It’s not Arbatova who’s bad, and not Solovyov either. Sure, it would be nice to apply the life-giving procedure of euthanasia to them too, but the main enemy in this setup is Novodvorskaya. That vain old woman knew perfectly well why she had been invited there. She understands perfectly well that they’re using her like a monkey—God’s monkey, a democrat monkey. With any other opponent for Arbatova (well, almost any), those calling for Bakhmina’s release would get twice as many votes as those who put her in prison. But the old lady wants to be on TV. And Bakhmina’s defenders are shown that in one hour viewers cast more votes "against" than the activists managed to collect "for" in an entire month. Novodvorskaya is the one who screeches the loudest about how "you must not take part in Kremlin projects." Yesterday’s episode of To the Barrier! (a Russian TV debate show) was an excellent, successful Kremlin project. And the key ingredient in that success was V. I. Novodvorskaya. Drive these people out from everywhere. All the Novodvorskayas, the Saddamych Kovalyovs, and the rest. How much longer are we going to keep putting senile wrecks and wreckers on the presidium?! That same Saddamych happily joined YABLOKO’s top three list (Yabloko, the liberal political party), took part in the election campaign using "Kremlin" money, urged everyone to participate in the bullshit called "elections," and didn’t make a peep. But after the election he started writing letters: there were no elections. If there were no elections, then why the hell did you take part in them? Or did you not know that’s how it would be? Or did you not know whose money it was? They did time, and therefore they’re saints. Well, yes, they did time. They fought Soviet power—good for them. We can praise them for that. But how much damage have they done since that Soviet power fell? It can’t be measured. Any democratic project dies from these people’s mere presence. Look at the makeup of any standard coalition: politicians, public figures, and "human rights activists." That last category will kill absolutely anything. People with no clear occupation, political drifters, have appropriated the label "human rights activists." Any scarecrow can call itself a "human rights activist" on the grounds that it is against Putin. And journalists do their part: - Hey, that shaggy guy speaking there—who is that? - So-and-so... - And who is he? - Some random crank who wandered in. Sick in the head. - Fine, let’s label him a "human rights activist." And everyone moans about them. Regardless of their position on Chechnya, migration, and so on. A new liberal coalition is being formed right now. Ask anyone involved, "How are things over there?" and the answer is always the same: everything’s fine, but those ... are so damn exhausting (and then they start listing everyone from the "human rights" crowd). Then why do you bring them in? — Well, you know, we have to. We’ve always included them. And because they’ve always included them, they’ve always ended up with their half a percent and two hundred people showing up for a "nationwide action." It’s like that guy who turned everything he touched into gold. Only these people don’t turn things into gold.