Do We Choose the Usual From Two Evils?
March 16, 2023
Political scientist Daniyar Ashimbayev and journalist Sergey Kozlov told about who and how is running for deputies of the Kazakh parliament and what its new composition may be (newspaper article).
Sergey KOZLOV: I recently heard a joke related to the nomination of candidates for our parliament: if someone has not yet registered, then the queue is over there. That is, it seems that literally everyone who has been noted in any way, and over the past decades, on the political stage or in public discussions, has come forward. And also those who have not been marked in any way at all and are completely unknown characters for Kazakhstanis. Elections for everyone, it turns out? Is it not a triumph, or rather, is it not a riot of democracy, which many of our democrats have dreamed of so much? By the way, they, these mossy democrats, I'm sorry, with mold all over the surface of dried brains, of course, criticize both the authorities and the ruling party (we will not, we will not name these parties here, so as not to blame us for election campaigning), but even these reptiles cannot but admit that the elections are taking place! Moreover, everything that the president promised in this part of his program for the transformation of the country is actually happening. Here's an opportunity for you to legally, without rallying and tearing, without illegal pickets and showdowns with the police, to try yourself as a real politician. And they try! As I said, many of them. As for, let's call him my unloved word, the electorate, he is in deep, I think, perplexity: where did they all come from, candidates for people's deputies? And that there are so many of them? And what are they promising right and left, promising and promising? It is clear that no one can fulfill even a thousandth of all these promises, but these are the rules of the game – promise and charm, travel to remote areas, talk to people, delve into their aspirations and needs, fix problems and requirements. And the electorate, as far as we can judge, is somehow getting more and more annoyed and perplexed as the voting day approaches. And this is also probably part of the game called "democratic parliamentary elections". Or is it still not a game?
Daniyar ASHIMBAYEV: In fact, the number of candidates in single-mandate districts, both in the majilis and maslikhats, is surprising. But this is only at first glance. Many simply forgot the situation at the elections in the 90s and noughties. The competition was no less, take at least the elections in 2003 and 2004. But then the situation changed. The Mazhilis was completely transferred to party lists, while party legislation was tightened at the same time. In maslikhats, competition was first reduced by introducing intra-party primaries, and then transferred to party lists. Since the structures of the ruling party were completely raised under akimats, we received absolutely gray and silent maslikhats that reflected the interests of akimats and developers. As a result, there was no one to actualize regional problems, criticize the policies of local governments, and generally represent the interests of the population. The transition to a mixed system allows this situation to be overcome at least a little. I will not fall into excessive optimism about the independence of the new maslikhats and the adequacy of the results of future elections (after all, the level of political culture has fallen significantly), but the country as a whole and the state in particular objectively needs deputies who ask unpleasant questions and demand answers to them. For a long time we proceeded from the concept of a "smart and enlightened state", but, finding ourselves without criticism and competition, it quickly degraded. I would compare our public administration with the digestive system: no matter what beautiful ideas are at the entrance, a characteristic mass is obtained at the exit...
S. K.: Has the level of political culture dropped? It's hard for me to say that once this level was at least satisfactory. But times are changing, whole generations of young people have grown up, who, in my opinion, have some kind of, sorry, mess in their heads. I mean ideas about politics, about how our political system should be formed, what kind of people are required in it, how to organize the interaction of government and society, etc. That is why the outcome of these elections, I'm afraid, will be very unpredictable. But we will see in the near future, when the results of the vote will be summed up. Now, as you correctly noted, the huge number of candidates for deputies is simply unknown to voters. We see rampant parochial populism. No one watches the programs of either parties or self-nominees, everyone is interested in either how election campaigning is carried out (with performances and original tricks), or what the candidate has noted in the past (attacks against the government, scandals, sharp is by no means catastrophic, despite verbal chatter and empty promises, she, dear democracy, is everywhere like this, only with certain features inherent in a particular political culture. We have it, what to do, what it is. By the way, not the most primitive in the world, believe me. But the main thing, in my opinion, is real political life. She became more active, people, as they say, engaged in her, real politics. Sometimes it looks funny, sometimes repulsive, but still…
D. A.: And where to get another electorate? We remember the elections of the 90s and the beginning of the noughties - there was interest, there was more or less high–quality supply and demand in the electoral market. Where did it all go? Few people remember about such a "house of democracy" in Almaty on Vinogradov Street). It is clear that the vast majority of all these characters will not be elected anywhere. As in the joke: I won't catch up, so at least I'll warm up, but someone will get through… All this is, I repeat, Seifullin, where various parties and movements sat on three floors, often existing only in the person of their leader. They were in the media, journalists ran to them, they periodically voiced their position, and people saw that there was someone who expressed their opinion - on ecology, on social protection, on the national issue, etc. Maybe these parties were virtual, but they gave a full palette of public opinion, which the state considered. Then someone retired, someone sat down on grants, and the state became lazier and lazier every year. The number of parties was optimized, the districts were abolished, and ended up with the fact that instead of right and left, conservatives and liberals, only nationalists and internationalists remained in the country, then the question came down to "true" and "shala" or "vatnik" and "nazis". Plus a huge number of those who first lost faith in politicians, and then interest in it.
S. K.: Maybe this is a natural continuation of our political process? Even if some parties, as you said, consisted at best of several people, and positioned themselves in the singular, in the person of their leader. The entire current state of our (even if the word is somewhat vague) electorate has been prepared by this process. Times are changing. In the 90s, there were completely different people - intellectuals who had not yet cooled down from the grand collapse of the USSR, then everything was seen in a completely different way than today. Then everything seemed quite possible – and to make a rapid political career, and to make a decent fortune. We were all naive. But time passed, it didn't work out, they didn't give you a lot of money to earn (unless you integrate into the system or join some criminal clan), the authorities very skillfully used the infantilism of society, playing on this and that, slipping parties, leaders, eliminating certain objectionable characters from the political scene, either discrediting them, or pitting them against competitors and just envious. This is the result: people do not believe that an effective, cohesive and capable political force capable of governing the country can appear as an alternative to the authorities. People listen and watch election videos and give preference to those who they just visually like or like their harsh statements. This is also reflected in the so-called rally activity. She's just no…
D. A.: For a long time, everyone has paid attention to the dwarfism of rallies in Almaty over the past decades, and there are a lot of acute problems, but people have lost the habit of expressing protest and do not believe in the meaning of this very expression. The January events do not count, they were well-organized "protests" from above with a mobilization factor in the face of special services, criminals and religious radicals. The public inquiry today concerns the topic of justice, but it is obvious that the concept of justice is very, very different for everyone. Justice could only be provided by honest courts, but where to get them if the law of force, telephone law and envelope law have dominated society for many years? There is no legal, there is no political culture, but in a wide assortment there is a request for paternalism (read – dependency) and a new reading of the country's history, which simultaneously instills in young people (and not only) a mania for national greatness and an inferiority complex with an imposed postcolonial syndrome. The latter, as you know, causes a need for some kind of revenge, and good advisers immediately slip religious radicalism, militant nationalism and xenophobia as tools. At the same time, people stopped reading (reading even messengers is replaced by audio and video messages). People stopped thinking. So the candidates and their populist programs fully correspond to the social demand. Do not forget that for candidates for members of public councils, certificates from narcology and psychiatric hospitals are still required, but for candidates for deputies – no longer.
Sergey KOZLOV: I recently heard a joke related to the nomination of candidates for our parliament: if someone has not yet registered, then the queue is over there. That is, it seems that literally everyone who has been noted in any way, and over the past decades, on the political stage or in public discussions, has come forward. And also those who have not been marked in any way at all and are completely unknown characters for Kazakhstanis. Elections for everyone, it turns out? Is it not a triumph, or rather, is it not a riot of democracy, which many of our democrats have dreamed of so much? By the way, they, these mossy democrats, I'm sorry, with mold all over the surface of dried brains, of course, criticize both the authorities and the ruling party (we will not, we will not name these parties here, so as not to blame us for election campaigning), but even these reptiles cannot but admit that the elections are taking place! Moreover, everything that the president promised in this part of his program for the transformation of the country is actually happening. Here's an opportunity for you to legally, without rallying and tearing, without illegal pickets and showdowns with the police, to try yourself as a real politician. And they try! As I said, many of them. As for, let's call him my unloved word, the electorate, he is in deep, I think, perplexity: where did they all come from, candidates for people's deputies? And that there are so many of them? And what are they promising right and left, promising and promising? It is clear that no one can fulfill even a thousandth of all these promises, but these are the rules of the game – promise and charm, travel to remote areas, talk to people, delve into their aspirations and needs, fix problems and requirements. And the electorate, as far as we can judge, is somehow getting more and more annoyed and perplexed as the voting day approaches. And this is also probably part of the game called "democratic parliamentary elections". Or is it still not a game?
Daniyar ASHIMBAYEV: In fact, the number of candidates in single-mandate districts, both in the majilis and maslikhats, is surprising. But this is only at first glance. Many simply forgot the situation at the elections in the 90s and noughties. The competition was no less, take at least the elections in 2003 and 2004. But then the situation changed. The Mazhilis was completely transferred to party lists, while party legislation was tightened at the same time. In maslikhats, competition was first reduced by introducing intra-party primaries, and then transferred to party lists. Since the structures of the ruling party were completely raised under akimats, we received absolutely gray and silent maslikhats that reflected the interests of akimats and developers. As a result, there was no one to actualize regional problems, criticize the policies of local governments, and generally represent the interests of the population. The transition to a mixed system allows this situation to be overcome at least a little. I will not fall into excessive optimism about the independence of the new maslikhats and the adequacy of the results of future elections (after all, the level of political culture has fallen significantly), but the country as a whole and the state in particular objectively needs deputies who ask unpleasant questions and demand answers to them. For a long time we proceeded from the concept of a "smart and enlightened state", but, finding ourselves without criticism and competition, it quickly degraded. I would compare our public administration with the digestive system: no matter what beautiful ideas are at the entrance, a characteristic mass is obtained at the exit...
S. K.: Has the level of political culture dropped? It's hard for me to say that once this level was at least satisfactory. But times are changing, whole generations of young people have grown up, who, in my opinion, have some kind of, sorry, mess in their heads. I mean ideas about politics, about how our political system should be formed, what kind of people are required in it, how to organize the interaction of government and society, etc. That is why the outcome of these elections, I'm afraid, will be very unpredictable. But we will see in the near future, when the results of the vote will be summed up. Now, as you correctly noted, the huge number of candidates for deputies is simply unknown to voters. We see rampant parochial populism. No one watches the programs of either parties or self-nominees, everyone is interested in either how election campaigning is carried out (with performances and original tricks), or what the candidate has noted in the past (attacks against the government, scandals, sharp is by no means catastrophic, despite verbal chatter and empty promises, she, dear democracy, is everywhere like this, only with certain features inherent in a particular political culture. We have it, what to do, what it is. By the way, not the most primitive in the world, believe me. But the main thing, in my opinion, is real political life. She became more active, people, as they say, engaged in her, real politics. Sometimes it looks funny, sometimes repulsive, but still…
D. A.: And where to get another electorate? We remember the elections of the 90s and the beginning of the noughties - there was interest, there was more or less high–quality supply and demand in the electoral market. Where did it all go? Few people remember about such a "house of democracy" in Almaty on Vinogradov Street). It is clear that the vast majority of all these characters will not be elected anywhere. As in the joke: I won't catch up, so at least I'll warm up, but someone will get through… All this is, I repeat, Seifullin, where various parties and movements sat on three floors, often existing only in the person of their leader. They were in the media, journalists ran to them, they periodically voiced their position, and people saw that there was someone who expressed their opinion - on ecology, on social protection, on the national issue, etc. Maybe these parties were virtual, but they gave a full palette of public opinion, which the state considered. Then someone retired, someone sat down on grants, and the state became lazier and lazier every year. The number of parties was optimized, the districts were abolished, and ended up with the fact that instead of right and left, conservatives and liberals, only nationalists and internationalists remained in the country, then the question came down to "true" and "shala" or "vatnik" and "nazis". Plus a huge number of those who first lost faith in politicians, and then interest in it.
S. K.: Maybe this is a natural continuation of our political process? Even if some parties, as you said, consisted at best of several people, and positioned themselves in the singular, in the person of their leader. The entire current state of our (even if the word is somewhat vague) electorate has been prepared by this process. Times are changing. In the 90s, there were completely different people - intellectuals who had not yet cooled down from the grand collapse of the USSR, then everything was seen in a completely different way than today. Then everything seemed quite possible – and to make a rapid political career, and to make a decent fortune. We were all naive. But time passed, it didn't work out, they didn't give you a lot of money to earn (unless you integrate into the system or join some criminal clan), the authorities very skillfully used the infantilism of society, playing on this and that, slipping parties, leaders, eliminating certain objectionable characters from the political scene, either discrediting them, or pitting them against competitors and just envious. This is the result: people do not believe that an effective, cohesive and capable political force capable of governing the country can appear as an alternative to the authorities. People listen and watch election videos and give preference to those who they just visually like or like their harsh statements. This is also reflected in the so-called rally activity. She's just no…
D. A.: For a long time, everyone has paid attention to the dwarfism of rallies in Almaty over the past decades, and there are a lot of acute problems, but people have lost the habit of expressing protest and do not believe in the meaning of this very expression. The January events do not count, they were well-organized "protests" from above with a mobilization factor in the face of special services, criminals and religious radicals. The public inquiry today concerns the topic of justice, but it is obvious that the concept of justice is very, very different for everyone. Justice could only be provided by honest courts, but where to get them if the law of force, telephone law and envelope law have dominated society for many years? There is no legal, there is no political culture, but in a wide assortment there is a request for paternalism (read – dependency) and a new reading of the country's history, which simultaneously instills in young people (and not only) a mania for national greatness and an inferiority complex with an imposed postcolonial syndrome. The latter, as you know, causes a need for some kind of revenge, and good advisers immediately slip religious radicalism, militant nationalism and xenophobia as tools. At the same time, people stopped reading (reading even messengers is replaced by audio and video messages). People stopped thinking. So the candidates and their populist programs fully correspond to the social demand. Do not forget that for candidates for members of public councils, certificates from narcology and psychiatric hospitals are still required, but for candidates for deputies – no longer.
