associations with Stalinist-era purges, which may make it less suitable for explaining modern political persecution to less-informed audiences. It may be useful to demonstrate the continuity of mechanisms aimed at instilling fear and suppressing protest, as well as how contemporary victims of repression experience the same consequences as those persecuted under Stalin — the destruction of social ties, restrictions in employment, physical and mental health problems, and so on.
   
   ● «Punishment for protest» — a term that will be especially clear to those who value the right to protest.
   
   ● «Punishment for beliefs» — another phrasing that highlights the strength of character and courage of those persecuted.
   
   ● «Political persecution» — a softer term compared to «repression». Experts tend to prefer this term (for example, an activist who received threats and was forced to leave the country might describe their experience as «political persecution» but not «repression»), though a broader audience may associate it exclusively with formal political activities.
   
   ● «Violation of international conventions», «unlawful anti-extremism», etc. — terms that may resonate better with experts and human rights professionals.
    

9. It is necessary to explain why both legislation and law enforcement practices can be considered repressive, questioning trust in the judiciary, judicial system, and investigators.
    

10. It is also important to explain that certain legal provisions are commonly used as instruments of political repression (such as laws on «discrediting the army», «terrorism and extremism», «undesirable organisations», etc.), but they are not the only ones serving this purpose. Other charges, including those related to pedophilia, drug offences, and more, may also be weaponised. Law enforcement agencies may fabricate criminal and administrative cases for political persecution, meaning the overall scale of repression is broader than just cases prosecuted under explicitly political articles.
     

11. It is crucial to clarify the various forms civic and political activism can take and why an act of violence can be considered an anti-war statement, or why belonging to a particular group can serve as grounds for political persecution.
     

12. Encouraging civic awareness and independent judgments about political and social issues is key. These discussions should be democratised to reduce the fear of lacking expertise.
     

13. Encourage civic education at the level of everyday life — spreading information among relatives and friends who do not follow the news or do not read independent media.
     

14. Foster a sense of involvement and connection, showing how what happens «over there in Bakal» affects all of us.
     

15. Talk about those engaged in civic activism: are there many of them, or just a few? Do they look like me, like him?
     

16. Discuss different ethical perspectives through historical events, both Russian and international. On the one hand, this is already a widely used practice; on the other, it allows people to maintain a comfortable distance from the distressing current news about repression.
     

17. Many sympathise with cases where «inconvenient» people face repression — an honest doctor dismissed from a clinic, a mayor removed from office for openly engaging with city residents. For some less-informed individuals, this is the closest equivalent to political repression, making such narratives a useful way to discuss the nature of repression.