ForGO presented a report “The Antifragility of Putin’s State”
[ad_1]
The Foundation for the Development of Civil Society (FORGO) presented on Thursday its new report, “The Antifragility of Putin’s State.” His main idea is that the system built by Vladimir Putin is flexible and balanced enough (including in matters of sovereignty and freedom) to be sustainable, and the Russian state, although generally working for the majority, also takes into account the interests of the minority. During the presentation, experts also called Mr. Putin’s reign an “era” because he has been in power longer than many Russian czars, and expressed hope that his system will be “prolonged.”
The concept of “antifragility” belongs to the Western thinker Nassim Taleb and means a system that is sufficiently flexible and ready to face challenges – as opposed to a rigid system that can “break.” As Kommersant reported, the experts of the Forgotten Society, as if by chance, saw the “antifragility” of today’s Russia precisely at the height of the presidential campaign (see “Kommersant” on February 3), promising to soon present a corresponding report to the public. This is what was done on March 14.
The authors of this document methodically prove that Vladimir Putin has created a stable system from the Russian state – flexible, but with “stiffening ribs,” as the head of ForGRO Konstantin Kostin likes to repeat. One of the foundations of this system is the implementation of “objective requests of citizens” for stability, order, development, pride and a single national identity. Care and protection are the main criteria by which Russians evaluate the state, according to FoRGO.
“Russia chose as its national idea not a set of philosophical postulates, but an accumulated idea of citizens about the place and role of Russia in the world, bearing the characteristics of a civilizational approach, and their own system of values, which are usually called traditional, where family, children, respect are the basis to elders, historical memory, spirituality, compassion, the greatness of the country,” the authors note, emphasizing that these values “cement” society as the foundation of lasting power. At the same time, the “antifragility” of the state is achieved, among other things, by reducing internal political competition “through certain political operations,” the document says.
A guarantee of the sustainability of the Russian state project is the establishment of a conservative trend, which is expressed in the authorities’ balanced attention to four value demands: state dignity, material well-being, justice and freedom. The philosopher responsible for this part of the report, Boris Mezhuev, explained that at different periods of time the main emphasis, as a rule, was placed on only one of these values: once on sovereignty, once (as during perestroika) on freedom (in The report called this “a “stretch” between Stalin and Gorbachev”). In Putin’s time, according to Mr. Mezhuev, they are all in balance: “No request destroys or dominates the other.” But this balance, the authors of the document stipulate, can only be maintained in conditions of Russia’s remoteness from the Euro-Atlantic space, represented by the NATO bloc. Otherwise, the request for freedom will be under threat and the situation will require a more “rigid ideological design of the current Russian statehood.” But experts are optimistic: the foundations of freedom can and must be sought within Russia, and not outside it.
The Russian government system is described in the report as “a balanced framework of political and social institutions, institutions, norms (rules), relations and processes.” At the same time, the role of processes is often decisive, which allows the system to take into account social dynamics and be mobile and flexible (here, apparently, what is meant is that in the Russian political system, decision-making is primary, and not strict institutional restrictions). After the start of the SVO, the system withstood unprecedented pressure and is now completely sovereign, and the upcoming presidential elections should give it “binary legitimacy,” the authors note: on the one hand, this is the legitimacy of the order in the conditions of the SVO, on the other hand, these are the first presidential elections after amendments to the Constitution 2020. Speaking at the presentation about this part of the report, political scientist Alexey Chesnakov explained that in the early 2000s the Russian state resembled “a car that doesn’t move,” but now everything is different: “Over the past 25 years, the state has been filled with meaning and strengthened.”
In turn, economist Nikita Krichevsky, commenting on the economic block of the report, pointed out that in Russia the interests of society and the state “are increasingly living in harmony.” Thus, in his opinion, the final decision to increase the personal income tax rate for a number of categories of citizens will “negatively” affect the richest, and “positively” affect the socially vulnerable. However, experts refused to discuss this topic in detail and the question of for whom the reform will be balanced and for whom it will not, until all the parameters of the future decision are understood.
During the presentation, its participants repeatedly noted another important idea. “The entire system of power, social, political and economic, works in the interests of the majority, but the opinion of the minority is also taken into account,” emphasized, for example, Konstantin Kostin. “Kommersant” asked experts to give an example when the Russian government was guided by the interests of the minority when making decisions. Mr. Kostin responded by recalling how the State Duma adopted initiatives initially initiated by opposition parties. Nikita Krichevsky said that the minority are, for example, large families. And Alexey Chesnakov gave two examples at once. The first is the refusal to remove Lenin’s body from the Mausoleum, although the majority of the population is in favor of this. And the second, especially clear for the media: “The majority is in favor of censorship! But power does not follow the lead of the majority, it follows your (journalists.— “Kommersant”) interests”.
During the presentation, Boris Mezhuev also mentioned that Vladimir Putin has been in power longer than many Russian tsars, so his reign can truly be called an “era.” “And the fact that the era has obvious mechanisms for ensuring sustainability, prolonged or not – we, of course, hope that it is prolonged – this, of course, is the subject of serious study by political scientists, journalists, and including political philosophers,” noted Mr. Mezhuev.
[ad_2]
Source link