This peer-reviewed interdisciplinary article examines the ethical motivations and value orientations underlying volunteer participation in the networks of Navalny’s headquarters between 2017 and 2023. Rather than focusing exclusively on the political dimension of the movement, the study analyzes volunteer networks as a social environment in which civic subjectivity, moral responsibility, and collective identity were formed under conditions of increasing legal and digital control. Using qualitative research methods—including analysis of public materials, interviews, and observational data—the article reconstructs the internal motivational structures of participants. The findings show that many volunteers interpreted their involvement not primarily as ideological or partisan political activity but as a moral choice rooted in notions of justice, dignity, personal responsibility, and the aspiration for a “normal” civic environment. Volunteer networks functioned as informal spaces of civic education, where participants developed skills of public communication, self-organization, and collective responsibility. Particular attention is given to the transformation of motivations after 2021, when several organizations associated with the movement were legally designated as extremist. This change significantly altered the legal context of participation and introduced new risks for volunteers. The study demonstrates how this shift generated ethical dilemmas, encouraged more cautious strategies of civic engagement, and contributed to the spread of digital self-censorship and distancing from formal civic initiatives. At the same time, the research indicates that the underlying value foundations of participation often persisted even as external forms of engagement changed. The experience of volunteerism continued to influence personal identities and perceptions of citizenship, leading many former participants to reinterpret their role not as members of a specific organizational structure but as individuals maintaining a civic position within broader social contexts. The version deposited in Zenodo corresponds to the peer-reviewed scholarly publication and reflects the author’s original research without substantive modification.
Veronika Golovatenko (Mon,) studied this question.