Is Alexei Navalny really the saviour of Russian democracy?
- Nadia Dalla Gasperina
- 2 feb 2021
- Tempo di lettura: 4 min
Aggiornamento: 15 set 2024
The recent developments in Russia, with Navalny being poisoned - officially falling ill, without mentioning the alleged intervention of the Russian secret services, to preserve the appearance of Russia as a democratic and free country, have again put Russia and its political system at the centre of attention. Alexei Navalny, with its strong declarations and love for the country, has raised a wave of empathy towards him that culminated with protests all over the country to demonstrate the strong popular support for him. However, do Russian people actually support the person of Navalny, or have they transformed into the emblem of political opposition and hope for a truly democratic system?
The opposition to Putin in Russia is constituted by many different actors, ranging from independent people, organizations, to proper parties. However, two elements cast a shadow onto all these adversaries: first, Russia is a semi-presidential republic, which automatically gives more space to the person rather than the party: think of the US or of France, where the leaders are always at the front line. It doesn’t help the fact that Putin runs as an independent. Secondly, the laws for building and representing a party as legitimate opposition concurring in the elections are extremely hard to comply with, and censorship, lack of financial support and of official registration as a party make it very difficult for the rest of the organization to be recognized and supported by the public.
Now in Russia the memory of Communism and everything that came with it is still very strong, especially among those that lived it. On the contrary, younger generations that have known only Putin or Yeltsin at most, appear to have a completely different set of values than their parents, and at the same time the availability of social media has benefited their freedom of expression. Navalny has very clear political positions: he is explicitly anti-Kremlin and anti-corruption, but he also supports nationalist ideals such as anti-immigration policies, “Russian first” sort of agenda in the questions of the ex-USSR with his “Stop feeding the Caucasus” program, and generally combining right-wing stances with market liberalism and populist ideals. He is therefore great at building the momentum that many Russians are awaiting, that is, Putin’s fall. However, even though he is seen as an alternative to the current leader - although his takeover is utopist to say the least, he is definitely not supported by everyone. Globalization strikes in Russia, too, and an emerging post-communist consciousness holds far right wingism and ultranationalism as an enemy: the fear of a “new Hitler”, as a return to oppression, is constantly present. His rhetoric is full of controversial elements that appear to disregard both Russia’s past and current problematics such as racism and ethnic conflicts.
What Navalny represents is the expression of being anti-Putin. His communication style, as well as the perception that the public, especially young people, have of his persona, is very effective. He functions as a leader for those that cannot normally speak up, for those that want to conduct a normal life without fearing of losing their job, family, or even dignity in front of “those that count”. He was able to build up an image of him that reflects the new generations in Russia, that may disregard Communism but still live in its aftermath and have to face its consequences daily. He represents a clear turning point and gives a face to those people who are tired of Putin, but do not find anything credible to support due to minimal public space given to the other parties. The young like Navalny’s determination and above all his proclamation of “love”: for Russia, by returning to the country at the risk of being imprisoned; for the family, following closely his wife depicted as a sensitive and nurturing woman by the media, arrested several times in the course of the protests. The older people are fascinated by someone finally speaking up; it may occur that Navalny is even able to wake up Putin’s passive supporters, who see the current leader as a liberation from worse times but at the same time don’t really deem him as necessary for the good future of Russia.
Therefore, Navalny represents an ideal more than an alternative. He may enjoy some electoral support, but most importantly he is everything that Putin is not, or at least so it is thought. He certainly has exposed Putin’s weakness and has been the initiator of a strong wave of protests and general idea of unfairness in the Russian political system. However, the creation of consciousness by each individual and its development into the public sphere is yet to come. Depending on how the situation is handled by the media and the government, and on how the world and the protestors react to it, Navalny may be the starting point of a complete change in Russia devoted to the ideals of democracy, freedom, and representation.