The channel of the Ural Liberation Movement, like the movement itself, in a couple of months will celebrate a year since its inception. If earlier, at the initial stages of the existence of the community, we declared ourselves only as supporters of an independent Ural state, now, in the presence of several independent separatist movements, we recognize the need to clearly define our political views and ideological basis. The concept of an independent Urals is shared with us by the supporters of the Free Motherland movement, who are our platform allies and represent left-anarchist views. In addition to them, the idea of separatism is supported by the movement of the Orenburg Cossack Army, speaking from the right position against the united Moscow state.
UOD adheres to liberal democratic views and shares the ideas of a socially oriented state, however, it is worth noting that we have serious disagreements with supporters of the Moscow liberal opposition on a number of key issues.
We are categorically not satisfied that the Russian liberals refuse to recognize the rights of peoples to self-determination, which their leaders have systematically and repeatedly stated throughout the time that has passed since February 24 last year. A position striking in its inconsistency, which, being, like, a product of the thought of liberals, nevertheless, completely ignores the central idea of liberalism about the freedom of the individual. How is personal self-determination combined with a ban on self-determination of groups, peoples and ethnic groups, which, one way or another, represent the sum of the identities of each of its representatives? By making a statement against the collapse of Russia, the liberals are not so much against the supporters of decolonization, but against the principles of the idea under the flags of which they themselves act, swearing allegiance to the vicious Russian statehood, which for centuries was built on the suppression of man, individuality and identity.
It is really impossible for Russia to instill a democratic system, because, like any colonial empire, it is not able to ensure the observance of personal rights and freedoms, while maintaining vast territorial gains. However, it is precisely the integrity of this state that is the main obstacle to the establishment of the order of a civilized society here. There were periods of freedom in Russia and they were accompanied by various kinds of socio-political and economic cataclysms, but not because of harmful liberal ideas, but because of the aggravation of internal contradictions, which in ordinary periods were crushed under the weight of a despotic state machine and came to the surface in natural conditions. conditions.
We do not demand from the Moscow liberals to start dismantling the Russian state with their own hands. The desire to preserve a single country cannot be considered criminal as long as it does not violate the rights of peoples and ethnic groups to self-determination and its realization. We are convinced that the most important task of the future free government of Russia should be to enshrine in the fundamental law the right of regions to secede from the country on the basis of the will of the inhabitants of the regions, and we, in turn, will achieve the full implementation of this right. This is the best-case scenario. Peaceful, legal and in our interests, however, we must admit that it is unlikely that a change of power in Russia will occur without its simultaneous collapse.
At the same time, the Russian opposition itself is pushing future independent states towards radical political views, preventing the spread and popularization of liberal ideas of a regional orientation because of its intractability and its own unwillingness to recognize the rights of peoples to self-determination.
But now we can rightfully declare that the UOD is the first movement in Russia that proclaims the principles of liberal separatism as its central idea.
We See What Others Cannot
