Test for protest

Unlike the Russian progressive public, I do not see a political crisis in Russia. In my opinion, there is just an euphoria in which participants in the December rallies are still injected from such crowding. But there is no crisis, because even the necessary minimum conditions of non -violent pressure on the authorities, which is formulated in the famous book of American political scientist Gin Sharp "from the dictatorship to democracy", is not fulfilled from the side of the protesters.

Do not stop? But in Russia, mass rallies ended on December 24, and did not continue without a break, as on the Maidan or on Tahrir Square. The next rally is scheduled only on February 4. Is the atomization of protesters overcome? No, it, on the contrary, only intensified. Literally the war of all against everyone began. So so far there is no need to talk about any consistent and incessant pressure on power. Strategy is not visible. Moreover, among the protesters there is no unity even on the fundamental question of a monopoly on power.

The December protest movement reflects the general condition of Russian society. And it, as in 1991, remains pseudo -democratic. True, if 20 years ago, Western democratic ideals and eastern totalitarian skills were characteristic of him, today, after a long-term massive campaign of debunking the “dashing” 1990s, anti-war, propaganda of traditional autocracy and great power as the highest values ​​of Russian civilization, democratic ideals are very faded, if not completely discredited, but the eastern ones are completely discredited. Totalitarian skills have only strengthened. Society, perhaps, really fell out of love with Vladimir Putin and dissatisfied with his life today, although this fact speaks more about the society itself, in which only three years ago the opposite picture was observed - almost 80% of Russians were satisfied with their lives.

However, even today everyone still reckses with power and it is with it that they associate hopes for changes. Without Putin, but with power. And statesmen-guardians, and liberals, and left. Everyone is waiting for the authorities to finally show a "political will"! It will start a new industrialization! He will open the front of a real struggle against corruption, maybe even with loud indicative processes over especially stained! And everyone is yearning for the ideal. Here is the statesman Mikhail Leontyev, confident that the country "sullenly waits for it to be given meaning, work and future." But Liberal Andrei Pelipenko, who believes that "the inability and unwillingness to offer society to develop a development strategy even at the level of any convincing imitation is a much more serious vice than it may seem at first glance." Or left socialist Sergei Udaltsov, who dreams of "some further general business" for rallies.

That is why, despite the curses at the "National Leader", Russia is doomed to the new leader. The “new economic policy” of Putin’s decade, today everyone is unhappy, but they don’t want to return to the troubles of the 1990s. And what remains? You can argue about the definitions of this option. Someone will agree with Andrei Illarionov, predicting Jamahiria. Someone - with Dmitry Shusharin and Yuri Afanasyev, talking about non -ootototilitarism. One thing is clear: the new round of the country's historical development dictates the strengthening of traditional Russian statehood and the enslavement of society with all the ensuing consequences.

The democratic option is simply nowhere to come from. It is not visible even in the bud. Today, few people argue with the assertion that no democratic revolution in August 1991, although then everyone was in euphoria. And in subsequent years, the Russian authorities only strengthened its positions, fixing, including the "new Russians", who once became the owners of huge pieces of state property. Owners, but not owners. The irony of history is that the Russian rich were in the position of slaves of the supreme power. The power corporation itself, also becoming the owner, put under control not only of power structures, but also by society, making it the object of its manipulations.

Even the past rallies play the hands of the authorities, because they legitimize the election campaign in the eyes of the West. Here, please, a recent confirmation - the answer of the Prochrevsky political scientist Vyacheslav Nikonov to the question: "So there will be" rally blizzards "in February or not?" “The rallies, of course, will be,” he said. “This, in fact, is the logic of the current political process, coinciding with the presidential election campaign. And the political struggle will certainly become aggravated. It will become more sharp than during the fight for the posts of State Duma deputies ...”

The main question of the moment being experienced is whether it is possible to interrupt the poor repeatability of Russian history. Make sure that Russia does not slide into confusion, as in 1917, nor in totalitarianism, as in 1929. Theoretically, it was possible - and this could do Russian businessmen. It was they who could become the center of assembly of the new free Russia. Again, theoretically, because so far there are no signs that businessmen are capable of an act - to challenge the supreme power, to demand from it guarantees of private property right.

All of them are silent. The oligarchs are silent, who have received the wealth of the Russian bowels in a doubt way. Other major owners who are under the wing of the supreme power are silent. Middle and even small owners are silent, who prefer to pay tribute to security forces and local authorities. No one even tries to raise a fundamental question about the revision of the results of privatization of the beginning of the 1990s and establishing honest rules of the game. No one seeks to create a normal liberal party (and not the pseudo -party of Mikhail Prokhorov). No one requires a revision of criminal cases and the release of thousands of prisoners serving a deadline for economic articles.

I don’t know if Russian businessmen read the book of Richard Pipe “Property and Freedom”. If they read, then, it seems, they preferred to remain serfs in the service of the Russian government. They preferred to buy real estate abroad, throw money down and invest them in no one needed football clubs, but not spend them on the development of their country. And it is beneficial to keep them in their power to the Kremlin, cultivating a complex of guilt in them.

World history does not know another way of becoming democratic procedures and institutions except for the approval of private property right. First, private owners with a guarantee of the right to transfer property by inheritance, and then normal parliament, normal parties, normal court, etc. to uphold their interests. It was private owners who became the basis of the legal state in the West. It was they who ensured the execution of the contract between the state and the company, doing this for the purpose of their own survival and security. But these basics of the rule of law and democracy are for some reason the most difficult to perceive.

To demand, in the current conditions of honest elections, elections to the pseudo -parliament in which the pseudo -Parties are sitting, is nonsense, a contradiction in the definition, not to mention the fact that these requirements only help the authorities strengthen the facade of imitational democracy.

The Russian community, really interested in the free development of the country, must be pulled to their side of businessmen, enlightening them, organizing, raising civil self-awareness from them, convincing them to get out of the wing of power. Any other way is the path to non -Ototilitarism. With computers, iPhones, iPades, with new industrialization, but also with traditional supreme power and new enslavement.