Thread by @FPRI_Orbis

Reading through the comments on @radiofreetom's tweet, with a number of very good questions raised, thought, since I did not see a longer thread, to give my take. 1/

https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1522327669974749187

In 1990, in order to contest the Russian elections, a variety of liberal and anti-communist forces coalesced around the "Democratic Russia" movement. Candidates running under this banner swept most of the competitive seats for the Russian Congress of People's Deputies. 2/

"Democratic Russia" (DR) was the main base of political support for Boris Yeltsin in his fight with Gorbachev and the Soviet system. It was a national, grass-roots movement. Its broad-based agenda was to create a democratic system & to create conditions for a market economy. 3/

DR did great in opposition, but after 1991, when it ended up as the de facto governing coalition of post-Soviet Russia, its factional weaknesses were exposed. 4/

DR had brought together in common cause all sorts of small, local parties and movements, as well as all the leading intellectuals and ex-Communists after the great resignation of summer 1990. But many of these groups held maximalist agendas. 5/

DR's leadership council was also unwieldly, because every "party leader" claimed a right to be part of leadership. Efforts to consolidate DR into a more streamlined party failed. Smaller parties began to leave DR after 1992. 6/

There were some genuine ideological splits--market fundamentalists vs. those who wanted to preserve some state role in the economy; small-c conservative groups versus socially liberal, etc. 7/

But even small parties that held largely the same views on policy refused to consolidate because many political leaders preferred to be the chair of a small party than the vice-chair of a big one. 8/

Ideally, DR should have given way to a consolidated center-right and center-left party. Instead, as DR collapsed, there was a proliferation of what were called "sofa"parties--e.g. the party membership could comfortably sit on one sofa. 9/

DR collapsed as a political force after 1993, even though two years earlier it had been the majority political movement. Over the next ten years, most of the small parties and movements that had been part of DR also disappeared. 10/

All of these small parties had detailed manifestos and demands & would drop coalition partners at the drop of a hat if any part of their detailed plan was ignored. There was a greater emphasis on retaining purity of program than actually being able to win elections. 11/

After 1993, Yeltsin abandoned his faith in DR's politicians, who were at the bottom of the list in his "Russia's Choice" coalition, in favor of trying to create a "party of power" that would band together regional elites. 12/

DR also failed at the national and regional levels in the #doorstep test--being able to deliver on constituent services. Activists & intellectuals who were elected in 1990-91 gave way to ex-communists and managers. 13/

Moscow a great example. Academic Gavril Popov, elected on popular wave in 1991, resigns in 1992, replaced by a city manager & former head of the city building trust. To simplify it, Popov gave stirring speeches, Luzhkov built things. 14/

Luzhkov ultimately absorbed into Putin's team as one of the co-founders of the United Russia Party. Popov todays heads the International University in Moscow. 15/

Addendum: similar lessons from Venezuela …

https://twitter.com/nywonk347/status/1522372880570454017

And @RadioFreeTom has distilled lessons in a single tweet …

https://twitter.com/radiofreetom/status/1522364918992887808