Monopoly on nationalism

Today the Federal Registration Service must comment on its refusal to register the Great Russia party. Experts have no doubt that state registrars will present formal complaints to the party: inconsistencies in the charter with the requirements of the law and an insufficient number of members (they say that Fed employees were not too lazy to call those who declared their belonging to “Great Russia” in order to verify this fact). In fact, it is obvious that behind the legal tricks is the desire of the authorities to maintain a monopoly on nationalism.

After all, “Great Russia” has every reason to consider itself the party of the president. Suffice it to remember how a year ago Vladimir Putin announced the special rights of the “indigenous population” and demanded that officials protect them. Moreover, meeting yesterday with representatives of pro-Kremlin youth, he actually approved the initiatives of activists of the “Local” movement. They reported to the president that, on their own initiative, they “monitor” markets in order to protect national consumers and “make comments to migrants” caught in inappropriate behavior.
“All visitors should know that it is better not to come to us with their charter,” Putin concluded, reminding the “Locals” that when “monitoring” they should remain within the bounds of the law.

It is only with great difficulty that one can detect the difference in the rhetoric of the Great Russians and the pro-Kremlin movements. But at the same time, the authorities do not intend to share with anyone the right to exploit nationalist sentiments. Therefore, “Great Russia” closed the door to big politics.