Results of the week. Approach to target

Many feathers have already been broken regarding the National Assembly. And what kind! On the one hand, such highly respected analysts as Mr. Radzikhovsky, Ms. Novodvorskaya and Mr. Makarkin paint us the horrors of cooperation with all sorts of dubious personalities, on the other hand, the no less respected Messrs. Shenderovich, Osovtsov, Piontkovsky, Bilunov and Ikhlov explain that the main thing today is to achieve the restoration of democratic procedures, and this task cannot be solved separately.

It seems to me that it is counterproductive to continue this fruitful and undoubtedly important discussion. And it's just boring. Everyone who is not with us remains unconvinced (but we, of course, are still waiting for them and will be glad to see them), and, excuse me, it’s time for us to get on with our business. This is actually what makes sense to talk about.

Last week, the first meeting of the Bureau of the National Assembly was held, which included representatives of all ideological trends that participated in the last forum. In addition to the “Other Russia” (its delegates, let me remind you, were chosen during the primaries last year), we are talking about patriots, leftists and liberals. Those gathered exchanged impressions about the forum, nominated candidates for committees, and discussed future plans.

So, what does the National Assembly have to do? If we formulate the task in an extremely general form, then, as it seems to me, it is divided into two conceptual blocks of issues - determining the mechanisms for dismantling the regime and developing universal rules for the transition period. That is, until the moment when it will actually be possible to hold fair and free elections in the country. I am a categorical opponent of the Assembly beginning to formulate its consolidated view on the future of our country, on its political and social structure. This is precisely the prerogative of future parties that will begin to function in the new political space and compete in elections. But to create a comfortable and transparent environment for such competition, to build a new legal system (Andrei Illarionov spoke about this a lot and convincingly) - this, in my opinion, is the main task of the National Assembly.

Let's go in order. And in order, our first number is dismantling. And the main question that inevitably faces people who decide to radically reorganize life in their own country is how to enlist the support of an apathetic population raped by official propaganda? At least - its responsible and most active part. There are two problems here: what exactly to say and how, under conditions of media blockade, to convey your thoughts and ideas to people. Let me first focus on the ideological component.

Today, all opposition movements agree that the current Russian government is illegitimate. I see it as extremely important to introduce this simple idea into the public consciousness, which is, in fact, obvious at the primary subcortical level to a huge number of our fellow citizens. Because Russian citizens themselves saw very well how the last elections (be it Duma or presidential) were prepared and under what conditions they were held. It is necessary to explain to people that a government that deprives its people of the right to influence their own lives and the life of the country as a whole through the institution of elections is automatically outlawed. If the thesis that there have been no elections at all in Russia in recent years takes root among sufficiently wide sections of the population, this will already be a great victory for the opposition and an important step towards gaining active supporters. Because the acceptance of this thesis as an indisputable fact is followed by numerous semantic and behavioral consequences. After all, if the hated government is illegitimate, that is, illegal, then this means... The list of conclusions is very extensive and diverse and gives the opposition ample opportunities to conduct propaganda and practical activities.

As for the technical problems of creating reliable communication links between the Assembly and its supporters, it will most likely not be possible to come up with anything new. The opposition won’t be allowed on Channel One anyway, so, of course, the Internet, of course, trips and meetings with public activists in the regions, of course, numerous and varied printed materials. But this activity can only make sense against the backdrop of purposeful and systematic organizational work.

I think that the branches of the National Assembly in the regions, perhaps not in name, but in essence, should become something like Committees for Nonviolent Civil Resistance. Here it is appropriate to return to the thesis about the illegitimacy of power. If the government is illegal, then any responsible citizen of the country not only can, but must resist it, relying on the current Constitution. The forms of such resistance (up to a general political strike) must be developed by the National Assembly. The principles are already laid down in the Charter. And one of the key ones is that we are talking only and exclusively about nonviolent actions. But at the same time - large-scale and uncompromising. And here it is necessary to talk about the accumulation of protest sentiments of various groups of the population, about efforts to reformat social protest into political, about establishing interaction between any opposition movements and parties that are ready to agree with the principles of cooperation proposed by the assembly.

I have no illusions that the program to dismantle the current Russian government will be completed in the short term. Much here depends on how accurate the forecasts about the inevitable and imminent global institutional crisis in Russia turn out to be, when, according to many experts, power will begin to crumble on its own and without outside pressure. But in any case, the country needs a responsible body that is ready to take over this power, prevent a civil war and, while maintaining relative public peace, bring the country to fair and free elections and transfer it to the legally elected government.

Here, in fact, we have come to the question of the second function of the National Assembly. On the development of rules for the transition period. It is clear that the country must approach the new election cycle with at least partially restored political space and legislation that could ensure the holding of free and fair elections. In other words, it is impossible to abolish censorship on television today and then go to the ballot box a week later. Who will we choose? Gryzlova and Mironov? We don't know the others. This means it will take some time. In order for political parties to appear in Russia that would be able to convey their ideas and plans to voters and would have the opportunity to compete with each other on equal terms. Obviously, the development of such conditions will require a radical reformatting of the right field. It must become adequate to the new tasks of the new Russia. Perhaps, already at this stage, certain lustration procedures will begin to work, designed to eliminate sabotage and ensure real reform of the entire system of state power.

Here is just a small and, of course, far from complete list of the problems that the National Assembly will have to solve. And we will definitely return to the question of whom a decent person should sit at the same table with, and whom a decent person should avoid. But, if you allow, a little later. Let's take care of things...