When a single person decides solely based on his own views who should lead hundreds or thousands of party members, it means that the party and its members do not decide anything at all. Excuse me, but what more is authoritarianism? Why should I believe that a party run in this way will return to power and establish democratic governance in the country? — analyst Irakli Melashvili wrote on social media, responding to the announced renewal process in the “National Movement.”

According to him, “such a party can never be a democratic alternative to anyone.”

“Let no one tell me that those of you who remain in the ‘National Movement’ from now on are in any way concerned about authoritarianism and informal governance in Georgia, that you want democracy, etc. From your side, this would all be pure hypocrisy! When in a multi-thousand-member party it is possible for a person with no official position, a citizen of Ukraine, to watch a program where his supporter says that this party belongs to this man, and this becomes enough for Mikheil Saakashvili to effectively hand over the party to this person, while neither the party chairman nor governing bodies (not to mention the members at all) are even aware of it — this is exactly informal rule!

If Saakashvili says, ‘Nanuka has my full trust and mandate,’ and that is enough for the party ‘leaders’ to line up in television studios and convince the public how brilliant a decision Saakashvili made, then this is nothing other than lack of dignity and blind obedience to a leader. When one person alone decides who should manage hundreds or thousands of party members, that means the party and its members decide nothing at all! Excuse me, but what more is authoritarianism? Why should I believe that a party run like this will return to power and establish democratic governance in the country? Will these people distribute power, decentralize it, strengthen local self-government, and end our country’s 35-year misfortune of Soviet-style governance? Not a chance!

I want to emphasize that for me, the personal issue is completely irrelevant — who Nanuka Zhorzholiani is as a person, what she has done, good or bad, I do not intend to argue about that with anyone.

I am deeply convinced that such a party can never be anyone’s democratic alternative. Impossible! It is exactly the same authoritarian organization with informal rule as ‘Georgian Dream’! In both cases, one person makes decisions. More importantly, in both there are layers of people with a totally obedient, totalitarian mindset, who believe it is right when the leader treats them this way, and are ready to accept any decision with bowed heads, endlessly justify it, and glorify the leader.

I understand that Kobakhidze is the Prime Minister, so holding press conferences to praise someone is extremely shameful and disgraceful, but just think for a moment — what is the mental difference between those who write panegyrics for Kobakhidze and those who do the same for Saakashvili, whether on social networks or on television?

From what I see, on both sides there are plenty of people for whom the only way to be in politics is to speculate in the name of the leader and shout praise for him. That is their only ‘political talent’ and ‘flexibility.’ For me, these people are mentally identical, and it does not matter who supports which leader — they differ only in clothing, hairstyle, or perfume quality. I am convinced that it was precisely these people, by nodding in approval to all of Saakashvili’s decisions and shouting ‘yes, yes’ for years, who led him to prison.

I have said and written this a thousand times, and I want to repeat it now: in Georgian politics, the line between freedom and totalitarian thinking has never run between government and opposition. This line between free and unfree people has always been very broken and often even ran inside parties themselves. Unfortunately, the zone of freedom defined by this line in Georgia is still very small and vulnerable, and it is attacked not only by ruling party leaders but also by opposition leaders and their followers.

Society will always lose as long as it sees danger only on one side and closes its eyes on the other, because it has been taught to do so, and is scolded for criticizing the opposition, as if it “serves Ivanishvili’s interests.” In reality, it is the opposite. If the opposition remains as it is, it will never become a better alternative in the eyes of the public, and this will always benefit ‘Georgian Dream.’ It is bad if we still do not understand this.

P.S. Personally, at no stage of our country’s development have I ever considered the ‘National Movement’ part of a free space. I have had many arguments and conflicts over this, but as time passes, unfortunately, I am even more convinced of the correctness of this position,” Melashvili wrote on social media.