Paul
Goble
Staunton, December 7 – The various
absurd and scandalous proposals Duma members regularly offer to the public
serve the Kremlin’s purposes of keeping the opposition and the population
divided and thus unable to unite against the authorities and thus are
encouraged rather than discouraged by them, according to Pavel Svyatenkov.
Such provocations and their use is
nothing new, the analyst at the Moscow Foundation for Historical Perspective
says, pointing to the Dreyfus case which split French society for a generation.
But what Russia is dealing with now is “a multitude of small ‘Dreyfus cases’”
that has much the same purpose (svpressa.ru/politic/article/106164/).
Svyatenkov’s
argument is one of those offered by Yaroslav Belousov in his survey of expert
opinion about what he describes as the “ever more absurd” proposals that Duma
deputies are offering to the public, proposals that seem to have no obvious
purpose and little or no chance of being adopted.
Among such
proposals, he says, are calls to rename the FSB the KGB, ban foreign words in
advertisements, ban energy-saving light bulbs, repaint the Kremlin white, call
Russian oblasts guberniyas, impose a tax on flights to foreign countries, and
change the picture on the 100 ruble note.
Real
legislative proposals which pass and become law in almost every case come from
government offices rather than from Duma members or even Duma fractions, but
most Russians are not in a position to clearly distinguish one from the other
and thus the absurd or even surreal ideas that circulate are taken more
seriously than might be the case in other countries.
Vyacheslav
Tetyokin, a Duma deputy, says that one of the reasons that his colleagues make
these proposals, coming up with ideas that raise questions about their sanity,
is the desire to attract attention in the media and thus win support. Even when
their notions are absurd, some commentator can be counted on to say that there
is some “rational” core to them.
But what most
Russians do not understand is that these proposals do not even go as far as
draft bills, Tetyokin says. Instead, they are simply an idea that has come into
the head of an individual deputy or has been thought up by his fraction which
includes “’smart guys’ who specialize in thinking up [such] initiatives.”
The
parliamentarian gives as an example Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s LDPR whose deputies “approximately
once a week” offer one or another idea which attracts media attention but then
goes nowhere. Its deputies get media attention, and the public is left even more
confused than it was before.
But one deputy
who has offered a proposal others consider absurd defends his actions. Roman
Khudyakov, who called for changing the picture on the 100 ruble note, said he
got the idea from his constituents. While visiting voters, he encountered two
school children one of whom was telling the other that the picture on the money
showed Apollo’s penis.
Khudyakov said
he was “shocked” by this exchange, that he considered it “abnormal” for young
people in schools to be talking about such things, and that he is convinced
that there ought to be a law to prevent that from happening by changing what’s
on the money of the Russian Federation.
No comments:
Post a Comment