[Russia Profile Discussion Group] The Perm governor, "Nashisty" and "fashisty"
Russia Profile Discussion Group Moderator
inviting members of an extremist organisation to speak at a public
youth forum recently. The self-described "anti-fascist" youth movement
Nashi has called for his resignation, portraying him as Hitler. Some
analysts, however, say that the scandal has been whipped up ahead of
mayoral elections in Perm. SPS leader Nikita Belykh has also been
implicated, and tarred by movements like Nashi and Molodaya Gvardiya
with the same brush as Chirkunov.
Was Chirkunov right to ask far-right representatives to speak at the
conference? Is the scandal anything more than a storm in a teacup? Do
"anti-fascist" movements like Nashi and Molodaya Gvardiya really speak
for Russia's young people? And if so, what should we make of them?
Discuss the issues here.
http://www.russiaprofile.org/politics/2006/1/9/3008.wbp
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2006/02/13/012.html
http://www.fjc.ru/news/newsArticle.asp?AID=357788
http://www.1tv.ru/owa/win/ort6_main.main?p_news_title_id=86014&p_news_razdel_id=1&p_pagenum=1
Peter Morley (Russia Profile Discussion Group)
The current mode in Russian politics for "anti-fascism" finally attained more formal status in the shape of an "anti-fascist pact" signed by many of the country's political parties. Signatories to the pact – which includes United Russia, the Union of Right Forces, and the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, as well as a host of smaller parties – pledge to exclude anyone with extremist views from the political process. The list of those who signed the party appears to be a demonstration of the old adage that "politics makes for strange bedfellows" (in this case, a Kremlin party of power, a right-wing liberal party, and a nationalist party whose leader is renowned for his often outrageous antics), and has led some of those who didn't sign to dismiss the whole idea as a "publicity stunt". Stay-aways included the Communist Party, Yabloko and Rodina – although the pact apparently remains open should anyone else want to join.
But some questions remain, for me at least, unanswered. The first is what is meant by "anti-fascism". "Fascism" in Russia carries extremely strong overtones in Russia, where it is strongly associated with Nazism and the Soviet victory in the Great Patriotic War, and fear of fascism in this sense remains very strong in a country where that victory is a unifying source of pride (the May 9 holiday is still probably the most popular in the calendar, after New Year). Yet recently it has taken on broader meanings, outside of traditional Nazi or Fascist ideology, to encompass more general xenophobia and nationalism. Indeed, in the wake of the Perm scandal, state-run television even implied that SPS – a party with pretty good liberal credentials, to Western eyes at least – was actually at best a bunch of opportunist scandal-mongers, and at worst actually a fascist grouping. In short, it seems now to be a label with which to tar opponents – being called a "fascist" is about as bad as it gets.
Secondly, what purpose will this pact serve? Currently it has no legal status, and signatories are all voluntary. Whether SPS signed the pact to alleviate some of the pressure it has come under since the Perm governor scandal and to try to restore its image remains a moot point. And there seems little doubt that the LDPR signed up for anything more than publicity. Indeed, given the party's record – was it only last year that party deputies signed a letter demanding the closure of Jewish organizations? – it would appear at least mildly surprising that Zhirinovsky was invited to sign in the first place. Thirdly, there remains the minor question of whose initiative this was. The presence of United Russia as the pact's main backer, of course, immediately points back to the Kremlin, and certainly it seems unlikely to have been a spontaneous coming together of what are generally opposed political parties. Finally, could not publicly vowing to exclude holders of certain viewpoints backfire, and lead to their greater popularity among certain groups that feel alienated? Would it not be better to involve them in political dialogue?
I would suggest another interpretation of the pact, based on these unknowns and other recent "anti-fascist" trends, such as youth movements like Nashi and Molodaya Gvardiya. While proclaiming their "anti-fascist" ideologies, much of what these groups actually do seems little more than the Kremlin's dirty work – hounding disobedient or independent officials, denouncing those seen to have "insulted" Russia, and slavishly parroting the administration's watchwords of the day. Currently, these watchwords are based around ideas of national sovereignty and national interests at home, and Russia (re-)establishing itself as a major player on the world stage. I would posit that the current line is based on one thing only: fear of the Orange Revolution, motivated by the natural desire of the ruling elite to stay in power – a fear that has paralyzed the state system (the Russian word vlast' says it much better) for more than a year now.
Thus – and please note that I am not passing any value judgments here – the pact makes absolute sense in the current context of, for example, ongoing tensions with Ukraine and other countries, the new NGO law (and despite robust defences of the new law, I remain unconvinced that it will be used for any purposes other than to increase pressure on NGOs), etc. I expect to see the pact trotted out to tarnish non-signatories along with accusations that they are "unpatriotic" or similar. Other than that, it would seem to have little purpose.
Your thoughts, please!
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060220/43655810.html
http://www.russiaprofile.org/cdi/2006/2/20/3295.wbp
http://www.russiaprofile.org/politics/article.wbp?article-id=FF900263-7F6E-4392-AB0F-4156D3B11B3E