Here’s something to chew on. Nicolai Petro asks in his column “Why Russian Liberals Lose“:
“Why have Russia’s self-proclaimed “liberals” done so badly at attracting popular support?” A few reasons actually. First, he states that liberals like Vladimir Ryzhkov, Irina Khakamada, Grigory Yavinsky, Mikhail Kasyanov and Boris Nemtsov’s initial embrace of figures like Eduard Limonov and Garry Kasparov have caused more harm than good. The fact that most of them, except for Ryzhkov and Nemtsov, have dumped Other Russia, the fact that they were once wedded to them is a hard thing to shake.
Second, the problem isn’t that the liberals can’t get its message to the public. Petro claims that a quarter of Russians have access to the internet, each of the eleven parties on the ballot got “three hours of prime national television time,” and that Yabloko has a 97 percent name recognition rate. In his view, this is enough to circumvent “censorship.” Of course, I can’t help wonder how the three hours of TV time compares to Putin’s airtime and if 97 percent of Russians do recognize Yabloko, how often is it proceeded or followed by grammatically applicable variants of “idiots” or “traitors” I buy this reason less. If anything, our times tell us that media matters.
But no Petro says that the lack of fanfare for Russian liberalism boils down to the political winds. And given how they’re blowing, Yabloko’s and SPS’s sails are either at half-mast or full of holes. Basically, he writes, “the problem is with the messengers, who have managed to alienate their natural constituency – Russia’s growing middle class.”
Then he presents a political choice:
What you would do if faced with the following choice:
One, a political movement that unites a former chess champion whose family resides overseas, a former prime minister popularly nicknamed “Misha 2 percent” because of alleged kickbacks for authorizing government-backed loans to private firms, and an ex-punk rocker released from prison a few years ago who vows to restore the Russian empire by any means necessary.
Two, the party of Vladimir Putin, which has pledged to continue the policies that have increased average salaries from $81 a month to $550 a month, which has dramatically increased social spending and reduced the poverty level from 27 percent to 15 percent.
Um, option #2, please.
{ 7 comments }
Ah yes, Ole’ “Nik Petro” (in the parlance of the esteemed Mr. Averko) citing the objectivity of Russian television to buttress his arguement. I’ll assume he simply doesn’t watch Russian televsion. Otherwise I’d have to conclude he’s simply dumb.
There is nothing in this piece about the objectivity or lack thereof of Russian television.
Sean, when did Yavlinsky embrace Kasparoc and Limonov? I remember Yabloko boycotting Other Russia just a short while ago.
Sean, when did Yavlinsky embrace Kasparoc and Limonov? I remember Yabloko boycotting Other Russia just a short while ago.
This claim was made by Petro in his article. I just repeated it without checking. Maybe he will weigh in (he suggested to me that he might).
I remember that initially Yabloko and Kasparov were allied, but when Other Russia was formed in 2006 Yabloko and SPS protested the inclusion of nationalists. I assume that Yabloko had some ties because if they didn’t why would they care enough to protest?
Yabloko leaders, both senior and “youth” have made common cause with the NBP on a number of occasions. Here are just two examples.
Kommersant (http://www.kommersant.com/p579656/Kill_Your_Television; May 23, 2005) carries a report of a protest “against lies and censorship on television” held at the Ostankino television center in Moscow. Verbatim: “Its official organizer was the Yabloko Party, although the entirety of the opposition – Union of Right Forces, Homeland, the National Bolsheviks, Our Choice – took part. . . . The National Bolsheviks carried signs reading “We’re sick of the Putin serial.” Limonov talked about how great it was that all the opposition could unity [sic] around freedom of speech. “The Russian revolution will be red any way,” he said. “Our country is leftist.” The National Bolshevik column did not have a special forces escort at first. There were very few police of any kind present. More protesters were waiting near Ostankino Pond. Yabloko leader Grigory Yavlinsky and Our Choice leader Khakamada were among them. . . . The meeting began. Yavlinsky was the first to speak. He thanks those who assembled for coming to “say in full voice that there is no freedom of speech in Russia.” . . . . Red Youth Avant Garde leader Sergey Udaltsov said that he saw President Putin on all channels once and threw his TV against the wall. “And then a miracle happened,” he said. “Putin was no longer in my life.” First secretary of the Moscow Municipal Committee Ulas said that he was glad “the Putin regime has united such different people on one rostrum – Communists and liberals… From our spark, the fourth Russian revolution will ignite,” he intoned to wild applause. Youth Homeland leader Sergey Shargunov gave a rhymed speech. Yabloko youth leader Ilya Yashin that it is “damn important that everyone protests against censorship, both democrats and Communists.” Limonov was glad too. “We are all on the same side of the barricade,” he said. “on the same side of the battlements.”
The following blog (http://smetanka.blogspot.com/2007/06/russia-completely-different-other.html) carries excerpts of an online debate among liberal opponents of Putin’s regime, Maria Gaidar and Ilya Yashin, and their “friends” at the NBP. Yashin is the leader of the youth wing of Yavlinsky’s Yabloko party. Again, here are some telling excerpts: “. . . . when the [National Bolsheviks] started yelling “Russia is all, the rest is nothing,” my mood [says Yashin] was ruined completely. . . . But I do not regret having attended. And I’ll come next time, too. First, because it’s stifling in the country, and the Dissenters’ March has the spirit of freedom. Second, after the April beatings it was impossible not to come. . . . And one more thing. It’s hard to accuse me of being [against Limonov]. You know that I’ve taken part in rallies to support NBP’s political prisoners more than once, and I wrote letters to judges, and I helped your lawyers [...]. I really respect many [National Bolsheviks] and consider them decent people, and some – real heroes. But you’ll have to renounce all the ugly stuff that you propagated in 1990s. Otherwise, guys, we have completely different other Russias with you.” The author of this piece, Veronica Khokhlova, concludes: “Soon after Yashin blogged about his views, members of the “adult wing” of Yabloko spoke against any kind of alliance with the Other Russia and announced their intention to nominate Grigory Yavlinsky as their 2008 presidential candidate – a move that, among other things, further emphasized the Russian opposition’s famous lack of unity.”
Anyone following the storm around Oleg Svartsman’s interview in Kommersant?
It came out day before elections. And already fallout by midweek with the Israeli and EBRD withdrawing from Investment Fund.
I wonder to what extent the NBP’s ideology has or has not changed. The last time I checked (a couple of years ago, and I can’t find their website), the Israeli branch was proclaiming their desire for a “Red Zionist Greater Israel” that seemed to include practically the entire Middle East. (I translated part of the homepage for the people on Doug Henwood’s LBO list, which you can see if interested here: http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/2006/2006-March/006290.html )
Speaking of Doug Henwood, he interviewed Peter Lavelle (or “PL,” as some call him) on the Russian elections today and it should be aired on his radio show tomorrow (link avaliable on the left-hand side of Sean’s blog
).
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 1 trackback }