Voices of the week

The week began with almost siege strengthening in the capitals and ends almost in a spring rally on New Arbat and anxious expectation of the sentence to Alexei Kozlov. And against the background of this - thoughts about how to live on. We again gathered the most significant voices of our colleagues and experts that sounded outside the Polit.ru: Philip Dzyadko, Alexander Polivanov, Alexander Arkhangelsky , Boris Akunin , Konstantin Sonin, Natalya Zubarevich , Grigory Golosov and the collective voice of those who supported Alexei Kozlov . The text of Vadir Pastukhov was a fundamentally important event of the week, but it is completely available to us.

Philip Dzyadko (" Big City ")

There was an amazing time in the city of Moscow - it continued from December to February. And on March 5, it will end. Graduation ball, last evening of the holidays, August summer evening. This optionality, smiling diligence, walks at twilight “for all the good” - all this ends. The chapter about fish and birds, who “laugh and are afraid in the dark,” is passed. I ask to the board, open the page fifteen. This chapter is more difficult for reading - it is about seriousness, everyday struggle for her and other people's rights, for amending laws, for private initiatives - in the field of culture, social construction or civil control. It is necessary to fight for each illegally convicted person, to protect everyone who has entered the flywheel of the state corporation. And do not buy cute cultural clusters prepared by this corporation. This is a long chapter with the prospect of repeated retake.

Alexander Polivanov ( Lenta.ru )

The most important sensation at winter rallies in Moscow was a sense of life together in the city. We had previously gathered in the kitchens and discussed politics, and previously corresponded to LiveJournal and Facebook, breaking articles about various injustices. But only in winter it turned out that there are really a lot of such people sitting in their kitchens, that the neighbors on the entrance, house, the district are sitting in the same way in the kitchens, they write in the same way on Twitter. These neighbors do not look like you, they lead a completely different way of life, with them, maybe meeting them in the elevator, and I don’t want to say hello. And suddenly it turned out that we were standing with them and holding hands on the garden ring, not shining each other. In people passing by people, good, not bad, began to see - as if someone washed them (well, or washed you, it doesn’t matter).

In March, Moscow showed how a little was needed to feel again in a huge city alone - inside her apartment, inside a group of friends on Facebook.

Alexander Arkhangelsky (blog in Livejournal, March 7 )

I was on Pushkinskaya on Monday. Before acceleration. About power a little lower, while about the rally itself. The spectacle was dull - except for the humanoid speech of Yavlinsky and the very fact of Prokhorov’s appearance among speakers. Regardless of speech itself. Everything else is chewing chewed, with the addition of aggression, such as Putin on a bunker. Not a single fresh thought, not a single new emotion, not a single intelligible slogan. It seems that the faces and votes of the December-Yandavian resistance do not know what to do next. They are not ready to call people to the struggle for a new state, where the personality is in the center of politics, where the right is higher than expediency, where I am in force for general rules for everyone. But they are also not able to dump the current power. And slowly and at the same time steadily expanding their own field, preventing this power from becoming total, they are also not ready.

As for the authorities, the Putin’s performance on Manezhnaya was not a performance of a joyful winner; The note of the thickening revenge sounded in it. Power structures heard a message. And on Pushkinskaya, everything was done to excite the protesters to the state of hysteria: the regional riot police, who hate fatting Muscovites, is an incredible number of police. When the acceleration began (although legally by his performance, Ponomarev managed to turn the rally into an unlimited meeting with the deputy), acted prohibitively cruelly - in relation to everyone, including journalists and those who left the rally. All the conversations that in America are accelerating harder (version of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) break that in America they disperse tougher after many hours, or even multi -day warnings, and not at 21 hours 01 seconds.

BUT.

The call of Udaltsov was

a) direct evidence of internal defeat: the fighting leaders saw that they were losing the situation and sharply increased the degree, as a bad conductor, not being able to captivate the orchestra with real passion, begins to escalate speed;

b) a direct violation of the agreements of the organizing committee,

c) stupidity.

Stupidity because orange (yellow, blue, white) revolution is possible only if there is a candidate who had a victory in the elections. And associates of the candidate. There was no such candidate for the presidential election, and there can be no such specific era in this particular era. There is no one to climb into the fountain and put tents on the snow. And if you want to move on to self -sufficient attacks from peaceful forms of struggle, without the closest achievable goal, then such attacks have your own commander. His name is Limonov. And he will not give your 500 fiery fighters to you. But you don’t need 500.

Therefore, the conclusion is. I will personally go to the procession of the 10th. Because I am considering the results of the December, January and February processions as a useful matter. Not breaking the situation (and there was no chance that there was no one), but something has already changed. But if the speakers do not come up with something more likely than “Putin on the Nara” or “we will stand to the end”, it will be difficult for me to force myself to come again.

Meanwhile, rallies - maybe not so frequent - will be very necessary. Although very soon we will need to disperse into the columns - Torah in our direction, Udaltsov in our own, and to our own. Rallies develop a habit of civil action, accustom people to the legitimate, but steadily upholding of their rights, train political muscles, which will be needed in the process of alternative part -time, the development of civil action institutions. Without them, it will be impossible to calmly change the country. Preparing it for changes without revolutionary breaks. But stubbornly.

What are these changes? This is primarily a change in the picture of the world. As long as most of the eyes of Soviet paternalism and longing for the irreparable monarchy have before the eyes, do not change the regime of government. Even if the scrap happens, the same will be restored from the wreckage, only in a worsened copy. As after the revolution of the 17th, a worsened copy of the autocracy with a worsened copy of serfdom was restored.

Without education, a peaceful struggle is useless. But without a peaceful struggle there will be no education.

Alexander Arkhangelsky (blog in Livejournal, March 10 )

It seems that conclusions from the failure of the rally on Pushkinskaya are drawn. The mood is calm, the degree of hysteria strives for zero, an attempt to give new faces, which finally sounded a call to stop calling Putin voting behind Putin and humiliate them. Drilling and so far (I hope only for now) that is not a removal reversal from fierce protest to the support of civil movements and initiatives, instead of “Putin on the bun,” is an independent court and the right as the basis of a common life. There are fewer people than at the protest rallies of the pre -election months, but it should be so.

UPD. Boris Akunin ( blog in Livejournal )

After the first rally on Bolotnaya, exactly three months passed. The depressive-cunning interpretation on March 5 on Pushkinskaya Square made a painful impression on me. Yesterday I went to a new Arbat to see a large rally period and say goodbye to the youth of the civil movement.

He said goodbye to his youth, she certainly ended. As for the final of the rally activity, it seems, was mistaken. In the Novo -Arbat rally, I felt a new mood and new energy.

There were many new people who did in their speeches without boring hatching, without perky screams, without the requirements of the immediate triumphal victory of good over evil.

Konstantin Sonin ( blog in Livejournal )

A candidate who wins the election between 40 and 60 (we can confidently say that Putin does not have 60% without direct falsifications) can only rule the country if he builds his practical policy to some extent “coalition”. You can attract people from the opposition to the government-from the Communists, for example, or from the Muscovites, you can make some real (not PR) concessions, but it is impossible to manage it effectively, and this is not a normative (“you need to take into account the interests of the opposition”), but a positive (“nothing will work out if you do not take into account the interests of the opposition).

The main problem with the Duma (the problem, including Putin) is not that it is “illegitimate”, but that it is not representative. When dealing with the Duma, Putin deals with that half of the population (and a smaller part of Moscow), which already supports him. The new elections to the Duma a year later are fraught with Putin to many, including the loss of the “Putin majority”, which is in parliament, but it is better to deal with a stranger, but representative parliament than with “their own”, but unreasonable.

He [Putin], it seems, organically cannot work with anyone, whose point of view on how our country should develop, differs from it. He simply does not admit that someone can (a) love our country and (b) to believe that in the field of practical politics it is not such steps that Putin considers necessary.

No one in Russia work Prokhorov in the government in Russia as Putin needs it. To expand his support-at least in Moscow, Putin would have to beg Prokhorov to enter the government (it is difficult to imagine that Prokhorova could interest another post except the prime minister, so it would be necessary to look for a possible decision with Dmitry Medvedev). Of course, the voices are so simply not summarized from 20% of Muscovites who supported Prokhorov, the most part could not like that he was included in the government (although, by the way, the number of those who supported this, if he becomes the prime minister, will obviously be more than if he takes a smaller position). It is also not obvious that Prokhorov himself needs it, so Putin, who needs it very much, would have to go to great concessions.

On March 4, the entire “Putin team”, as I understand it, was horrified after his trick at the rally, when he actually declared half of the country's population (and most of the inhabitants of Moscow) “enemies” from which the country needs to “protect”. On March 7, the “military” rhetoric was replaced by “criminal” (“gypsy with a rotten teeth”), but something I have no feeling that it is more popular ...

Natalia Zubarevich ( "New Gazeta" )

... Different "Russians" need different things. Russia-1 [the largest cities] wants political representation, rights and freedoms, respect, European standards of life and security. Russia-2 [industrial cities] also implicitly all this is required, but in the foreground she has a stable job and salary. Putin has yet provided this, so the choice of people voting for him in industrial cities and regions is rational. Yes, the system of values ​​is different than that of the educated youth of large cities, but it is impossible to brand them with “anchovies” and “cattle”. It is necessary to look for contact points and explain that the transformation of the system is necessary. Russia-1 and Russia-2 will not be able to agree for a long time, but they must try to understand each other. Then this will sharply increase the possibility of their interaction in the future.

If possible economic protests of Russia-2 and the ethical protest potential of Russia-1 are merged, there will be an interesting combination.

Grigory Golosov ( Slon.ru )

It is clear that Putin’s departure can become the subject of negotiations with Putin only in a situation that is very different from the current one. But I absolutely do not understand why a supporter of democratization - right now - could not hold negotiations with Putin about the alleged “filter” in the governor's election.

... If some do not demand Putin’s departure, then others decisively do not succeed in removing the “filter”. And why, in fact, to shoot Putin? The higher the bets on the same table, where they play in a circular one, the more you can win the little things-but without much risk-at the other.

The principle should be one: refrain from attacks on another oppositionist.

The democratic opposition ends as a political player exactly where for some of its participants Putin is better than Udaltsov, for others it is better than Navalny, for others - better than Nemtsov.

... Do not push the immigrants from the ruling camp, even if you doubt their sincerity. ... If we want democracy, we should not only stimulate, but also accept the split of the ruling group.

... The transition to democracy can only take place as a living political process in which not a single player awaits a complete win. But they will win collectively.

Collective voice ( online patting )

Appeal of citizens to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the case of Alexei Kozlov

To: Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Lebedev

Dear Vyacheslav Mikhailovich!

We are applying to you to pay attention to the case of Alexei Kozlov, the consideration of which in the Presnensky court of Moscow enters the decisive phase.

The case is considered again: the first sentence against Kozlov was canceled by the Supreme Court, despite the active opposition of the Moscow City Court. Today, the court is trying to re -make the same decision.

We do not consider ourselves the right to evaluate the incomplete trial, but we must say that the course of the case contradicts our ideas about the civilized process.

We are especially disturbed by infringement of the protection of the defense, contrary to the decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which returned this case for a new consideration due to similar violations.

Our appeal is not an attempt to influence the court, we only want to convey to you our fears that what is happening looks like revenge to Alexei Kozlov and his wife Olga Romanova for their struggle with corruption in the judicial system and law enforcement agencies, for participating in the voters league and a publicly declared civil position.

We ask you to do everything in your power so that this court is fair, impartial and pass without violations of the law.

See also: The end of the rally Voices after the election