Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 27 – Kremlin strategists
now recognize that the themes of stability and modernization will not allow
them to connect with the rising generation in Russia as such ideas did in the
last election with slightly older people, but they have not yet figured out
what themes they will try to use, according to an expert at the Public Opinion
Foundation.
In an article on Slon.ru yesterday,
Larisa Pautova says that the Kremlin’s uncertainty in this regard reflects the
fact that generational change is taking place increasingly quickly in Russia
and that the new generations are different from the ones immediately before them
but similar to some earlier ones (slon.ru/russia/novoe_brezhnevskoe_pokolenie-1062007.xhtml).
Pautova suggests that young people
who do not remember the Soviet era are reacting to the new authoritarianism of
the Putin regime in a very different way than the slightly older group who do
and who as a result are more inclined to back the modernizing ideas associated
with Dmitry Medvedev.
The sociologist says that she uses
the term “generation” in a quite arbitrary fashion to distinguish various
cohorts among the young. She calls those
who finished school between 1977 and 1984, the Suslov generation; those who did so betweeen1985 and 1991, the Gorbachev
generation; those who did between 1992 and 1999, the Yeltsin generation; those
beginning in 2000, the Putin generation; and “graduates from 2010 to 2014 ...
the Medvedev generation.”
The
Suslov generation “didn’t believe in Soviet ideals and felt sharply the need
for freedom.” Its Gorbachev successor not only felt that need but achieved it.
Both these cohorts have thus felt bad about the increasing authoritarianism in
Rusia because it has “taken away the feeling of freedom and the possibilities
with which they lied in their younger years.”
Those
who entered adulthood as the Yeltsin generation were very different from their
predecessors. They suffered from the crises of those years, and members of this
cohort “highly value comfort and relative stability.” Consequently, they are much
more supportive of the current regime.
In
a certain respect, Pautova says, “this generation recalls the Brezhnev one of
1969-1976 which grew up in the post-war period” and benefited from the
relatively well-off “’golden 1970s.’”
But
now a generation is emerging which does not particularly remember the
turbulence o the 1990s, she says. For them, either Putin or Medvedev has always
been president. And they take relative economic stability as a given.
Consequently, this generation, like the Suslov one, is appalled first and
foremost by the rampant consumerism and cynicism” of many Russians.
In
saying this, Pautova continues, two qualifications are in order. On the one hand, far too little is known
about this generation to justify as sweeping conclusion. And on the other, the new generation is
deeply split between the 20 percent who follow public events and the 80 percent
who only want to focus on their own lives.
In
research conducted last year, she says, 51 percent of young people in Russia
between 18 and 30 said they were not keeping track of developments in Ukraine
and were largely indifferent to them and to what is going on in other
neighboring countries, despite the attention such events get in the state
media.
Pautova
nonetheless believes that the new generation may make a difference. She cites
the findings of her colleague Olga Kryshtanovskaya who found growing
dissatisfaction with the existing political system in Russia not among young
people in the capitals but also in the regions as well.
“It
is completely possible,” she suggests, that this generation will have its own
ideas about how the authorities need to be changed.” And she gives as an example
research findings showing that “among young people, Zhirinovsky is very popular
and chauvinist attitudes are in general growing.”
But
how actively such young people will pursue these goals remains an open
question. Many of them are actively involved
in social networks where they create and even experience “the illusion of
activity” with “likes and reposts replacing genuine action. An individual pushes a button and it seems to
him that he has done something, but this is not so.”
No comments:
Post a Comment