Today I wondered, who could Trump and Clinton be compared to? Perhaps to “Chichvarkin” and “Lavrov.” Of course, “Polonsky” would be more fitting, but Trump indeed has brains. “Zhirinovsky” doesn’t fit because his background is in politics, not business. Other oligarchs don’t fit either, because they are either not charismatic or not businessmen. To achieve the same Trump-effect, a hypothetical Chichvarkin would have to focus not on Moscow, but on the regions. On some hypothetical Chelyabinsk. A hypothetical “Lavrov” would make an ideal partner, relying on professional experience and knowledge. But the hypothetical “Chelyabinsk residents” wouldn’t trust a bureaucrat and would vote for “their simple guy who’s going to sort everyone out.”
But overall, such a scenario would never happen in Russia. That very working class in Russia doesn’t like change. They won’t take to the squares and won’t collect pine cones for the future. In Eurasia, the further southeast you go, the larger the part of the population that needs an authoritarian ruler and a certain level of chaos (corruption, loophole-riddled legislation, etc.). The further east you go, the better the “I’m a little person, my house is on the edge” philosophy works. I don’t know if there’s anything similar on the other side of the globe.
And this also reminded me somehow of Brexit.
Hi, I'm Rauf Aliev. 