Burden of Choice

Dear Leonid Aleksandrovich, I am very flattered that in your

I am one of the main characters.

It seems that this gives me the right to a detailed answer.

I would like to dispel the idea among readers of our correspondence that I am an infantile democratic dreamer who is taught with bitter irony the realities of a fallen world.

I am writing to you because you are a politicized intellectual, a columnist for several publications. So I ask you to define your position on what has suddenly become a watershed issue for liberals. I ask you not to get away with a sad statement of human imperfection. We all know that during the preparation of the National Assembly, which happily coincided with the coronation of the successor, the liberals were clearly divided into supporters of restoring democracy in the country (in the sense of democracy) and supporters of a positive influence on Medvedev and on the apparatus in general.

Each side presented its point of view in detail and convincingly. My position is made very clear in the Charter of the National Assembly, to which I am sworn. But I’m wondering where are you, on which side of this new “barricade”?

Are you asking what to do with a country that, like a pig, is tossing and turning in a puddle of petrodollars? Even without you and me, this will cause the next crisis, which will “correct the market” and break through the credit boom bubbles. History, which has been mentioned many times, contains many examples of the dramatic ending of an unhealthy financial rush.

Do I have recipes for changing socio-economic life? There are no exact ones, but let the wise ministers and their brilliant advisers in the new government of “democratic unity” puzzle over this. Offhand, I propose to confiscate (as criminally acquired) the share of a well-known person in Gunvor, nationalize state corporations, bring “transparency” to them, and then, at the right time, privatize them. And the money goes to the Pension Fund, to children's cancer centers, to sports centers and libraries, and to mortgages for young large families. But perhaps the next democratically elected government will repeat the “choice of the democrats” that they made in 1990-1993, and will allow the old elite to keep pieces of “public property” and “party gold” - in exchange for compliance...

I am not a Manichaean, nor do I share the belief of some faiths that the original source of evil is the metaphysical Adversary. I believe the source of human evil. And some institutions in which such people are specially selected in increased numbers. You gave a lot of examples about the threat that some Black Hundred-oriented figures pose. But aren’t they all the homunculi of the famous Doctor Faustus? I’m not talking about “Operation LDPR”. But let's remember “Operation Homeland”. Destroy the monopoly of great power nationalists and Stalin admirers on television and you will see how the polling data will begin to change. You yourself told how easily and quickly you promoted General Lebed (a very worthy person) in 1996. So promote Yavlinsky, Belykh, Kasparov!

In January 2005, two significant events took place: the “calico riots” against monetization and the scandal surrounding the “500” letter (this is about ritual murders in Judaism). The signatories of this anti-Semitic libel are now working hard for the Kremlin’s propaganda - exposing the “lie about the Holodomor”, “lie about Katyn”, and vilifying the National Assembly. And crowds of thousands of protesters carried Putin, Zurabov and Matvienko over the bumps... But they did not mention Jews and Caucasians, although for years ordinary people (and ordinary intellectuals) were diligently palmed off with texts that even the Third Reich would have been ashamed of.

I simply assert that the main source of evil in our society is the current state, more precisely, some intelligence agencies and political technology structures. Here's an example. Once upon a time there was a society called “Memory”: they sweated in formation in black T-shirts, started a couple of fights in intellectual meetings, and issued outrageous proclamations. Everyone was afraid of him. In Leningrad in February 1990, even a rally was canceled out of fear of pogromists from “Pamyat”. (In Moscow, it was not cancelled, and half a million came to Sadovaya.) Hundreds of thousands of Jews (and related persons) left Russia, completing “200 years together.” Then “Memory” split - and the RNE of former special forces sergeant Barkashev appeared. He creates armed detachments that almost capture the capital on October 3, 1993. Then his militants secretly leave the White House, which is besieged by troops. Then the RNE split - and it turned out to be Kassin’s “People’s Council”. Based on his denunciation, a criminal case is being initiated against Andrei Erofeev and Yuri Samodurov. And Kassin himself goes to the “Public Human Rights Center of Russia” created a week ago (together with state security veterans). And the new Russian-speaking Israelis did their best to support Putin as a fighter against “Islamic terrorism.” The most beautiful operative security multi-step is evident. But what does this have to do with the people, whom it is supposedly risky to let into power? It is risky for the Gebe to let this approach to “managed democracy”!

Leonid Aleksandrovich, I understand that history can provide examples for any thesis. But I tried to choose from a series of events that corresponded to our situation. Now about your examples.

You are surprised by the “attack” on Stolypin. I did not say that VOSR happened because of his reforms. But it, and the civil war, happened, from the point of view of history, immediately after. Let's think about the reasons.

The Stolypin coup of June 3 (16), 1907 - the dispersal of the 3rd Duma - freed the royal court from the emerging control of the liberal public (civil society). And the holy elder reigned at court.

The Stolypin reform transferred peasant aggression from the landowners' estates to their neighbors. And ten years later, hundreds of thousands of rifle barrels fell into the split village, exhausted by mutual hatred, shocked by the collapse of the traditional way of life. And the Peasant War flared up, burying the brilliant “St. Petersburg civilization.”

Franco did not lead Spain to a liberal democratic monarchy. It’s just that two years before his death, the Basque underground eliminated his right hand (the prime minister, Admiral Carrero Blanco), and the young king did not want to be a screen for the party in power (the phalanx). We had to release political prisoners and return political emigrants. The Phalangists wanted to become a respectable European conservative party. I had to go to democratic elections and turn the mini-empire into a federation. But in neighboring Portugal they did not have time to carry out “democratization,” and in April 1978, young officers staged a “socialist” revolution, which was written into the constitution.

Guchkov and Miliukov were not any “shvonders” (obsessed social experimenters), but they were calculating conspirators, elementary putschists. Frightened by the fact that the tsar, perhaps shocked by the monstrous victims of the Brusilov breakthrough *, was preparing for a separate truce, the leaders of the then military-industrial complex decided to take power into their hands. In October 1916, Guchkov went to Headquarters and persuaded the generals, who were engaged by the French, and Miliukov created a broad anti-government and anti-Nicholas coalition in the Duma (including Purishkevich). The start of the putsch was given on November 1 (14) - the famous speech about “stupidity and treason,” and the completely “orange” unrest in Petrograd became the reason for an ultimatum to the emperor from the front commanders.

By the way, about “orange”. Why did you, Leonid Aleksandrovich, speak so contemptuously about the “pale orange” revolution? Has nothing changed?! In Ukraine, the authoritarian party system was peacefully eliminated. Instead of the dominance of the “party in power,” the “pendulum” parliamentary democracy traditional for Eastern Europe was established, when right- and center-left coalitions change in power. Everything is orderly and neat, just as you want. No raging pogrom crowds that need “machine guns.” Just a series of small but noisy scandals. Just some kind of Italy.

Therefore, in the dilemma of the “golden stagnation” or the rise of the democratic movement, I consciously advocate democracy. Moreover, the Shevchenko-Rogozin-Savelyev-Kassin women are on the opposite side.

I'll say it even more frankly. Between the options: either the Fifth Russian - human rights - revolution (previous: liberation movement of 1905-6, 1917 (two), 1989-93), or the National Revolution (All-Russian Kondopoga) - I choose the democratic revolution. This is the risk. But waiting with folded hands until the nomenklatura-KGB system, in its decomposition, comes to an attempt to establish a fascist regime, which will be followed by the inevitable interethnic and civil wars, I believe is an even greater risk. The “Chekist oligarchs” did not take power in order to carry out progressive reforms. Authoritarianism is needed so that “the cattle do not leave the stall.” This is the layout. If, from your point of view, the situation is different and there are other, not so “diabolical” alternatives, I am convinced that not only I will be interested in knowing your opinion.

With utmost respect to you,

Evgeniy Ikhlov,

Member of the Council of the National Assembly

* “The Russian Army in the Great War: The offensive of the Russian South-Western Front in the summer-autumn of 1916: a war of self-exhaustion?”:

...Taking into account the fact that by November 1/14, 1916. the shortage was 109 thousand people, the entire offensive of the Southwestern Front in May-October 1916 absorbed 1.5 million people in combat personnel alone. And by the end of the year, according to front headquarters data sent daily to Headquarters, losses as a result of A. A. Brusilov’s offensive were: killed - 2,930 officers and 199,836 soldiers, wounded - 14,932 officers and 1,075,959 soldiers, missing - 928 officers and 151,749 soldiers, a total of 18,006 officers and 1,436,134 soldiers. The Austro-Hungarian Northern Front from May to December (including actions near Baranavichy and Romania) lost 1,294 officers and 43,764 soldiers killed, 4,769 officers and 211 705 soldiers wounded and 5,981 officers and 371,818 soldiers missing. German troops lost 140 thousand killed, wounded and missing in Brusilov’s offensive zone.