Paul
Goble
Staunton, September 10 – Sociologists
Sergey Belanovsky and Anastasiya Nikolskaya interviewed 60 Russians who
identify with the non-systemic political parties in order to determine “the
range of ideas that, in the event of radical changes in the existing
government, could shape a new agenda.”
What they found, they say in a
report on the Riddle portal, is that such people focus almost
exclusively on regime change – the ouster of Vladimir Putin – rather than on
the development of a specific agenda they can offer as an alternative to his
policies (ridl.io/ru/ideologija-politicheskoj-oppozicii-v-rossii/).
As a result, Belanovsky and
Nikolskaya say, “there is a danger that, in the event of sudden democratic
transformations, the discussion of specific steps will drown in a stream of
insoluble political conflicts,” leading to chaos, yet another crisis, and “a massive
return to the idea of ‘a strong hand’ to restore order,” leaving the country possibly
even worse off.
“The ideological platform of most
representatives of the democratic opposition is vague,” the sociologists say. “Most
call themselves liberals but prefer to avoid the question as to whether they
are right-wing or left-wing liberals.” Thus, most favor a smaller state but
greater state support for medicine and education. “As a rule, they aren’t concerned with
economic issues.”
Their ultimate goal is democracy but
they do not have much “understanding of issues concerning state structure,
economics, and other spheres of public life,” and they do not form “a real
assessments of the current situation.” Instead, they are inclined to “postpone
until later” after democracy “wins.”
This stance, the two say, “leads to
an atmosphere of expectation of a social miracle that will supposedly come true
when the existing regime is replaced by a democratic one. And it is this expectation
that is what really unites ordinary representatives of the democratic
opposition in Russia today.”
That sets the stage for disaster even
if Putin leaves the scene. Instead, Belanovsky and Nikolskaya say, the opposition
needs to articulate a program aimed at achieving “a national consensus at least
on key issues” and “to seek contacts with the unspoken opposition that exists
within the state apparatus” and take their experiences and views into account.
Many officials are ready to take
part in such an effort because they are currently carrying out policies they
don’t believe in. The two sociologists point to the situation in Khabarovsk
where ousted governor Sergey Furgal changed policies without having to change
that many people as a case in point.
Unfortunately, they suggest, there
is little evidence that the rank-and-file opposition is thinking in these terms or that their
leaders are trying to move in that direction either.
No comments:
Post a Comment