In 21 century Georgia there is a ruling "National Movement" which has many chieftains. They are heading own local communes and are moving from one governmental body to another with own "team". Each of them has a suite of 20-30 people following after chieftain to different departments and ministries. They as well can do local reshuffles of employees. Eventually in a year in a separate governmental body 100-200 employers may be replaced. Such attitude to the administration certainly excludes any ties with professionalism. When "National Movement' was coming to the power, its main plus was an orientation to the professionalism. This naturally denoted defeat of corruption, provincialism and clan ruling mentality, criminal authority mentality. They were declaring that they represented united team, and for a mistake of one of them would be answerable all. Everything happens quite differently. Some conclusions about the ruling of Nationals we can make now: no productivity, problems in management, unqualified personal. Namely the above mentioned problems are source of frequent replacement of cadres, reshuffles, rotations, experiments in all levels from ministers to ordinary employers. Nationals appeared not ready for ruling to change the reality. Even more, opposition representatives aren't ready. However classic opposition party as well classic ruling party does not exist in Georgia. Both sides have the only aim - to get a job in the circumstances of total unemployment. Some of them are in executive some in administrative bodies. Only new political faces and new political unions could help to come out from the dark reality. Annoyed political faces knew this well, and they are trying to make a barrier of novelty to avoid a danger of competitiveness and rivalry. The society can neutralize unhealthy political desires of some politicians if it will strive for the truth and willingness for freedom. When they will protest against insult from fake elections and those people who sold own personalities for popularity and business interest, but at the same time are blaming poor for exchanging own vote for bread and medicines.