The the idea of the separation of powers, the

venture to craft a completely modern democratic government on the land of former
Soviet Russia has vanished. The main features a democracy boasts, like the idea
of the separation of  powers, the commencement
of freely held elections, a national form of main government, localized
autonomy, the sovereignty of the judicial system and much more  were not the reality for Russia. These
democratic concepts were substituted with a system of private organizations that
seized the functions and abilities of the government and utilized the gained
power as a means for gluttony rather than utilizing the potential to help the
population. Later on, “The People’s” manifesto demanded political alterations; therefore
Russia could begin to follow a path of liberty in democracy. Several major concepts
protected by the Movement include Russian national renaissance, liberty for
everyone, and impartial courts. By stating the need for national renaissance the
movement meant bringing the Russian states decline to a halt and making the critical
conditions for the keeping and innovation of the Russian people, the language ,
culture, and Russian historic territory. It is crucial to clarify that the
manifesto’s writers do not stand with standard nationalist ideals, not to
ethnocentrism. Only pieces of modern, non-savage, cultural nationalist ideals have
their place in the manifesto. If this manifesto is examined while remembering the
overall social and political atmosphere in modern Russia, a couple contextual dilemmas
become apparent. To begin, the nonexistence of a specified immigration policy
of any form, next, the lack of social reforms and nationwide projects. Finally,
the incapacity of the  government to create
a specific nationwide concept or to make an ideology of their own is a problem
not addressed in the manifesto. These factors combined contributed to the
increasing social tension, which, combined with financial and political issues,
created a need for a proud rhetoric that, for multiple reasons, was by the
media labeled as “nationalistic ideals” and too extreme.

Navalny and other signers of the “The People” manifesto then accused organizations
that were actually extreme and the government for planting nationalist ideas for
their own interests and creating the major misconception in public view of
nationalism in contrast to patriotism. According to them, the government is attempting
to utilize patriotic ideals to their ownbenefit, but at the same time, national
provokers discredit the authority with their xenophobic ideals by calling for
violent removal of ‘aliens,’ therefore making an extremely “bad guy” image of
the nationalist movements as a whole. Navalny’s personal views in regards
to a nationalist are very different from what is usually perceived by the government.
According to Navalny, a nationalist is a true patriot that places the interests
of Russia as well as the nation, above his/her personal interests. He does not believe
nationalist ideals are evil, intimidating and should be a social taboo.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now