Medvedev: his ideology. The "appointment" of a supposedly liberal Dmitry Medvedev as his successor brought confusion to the ranks of the liberal oppositionists. The words of the heir to the throne, as The New Times made sure, are indeed liberal. Which, however, does not yet speak in favor of cases
That part of the liberal electorate that considers itself to be adapted, educated, wealthy people, as a rule, is conformist. The standard model of behavior is voting for power or not voting, political apathy. But if an official with a “liberal” label on his chest is presented as a candidate from the authorities, then such an electorate with all the greater desire and even relief votes for an outwardly unusually decent and democratically oriented candidate.
The drunken air of Davos
Among the voters of Mikhail Kasyanov or Boris Nemtsov, there are many who, in the current situation, when the liberal electorate is offered some kind of compensation in the person of Medvedev for Putin's mobilization speech at Luzhniki, will vote for the successor with enthusiasm and gratitude. Just now you were discussing with a friend in the kitchen whether to leave the country or not to go, and then they show you on TV a liberal young man, just like yourself ...
Moreover, with all the doubts about the independence of the potential president, he now personifies the showcase of Russia, represents the human face of Putin's power, facing the West. That is why - with all the reservations - this very West is inclined to treat Medvedev's presidency with restrained optimism.
It is clear that in the course of his election campaign, Dmitry Medvedev will simply be forced to play the role prepared for him by the president of all Russians. That is to please everyone. But for this he does not need to throw off his sparkling liberal clothes and change the wings of a dove for a hawk's beak. It is enough to more actively "lean" on social programs, national projects, demographic policy - exactly what Medvedev has been doing up to now. And for the liberal audience, for the intelligentsia and the educated stratum, there will also be polished words.
Take, for example, the same democracy. Any layman who is a democrat at heart will be heard: “Today we are building new institutions based on the basic principles of full-fledged democracy, democracy without unnecessary additional definitions, efficient democracy, based on the principles of a market economy, the rule of law and accountability of power to the rest of society. We are well aware that not a single non-democratic state has yet become truly prosperous. For one simple reason: freedom is better than lack of freedom.
This is a passage from a speech at the Davos Forum in 2007 - a kind of presentation to the Western community of a potential successor, who at that time had not yet given the palm in the competition of heirs to the throne to Sergei Ivanov.
It might seem that the drunken air of Davos turned the head of the young candidate for the post of head of state. If not for one circumstance: Medvedev is not Professor Pleishner. Absent-mindedness does not differ, turnout does not fail. Most likely, the head of the country was also aware of every word in his speech, especially since it was attacked by the same speech writers as Putin's. It was simply necessary to present the westernized component of the Putin regime, to encourage, as Putin, and Medvedev after him, "some of our partners." Vladimir Vladimirovich can do it himself. What, in fact, dabbled in at the very beginning of his career. It's just that today such words are not very organic for him.
Words are separate
Medvedev often emphasizes that he is a lawyer: this allows him to look like a modern, de-ideologized technocrat - a typical Western official of the post-industrial era. He did not like - and, it seems, sincerely - the term "sovereign democracy". He spoke about this more than once. For example, like this: “If some definitions are attached to the word “democracy”, this creates a strange aftertaste. This suggests that after all we are talking about some other, non-traditional democracy ... This term (sovereign economy. - The New Times) ... I like it even less ... if we literally interpret the term "sovereign economy", then this is a state economy . And neither you nor I ... are adherents of the idea of nationalization of the economy. Or like this: “...To stick out one of the signs of a full-fledged democracy ... seems to me, as a lawyer, to be redundant. And sometimes even harmful.
By the way, about the economy. Here, too, Medvedev is presented as a moderate liberal with state thinking. He is reserved about state corporations, believing that their number should be limited to those already created. Moreover, Dmitry Anatolyevich carefully expressed doubts about the advisability of certain actions in relation to Yukos: “The question arises of how legally effective the arrest of Yukos shares is. The consequences ... will immediately affect the economy, cause embarrassment in political life.
On the whole, Medvedev reveals a balanced approach to state participation in the economy: “I don't think that state corporations are more efficient than private ones. On the contrary, I hold the opposite view. But there are sectors of the economy where state-owned companies are needed, especially when it comes to Russia.” And at the same time: "Even if the state retains a controlling stake, we are guided by the creation of public companies with a significant share of private investment in their capital."
As a person responsible for healthcare, education and other areas close to people, Medvedev is obliged to utter various mantras about investments in human capital or the knowledge economy: “... Only investments in people can help move away from the “resource and industrial” economy to the knowledge economy , to an economy of "daily technological revolution" that is created by the personal efforts of active, healthy, educated citizens.
This liberal "button accordion" plays in almost all of the successor's performances. But for now, these are just words. Although some indirect signs - for example, the words spoken by Medvedev's closest friend and ally Anton Ivanov, chairman of the Supreme Arbitration Court, in defense of PriceWaterhouseCoopers, which is persecuted in Russia, and against Article 169 of the Civil Code (on transactions that are contrary to morality), with the help of which one can take away property , - testify in favor of the true liberal convictions of the pretender to the throne. In the logic of "tell me who your friend is...".
But Medvedev is just an official loyal and devoted to the top leader, and not a politician and not a fighter for the triumph of freedom. Therefore, everything will be the same as under Soviet rule: words separately, real steps and actions separately.
