Русская версия

Русская PDF-версия РЖ № 4-5(46-47), 24 февраля 2010

English PDF-version RJ № 4-5(46-47), 26 февраля 2010

Nikolai Levichev – Russian statesman, head of the State Duma fraction of the FAIR RUSSIA party of the Russian Federation, secretary of the Central Office for the FAIR RUSSIA party.

– Mr. Levichev, two years of Dmitry Medvedev’s presidency has passed. Can we describe the main trend of this presidency by the term "progressivism"?

– Search for the ideological predecessors of Dmitry Medvedev are rathernave, as the President in Russia is beyond ideology. It is obvious that the President sees the drawbacks and weak points of our system. But I wouldn’t speak about a progressive trend. The ideology of progressivism has arisen from socialist and social-democratic trends. In April 2009, I visited an International forum of progressionists, which was called "The New Globalization for Progressive Change". Many our colleagues from the social-democratic parties of Europe are active participants of the modern progressivist movement. It’s progressivists who have today become the main stronghold of strife against neoliberalism. I would like to pay attention to the succession of power and governing process. The model prevailing in Russia earlier, when a new leader negated everything that had been done in the past, fortunately, is fading away.

The President has reacted to that social inquiry, which has emerged in Russia. One shouldn’t be an expert to realize that the country is losing leadership in many spheres. Growth rate of the economy is low, social capital of the country is degrading and if we do not introduce any new institutions of people’s motivation, including competitiveness in all spheres, then Russia will never be able to escape from the trap of catching up development. The ideology of Dmitry Medvedev is in essence different from what we have seen earlier. In the 1990-s the state in fact refused to protect human rights. "The oligarchs" prospered, ordinary people grew poor and the state developed. That’s why we need ed state ideology. Naturally today, when the collapse of the state is not on the agenda, the President has paid greater attention on the realization of modern social and political practices, modernization of the social life, etc.

– Is the ideology of progress characteristic for the Russian left and right? And if yes, how does it affect the ideological background of the leading statesmen of the country?

There is no secret that the Russian ideological spectrum is very fuzzy; there is no unity either in the left or the right wing. The right has already demonstrated their understanding of the progress: privatization for those, who have access to power, combination of power and business – these are the consequences of the reforms carried out by the liberal economists and politicians.

Right-of-centre parties, to which I refer "United Russia", haven’t moved to a progressive scale of taxation for the last two convocations, they are sincerely convinced that Prokhorov and Abramovich should pay 13% of their income, like an ordinary secondary school teacher.

The Communist Party of the Russian Federation and their admiration for Stalin’s modernization, in my opinion, has nothing in common with the social progress. Progressivism for us is a movement to the society, where the progress works for every person; it’s a broadening of opportunities for education, selfdevelopment, and political involvement.

– Can the ideology of "Medvedev’s progressivism" become the basis for creating a new political party? Can’t "Medvedev’s progressivism" remove the antagonisms between the left and right Russian progressionists in their adherence to technical innovations and modernization?

Progressivism today shouldn’t be reduced to technical and scientific innovations. It also implies new approaches to the development of people’s capital, development of social sphere, so called "social hi-tech". It’s a large field for the search of the optimal development models, where different political parties should participate. It’s the first point. Secondly, all political powers and all the citizens of the country are interested in the modernization of the economic system. Progressivism could become an idea consolidating the whole nation on the assumption of effective communication with the society. More active involvement of the civil society will enlarge the number of subjects for modernization and provide support of the reforms on the part of the citizens of the country.