Novaya gazeta publishes Mikhail Khodorkovsk’s letter.

Novaya gazeta published the correspondence between Mikhail Khodorkovsky and one of the readers, Natalya Tochilnikova, in its issue of November 20 2006.. The letter dealt with the charges contained in the sentence delivered to the former Yukos head and the situation in modern Russia. The edition, The World in 2020 (it contains futurological articles written by Vladislav Inozemtsev, Alexander Nekless and other analysts) has recently been published. It was edited by Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

In this regard, Tochilnikova wrote to Khodorkovsky again. She was interested in the Yukos head’s opinion on world trends, the outlook for Russia, the influence of information on public institutions (specifically, the role of the world wide web and network communities) and “the saint liberalism” attributed to Khodorkovsky. The response from Chita was received at the end of April. We publish Khodorkovsky’s letter slightly abridged.

Dear Natalya!

Thank you very much for your letter.

<...> I don’t like to make idle judgments. Corrupt bureaucracy exists, but there are also quite decent people. True, there is an ineffective governance system and mediocre officials. But again it’s not always like that and not across the board. You can see people come up with sound decisions and there are some understanding people too. Even if the authorities borrow ideas from the opposition, I do not disapprove of that. More important is the positive outcome for the country and the people. My personal fate is a private matter. It came as a result of personal vengeance. <...>

The collections were the result of my desire not to lose touch with the development of modern thought. I’m very fond of new, slightly off-the-wall ideas. I look for them and, provided I have an opportunity, I advance them. I’m personally very interested, although I am far from agreeing with everything.

I’m a man of compromise, which displeases many respected people (human rights activists, liberals and so on, particularly V. Novodvorskaya). Still, I’m convinced that modern society is destined to be tolerant, to seek common ground, to forgive and to deny monopoly of the truth. We, Russians, represent a non-modern society, an irreconcilable society. We are fond of simple truths that do not exist. There’s always “But” in between. I hope we are capable of change, quick change. Because we live in a very competitive world and modern competition exists precisely in the sphere of culture (if you interpret the word widely). Economy and furthermore politics are derivatives of the competitiveness of culture. I hope that I changed your opinion with respect to “saint liberalism”.

There must be “equal chances” for each child irrespective of the family he or she was born into.

The right to protection by society for each person deprived of the possibility of working.

The right to food, shelter and medical aid for each person (absolutely each one).

Respect for success on the part of each member of society. For the success of an individual and overall respect for “differences” in personality.

That is how I see the basic aims of our development.

Methods may be different, although as a specialist-manager I believe the division of powers, control on the part of civil society institutions, genuine federalism and local self-administration to be the most modern and efficient.

Actually, I have a very pragmatic attitude toward democracy. I think it is a method of governance. At the same time the word “democracy” is different from the original Greek “direct democracy”. From this perspective “national elections” are far less significant than the genuine division of powers and the independence of the mass media.

I am in no way against national elections, but democratic societies value qualifications of voters at a certain stage of development. However, without the division of powers and mass media independence, there is no real control and no response. Therefore, operation of a modern effective system of governance that must satisfy the structure of the modern economy and society is impossible.

It is obvious that the most modern and efficient structures are network ones. Specifically, small and medium-sized businesses, interacting through systems of outsourcing, franchising, associative membership and so forth. The “Vertical” in this case has to either abandon controlling these structures (rejecting regulation of these systems) and solely charge them corruption tax or destroy them by unification or total control on the part of major vertical structures. Both are a tremendous loss of competitiveness for the economy and society as a whole. <...>

I apologise for some fleeting expression of my views on quite a specific matter. I only wanted to make clear the direction of my own thoughts and their difference from traditional ones in liberal circles <...> although, possibly, I have a vague idea of modern “traditional” views.

Thank you very much for sending me your letter.
Sincerely yours,
.

(Novaya gazeta, 10.05.2007)