БЛОКИРОВКИ ПОШЛИ НЕ ПО ПЛАНУ

Overview

The video argues that Russia’s ongoing Roskomnadzor “blocking campaign” against foreign internet services has backfired, making it effectively “self-defeating.”

Key Points and Claims

• The original plan didn’t work

  • Authorities supposedly expected that blocking platforms like YouTube and restricting Telegram would push users toward domestic “import-substitutes.”
  • The narrator claims people largely didn’t switch, and instead learned workarounds.

• Domestic platforms failed to meet expectations

  • Russian replacements are portrayed as delivering worse quality, with bugs and unusable recommendations, rather than functioning as a viable substitute.

• Blocking increased circumvention and digital literacy

  • The creator emphasizes that before the bans, many users didn’t even know what a VPN was.
  • After the crackdown, a majority allegedly learned to bypass restrictions (e.g., DNS changes, proxies, VPN setup).
  • This is presented as an ironic outcome.

• VPNs described as an “arms-race” reality

  • Roskomnadzor is framed as losing an ongoing “war” against circumvention tools, constantly forced to react.
  • Users, meanwhile, keep access through updated servers, protocols, and encryption.

• Propaganda efforts are mocked

  • The video cites examples of officials and educational programs warning students that VPN use is unsafe.
  • This is described as absurd “schizophrenia,” especially given claims that officials themselves rely on bypass methods.

• Telegram’s block is framed as futile

  • The narrator claims efforts to block Telegram (e.g., “from April 1”) will only motivate more people to install and learn tools like it.
  • Telegram is treated as essential for communications and information.

• A “political awakening” effect

  • The guest and narrator argue that by restricting access to information and privacy, the state may push previously non-political citizens to seek opposition content via VPNs—thereby increasing exposure to political narratives.

• Supporters later oppose bans due to consequences

  • The video repeatedly contrasts earlier pro-blocking figures (especially those associated with Ekaterina Mizulina and Vasya Vinokurov) with their later critical stance.
  • The implication is that the shift only occurred after the bans caused practical harm.

• App store removals cause further hysteria

  • After European sanctions allegedly removed Russian apps (including VK apps) from the Apple/Google app stores, the creator claims there was public outrage.
  • The video argues companies will likely “quietly return” access, portraying the episode as evidence of arbitrariness and control.

Overall Conclusion

• “Everything continues to be used”

  • Blocked services remain accessible through VPNs and other circumvention methods.
  • Meanwhile, domestic services continue to rely on subsidies but are said to keep losing money.

• The video’s central claim is that blocking didn’t go according to plan—serving as evidence that censorship and restrictions are economically ineffective and socially counterproductive.

Presenters / Contributors

• Ekaterina Mizulina (mentioned; not presented as a speaker in the provided text)
• Vasya Vinokurov (mentioned; not presented as a speaker in the provided text)
• Slash (guest presenter)
• The main narrator (unnamed in the subtitles; delivers most commentary)