Episode of “Full Albats” from November 7 2010.

Marches of hatred: who is behind them? - Boris Nemtsov, Alexei Navalny, Andrei Zubov, Kirill Shitov - Full Albats - 2010-11-07 07.11.2010

E. ALBATS: Good evening, 20:07, on the air are the radio station Echo of Moscow and the television company RTVi, and I, Yevgenia Albats, am beginning our traditional Sunday program devoted to the key events of the week, those events that will influence politics in the coming weeks and months. This week there were several such events: on Wednesday, environmentalist and defender of the Khimki forest Konstantin Fetisov was beaten with a baseball bat - he is in the hospital, in a coma. On the night from Friday to Saturday, journalist Oleg Kashin of the Kommersant publishing house was beaten no less brutally - beaten demonstratively: the phalanges of his fingers were broken so that he could not write, his legs so that he could not walk, and his lower and upper jaw so that he could not speak. They beat him demonstratively, they beat a journalist. Over the last 10 years, 21 journalists have been killed in Russia, 170 people have been attacked - according to the data of the Glasnost Defense Foundation, which constantly monitors the situation with journalists in the country. This year alone, 8 people have already been killed and 40, one way or another, maimed. And another event, in my view, quite closely connected with this whole story of ours. Namely, two marches - the “Russian March” in Lyublino with the usual slogans like “Russia for Russians” and the “Russian March” organized by the pro-Kremlin movement “Nashi” with the support of the state agency “Rosmolodezh.” At this march, the enemies were named by name, posters were carried, the posters said “Shame on the enemies of Russia,” and then Nashi commissars trampled these posters. On one of them was a portrait of the chair of the Helsinki Group, an absolutely saintly person, 82-year-old Lyudmila Mikhailovna Alekseyeva. That is what we will be talking about today. But first I want to show - we will publish this in the magazine tomorrow - here is that very frame where one of the Nashi commissars is trampling on a portrait of Lyudmila Alekseyeva. We remember how this happened in other countries - for example, in 1933 in Germany. But more on that later, and now my guests are Andrei Borisovich Zubov, historian. Boris Yefimovich Nemtsov, politician, Kirill Vladimirovich Shitov, deputy of the Moscow City Duma, member of the Young Guard, and by phone - Alexei Navalny, lawyer and public figure. I will address the first question to Kirill Shitov precisely because you are a member of the Young Guard, the youth wing of the party in power, United Russia. The following text was posted on the official website of your organization - quote: “Take, for example, that same Oleg Kashin, the author of the scandalous interview with one of the Khimki rioters, moreover, with one of their leaders, who, as indicated in the material, heads a column of anarchists and AntiFa activists - which of us can imagine that a normal, decent person would talk to degenerates smashing everything in their path” - this was posted on the official website of your organization under the headline “Traitor-journalists must be punished.” Next to the text was a photograph of journalist Kashin, with a stamp on his chest reading “will be punished.” Here is a screenshot from that site - so that God forbid you don’t think I’m making something up. Yesterday this was removed from the Young Guard website, but on the internet, as is known, nothing can be hidden once it was there - here it is from the Young Guard website, the youth wing of the ruling party United Russia. In this connection I have a natural question - was it your guys who “worked over” Kashin? K. SHITOV: no, of course not. E. ALBATS: no? And how can you explain that on your website - by the way, it is still there: “traitor-journalists must be punished” - what is that supposed to mean? K. SHITOV: Let me explain. First, the website carries the official statement of the Young Guard regarding the tragic event that happened, and the organization’s position toward the methods of beatings, that is the first thing. Second - Oleg Kashin, on the one hand, may have been a political, ideological opponent of the organization, nevertheless, in 2007 he took part in our congress, and here the question of punishment is not about physically inflicting some kind of beating, breaking a shin, or something else. There is political struggle, perhaps a political, ideological clash, an informational one. And if we make a statement - by the way, that article is not an official statement of the Young Guard as an organization, it is the opinion of one of the authors, there is a signature below. E. ALBATS: Is this author a member of the organization? K. SHITOV: yes, a member of the organization. Nevertheless, there was no talk that the punishment would be physical or should be physical, or any calls for physical reprisal. E. ALBATS: Excuse me, Kirill, it says here “will be punished.” Let me reveal a secret - you are not the first, before you the Russkaya Volya website did the same things - they did it a bit more cleverly - they indicated the date of birth, and then gave the date of death - the sentence will be carried out. K. SHITOV: Yes, I would like to emphasize - yes, what Russkaya Volya did and what the Young Guard does are different things, and I am now conveying the official position of the organization - as a member of the organization, as a member of the political council, - it is neither bad nor good, my version and my position are what they are: the punishment is not physical, but informational. We can argue, discuss. E. ALBATS: And whom do you mean by “traitor-journalists” - what exactly is that, in what war and on what fronts is all this happening? K. SHITOV: There are information wars with regard to our country, there are journalists who take a pro-Russian position, there are those who disagree with how our country is developing. E. ALBATS: if they disagree - they are traitors, yes? K. SHITOV: No, well what does it mean - traitors? E. ALBATS: That is what is written on your website - I quote: “Traitor-journalists must be punished.” I want to know who these traitor-journalists are, and who will be next on your list? K. SHITOV: Who will be next, I do not know, it will depend on how journalists interpret Russia’s development. But when some representatives of the journalistic community call our country, excuse the unparliamentary expression, “Shitty Rashka.” E. ALBATS: I do not know such journalists. K. SHITOV: Fortunately, you do not know them, but such journalists exist, such publications come out periodically, and the Young Guard as an organization supporting the United Russia party, and the United Russia party is pro-government, accordingly supporting the country’s current development, the current course of the government, that is why it is pro-government, in fact considers traitor-journalists to be those who oppose the current path of development, who criticize the actions of the authorities, call for some actions to change the system that are not always lawful. E. ALBATS: Did I understand correctly that everyone who criticizes you or the ruling party, or your national leader - they are traitors? K. SHITOV: Not quite so, you misunderstood me. Criticism can be constructive, and it can be destructive. E. ALBATS: destructive - that means traitors? K. SHITOV: Of course. E. ALBATS: And how do you deal with traitors, tell us, or how do you intend to deal with them? K. SHITOV: I repeat once again - maybe for the third or fourth time. E. ALBATS: yes, I would just very much like to hear it from you. K. SHITOV: Informationally. What is the strength of a journalist, the strength of the pen, the strength of the word. The Young Guard has its own informational resources where, with the power of the word, the power of the printed word, one can give a rebuttal, argue - that is the struggle, an informational struggle. Once again - I simply ask you now not to drag things in by the ears and not to try… E. ALBATS: But admit it - it is hard not to drag them in. K. SHITOV: It seems to you that it is hard not to drag them in, while it seems to me it is hard to drag them in. E. ALBATS: You wrote: “will be punished,” and on the night from Friday to Saturday… K. SHITOV: And when was this text written? E. ALBATS: After Kashin’s materials. K. SHITOV: You see how much time passed. E. ALBATS: So, you gave him a little time to live? K. SHITOV: Why gave him time to live? I am simply saying that… E. ALBATS: Kirill, I ask you once again absolutely seriously - on the website of your official organization it said “will be punished.” On the night from Friday to Saturday we saw how Kashin was punished. On your website the headline “Traitor-journalists” is still hanging there. I want to understand whether this means that the policy of the youth wing of the ruling party is that if the enemy does not surrender, he is destroyed, according to Comrade Stalin’s slogan. Do I understand correctly that the ruling party believes that you, the youth wing, have the right to call people, fellow citizens, “traitors”? K. SHITOV: There you go again, - I will once again, for the fourth, fifth time, I am ready to repeat it ten times. E. ALBATS: Answer briefly so people can hear. K. SHITOV: I think people have already heard, I am ready to repeat - to punish, to fight informationally - yes, with the power of the word - yes, with the power of fists, beatings - no. E. ALBATS: Don’t you think that people who read your website may perceive this statement “traitor-journalists must be punished” as a call to action? K. SHITOV: I do not think so. I think that people who read our website are quite adequate, intelligent people who understand the message correctly. There is no talk here of any physical reprisal. E. ALBATS: I would now like to hear a comment from one of the most popular people on the internet - let me remind the audience - Alexei Navalny is one of the most popular people on the Russian internet, more than 18 thousand people read him. When there was an online poll about whom the internet community would choose as mayor of Moscow, it was Alexei Navalny who got 40% - he is a lawyer, his blog is often called an “anti-corruption reception office,” he is now at Yale University studying law, and that is precisely why he is not here with us in the studio but on the phone. Alexei, your comment? A. NAVALNY: First of all, fortunately I am not in the studio and no one saw how I blushed - thank you, Zhenya. And secondly, of course, what Kirill just said is something astonishing. The fact that they openly admit that everyone who disagrees with a certain current path of Russia’s development - and I categorically disagree with it, and one could say I disagree with it in a destructive form: I cannot offer you any constructive suggestion except that you must leave immediately - against such people an informational campaign will be unleashed. I want to say that this is not political struggle, this is called a political sanction. They have set up such a nice system in which there is the government, the United Russia party, which create alongside themselves proxy organizations like the Young Guard, which issue political sanctions and radical statements and directly combat units - most often these are fan groups associated with organizations like Nashi, and so on. It is precisely through this system that the signal to beat or persecute a specific person passes. For example, Kashin himself - I would like to remind you that he had long complained that he was on the FSO “stop lists” - he could not fly anywhere, he was constantly removed from the plane, before every trip, when he came to check in, people approached him, talked to him. That is, for quite a long time he had already been organizationally on some list of suspicious people and some kind of “enemies of Russia.” And of course such articles give a completely clear signal to these militants: hit him. They give a clear signal to the police: this does not need to be investigated, they signal to everyone that these are people outside the law. And we have a huge number of people in Russia - political activists, journalists, and so on - on whom such a label as “radical” is stuck, and they really are outside the law. Take the National Bolsheviks themselves, however one may feel about them, and even representatives of liberal groups, various groups - they cannot go anywhere by train. My acquaintances have repeatedly complained that they cannot go either to the March of Dissent or to their grandmother in the village - they are taken off the train, they are on the list of “enemies.” They are taken straight to the police station, and there they can do anything they want - because I am an “extremist,” and on the Young Guard website such respectable deputy guys like Kirill are conducting an informational struggle that clearly tells everyone: hit this man, and nothing will happen to you for it. E. ALBATS: Yesterday in your blog you wrote a detailed post in which you said that in fact Kremlin PR technologists should be held responsible for what happened, including with Kashin, that the atmosphere created in the country over the last 10 years, the atmosphere of constant division into “ours” and “theirs,” “enemies,” “ours” and “not ours,” inevitably produces violence, one expression of which was the punishment of Kashin. Do I remember correctly? A. NAVALNY: Absolutely correct. And despite the fact that the opposition is reproached for extremist rhetoric, look at what is said officially: Surkov says “we will not just give up power, we will fight.” Pavlovsky says “the authorities will punch you in the face” - that is a literal quote. Then, at a lower level, Kirill and his colleagues write that yes, indeed, “will be punished” - should get punched in the face. Then the guys they hired literally punch someone in the face. Yes, they really have created an entire system, and the degree of rhetoric, precisely that of the authorities toward the opposition, its aggressiveness, increases with every day - these are literally statements saying that we will beat you, we will kill and persecute you, you will get no protection. People who sit at the lower level, “a la” police, governors, administration - they naturally interpret these signals, perceive them as a guide to action. And all this huge number of youth groups and special groups attached to them that has been created - this is a huge apparatus of forceful persecution. E. ALBATS: Thank you, Alexei. Boris, what would you say in connection with this story? I would return to the “Russian Marches” - there was a curious thing that Ilya Barabanov noticed - at the nationalists’ “Russian March” in Lyublino a human rights slogan was unfurled: “For your freedom and ours” - the one with which, as is known, demonstrators came out to Red Square in 1968 to protest the occupation of Czechoslovakia by Soviet troops. And this is a picture from the “Russian March,” organized with the support of the state agency Rosmolodezh - that is, with taxpayers’ money, - we are also paying for this business. Tell me, what is happening, why are the authorities doing this? B. NEMTSOV: First, I believe that there is a direct connection between the attempted murder of Oleg Kashin and the marches of hatred that took place on the 4th, on National Unity Day. In fact, the atmosphere of hatred, the atmosphere of contempt for human dignity, these self-exposing speeches of the representative of the Young Guard, the messages on the internet - of course, all of this is a nightmare, and the authorities bear direct responsibility for it, and directly the curator of these so-called youth organizations, which are in fact extremist organizations - it must be said directly that these are extremist organizations, that in many countries of the world they are already perceived as extremist, many people, in particular from the Nashi organization, are already included on the list of extremists, cannot enter the European Union, for example, - all these organizations have a curator, his surname is Surkov. E. ALBATS: Vladislav Yuryevich, first deputy head of the administration of the President of the Russian Federation. B. NEMTSOV: Yes. He bears full responsibility for the atmosphere of hatred, for the little articles saying that all journalists who disagree with the party of thieves and traitors, United Russia, turn out to be traitors. Here I can say - I categorically disagree with this party and its leader, I believe that its leader has plunged our country into an abyss of African-style corruption, I believe that he secured billionaire fortunes for his buddies from the chekist junta, I believe that his close friends-oligarchs enriched themselves at Russia’s expense, and I believe that the sooner we send him into retirement together with this vile party, the better it will be for our whole country. I absolutely disagree that people who are in opposition are enemies of Russia. On the contrary, I believe that Russia’s enemies are now in the Kremlin and the White House. E. ALBATS: You have started to frighten me, Boris Yefimovich. I am afraid when the word “enemies” is used. B. NEMTSOV: Don’t be afraid. I think that this chief curator named Surkov has a deputy, his name is Vasily Yakimenko. By the way, an important remark regarding Yakimenko: at one time Oleg Kashin wrote a message about Yakimenko’s inclination toward pedophilia, specifically that Yakimenko had intimate relations with the teenager Anastasia Karchevskaya. This is an underage girl who wrote in her blog that they had an intimate relationship. Kashin wrote about this. E. ALBATS: In a blog? B. NEMTSOV: Yes. Somehow this story is now forgotten, and it seems to me it has been forgotten in vain. In fact, it is clear why pedophiles become heads of the youth committee… E. ALBATS: That is a lawsuit, Boris Yefimovich, you understand? B. NEMTSOV: yes, personally, I like it - I am ready. I believe that as long as such scoundrels are in power here, these marches will continue. Now - regarding these marches. Before that, this summer, they held, as you know, the Seliger gathering. There was an installation there where representatives of the opposition, public organizations, and the same Lyudmila Mikhailovna were in Nazi uniforms. And I, by the way, was also there in a Nazi uniform, together with Lyudmila Mikhailovna. And here, on these posters - you do not have this photograph in the New Times, but it exists on the internet - where they are trampling my photograph too. But it does not matter. Then they, I want to remind you, dressed Nikolai Svanidze in a Nazi uniform - attention: a journalist. You must understand that this is not a typo. They are now trying to tell us that they have nothing to do with it, that they only participate in verbal debates. We see their verbal debates all over the country - these “young guardsmen” attack me everywhere. K. SHITOV: Am I attacking you? And where did I personally attack you? B. NEMTSOV: I was not talking about you - “young guardsmen.” K. SHITOV: Then why are you pointing your finger at me? B. NEMTSOV: And who are you? You are a representative of the organization. K. SHITOV: Yes, but I am not attacking you, no need to point fingers. B. NEMTSOV: Need to, need to. K. SHITOV: That is impolite, at the very least. You are an adult, you ought to… B. NEMTSOV: That is excellent - scoundrels should be known by sight. In short, they are everywhere, all over the country. I am a physically healthy man, and I can punch someone in the face, as you yourself understand. They everywhere try to intimidate, rough up, frighten any “dissenters” - that is their principle and their “boss,” Surkov, is engaged in this. Therefore I believe that if Mr. Medvedev really wants to establish elementary order in the country, wants the opposition to operate in accordance with the constitution and the laws, - so that journalists are not killed or maimed, - Surkov and Yakimenko must be sent into retirement immediately - immediately. They are dangerous for the country, they must be removed immediately. Further - these organizations of “Red Guards” that operate here, that attack journalists and the opposition - these organizations must be immediately disbanded - they are dangerous for society. As long as these organizations exist, there will be a constant threat to journalists, human rights defenders, public figures. Next, this march - colorful pictures. I am a physicist, as you remember. Look: there were 20 thousand of them there, - they themselves say there were 20 thousand, - they all came from other cities, and I was not too lazy, I calculated how much this very “Russian March,” this march of hatred, cost you and me. Do you know how much it costs? E. ALBATS: How much? B. NEMTSOV: There were 20 thousand, to bring guys from Penza, Vologda, Vladimir - by the way, normal, decent guys who did not even know why they were going - you have to pay for transport, accommodation, and feed them properly. On average such a trip costs 5 thousand. Now multiply 20 thousand by 5 - you get one hundred million rubles. For the “March of Hatred” you and I paid one hundred million rubles from the budget - at a minimum. E. ALBATS: But Rosmolodezh was in support - Nashi claim that it was not Rosmolodezh that financed it, but certain private organizations - not your friend Prokhorov, perhaps? B. NEMTSOV: I think not. You understand, a man with a world-famous name still values his reputation and is unlikely to agree to finance scoundrels. E. ALBATS: On that wonderful note we are going to commercials and the news, then we will return to the studio. NEWS E. ALBATS: We continue the program, today we are talking about “marches of hatred” - it is clear that we began our program with the attempted murder of Konstantin Fetisov, an environmentalist who is now in a coma - he was beaten with a baseball bat, he is one of the defenders of the Khimki forest, and the attempted murder of our colleague Oleg Kashin, which happened on the night from Friday to Saturday. And all this happened on the days when two “marches of hatred” took place in Moscow - one in Lyublino, where young people threw up their hands in a fascist salute - some of them, there were slogans “Russia for Russians” and about how to deal with Jewish power - business as usual, nothing new. But what really was new was what happened on the Taras Shevchenko embankment in Moscow, where the “Russian March” took place, organized with the support of the federal agency “Rosmolodezh,” this is a state organization that exists on taxpayers’ money - they brought 20 thousand people from all over the country, Nemtsov estimated that it cost one hundred million rubles. B. NEMTSOV: At a minimum. E. ALBATS: yes. And there, in particular, they trampled posters with photographs of famous people of Russia, in particular Lyudmila Alekseyeva, who was called an “enemy” - this was done by Nashi commissar Dmitry Chmarov. This is not the only photograph of this kind. A question to A.B. Zubov, a well-known historian, professor at MGIMO. - Andrei Borisovich, tell us, in what eras in our fatherland did such “marches of hatred” take place, what era in Russian history does this characterize, what does it say about the current state of minds in our fatherland? A. ZUBOV: This is not Stalinism. The only era is the time between 1927, when Stalin’s struggle with Trotsky and the Trotskyist opposition began, and all these marches ended by 1934 - such “marches of hatred,” because later such a form of pseudo-spontaneity seemed dangerous. But meetings began at enterprises, with demands for shootings, executions, destruction: “if the enemy does not surrender, he is destroyed” - these are the words of Maxim Gorky, which Stalin later repeated many times. All this continued precisely in these forms until the very end of the Stalinist regime. E. ALBATS: That is, this is the time of the Shakhty case? A. ZUBOV: Up to the time of the “Jewish nights” in 1952-1953. That is, this is precisely the hallmark of Stalinism. Lenin’s time had its own nastiness, but this was not there. And after Stalin’s death it immediately ceased to exist - even in the period when Beria and Malenkov ruled the country in the first months, from March to June 1953 - even then this was no longer there. That is, this is a typical hallmark of the Stalin era. Similar things existed in Nazi Germany. E. ALBATS: It is no accident that Ribbentrop studied here. A. ZUBOV: Not by chance. And in general, when he signed the famous Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, but in fact the Hitler-Stalin pact on August 23, 1939 - after that there was such a narrow drinking party attended by Stalin and Molotov on the Bolshevik side, and Ribbentrop and Schulenburg on the German side, - later Ribbentrop recalled and said that he felt there as cozy as among old party comrades. So this, of course, is not accidental. Similar things were actively practiced by Mussolini from the moment when he had not even yet come to power - this is the “March on Rome,” and so on, and in the period after he came to power. Interestingly - this is known less well - that similar things were practiced in Italy by communists after 1944, when they settled scores with Nazis, fascists - they were simply beaten, destroyed, killed without trial - according to some estimates, about 100 thousand people close to the fascist party died. That is, in fact, this is the hallmark of two totalitarian systems and two totalitarian parties. The same thing existed in China and throughout the Eastern bloc - Cambodia, North Korea - all the same. E. ALBATS: From your point of view - what is there in these marches that makes them so attractive to the authorities under totalitarian regimes? We observe such things in Venezuela too. A. ZUBOV: Of course. It is very simple: the point is that any crime requires accomplices. It is always easier when you are not alone, when others are with you. A typical principle of criminality is to smear others too, so that people can never break away from you, cannot rise up against you, you can easily say: but you killed together with me, voted together with me for executions. And ultimately, in my view, this is simply such a satanic involvement in crime and sin, which leads a person to the destruction of conscience, soul, and everything else. Because those people who voted at their factories for the execution of some “criminals” - starting with the Shakhty case, - these people could never again be entirely healthy, they understood that they were murderers at a distance, and this left a terrible imprint on them. Properly speaking, all this was done for that very reason. E. ALBATS: But you must agree - Stalin understood that people who are satiated with blood become dangerous, therefore every time he removed them layer by layer - sent them to camps, shot them, new killers came in - for example, in the NKVD - Yagoda, then he and his people were shot, Yezhov came, and so on. The same thing happened with those who took part in the marches of the late 1920s - early 1930s, the same thing happened in Nazi Germany. Because naturally those people who were at the top of totalitarian power feared that these “wolves,” especially the young ones, might… A. ZUBOV: Devour them themselves. E. ALBATS: Of course, turn on them and go for their throats. But what interests me is this - Stalin and Hitler understood that sooner or later they would destroy them - so they destroyed them. But what will our rulers do? They brought 20 thousand people who joyfully chanted “Shame,” trampled portraits of famous people. And then what? So should we expect that if this is early Stalinism, then our authorities will move to actions characteristic of the 1930s in Russia, the USSR, and Germany? A. ZUBOV: Frankly speaking - it is hard for me to imagine that. The authorities are weak, and they are unlikely to be able to turn to mass terror. E. ALBATS: And there are no economic reasons for it. A. ZUBOV: No, by the way, and no purely political resource for it either, and thirdly - the authorities are too dependent on the West - their capital is there. So such things are simply impossible. Therefore I think they are doing these things without themselves realizing what they are doing. This, by the way, is like much of what is being done now. E. ALBATS: That is, they do not understand that the guys may turn around and pounce on them? A. ZUBOV: I think - if otherwise, then I am a fool and they are smart - but it seems to me that the current authorities, allowing these completely unacceptable forms, for which, of course, Russia will never say “thank you” in the future, and every day it becomes clearer that this - I am a historian, and I imagine that future historians, in 50 years, will speak of this with great bitterness, and it will bring no credit to these people. But it seems to me that, like much now, this is in general amateurism: let’s try it, maybe it will work, maybe they will fall silent, maybe they will reconcile themselves? Indeed, our society is now crushed by that same communism, Stalinism, and Leninism, by those terrible repressions that began in 1917, and in fact it still has not risen from its knees. All activists, active people were destroyed or left, exiled, or died in the Civil War, mostly decent people. Or they were heavily crushed by the camps, and later preferred to keep silent. Such a society is easy to govern. And it is easy to twist ropes from it. But someone begins to speak - a new, young generation, to which Kirill Vladimirovich belongs - it has no longer experienced that oppression, and it becomes dangerous. Because the current власти in fact parasitize on the crimes of past generations, on the crimes of Stalinism, the crimes of Khrushchev and Brezhnev with his psychiatric hospitals, Andropov, and so on. And it uses the voicelessness of society, its disunity. Stalin in his time quite consciously smashed all communal forms - hence collectivization - in order to bring Russian society to atomization, so that it would be easy to govern. And that is what they are using now. I think that society is beginning little by little, very slowly, to consolidate - this is a natural process in conditions of at least limited, but freedom. E. ALBATS: On the websites of various of our pro-Kremlin political analysts one can read that in fact they are trying to seize the Russian national idea from radical nationalists, from skinheads, from all sorts of Slavic brotherhoods, which may pose a threat, and they want the state to saddle this national idea, but it would be such an “enlightened nationalism” - what can you answer to that? A. ZUBOV: It seems to me that in general the time of such ideologies, first of all, has passed, and secondly, the era of ideologies, that is, the 20th century, proved that these ideologies bring nothing good. All these ideologies of nationalism, racism, the corporate state - Mussolini, the class state. E. ALBATS: And Salazar. A. ZUBOV: yes. All this, in the final analysis, leads to national fiasco. By the way, in Russia too in 1991 there was a national fiasco - this is completely obvious, analogous to the national fiasco of Salazar’s regime, analogous to the fiasco of the fascist regime in Italy, and as for Germany, everything is already clear to everyone. That is, all these things are painful things. It is no accident that the practice of communism is now condemned in PACE, it is no accident that Nazism and fascism are condemned by all reasonable humanity. These things are extremely dangerous for the future of the country. For a real Russian patriot there is nothing worse than these “Russian Marches,” this Russian idea. Russia’s revival comes through the revival of the human being, his dignity, his personality, his selfhood, - as Pushkin said, - through this comes the revival of Russia, accordingly Russian society, and not through the arousal of these painful feelings, which in the end inflame like an abscess and can lead either to severe illness, or even to the death of the one in whom this abscess has ripened. E. ALBATS: Thank you. Kirill, in your blog you were congratulating people on the Day of Unity and Accord, I looked carefully - it turns out that your organization not only called for dealing with traitor-journalists, but you were also holding some kind of festival. Tell me, when you look at these pictures, how does it seem to you, how does this go together with the Day of Unity and Accord - when they trample portraits? K. SHITOV: I will explain now. I feel a little hurt, not even hurt, but a little ashamed before the listeners - somehow from the very first minute of the broadcast we are misleading them and using substitution of theses, - by the way, in rhetoric this is a prohibited technique. Starting with dragging in by the ears the opinion of one of the authors of the Young Guard website. E. ALBATS: Is this the official website? K. SHITOV: This is the opinion of one of the members. E. ALBATS: Why did you leave it on the website? K. SHITOV: Why are you interrupting me? You invited me as a guest - let me finish, then I will answer your question. This is the opinion of one of the authors on the official website - but one of the authors, not the whole organization. Regarding the “Russian March” of the Nashi movement - I have no direct relation to this organization, I can say that at this march there was a presentation of various projects of the Nashi movement. For some reason we pulled only one photograph out of context - by the way, from a moral point of view I do not approve of these methods of political struggle - trampling portraits. But what was there? There were patriotic projects there: veterans marched in the column, within the framework of the Nashi movement’s “Our History” project, there were portraits of traitors, enemies - they were called differently - owners of stores selling expired products. E. ALBATS: They are enemies too? K. SHITOV: These are not enemies, these are criminals. Keepers of dens - that is a criminally punishable act. E. ALBATS: Tell me, Kirill, are you aware that one can call someone a criminal only by court decision? Are you familiar with such a concept as the presumption of innocence? K. SHITOV: I agree. Let us move on. I am simply telling what was at the Nashi movement event - I am not now evaluating whether it is good or bad. E. ALBATS: And were you there? K. SHITOV: No, I was not there, I read news materials about this event. So, they marched, carried portraits - I repeat once again - of some illegal, more precisely, those who sell alcohol and tobacco products to minors, and so on. Well, there is also some ideological movement there, political, one of the directions - political struggle, - understandable, that is how they expressed themselves. I repeat once again - from a moral point of view I do not accept such forms of struggle, let us say - trampling portraits, not trampling. But I saw no criminality, no crime in these actions. From a moral point of view one can relate to it in different ways. As for the Young Guard, indeed, we held the “Energy of the Streets” festival, we united representatives of various youth subcultures that exist in modern Russia, in the modern world - this is precisely our position, this is a celebration. Here I would not agree with Andrei Borisovich - here again we are somewhat distorting the situation: the ruling party, the United Russia party, is not trying to jump on the theme of nationalism, on the contrary, United Russia was the initiator of the National Unity Day holiday, because 400 years ago, in 1612, the people of Russia, having united in the Minin and Pozharsky militia, where there were Russians, Bashkirs, Tatars, Orthodox, Buddhists, Jews, - all together, uniting, defeated the Polish-Lithuanian intervention. That is the ideology of this holiday - the unity of the people. And I absolutely agree: nationalism will be harmful for Russia, because let us look at the map of our country - if we take the lands where ethnic… E. ALBATS: Kirill, we are quite familiar with the map of our country. K. SHITOV: You asked me regarding the holiday and my organization’s attitude toward this holiday. E. ALBATS: Correct. K. SHITOV: I am explaining the personal attitude and that of the organization. E. ALBATS: And I am stopping you because you are beginning to tell us things about which we, people with higher education, are well informed. K. SHITOV: That is pleasant. E. ALBATS: Tell me, do you think that when people walk through the streets of the capital of our homeland and declare other citizens enemies and traitors - you did not say it by accident - criminals. Do you think this contributes to unity and accord? K. SHITOV: I believe that when owners of dens, when sellers of low-quality products… E. ALBATS: Tell me, were they convicted or not? K. SHITOV: I will answer your question. When owners of dens, sellers of alcohol and tobacco products, that is, people who violate the law, - selling to minors is prohibited by law. E. ALBATS: Excuse me, do you belong to law enforcement agencies? K. SHITOV: No, I do not. E. ALBATS: Which means you have no right to judge. K. SHITOV: But I am not saying that, I am not condemning. I am saying what was at the Nashi movement event, simply describing objective reality. It is the organization’s right to give an assessment. E. ALBATS: Alexei, are you still here? Tell us, what should be done with all this - you have heard everything, what are we going to do? It is obvious that you and I are on this same list. A. NAVALNY: First of all, I wanted to say - Kirill, do not consider everyone fools - you sit in the Moscow City Duma, where United Russia has 80% of the votes. K. SHITOV: More. A. NAVALNY: United Russia has two thirds in the State Duma, a constitutional majority. Tomorrow come to work and pass laws against tobacco and alcohol. Do it, and why do you need marches? That is the first thing. The second thing - it was not even a “march of hatred,” which presupposes some kind of emotion. These guys have no emotion - this was naked cynicism, this was a march in defense of the business of the Ozero dacha cooperative, this was a march in support of the Rotenberg brothers, this was a “Russian March” in support of Timchenko, who latched onto Rosneft, in support of people who latched onto Gazprom, other oil corporations, and so on - that is, this is a march in defense of a huge pump that pumps money out of the multinational people of the Russian Federation and hides it somewhere in London, Switzerland, and so on, what should be done with these people? Zhenya, here we can do nothing right now - I mean, we cannot now create a mechanism by which we can protect political activists, journalists, and so on. Now, of course, a certain new challenge stands before us, because the authorities have obviously radicalized their actions, moved to some new level. Still, beating famous activists and journalists for several days in a row - this is something unprecedented. In this regard, I believe that civil society, political activists must consolidate in a principled way - we must directly name these people, - I agree with Nemtsov - the enemies of Russia, - United Russia, the party of the corrupt and swindlers, - they are enemies of Russia. These guys are False Dmitrys and Marina Mnisheks. All marches must be led against them. E. ALBATS: I cannot agree either with you or with Nemtsov - I believe that one cannot call citizens whose position we do not like “enemies” - one cannot. Because this is what happened in our history. Boris, so what shall we do? Declare them “enemies” and go wall against wall? B. NEMTSOV: By the way, I am inclined to agree with you - there is no need to act by their vile methods, that is wrong. Let God judge them, as for what should be done - what would I do? - first of all I would stop financing extremist organizations. E. ALBATS: But you do not finance them anyway. Or will you tell your friend Prokhorov - stop giving money to extremist organizations? B. NEMTSOV: Will you allow me? You asked me a question and do not let me answer - that is surprising. I believe that financing of extremist organizations must be stopped. The Young Guard, Nashi, Steel, Young Russia and others, our homegrown “Red Guards” - all live either at the expense of the budget, or at the expense of the Kremlin’s slush fund - we know that well. They spend money fighting us - that is all fine. That is the first thing. The second - if Medvedev wants to carry out modernization seriously, then he must get rid of these people who discredit and disgrace the country. First of all there are two people - they must be fired immediately: Surkov and Yakimenko. E. ALBATS: Do you think this will happen? Really? B. NEMTSOV: I believe that the journalistic community - you will be surprised - this is that rare case, precisely because of Oleg, - if the journalistic community is as solidarized as it has united in relation to Oleg, and if it conveys its point of view to the President of Russia, then there is a chance of these two figures being fired - it is greater than zero. I understand that Surkov has the image of a “great manager,” that he governs Russia, but one must understand that this is a line that must be crossed. Further - I do not agree with the analogy with Stalin - Putin is not Stalin. Putin is Stalin and Abramovich, and with much more Abramovich. And his task, as Lesha Navalny correctly said, is to preserve his own capital and that of his group. These people are called upon to intimidate the opposition, journalists, human rights defenders, so that under no circumstances do they dare demand their own rights, including the right to elect, the right to freedom of the press, the right to have a different point of view, and so on. These young people are not guilty of anything, I believe that most of them did not know where they were going and what posters they would carry. I am completely sure that with equal success they could have come to Triumfalnaya Square, if they had been brought there on the 31st, they could have come to the march in Lyublino - anywhere. E. ALBATS: So, they are mankurts? B. NEMTSOV: The vileness of these citizens, Surkov and Yakimenko, is that they corrupt the youth, make it cynical, venal, absolutely devoid of ideas and absolutely unpatriotic. We know perfectly well how Seliger is financed, we know how many tens of millions of dollars have been spent to brainwash them. They are afraid of their own people. And these so-called fighters, “Red Guards,” “Putin-Jugend” or “Surkov-Jugend” - I do not know what they should be called - are needed precisely so that the people are not given the opportunity to defend themselves, their rights, and defend our constitution - this is absolutely clear. Therefore I think this - we must now together - journalists, human rights defenders, the opposition - unite and ensure that this cancerous tumor in the persons of Surkov and Yakimenko flies the hell out of here. To judge them or not judge them - that is another matter - history will judge. By the way, I am absolutely not bloodthirsty, I believe that they bring an absolutely nightmarish climate into what is now happening. Besides, I want to say that Surkov is part of the McFaul-Surkov commission. I believe that if we are really talking seriously about restoring order, then at the very least the West should behave adequately and not pretend it does not know that journalists are being killed and maimed. I consider it a disgrace for the Obama administration to continue the work of the McFaul-Surkov Commission - a disgrace. McFaul should unilaterally withdraw from this commission, because by attending meetings with Surkov he thereby makes him legitimate, while he is outside the law. He is illegitimate. E. ALBATS: Unfortunately, at this point we must go off the air. I thank everyone who was with us. Let us stay healthy and I hope to see you again in a week.