Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod) wrote:

Taylor Kingston wrote:
An article on political opposition to Russian president Putin and
Kasparov's role in it:

http://www.slate.com/id/2145702/?nav=tap3

Thank you, Taylor, for the link, once again.

[...] the article leaves me
with some doubts about the political
thinking of Kasparov (or, to a lesser
degree, of the author of the article).

Kasparov should study the history
of the fall of communism. There
were of course also the crucial
external factors: the direction of the
new technology, the Reagan's clear
stand, the emergence of the Polish
pope John Paul II, ... Nevertheless,
the opposition had its important role.
Thus Kasparov should study and be
impressed by the Samizdat story,
which started in the USSR and fluorished
in Poland and other European Soviet
satelites. "Samizdat" means "SelfPublisher",
i.e. non-governmental. It had broken the
communist monopoly on information.
On the top of it in Poland many people
actually lived from Samizdat: writers,
publishers, ... This alone made communism
less significant.

Then Kasparov and other present day
opposition activists should study the
Polish KOR+Solidarity. The opposition
worked from the roots up. It has created,
in the final stages of the communism
regime, "a nation within the nation", the life
was going in Poland aside the regime,
around it. The opposition, at its mature stage,
started with the legal assistance for the
workers who got in trouble with the regime.
It encouraged and assisted the workers in
organizing the independent Unions. It had
organized help for the victims of the political
repression. (Thus, for instance, more and
more people were becoming materially
independent of the regime). And that was
the beginning of the end of the communism.

The actual participation in the government
was not an early but the last stage of the
struggle against the totalitarianism. Winning
any seats under a totalitarian regime
(which was somewhat possible at the end
of communism) wouldn't be of much value.

Regards,

Wlod