Translated material
They don't serve on holidays
Before the Central Election Committee had time to properly click its beak, announcing the country's capture of the next gaping height, the liberal democrats and democratic liberals, who lost to the nines and ashes in this political Monte Carlo, longed for a thaw, and even out loud. They quite amused the KGB public.
“Will we have a thaw soon?” This is with oil prices of 108 bucks! Dmitry Medvedev, fortunately, is a well-mannered person. Therefore, he only reminded that he was going to conduct the course of President Putin, and in our latitudes this means not a thaw, but a ski and sled hockey season. And he could have answered impolitely: “What’s not enough for you, guys, that you are accused of jackaling at foreign embassies, so you came to the Kremlin to jack up?”
The thaw is a purely winter concept, lowered from above, one of the types of imperious mimicry, but not at all the fruit of imperious humanism or any historically vertical virtue. In the sad history of Russia, the well-being of the authorities and the well-being of the subjects rarely coincided, and the subjects never said “thank you”. Grigory Otrepiev, hiding behind the name of Demetrius and trying to implement these same reforms, was thrown out of the window by the grateful people and is still anathematized. Alexander II adorned Russia with Western freedoms and rights, and only did not have time to convene a parliament: the progressive youth tore it to pieces with an infernal machine, and even together with the coming constitutional government. Boris Yeltsin returned to Alexander's reforms, was insulted and slandered, and today we only hear about the "chaos and horror" of the 90s. When everything is in order in power, she does not even think about reforms, but “quietly turns the nut after the nut”. The thaw follows the catastrophe.
Boris Godunov loosened the reins a little because the mad autocrat Ivan the Terrible lost the Livonian War, failed to defend Moscow from the Khan, destroyed his heir, and Boris had little legitimacy.
Anna Ioannovna was taken over by the "supervisors", that is, the landlords, and almost achieved "conditions" (constitutional government), if not for the conspiracy of the "siloviki" from the "amusing" regiments.
Catherine was simply smart, besides a foreigner, and her thaw is a conscious, albeit moderate, within the limits of the possible, act. The reforms of Alexander II are the fruit of a terrible catastrophe that befell Russia during the Crimean War. And the October Manifesto and the convocation of the Duma are the result of failures in the Russo-Japanese War. Whereas Arakcheevism, Speransky's exile, participation in the reactionary Holy Alliance as a gendarme of Europe - this is what the country inherited from the victory over Napoleon.
Reprisal against genetics, cybernetics and "cosmopolitans" is our share from the day of the Victory. Gorbachev started, and Yeltsin continued reforms, because the economy collapsed and there was nothing to eat.
Khrushchev's thaw was a way to blame famine, devastation, terror on Stalin and other comrades-in-arms like Beria and Malenkov. Push off and rise up. Security for their own - but also freedom for the victims of Stalinism. And now they have everything: security, their own courts, their own offshores, all the resources of the country, nuclear weapons and the West, ready to buy up oil and gas. Why do they need a thaw? The people are silent or yelling "Hurrah!" First - money, then - chairs. The thaw will come after another catastrophe. And now conversations on this topic strongly resemble the dialogue between the Parisian executioner Sanson and the Countess Dubarry on the scaffold: “One minute, Mr. executioner, one more minute!” Let's grimly face the truth. The role of the wolf is more honorable than that of the jackal. Let them get our skins as dearly as possible.