Constitutional Court of the opposition and the national question

On December 15th there will be another opposition march, the number of which even the most optimistic members of the Constitutional Court no longer believe in. I am also sure that the majority of members of the opposition Constitutional Court, not believing that anything could radically change in our country in December, are already preoccupied with selecting a venue for the New Year holidays.

And the next march will apparently be planned for early February...

However, despite the loser sentiment prevailing in the protest movement today, everything is not so bad. Let me remind you that no one believed in the large number of participants in the march on May 6, when after Vladimir Putin’s crushing “victory” in the presidential elections and an extremely incomprehensible rally on Novy Arbat, the level of protest activity dropped to almost zero.

There is still a lot of time until December 15th. And it all depends on how exactly the preparations for the march will be organized.

And this is what I wanted to say:

The protest movement has indeed failed so far to find a response among broad sections of the population. The topics of re-elections, fair trials and assistance to political prisoners are, of course, important, but they are not entirely relevant to the daily lives of our politically irresponsible fellow citizens.

In order to qualitatively increase the level of support for the protest movement among the population, which will inevitably have a positive impact on the growth in the number of participants in protest actions, it is necessary to use a topic that is understandable to fellow citizens and which they encounter every day.

And these are not housing and communal services tariffs or the introduction of tuition fees in schools, no matter how many left-wing activists rant. The population in our country, fortunately, is not so poor as to take to the streets because of hot water tariffs.

But there is such a topic - the national question . Or more precisely, the topic of migration.

To one degree or another, migrant workers cause rejection among a significant part of the indigenous population of our country. Some see them as competitors in the labor market, others are concerned about creeping Islamization, others see migrants as the reasons for the rise in crime and are worried about the safety of their loved ones.

The topic of migration has long ceased to be the preserve of nationalists. And many systemic politicians of various orientations are willing to speak out on it.

Here are the words of Mikhail Prokhorov :

“We also need to improve the southern borders. Russia is not a transit yard or a gateway for migrants from Asia to Europe. Without solving this problem, we will never build a single space with the European Union.”

And here are the recent statements of Sergei Mironov :

“Where today migrant workers with shovels and sledgehammers are engaged in unproductive work, helping someone to receive super-profits or launder budget money, small and large mechanization could develop, high-quality jobs could be created with high pay, which Russians would be happy to occupy.

...

The current migration policy is failing. Who benefits from it? An official who throws off “extra” worries about regulating migration flows, and a businessman who profits from the slave labor of powerless guest workers. But it is completely unacceptable for society, which is increasingly aware of the dire consequences in the long term that all this migration liberalism could have for the economy, for the socio-political situation, for the sphere of interethnic relations, and in general for the fate of Russia."

And if the cautious Prokhorov and Mironov, who are afraid to take another breath without the Kremlin’s sanction, allow themselves such harsh statements on the issue of migration, then why should our Coordination Council be afraid???

It is specific requirements in the field of migration policy that can ensure a qualitative increase in support for the protest movement among the population of our country.

And one of the reasons may well be a bill to amend the law “On Citizenship,” put forward by United Russia senators Umakhanov, Dzhabarov and Fetisov, according to which all former citizens of the USSR and their descendants will be able to obtain Russian citizenship in a simplified manner. And although the draft statement of the Coordination Council on this topic prepared by the nationalists did not find support among the majority of members of the Constitutional Court at yesterday’s meeting, nothing prevents organizations and activists participating in the protest movement from using this topic independently.

I understand that many members of the Constitutional Court are running away like hell from discussing any issues related to the problem of migration - they have objective reasons for this. A number of members of the Constitutional Court would prefer maintaining the current regime in Russia for another 20 years than even the smallest risk of nationalists or representatives of leftist forces coming to power in the country.

But the protest movement must follow the demands of the country’s population, and not follow the lead of a group of public figures, even authoritative and respected ones...