Dmitry Mikhailichenko, political analyst
In the ancient Eastern historical chronicles, most often the last ruler was presented as the weakest, through whose fault the collapse of the empire or state occurred. However, the dialectics of historical development is much more complicated, and empires and states do not fall apart overnight, this is the result of long-term processes. Accordingly, appointing a "scapegoat" is simple, only in reality it is very far from the truth.
In the public mind, without due reflection, Gorbachev is seen as a weak ruler who ruined the Soviet Union. This point of view, given Gorbachev's real managerial and political miscalculations, is correct, but by no means in everything.
Perestroika as a socio-political phenomenon was launched in the mid-1980s. in accordance with public demand. This is not a very successful attempt to make society more free and oriented towards a market economy, rather than planning and ideological dictates. At the same time, Gorbachev very quickly lost control over this process, and his team was unable to predict its consequences.
It is not surprising that Gorbachev is a negative example for the ruling nomenklatura, and the ruling class successfully imposed this optics on the entire society. The negativity of Gorbachev's example is largely based on the fact that it is not necessary to follow the path of satisfying the interests of society, but these interests must be formed, including harshly, with the help of propaganda and forceful methods.
At the same time, the trajectory of retaining power at any cost is hardly popular in society and is assessed by it as correct. Gorbachev did not prove to be a successful politician, but his retirement from politics ensured his personal longevity. In this regard, many of the current nomenklatura can only envy him.
And one more perspective: the current propaganda, contrary to the established traditions in society that one should not speak badly about the dead, has already begun to talk about Gorbachev's weaknesses and cunning. And Western politicians, on the contrary, speak about him mostly in complementary terms.