In recent times we could have been observing a big informational fuss around the person of Russian liberal politician Alexei Navalny and those parody on a social protest, that had been taken place all-over Russia. On this matter we offer you an article by modern Ukrainian traditionalist phiosopher Igor Zagrebelny, in which he  redefines the questions of Russian liberalism, reminding the historical heritage of Boris Yeltsin.

In early May, the European Museum Forum announced winners of the "Best Museum of Europe" contest. One of them was the Russian Yeltsin Center, under whose auspices in Yekaterinburg, the museum of the first president of the Russian Federation has been running. 

The Yeltsin Center to some extent can be considered a metapolitical project of the liberal and pro-Western environment of Russia. The very architecture of the newly built Yekaterinburg Museum, its aesthetics, gives the impression that this institution is aimed at cultivating the culture of agents of liberal changes.

The fact that the competition's decision was politically interlinked remains questionable. The jury noted the Yeltsin Museum for design features, as well as for "holding and encouraging public debate on the issues of freedom speech and the preservation of democratic freedoms in Russia." However, however, the symbolism of the event very aptly reveals possible scenarios for the development of Russia within the perspective of what we are used to call the globalist West. And these scenarios will inevitably affect Ukraine as well.

After all, Yeltsin's epoch was marked with significant 'westernization' of Russia, liberal transformation within the country, as well as partial loss of sovereignty in favor of the West. However, all this did not prevent the then Kremlin to move the country consistently through the path of imperial revenge. It is under Yeltsin's rule that Russia launched military invasion to Ichkeria (Chechnya) and Georgia, as well as provoked an armed conflict in Moldova. In that time Ukraine had remained firmly clamped in the sphere of the Kremlin's influence.

The situation would turned to be similar if liberals are replaced current Putin's regime. Russian society would become an object of implementing a cultural anniversary of radical liberalism - Putin's current policy of caricatural and staging conservatism creates a very favorable ground for this - and Russia would have to give way to a part of own economic and political subjectivity. Such kind of Neo-Yeltsinist Russia would fully satisfy Brussels, being profitable as a pole of stability in significant areas of Eurasia. Globalists are interested in dealing with an influential, but controlled Russia, capable of maintaining a favorable status quo. 

If the "neo-Yeltsinist" scenario is implemented, Ukraine, in the face of helplessness of its current leadership, will again have to return to the sphere of Russian interests. It goes without saing that the current drift towards the West will secure the country from this. Even now, it is now advantageous for Germany and France to deal with Russia as a strategic partner. When the Russian political pendulum is move again towards the side of modern Yeltsin, Sobtshack and Chubais, the complementarity of Moscow will increase tenfold.

The hypothetical new Russia, which people are visits institutions like the Yeltsin Museum or even take the streets with "anti-corruption" protest against "Dimon," is no less dangerous for Kyiv and the region than the current one - Putinist. In the end, the division between them is conditional. It is likely that the transition from totalitarian Putinist to neo-liberal 'Yeltsinist' state form will held as systematically as the transition from Yeltsinist to Putinist does. What's more importnat - Ukrainian vision for Russia should radically differ from the vision of globalist forces.