Four years ago, on may 7, 2012 took place the inauguration of Vladimir Putin. Today political analysts recall the successes of the President: Crimea, the military operation in Syria, repeating them will not. But do not forget that the inauguration was preceded by mass protests on Bolotnaya square, where participants spoke in particular against the current President. We talked to the heroes of those days and asked if they had changed in the four years the attitude to Vladimir Putin.
Maria BARONOVA, a coordinator of the human rights direction of the “Open Russia”, pardoned the “Bolotnaya case”::
– In fact Putin’s rule to 2016-th year, has already taken on a life character, in 2012 we began to feel threatened that his reign will be of a lifelong nature, and now the company demonstrates humility with this fact. You can discuss difficulties in domestic policy: the violence to the police, the presence of political prisoners, restriction of freedom of speech, limitation of electoral rights of citizens. You can discuss the success in the international arena, such as the Crimea, as yesterday’s concert in Palmira: Yes, this is really a victory of civilization. But from this concert in Palmyra Putin’s rule never ceases to wear a life character. I want to live in a normal country, I want to live in a country where prezidentsvo is institutional, where the President is elected every 4 years, where he retires, if something does fail. I do not want to live under feudalism. Feudalism can be successful, for example, in Singapore. Totalitarian state of Singapore is very successful, but to live under totalitarianism ashamed, and even more unpleasant to live under feudalism in Europe. Accordingly, what is my attitude: I am not very bad for Putin, as a man I treat him normal. I just do not want to live under feudalism and life under the rule of Putin in the 21st century, I want to live in a normal democratic country. And I think that the internal problems of the country largely depend on this life of the Board. If the President were changed once in 4 years, he is attentive to what is happening in domestic politics and in the lives of citizens.
Nikolay KAVKAZSKY, party “Yabloko”, pardoned the “Bolotnaya case”:
– My attitude to Vladimir Putin emerged in the mid 2000-ies: then it became evident that our country can go to a hard dictatorship. Today’s events – a sharp crackdown, the adoption of restrictive laws that stifle freedom in domestic policy, cuts in social spending, foreign aggression, which started even with Georgia, and Chechnya, confirm my original assumptions about how will the events develop further in the country. So my attitude to Vladimir Putin has not deteriorated and has not improved, it was extremely negative, as it was before.
The blame for this, of course, not one Vladimir Putin, and a reactionary conservative authoritarian system. Indeed, if Putin exchanged on someone else around him for any conditional Shoigu, may become worse.
Bad not so much Putin as an authoritarian system. But Putin is the leader of this sistemy.
Vladimir AKIMENKOV, an activist from Amnesty on the “Swamp case”:
– The attitude to Putin in that time has not changed: it remains negative. And it’s not just that Vladimir Putin is a former intelligence officer, a tyrant or the like. I, as an anarchist, have a negative attitude to Putin, not only as to the practice of reactionary, but as a leader of the state. In this sense there is no fundamental difference: whether we are talking about some Eastern despot, or the leader of the Western plutocracy, or about Putin. In all these cases the power the leaders have over the people, they dictate their will on society and different ways of trying to convince people that Rob and deceive the public is a reasonable and correct, appealing to patriotism and religious values. This happened in different countries, in different eras.
It’s not the personality of Putin. Many opposition members believe that, if you remove Putin and his entourage, the situation in the country will change automatically. But no matter who is in power, if such a device companies. The same social role played by Vladimir Putin, can do and more reactionary leaders like Yakunin, or more liberal like Medvedev, and even the leaders of opposition structures that are not important: although the Bulk, though the Gunners. In turn what is called Putin’s regime is a consequence of the development of even weak, but Yeltsin’s autocracy. Because King Boris came to power on a wave of popular indignation and the struggle for freedom, quite quickly turned a large part of the democratic conquests and began to introduce their own autocracy.Related posts: