Some of the discussion on modernization has started to create discomfort in the minds of ordinary folks. And for a good reason. Every time the theme of modernization is heavily cloaked in the vocabulary of ideology, one has to become cautious. What on earth is all the talk of political parties, their access to media and the definitions of democracy till kingdom come, and prescious little talk about economic expansion and modernization. This makes me wonder if the whole effort is about scooping the gullable middle class into believing that this rather naked discussion of power and how to get it -- is somehow related to their future, albeit vague, bliss? Wait a darn minute. Stop the tralala. What EXACTLY are your plans for economic expansion, innovation, modernization? What exactly are you planning to do about chaning the standard of living? It seems nobody exactly cares about it. Well, gentlemen, hold your horses. There will be no modernization in Russia nor progress, if the society at large does not participate. And society will only participate when you expand the economic pie and invest into infrastructure for HUMAN HABITAT, not infrastructure that gives contractors billions, with some vague promises of future economic growth. So, instead of blahblah-ing about the parties, how about making sure that each and every one of them stop ideologizing and propose a clear plan for economic development that will move the country forward? There is a whole lots more that a country like Russia could do, not just cut some taxes and hope for the best. All the talking heads just do not see much beyond their own agendas for their political prosperity and chiselling a bit larger power pie for themselves, hoping to get the economic development funds flow into "deserving" hands of their supporters. President Medvedev's paper of last September was BRILLIANT, but those who are hoping to ride on its coattails are unfortunately without any ideas.

Bianca, excellent comments. You've encapsulated both a desire by ordinary russians to see an improvement for all, and the pragmatism to cut through the noise to the clarity of what's actually to be done. There are still dinosaurs in the russian system that need to be retired, and younger faces step up for the next stage in Russia's growth. I admire much of what Dmitri Medvedev has outlined, but i think he's wrong in alluding to a parliamentary democracy being not suited to Russia. On the contrary, a government built on proportional representation represents a much wider range of view expressed as a society. Too much power in the hands of a few has only one eventual outcome as Russia's own history shows, and the modern history and present circumstances of many other countries too. (See the unnatural symbiotic relationship between the US government, their bankers, their military-corporate complex, and the army of self-interested lobby groups for clear evidence of this) Russia's much smarter than this, and over decades has, often in the face of overwhelming pressure from without and within, made some extraordinary contributions to mankind's evolution. It's the turn of the young to have their chance, and they can only do so if given the freedom and opportunity to do so, free of the corruption in most of the upper echelons of society, including the mayors of most of the major cities (especially Moscow). That's as bad as unfettered capitalism, and just as destructive, when the ordinary folk see the contempt with which powerful people fill their own pockets with the taxes of the many, and leave the rest of the people to struggle just to keep up, instead of helping and encouraging brilliant young cultural and scientific minds to fly for the good of the country as a whole, supporting them financially if necessary. When the citizens see those who corrupt from the top sacked, and held to account, then the ordinary people will have even better reasons to be more optimistic.

Alex, fully on board with your ideas on shaking things up. But I have by far less faith in the political institutions today. Parliamentary democracy has not made Italy prosperous or wiser. Nor many other countries. To the contrary, it has created a corrupt system of cronies. Just like the two-party system in US and (for all intents and purposes) in England is deathly afraid of other parties (the dreaded "hung parliament"), the same ones are heartily endorsing such hung Parliaments, and, as is the case in the ever-so-unstable Kyrgizstan. Ouch, so much for the democracy! You get all the young people into the dysfunctional system, and they will be as corrupt as their elders. What is needed is PROFESSIONALIZING the process. No election of people who do not have any expertese, other then political gift of the gab. Elected people should be REQUIRED to actually WORK. The work should consist of HIRING and SUPERVISING regional, city or other county MANAGING BOARDS, so that only people with real experience with managing are hired. Such Boards shold then HIRE City, Region or County EXECUTIVE based on fixed term, contract, and expected performance. Expiration of contract should not include automatic extension, and no legal challenges should be allowed. Only when, for example, City Boards consist of professionals, and those hire a city manager to run a city, can one expect that projects are finished, budgets followed, audits performed, and HR practices followed down to the lowest paid position. In addition, civil service needs to be restored in Russia, with clear division of responsibilities between customer service and program experts. Solid, proud, and secure civil service is the best antidote against corruption. Today, anybody can talk about "democracy", sound ah so smart, and hope to get the levers of power. Even the smallest lever! Enough talk, let's see their plans for the economy!

@Bianca I think they refer to modernization both of political and economic nature, hence talk about political parties. Also, political parties' participation in modernization process is desirable, as usually, they are the most socially active elements in society, therefore, they potentially may awaken and lead others. Russians by nature prefer stability. If everything is well, they don't rock the boat. They like current leadership, the country is largely peaceful, better off economically - everyone's happy, why modernize? Medvedev is trying to rally an active minority, those who ARE willing to rock the boat, despite stability, but in cooperation with others to build a new, modern Russia on solid foundation of past achievements. Understanding history is crucial: two successful modernizations in Russia were by Peter the Great (1700s) and after the October Revolution (1920s -1960s). They succeeded at a great human cost and were performed in a top down, authoritarian way. Medvedev's goal is to break tradition by rallying those in society who will work proactively and democratically on this wave of modernization. But because of Russian tradition and national character I strongly believe State must co-invest in projects and must lead whenever necessary, until mentality change takes place. It's wishful thinking to hope a "Cilicon Valley style" spontaneous modernization can take place from neighborhood garages. Russian streghts are traditionally in heavy industry, cosmos exploration, science, art, natural resouces. These require goverment involvement and heavy investment. Trying to copy the western way won't work. Regulation and tax system change is also key. The article is right: reward innovators through regulation and taxes and discourage those who want to skim the money and run, those without vision.

@Larisa, Idealistically speaking, I agree with you. One cannot afford to be an idealist in the time we live in. And there is just a bit too much talk of politicking in all the talk of modernization, to perk one's ears. However, this article is dominated by the political aspirations of Boris Makarenko, chairman of the Center for Political Technology. He wrongly states that forming the modernization coalition was the most important aspect of President's article. I have read it. He is also insinuating that "somebody" is afraid of it. Counting on the unhappiness of the middle class, he is hitting below the belt. By simply riding on the coattails of President's speech, he is trying to peddle political agenda. He is mocking the "ruling classes", as if he or the President himself are not part of the "ruling classes". This is a cheap trick --- portraying himself as an outsider and the defender of middle classes. Why does not the Center for Political Technology PUBLISH all the proposals for the economic development and modernization that have been received by the President's office or the Government from corporations, organizations or individuals? Have they been read at all? Anybody being afforded to make a presentation of their projects, including what form of Government support they are looking for? So far, I have not seen any real debate on RT on modernization projects and their relative merits. I do not believe that nobody took an interest in one full year. But then, if this debate is not open, how can Makarenko claim that the "ruling classes" are afraid of modernization? His credibility is pretty much shot by asking for such “modest measures” as equal access to media for all political parties! Modest indeed. If he can point to any country in the West where such "modest" practice exists, we should be very gratefull to him.