Translated material
The oligarch plays a new party
Prokhorov promises to begin the creation of a new mass right batch from his supporters. For all the ephemerality of “supporters of Prokhorov”, in principle, he would probably have this kind of project. There are only questions: is such a party needed and why right now? Or is it just a tactical course of Prokhorov’s campaign?
Even before the completion of the presidential campaign, her direct participant Mikhail Prokhorov suddenly announced that he was creating a new party. “I decided to create an independent right -handed party, and now, during the election campaign, I move to the creation of a new political force. You know my political program, I announced it. A massive party force for such a program is needed immediately, right now! I see that such a party will be multimillion -dollar, folk - much more the party in power. Those who want to vote for me are already obviously more than members of United Russia, ”Prokhorov shared his ambitions with readers of his blog.
Prokhorov expressed such a statement, oddly enough, the meeting of President Medvedev with the "non -playing opposition" - representatives of unregistered parties. Prokhorov criticized her, because he did not see there the forces that he expected to see. And then he decided to create his own political force.
The “bark of the party” will compose “voters of Prokhorov” and he, according to the novice “party -stand” has already developed. So the case is small - the vote on March 4 will pass and Prokhorov should immediately begin the formation of the party.
The application gives the melodrama. From the point of view of the practical in a hurry there is no need, it is rather harmful.
The law on liberalization of party legislation lies in the State Duma and, if the new Kremlin authorities will not play back, it will soon be accepted - not in this, so in the next session. Then the party will be purely technically easier to create. And there will be no need for the multimillion -dollar mass, the scale of the CPSU. United Russia has more than two million members (in the fall of 2010 there were 2 million 55 thousand of them), but the quality of membership leaves much to be desired-someone was simply recorded in the party by ordering, and many will run away from there as soon as “the wind of change” is smeared.
Good would if a specific reason had been voiced for haste. Say, keep the Prokhorov Electorate in a mobilized state after the election (question - for what specific goals?) Or try to take part in the regional elections in the fall. But Prokhorov does not report anything like that, the party simply suddenly needed "already yesterday." And the same elections to which the party need are not particularly visible on the horizon. In St. Petersburg, elections to the Legislative Assembly took place last December, Mosgordum to sit in the current composition for another one and a half years. Namely, to support in millionaires and even in the capitals - Prokhorov expects.
The thesis also seems doubtful that the creation of a new conditionally “right”, “liberal” or “democratic” party is generally in demand.
If there was such a request, then the question arises - why previous attempts to satisfy him (with the exception of a private case of the ATP in 1999, and that is, the nuances) left the voter, which they say that there were many, almost 20 percent, deaf? The thesis seems all the more strange - it sounded a lot immediately after the elections, in particular, from the former curator of domestic politics Vladislav Surkov - that such a party needs "angry townspeople."
Protestants from Sakharov Avenue and participants in the procession on February 4, according to sociologists, ideologically represent a rather colorful picture. According to the Levada Center survey, 38 percent of the rally on Sakharov and 30 percent of the procession participants on February 4 were called the Democrats. Liberals of sociologists were called, respectively, 31 and 27 percent of the gathered for protests. In the Lion's election, their share voted for the “apple”-for the party, rather, a social-democratic or, in a European manner, for social liberals. Thus, they are democrats of democrats, these are angry townspeople, but hardly liberals. And Prokhorov fans among them are about 20 percent. The Yavlinsky demonstrators love more: on the rally on December 24, 29 percent of the audience were ready to cast votes for him.
But Prokhorov lurks into the multimillion -dollar party precisely the same “Prokhorov’s supporters” from nowhere, clarifying, however, that it will not be a leadership, personalist structure. According to Prokhorov, it will be a "network batch of a new type." God knows what it is, it seems that the same chimera as the "strong mass liberal party." But I will start in this form almost guaranteed to wait for Fiasco. Non -personalist structures are not contraindicated to Russian politics (to take at least the “network” “solidarity” with its dozens of “fractions” and “wings” and eternal disputes about leadership), and Prokhorov is a type of charismatics - which is not a leader structure here.
How then the "Party of Prokhorov" will differ from the "Party of Zhirinovsky" is strongly unclear.
However, these are all lyrics and promises of a predomitable nature. In fact, Prokhorov once again said that he was a) new, b) ambitious, c) a politician independent of the Kremlin. And will continue political activities after the election on March 4. It was in this logic that the whole campaign of candidate Prokhorov was built. “I am not like all these fed faces from the TV. I am young, successful and the future is behind me. ” There is logic in this positioning: Prokhorov can be an alternative candidate, anti -which, anti -Putin.
And the application for the party here looks only a promise not to leave the begun and "I will hold my word." And this conversation is not about the party, the shortcomings of the political system or the response to real requests of the "middle class". This is exclusively election rhetoric. “I will not throw you, I am real,” Prokhorov says in fact. Whether it will throw it or not, whether the real is already a question for each specific voter.