What’s wrong with the Russian liberalism, and does it have a future?
Share
Image copyrightRIA NOVOSTIImage captionАнатолий Chubais believes that truly Russian liberalism failed to create
During the St. Petersburg economic forum the head of “RUSNANO” Anatoly Chubais, urged Russian liberals to a global reassessment and a rethinking of the foundations of liberalism.
In an interview with Business FM, the ideology of economic reforms in Russia 90-ies, he said that over the past 25 years, the country has survived several ideologies, and thus their representatives need to compromise. Special attention was paid to Chubais Russian liberalism, noting that he still has no basic features, but it is disastrous for its development.
“I believe that we have managed to bring or to bring in Russian liberalism, but we failed to create Russian liberalism. Our liberalism in the present Russian did not, and this is a very deep thing that concerns the most fundamental values of a liberal,” said Chubais.
To understand the features of Russian liberalism, its problems and the problems of liberal thinking in the country, possible ways of its development,Russian service Bi-bi-si addressed to the head of the effective policy FoundationGleb Pavlovsky, the Deputy editor of the New Times Ivan Davydov, Professor, European University at St. PetersburgGregory Golosov and chief editor of the Internet website of the Moscow Carnegie center Alexander Baunov.
Gregory of Votes: there is no need to reform liberalism
I think that modern Russian liberalism – it is an umbrella concept, talking about its common destiny difficult.
On the one hand, there are people who have consistently advocated a market economy, and they are not worried about market infrastructure. These people are now actively cooperating with the authorities and do it sincerely.
On the other hand, there are people that capitalism is not very interested, but are in favor of liberal democracy in Russia, that is, the principle of change of authorities. They are usually in opposition.
Something common in these groups are, but each has its own niche. These niches are justified, reform is impossible.
The Russian people now would not want the revival of socialism or a return to open dictatorship of the Soviet type
Therefore, I believe that no reform of Russian liberalism is not necessary – it is what can be in the modern world.
What you need to give liberalism some kind of Russian identity is not a new idea, but I would say that in reality each of the groups of Russian liberalism has achieved quite outstanding success.
Russia is currently a capitalist economy, with flaws, Yes, but from the state of Soviet-style socialism have very little.
Although Russia is not a democracy (it’s an authoritarian state with a competitive regime) – it has at the very least respect human rights, freedom of speech, freedom of movement. It is a success. And this is reflected in the mass consciousness.
The Russian people now would not want the revival of socialism or a return to open dictatorship of the Soviet type.
And Chubais, as I understand it, suggests that we need to develop a new language to Russian liberalism to tell people.
And to develop languages, you need a consensus. If you remember the political speech of the era of perestroika, she was very consistent and uniform, at some point, everything came to a consensus.
While there was no consensus, no common language. And from this point of view, the solution to the problems of Russian liberalism lies in the hands of history. This is not a project, this movement.
Alexander Baunov: liberalism is not a dogmatic teaching
In Russia very often, liberalism becomes a kind of dogmatic teaching. And this is the main problem of Russian liberalism. It is seen as something that in its best colors blossomed beyond the borders of our country, so “Kopi-past” is the only possible method.
The problem is that liberalism is trying to borrow ready-made, not to grow here that is, and to bring and reformat. And if the material resists, then blame the material, and teaching all right.
While healthy, effective, current liberalism , which will not reject, suggests a correlation with the will of the people, simply because liberalism involves and democracy too.
As soon as the liberal ideas begin to get to learn, they become authoritarian
If not, liberalism or turning into a marginal political movement that is losing popularity, or forced to act authoritarian methods. Let me remind you that the terrible authoritarianism in the history of Russia is associated with people who have condemned the repressive tsarist regime.
Dogmatic teaching can be imposed by force, and liberalism includes not only a set of insights that need to be taken on faith, but also the way in which people to these conclusions comes. And to liberal conclusions can be reached, only speaking freely. They should be forced to memorize.
As soon as the liberal ideas begin to get to learn, they become authoritarian.
Now power in Russia gravitates to conservative ideas, and the official ideology is that the archaic is better modern. In this respect, liberalism remained as something that should be condemned, what you need to distance yourself, that brings disaster and General bad example.
A final decision on this issue no. The government has no plans to ban liberalism, on the contrary believes that it is useful to have liberal speakers in talk shows on Federal channels: to show people how strange these cranks are far from reality and how dangerous they are. This is the position of the current liberalism.
Chubais, in an interview refers to those who consider themselves Russian liberals. With a call to get out of this cozy state of the seat around the campfire in the friendship circle (and around the darkness) and to understand that liberalism is not a social circle, and much more. Mutual acceptance is not enough.
Gleb Pavlovsky: it is necessary to determine the players in the liberal arena
As for liberalism, which says Chubais, it is unclear what he means by liberalism and why, after 30 years of public scenes of liberalism have to re-create a real liberalism.
I think the problem here is the person who wants to announce that he is not satisfied, but does not want to understand the reasons. That liberalism fell from Mars? He was a fake?
Business has lost a quality liberal forces, and in the 90 years it was believed that the business is liberal by nature
Chubais is not the ideology of liberalism. And for that we loved him. The problem is today that we must honestly restore real political and ideological map of Russia. We do not know it.
The country is all the more noticeable changes coming down the line and extensive changes, and we are all interested in knowing who is who. We are dealing with anonymous characters.
The wine does not Chubais, wine authority, which imposes restrictions on political position and open political conflict. The result is before us is the position of darkness.
Only in this sense can be understood Chubais, who said that after 30 years of development of different forms of liberalism, it does not have national peculiarities.
In our liberalism today is not identified the specific positions we are discussing only the names. Call Chubais has only the meaning that we need a political revitalization of the different forces in the country, including those that we don’t like. Otherwise we will not be able to understand when to start a real political struggle.
The problem today is – no position. What is the liberal democratic party? Zhirinovsky’s Party. He has no position. Who is Zyuganov? There is a position? The Communist party has? This is a boarding house for veterans of political work.
Now we can not impose their desired political spectrum. Who is the liberal? Business has lost a quality liberal forces, and in the 90 years it was believed that business is liberal by nature.
I did not like Chubais ‘ interview is the lack of error analysis.
Ivan Davydov: Russian liberalism in crisis
A handful of liberals I see, but apart of the movement don’t see it. Liberalism is in deep crisis, but all that happens to him is bad, has its good side.
I think in 2014 or earlier we live in a conservative experiment that carries our power.
It turns out that ideas about liberal values are blurred in the population that the rights and freedoms of particular value are not. We can see where he made mistakes liberals. I, of course, with the performance Chubais got acquainted. He focuses on things related to the economy.
You are unable to people for 25 years to explain that the destruction of the prison is not a disaster, and so poorly explained
Need to think about where mistakes were made. Perhaps when the economy has been put at the forefront and it was believed that the rest of liberal democratic values will be drawn, and they are not pulled.
And here’s 25-year existence of the new Russia, we discovered that the Soviet Union is really a tremendous value for the majority of the population, and its destruction is for people with a geopolitical catastrophe.
And this discovery is a disaster for the liberals. Well, you are unable to people for 25 years to explain that the destruction of the prison is not a disaster, and so poorly explained.
You need to “praviti” liberals, they need to get to the clearing nationalists boldly, to speak about national issues. We need to expand the liberal base of social support. You need to stop being afraid of the people, to abandon the argument that people are not ready.
Immanuel Kant said, “If you wait until the nation is ready for freedom, you never give him freedom.” We have good people and everything he’s done.
Chubays appeals to the elites, to those who consider themselves liberals now, it encourages them to engage in reform. The fact that Chubais sees in liberalism a crisis, that’s good.
The future of liberalism on 99% depends on whether the Russian liberal community, in deep crisis, this crisis recognize and correct errors. 1% that will happen the Third world war, and the fate of liberalism is already unimportant.
