Apple of Solidarity Shame

Another imitation of “political life in the country” aroused both constructive and irreconcilable opposition, which calls itself democratic and liberal. Why not? After all, Zhirinovsky called his party liberal democratic. And nothing - everyone is used to this absurdity. The opposition aggravation, provoked primarily by the elections to the Moscow City Duma, as well as by President D. Medvedev’s article “Forward Russia!”, fell, as expected, in the fall.

In the camp of constructive opposition, the first to speak was the co-chairman of the Right Cause party, Mr. Gozman, who on September 11 wrote an open letter to President D. Medvedev about his dislike for the mayor of Moscow Yu. Luzhkov and his wife E. Baturina. Dislike, which “encourages us to turn to you with a request for the resignation of the mayor of our capital.” To demonstrate to the president the nation’s dislike for Yuri Luzhkov and to justify the pronoun “we,” Mr. Gozman organized a collection of signatures for his letter “through sites specially created by our supporters,” or rather, one site on which the visit counter for some reason turned out to be fake. According to media reports, Mr. Gozman was immediately caught in this simple fraud by the vigilant press secretary of the mayor S. Tsoi.

The next person to intervene was the chairman of another constructive party, Yabloko, Mr. Mitrokhin, who on September 30, on behalf of the party, filed a claim with the Moscow City Court to remove the candidate from the A Just Russia party, G. Khovanskaya, from the elections to the Moscow City Duma, accusing her of “bribery of voters and abuse of power." At the same time, Mr. Mitrokhin did not even hide the fact that the selective use of the lawsuit was not against his supposedly main opponents - the United Russia party and Mayor Yu. Luzhkov, to whom the lawsuit would have been directly related, but against his former party colleague - this is politics. The essence of this policy is obvious: Mr. Mitrokhin must retain his mandate as a deputy of the Moscow City Duma by any means necessary and, for this purpose, demonstrate his support for the mayor through deeds. The latter did not appreciate his zeal, and Mr. Mitrokhin did not get into the Moscow City Duma.

Well, with constructive opposition everything is clear. For them, the main thing is to get into power, at least as deputies of the Moscow City Duma. In the camp of the irreconcilable opposition, it seems, other interests should reign. However, unfortunately, for a number of its representatives the main thing is to declare themselves the first guy of the opposition and appear in the media for any reason. That is, crow, but at least it’s not dawn!

This fall, this trend has prevailed again, and, as one would expect, the first was Mr. Nemtsov, who on September 9 organized a presentation of his next opus under the pretentious title “Luzhkov. Results: Independent expert report.” Upon closer examination, this swamp-green brochure turned out to be a banal, hastily and not always correctly made compilation, the main sources for which were not research and data from specialists, but publications in the media that always need careful verification (more than 80% of the references). At the same time, more than half of the text of this opus is devoted to the same topic as Mr. Gozman’s, which has already set teeth on edge with its triviality and in style resembles a denunciation to the president (otherwise he wouldn’t know without them!) topic - “the business of the wife of Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov Elena Baturina and the role of her husband in the formation of this business.” Such a publication in the press would most likely be classified as “jeans”, custom-made material in which reliable information is purposefully selected and intertwined with speculation. Therefore, the mayor and his subordinates gladly filed a series of lawsuits in court.

But the crown of the autumn aggravation of the opposition, of course, was Ms. Litvinovich’s article “Most Changes,” published on October 20 in Gazeta.ru. This, if I may say so, political technology “chick of Pavlovsky’s nest” has been waiting for a long time, more than a month since the publication of President D. Medvedev’s article “Russia, forward!” on September 10. An article that even by its name resembles plagiarism - remember Boris Fedorov, of blessed memory, who created the voting bloc “Forward, Russia!” back in 1995? But, obviously, only when Ms. Litvinovich realized that very few of the self-respecting professionals considered it possible for themselves to somehow react to yet another simulacrum of President D. Medvedev, she decided, or someone suggested, that she could take advantage of the situation and declare oneself as the main irreconcilable-constructive or constructively-irreconcilable oppositionist.

One can understand and sympathize with the United Civil Front, which hastened to part with Ms. Litvinovich. But, unfortunately, this should have been done much earlier. For those who are familiar with the indecent activities of this lady in the Union of Right Forces, in particular under the leadership of the absolutely handshake A. Koch, she is the same as Mr. Nemtsov, a “black mark” for any organization that claims to be democratic. This is once again confirmed by recent events.

And here the corrosive reader should be wary and say that the author is clearly “pulling the ears” of such different situations and actions. You are wrong, dear reader. Yes, in terms of banal and unappetizing content, which does not even make sense to discuss, these actions differ. But not according to the methods used by Messrs. Gozman, Mitrokhin, Nemtsov, Litvinovich and the like, and the destructive consequences that their activities have for the creation of the real democratic and liberal opposition that is so necessary today.

The actions and deeds of all these both constructive and irreconcilable characters are based on the principle borrowed by the Bolsheviks from the Jesuits - the end justifies the means. A principle that is absolutely unacceptable and incompatible with either democracy or liberalism.

Based on this principle, those who call themselves oppositionists use essentially the same “black technologies” as the current government. Manipulation of a mixture of reliable and unreliable information, defamation, “selective use” of appeals to judicial and law enforcement agencies for political purposes, political denunciation, and others. Unfortunately, Russian society today is accustomed to and practically does not react to such actions by the authorities. But those who use the same methods as the authorities are not and cannot be perceived as opposition and cause a sharply negative reaction among the majority. The requirements for the opposition are always higher and stricter than for the current government. This is the immutable law of politics. For people, the opposition should be “like Caesar’s wife - above suspicion”, serve as a source of only reliable and carefully verified information, act realistically, honestly and extremely openly. Only such an opposition can people support.

And one last thing.

All the actions and deeds of the listed and similar characters are not real actions, but artificially created information occasions, an imitation of vigorous activity with one goal - to draw attention to one’s person. The essence of this imitation technology was frankly formulated by Mr. Nemtsov: “Give me a TV for two hours, and all voters will be for me.” No, they won’t anymore, you can’t fool people endlessly. The real democratic and liberal opposition has never been and cannot be compatible with political pop.

The imitators and the structures they lead create no less obstacles for the real democratic and liberal opposition than the current government. They are happy to be used by the authorities to discredit such opposition and through their activities, to put it mildly, pollute the soil for its gradual germination.

Yu. Nisnevich