Here, in Kazakhstan there is such phenomenon, as “agashki” and “bratishki”.
“Agashka” is not an “elder brother” or an “uncle” from the word “aga”. “Agashka” is a patron, protector.
“Bratishka” is not a “younger brother”. It is a protégé, guarded.
I have nothing against such relationship. They exist in any country of the world. But here they sometimes acquire a strange form.
For some reason, “agashka” has an assistant – “bratishka” often at the state expense. “Bratishka” is listed in the civil service, has the position of an employee of the same department as “agashka”, receives a salary from taxpayers’ money, but serves not the Motherland, but to “agashka”. He carries his briefcase, opens the door to him, carries an umbrella over him during the rain, and disperses the crowd in front of him. Moreover, the “bratishka” does the household work of the “agashka”: takes his children to school, takes his wife to a beauty salon, brings home food, and arranges visas and tours for personal trips of the “agashka’s” family. I even heard that there are such “agashkas”, that are too lazy to even bend down after the sauna, so the “bratishka” squats and changes their slippers, brings fresh clothes, and take the dirty laundry and wash them home. And all this time of his “work” is paid from the money of taxpayers.
All this looks wild, especially in the eyes of guests from developed countries.
Yes, they have their aristocrats and millionaires there. They are also served slippers. But not by the civil servants, who work under their authority. For this, they have servants, governesses, housekeepers, etc. They are paid from the personal money of the “agashka”. And for God’s sake! All are happy for that, since these means additional jobs.
Here it’s absolutely another matter.
And why did it become possible here?
I think, because the “bratishka” feels dependant of “agashka”. Firstly, the “agashka” takes such a young man to work by a backstair influence. And the “bratishka” feels grateful to him for that. If they hired by conducting a contest, as it should be, would someone, passing the real selection, agree to serve slippers to the boss in the future? Of course not! Secondly, the “agashka” allows the “bratishka” to use certain goods from the master’s table: to intercede for his relatives on behalf of the “agashka”, put in a word for someone to “agashka” himself, etc. Can all if it still be possible, if the “agashka” did not interfere with the procedure for recruiting civil servants, if he did not affect the public procurement and other managerial decisions? Of course not!
So it turns out that “agashka” and “bratishka” are an external manifestation of the deep process of illegal relations in the civil service.