Paul Goble
Vienna, July 27, 2006 – Russians often have had to live with slogans that at bottom are contradictions in terms. In Soviet times, Communist ideologists routinely talked about “socialist democracy,” a concept in which the problematic adjective drained the noble noun of any real meaning.
More recently, Moscow officials from President Vladimir Putin on down
have argued that they are overseeing the building in the Russian
Federation of “sovereign democracy,” another example of a
combination of words that has either no meaning at all or an inherently
contradictory one.
But, according to a leading St. Petersburg human rights activist, the
most significant oxymoron now on offer in his country is one that
officials are in fact trying to impose but that they have been as yet
relatively unwilling to proclaim in public: the creation of “a civil
society within a corporate state.”
In an essay posted online today, Yuri Vdovin, vice president of St.
Petersburg’s “Civil Control,” argues that this latest effort to
exploit and at the same time undermine a popular idea to keep existing
power relations undisturbed is obvious to anyone who cares to look
[http://www.annews.ru/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=51245].
Vdovin gives three examples of the actions of Russian officials in
support of his argument. First, he talks about the way in which Kremlin
officials are using “Operation Successor” in order to block any
manifestations of “real civil society” and thus prepare Russians to
accept as their next president anyone that elite chooses.
“Those who form the so-called power elite,” the human rights
activist suggests, “are very much afraid of changes in the upper
reaches of the state.” Consequently, they are working, with Putin’s
“silent or possibly active” agreement, to ensure that no competitor
enjoying the support of the people will emerge.
They have taken steps to ensure that there will be favorable conditions
for only one party. They have “aggressively attacked” any
manifestations of democracy or real civil society.” And they have
taken “almost total control over the information space” of the
Russian Federation.
As a result, “the majority of the population possibly consumed that
propagandistic gibberish which the mass media controlled by the
government feeds them.” And the members of this stupified”
electorate will either support a third term for Putin or vote for
anyone he or the powers that be say is needed.
Thus, Vdovin continues, Russia’s so-called “sovereign democracy”
is something “different in principle” from “normal European
democracies,” where “the chief condition for progress is the honest
competition in the struggle for power of various parties which can
offer different ideas” about the future development of their countries.
In the short term, he argues, “sovereign democracy” may help those
in power stay there. But in the longer haul, its internal
contradictions will work against both them and the society at large because “there is not a single country run by a dictator which has been able to guarantee
its citizens a more or less decent existence.”
“Only [genuine and not ‘sovereign’] democracies are able to
flourish,” he concludes.
Second, he discusses a new directive by the Justice Ministry that he
suggests eliminates the Constitutionally mandated presumption of
innocence when it comes to the activities of non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) and will allow the government to harass and even
close down any group it wants to.
On June 22, the Justice Ministry issued Order Number 222 that allows
the government to examine the books of any NGO without defining the rules
of such examinations. Such “checkings,” of course, will be directed in
the first instance at any group that disagrees with the government.
Indeed, Vdovin continues, any close reading of this document shows that
it has been issued for no other purpose but that.
And third, Vdovin explores the ways in which the authorities are using
their commitment to fight terrorism as way not to do that – he
pointedly notes that for Putin, Hamas and Hezbollah are not terrorist
groups but allies -- but rather to crack down on groups seeking to help
Russians defend their own interests.
All three of these developments, the St. Petersburg activist says, show
that in Russia today, “no one violates the laws as often as officials
do” even as they insist that the population obey all the laws and
regulations that the state issues, however unconstitutional they may
be.
Such a situation, he concludes, can best be described by the term
“corporate state,” a concept with real meaning but one that the
history of the 20th century clearly demonstrates is completely
incompatible with and subversive of the principles of both democracy
and
civil society.
Latest Window on Eurasia stories | Religion Archive | Islam in Russia and CIS Archive | Orthodox Church in Russia and CIS Archive | All Window on Eurasia Stories Archive |
FreeMediaOnline.org ...supporting free media worldwide with information, independent analysis, and innovative solutions...
