Scientists need their own party

In continuation of the topic raised by Lev Klein in TrV-Nauka No. 25 (94) for 2011, I would like to propose an article on the need for a new party of scientists and university workers (as well as the need for new parties in today's politics). Unlike L. Klein, I propose, as it seems to me, a different point of view on the same problem with a general message.

The current political situation is remarkable for its uncertainty. Absolutely nothing happened except that one hundred thousand Muscovites, ten thousand St. Petersburg residents and even fewer thousand residents of other large cities declared their desire to influence the country's politics. Against this background, politicians and analysts are building ideological castles. Opposition resources are full of confidence in the imminent collapse of the regime. However, many authors sensibly believe that in order to collapse the regime, it is necessary to carry out some WORK, which, as we were taught in the Soviet school, does not boil down to standing in the squares. Standing in the square, following the example of the Decembrists, obviously leads to loss.

No less is written about how certain gentlemen “drain the wave of popular protest.” Indeed, popular anger will not find the right channel. It seems, not only because the majority of today's politicians are not capable of independent work without the parental control of the Kremlin. And not only because many of the speakers at the rallies bear personal responsibility for everything that is happening today. And more because the current structure of the opposition is hopelessly outdated. Created and debugged for a simulation policy, it is not able to work in real policy mode.

The fact is that official and unofficial parties trying to enter the current political stream were formed (or were formed from above) in the era of Yeltsinism-Putinism (the slightly longer history of the LDPR does not count). In both the 1990s and 2000s, parties were created as clubs of individual politicians. Having acquired an organizational structure, they came up with an ideology for themselves (it is significant that throughout the nineties the Yabloko party could not decide whether it was liberal or socialist. I don’t know if they have decided this issue now). And then they formed the core of voters - “those who vote with their hearts,” i.e. guided by likes and dislikes for leaders. As a result, we have a party system (the distinction between “systemic” and “non-systemic” opposition is insignificant in this case), which is tied to points of view on the further development of the country (and even points of view that are very vague, uncertain and non-systemic) - and not to the real interests of large social groups.

Indeed, none of the existing parties represents the interests of a real group of voters. Whose interests does A Just Russia represent? State employees and pensioners? Whose then is the Communist Party of the Russian Federation? Not to mention the fact that state employees and pensioners are very different - there is no need to talk about the unity of their interests. Who does Limonov’s “Other Russia” represent? This is not so much a party as a club of young extreme sports enthusiasts (like those who are passionate about parkour), who get their dose of adrenaline at street protests (at the same time, I want to say that I have great respect for Limonovites. It was their activity that largely prepared today’s street protests. I think that many members of this party, like all others, are really concerned about the fate of Russia and want to truly participate in politics). Each voter, if he still comes to the polling station, does not have the opportunity to vote for HIS party. He is forced to choose a party that is as close as possible - and again: not to his interests, but to his political views.

This leads to the main task of the day. We not only need FREE ELECTIONS, we need OTHER ELECTIONS. It is necessary not only to allow all existing parties to participate in the elections. It is necessary to give the opportunity to quickly create and register NEW PARTIES to those social groups that are not represented in any way in today's political life.

Let's take, for example, a large group close to me - university professors, associate professors, teachers and university staff. Over the entire twenty years of reforms, this vast group has not been represented in any way either in the State Duma, or in local parliaments, or - oddly enough - in the government of the country. Everyone knows who heads the ministry responsible (or irresponsible) for Russian science and higher education. These people got there by accident and have nothing to do with science or higher education. And, more importantly, they do not have the slightest idea what science and higher education aimed at it are. The university reform, which is in full swing destroying the universities remaining from previous times, openly runs counter to the interests of scientists and university employees. It often seems that we continue to teach students against the wishes of the Ministry. And that the Ministry is doing everything to complicate our normal educational process.

It's time to put an end to this. The parliament of the country and the parliaments of the constituent entities of the federation should consist mainly of educated people, and not athletes, dropouts (even with doctorates of science that they received as bribes) and the notorious milkmaids. It is scientists who are experts in a particular field who must make decisions that are important for the country and regions. At the beginning of the 20th century, it was the university party of cadets, which included famous university professors and representatives of the Academy of Sciences - P.N. Milyukov, V.I. Vernadsky and others, that set the tone for the political life of the country. There are still quite a few people employed in higher education and science in Russia today. They need their own party. With leaders working in universities and scientific institutes, and not from among professional politicians. This group of people has their own interests to fight for, namely:

• an immediate stop to the university reform, the abolition of state standards by which all higher education is forced to work today;
• debureaucratization of science and higher education;
• granting broad self-government to universities and scientific institutes, election of all officials of universities and scientific institutes;
• broad discussion of priorities for the development of science and higher education;
• a significant increase in funding for science and higher education;
• granting employees of scientific institutes and university employees the status of civil servants;
• salaries of employees of scientific institutes and university employees should be comparable to salaries in Europe and the USA.

These are priority requirements; the list can be supplemented and improved.

I believe that the university party will easily find allies in close social groups - among students, secondary school teachers, vocational school teachers, perhaps public sector doctors, etc. Simply by the commonality of interests that unite them.

We should not expect that our problems will be solved by some good uncle from professional politics. He doesn't care too much about our problems. We must pose and resolve our own questions. In the early nineties, we decided that politics was a dirty profession, that science was more interesting than politics, and we handed over politics to unprincipled grabbers and grabbers. And most importantly, for non-professionals - those who have not been able to make a career in other areas of life, for whom politics is an opportunity to get out into the world and make good money. Today, it has finally become clear that if honest and professional people continue to think this way, the power in the country will again be given to crooks.
I believe that the new university party is able not only to solve its own problems, i.e. to re-create the system of secondary and higher education throughout the country (which in itself is one of the most important tasks today), but also to offer the rest of the population something extremely valuable to them. Like the famous cadet party of the early 20th century (from which, by the way, Nemtsov, Ryzhkov and Kasyanov stole the second name - “People's Freedom Party”).

I gave just one example. But even so, it is clearly visible how politics will change when the people of Russia directly begin to work in it. The sphere of politics today is occupied by those who do not see themselves outside of politics. They have nowhere to go and therefore they really don’t want to. And what appears from below is a stalling system, unable to cope with any of the tasks facing the country. Even hold a decent rally.

When looking at the current situation, one gets the feeling that all current politicians, including the most radical ones, are running behind the locomotive, trying to guess what needs to be done in order not to fall behind forever. On the one hand, this is good, because a steam locomotive flying forward propels even such a static colossus as the Communist Party of the Russian Federation. On the other hand, this is bad, because the locomotive confidently flies forward only when there is a driver on it. To climb onto a locomotive, it would seem that you need very little: to demand exactly what the people of Russia want today, at least the majority of them. But the fact is that opposition politicians cannot answer this question for themselves. They, like the party in power, are not used to monitoring public sentiment and do not know how to do it. Therefore, they continue to demand what they themselves want.