Throwing Akela

I’ll make a reservation right away: I considered and continue to consider Eduard Limonov one of the brightest and most talented Russian politicians, and his organization as the most capable, effective, and possibly numerous in our country. (It is clear that purely bureaucratic, inflated from above, both “Russias” do not count. They are products of a fake policy, not a real one.)

Throughout the existence of the “Other Russia”, the right, democratic wing of this organization (although the UGF can very conditionally be classified as a right-wing organization) has been subjected to severe attacks from various representatives of the so-called “democratic camp” precisely for cooperation with the “Limonovites”. I have answered these accusations many times and am not going to repeat myself. And when asked who you are on the same path with - the angular, disheveled National Bolsheviks or the refined, ironed democrats serving the occupation Putin regime - both before and now he answered unequivocally. I am on the same path as those who do not declare, but in fact prove their commitment to democratic principles, who do not lie down, shamefully with their paws up, under criminal power, but oppose it (for example, at the cost of freedom, and sometimes life), who do not fit in into someone else’s agenda, but forms his own.

All of the above does not mean at all that I would be ready to join Eduard Limonov’s organization or, for example, facilitate the entry of the UCF into an election coalition with Limonov’s party - it is obvious that our disagreements on a number of key issues are global and insurmountable. Limonov is a man of leftist, imperial views that are alien to me, which, for example, was expressed in his virtually unconditional support for the Russian occupation of part of the territory of Georgia and his favorable attitude towards the recognition by our official authorities of the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Of course, in the conditions of a normally functioning political system, disagreements on such fateful issues (and these can also include obvious differences in views on the economic development of Russia, on its foreign policy problems, etc.) between the UCF and Limonov’s party would lead to a sharp ideological and political confrontation, would drive our organizations in different directions on the Russian political field. But all this is true only if we are talking about a truly free, competitive political space. There is no such thing in today's Russia. We just have to fight for it, guided by the principles that are repeatedly formulated in various documents of both the “Other Russia” and the National Assembly. And all these months, and even years, Eduard Limonov did not deviate from these principles. However, lately it has become more and more difficult for me to understand Eduard Veniaminovich.

At the recent Council of the National Assembly, Limonov sharply criticized the National Assembly itself. Later, he considered it possible to make his judgments about this organization available to the public. Here is an excerpt from an article by Eduard Limonov in the online publication Grani.ru: “My supporters and I are dissatisfied with the inaction of the National Assembly, with the fact that it has actually withdrawn from actual political activity. We appealed to ordinary deputies of the National Assembly - and there are about seven hundred of them throughout Russia - with a call to vote for reformatting the Assembly... We propose that the Assembly choose a new course of political struggle. We hope that deputies, especially deputies from the regions, will support us. It is impossible to allow further decay of the National Assembly...”

So, it’s clear why Limonov is dissatisfied. He demands a sharp radicalization of the activities of the National Assembly. The only problem is that this organization was not initially considered by any of the participants as a revolutionary structure, as a kind of body of direct action. The National Assembly is the first step towards creating a real political space in Russia, an alternative to the rotten pseudo-political Kremlin institutions and procedures. This is exactly what the Assembly began to do - specialized committees and commissions were created, which slowly began to discuss various problems, work with experts, and form platforms for thematic discussions and round tables. It turned out that the format of this kind of activity does not suit the National Bolsheviks. They feel uncomfortable in it. He is alien to them. At the same time, it is absolutely obvious that an attempt today to turn the Assembly into the headquarters of a revolutionary uprising (for example, to declare, as the National Bolsheviks proposed, the National Assembly the only legitimate parliament of the Russian Federation with the appropriate powers) will lead to its immediate defeat. Eduard Veniaminovich is well aware of this. Consequently, he is ready to sacrifice an important political project for the sake of ten minutes of National Bolshevik glory, which, of course, in the mass consciousness is inseparable from Mr. Limonov’s personal glory. And the fact that the fates of dozens (if not hundreds) of ordinary activists, who as a result will receive real prison terms, will be thrown into the furnace of this adventure does not seem to worry Eduard Limonov too much. But this, in the end, is a problem of the relationship between the party leader and his supporters.

The trouble is that such a position threatens the very existence of the National Assembly, and, therefore, willy-nilly plays into the hands, first of all, of the Kremlin.

In addition, the attacks of the leader of the National Bolsheviks on the United Democratic Movement “Solidarity”, which is being created with the active participation of the United Front, looks at least strange. It is enough to look at the basic and current documents of this organization to understand that we are talking about a truly opposition structure that aims to change the regime in Russia. It is clear that, perhaps, it is the UDD, along with left-wing and patriotic organizations, that over time may become a political subject of that new political space, which, I really want to believe, the National Assembly will have to form. It would seem that any oppositionist, regardless of his views, should welcome such an initiative. Meanwhile, from Limonov’s side we see a set of theses that are not much different from those that official propaganda spews out on this matter. Perhaps the reason for this rejection is purely political jealousy. At least I'd really like to think so.

But this kind of ideological intolerance can still be explained somehow. But I don’t know how to explain the document that appeared on the official website of the National Bolsheviks and was entitled “Address to the President and the Government.” Frankly, it left me in shock and awe. In this message, Eduard Limonov offers the government his services to resolve the economic crisis. It says exactly this: “We suggest that the President and the Government urgently meet with the leaders of opposition organizations in order to discuss the situation and find ways to overcome the crisis in Russia in order to protect our fellow citizens from its tragic consequences. I am personally ready for such a meeting.” And this document was signed in an absolutely marvelous way - Chairman of the executive committee of the “Other Russia” coalition E. Limonov.

I would strongly like to ask Eduard Veniaminovich the next time he considers it necessary to offer his services to Dmitry Medvedev or Vladimir Putin, to sign his appeal in some other way. So that the organization that he represents in this case is not associated with my name in any way.