Russian Presidential Election, 2018

[ag]

Question for the Russian posters: who did you vote for?

Yavlinsky. Though i understood fairly well, that everything was much more predetermined, then in 2012, when Prokhorov was rather serious candidate (especially - in capitals)

Just a question: why did you participate in this? What was the purpose?

[ag]

Question for the Russian posters: who did you vote for?

Yavlinsky. Though i understood fairly well, that everything was much more predetermined, then in 2012, when Prokhorov was rather serious candidate (especially - in capitals)

Just a question: why did you participate in this? What was the purpose?

Why not? Mainly to show that despite all propaganda on TV and other mass media, people who think and choose himlelf, and not as herd's part, still exist in Russia. And even in considerable numbers. After all - 77% for Putin, was lower then his support rating from such reasonably objective source as Levada center. Guys, i repeat 1000th time: you can't evaluate a country, where, until 1991, there wasn't even corrupted democracy, by standard "democratic criteria". It takes time. I will not live long enough to see "normal Democracy" in Russia (may be - only the very beginning), but my 16 year old son most likely will... Even if he stays here..

Why participate in a farce? There is no such thing as electoral politics in Russia, period. The only way one can participate in this without looking ridiculous is in a classic dissident manner: "Respect your own Constitution!" By all means, register as a candidate, as an observer, organise and participate in meetings, monitor what is going on, etc. It may be painful and dangerous - if you feel you do not want to do it, do not (I myself am a coward, I would not). But why vote for or otherwise deal with candidates, who explicitly got an approval for their candidacy in the presidential administration? What does this achieve, except create an impression that this profanation of an election is the norm?  How on earth is it bringing a democracy any closer. You are not making it more likely that your son would see actual democracy in Russia by participating in this farce: arguably, you are actually postponing that point, by increasing the regime stability.

As for "until 1991", this is simply ridiculous at this point. 1991 was 27 years ago - I remember, I was there. Dozens of countries have had reasonably successful democratic transitions since. I mean, Spain had not had anything like democracy till 1975 - there was no doubt that it had one long before 2002. Ditto Portugal (with a near-successful communist revolution tossed in to make transition more fun). Mexican democratic transition was barely starting in 1991 - it has had 2 electoral transitions between parties at the national presidential level since. At this point it is becoming like the old canard about the Mongol invasion: yes, it was horrible, but it was 800 years ago. Even Mongolia, BTW, has done a lot better on the democracy count since 1991 - and they are the Mongols. The fact is, Russia is not moving towards a democracy - has not been moving in that direction in some 20 years. Sustenance of fake institutions takes her away from this objective, not towards it.

I am not blaming Russia or Russians in general - that would be ridiculous. But by participating in this farce you are strengthening the regime. "Ah, he only got 72.12345 percent, and if you sum up all our nice guys we had 3.1415! You know what this means?! These are millions of people! May be, next time, if we are very nice, they would allow us another political party and approve a Duma member or two: imagine what speeches they would make on the floor! The people will wake up, when they hear Dunya Petrova explaining everything!" Look, I trust Dunya is a fine person, but all the people will learn if they see her on the floor of the Duma is that she has some good friends in the Kremlin and that, perhaps, if they get friends like this, they might get a Duma sinecure themselves. Conclusion: be good and you will be rewarded. It is not the TV propaganda that is the problem: it is the overall corruption of the public space. Well, you willingly participate in it yourself.

[ag]

Question for the Russian posters: who did you vote for?

Yavlinsky. Though i understood fairly well, that everything was much more predetermined, then in 2012, when Prokhorov was rather serious candidate (especially - in capitals)

Just a question: why did you participate in this? What was the purpose?

Hey, a warm welcome back to the forum for my fellow contrarian Russoanglohispanophone!

Get lost. I am not planning to participate in general discussions in any case.

[ag]

Question for the Russian posters: who did you vote for?

Yavlinsky. Though i understood fairly well, that everything was much more predetermined, then in 2012, when Prokhorov was rather serious candidate (especially - in capitals)

Just a question: why did you participate in this? What was the purpose?

Hey, a warm welcome back to the forum for my fellow contrarian Russoanglohispanophone!

Get lost. I am not planning to participate in general discussions in any case.

oh, alright, fuсk you too then

Good. I like that attitude.

[ag]

Yes, i willingly participate, and WILL participate. As long as there is even slight possibility to show, that "sane people" exist in Russia - i will do it. BTW, most countries you mentioned as "making considerable progress to democracy rather quickly" had relatively long democratic periods at some moments in their history. Unlike Russia, which NEVER had such periods (except 1991-1999, to most extent). I told many times that historically Russian tradition is extremely conservative. The same can be said about main church, which increased it's influence since period of Communist rule,  army (important institute in Russia), and so on. So, again - IT WILL TAKE CONSIDERABLE TIME for democracy even to take more or less solid roots in Russia, as there is almost no basis for it in Russian society. The process will be slow, difficult and with considerble setbacks...

Well, that makes you a collaborator, part and parcel of the regime. Of course, in no way does it demonstrate your sanity: to most people this looks like greater insanity than that of the true putinists (they do not pretend that somehow their objective is a democracy in Russia: so, they, are, at least, coherent) . So you manifestly fail on your self-declared objective. Participation in this takes Russia away from actual democracy, not towards it. I am not arguing against opposition to the regime, for god's sake: it is just that what you are doing is collaboration.

As for relatively long periods of democracy pre-1980s in, say, Spain or Mexico... I know, I know, they do not teach foreign history in Russian schools properly, really, you are not to blame. Russia is a lot less unique than you believe: it is no worse, really, than the rest of the world And, if it is to get a democracy at some point, it will not get it in some unique Russian way.

[ag]

Russia is not 100% authoritarian state like Nazi Germany - voting can occasionally have some effect. Navalny's close run for the Moscow major seat seriously scared the regime, and in some city opposition candidates have actually won - Yaroslavl, Yekaterinburg, as examples. I would probably agree that in this race to abstain is the more politically correct option, but it is not necessarily as bad as you say.

Russia is not a Nazi Germany. Volga flows into the Caspian Sea. Washington is the capital city of the United States. Very profound.

The Moscow mayoral elections did not scare anybody. Navalny was allowed to run by the regime (remember, he needed the "signatures" which the government deliberately gave him) because they knew full well that he has no chance of winning, but they wanted to release some pressure. True enough, at least, he, probably, did not explicitly ask for a permission in the Kremlin - they gave it to him for their own reasons. They were not scared - that is why they let it happen.  He got 27% of the vote - nothing to be scared about.  As for the victories in Yaroslavl and Yekaterinburg - and what happened after the elections? Urlashov of Yaroslavl is in prison, isn't he? And Roizman in Yekaterinburg has been defanged through eviscerating the mayoralty, so that all he is good for is scarying the decent folk ("if not us, it would be Roizman!").

В карты с шуллерами не играют.

[ag]

To be fair, wasn't 80s Mexico more o less comparable to Russia today? I do know that early 20th century Spain was sort of like modern Russia but with even more rigged elections, especially outside the main cities.

He does have a point there. Especially in the comparison with Mexico which happened without any breaks I think.

Yes and no. First of all, there was PAN - a party the like of which does not exist in Russia. These people believed Jesus Christ cared about honest elections. They went out, got beaten up, were laughed at - but they, generally, did not ask for a permission to do it in Los Pinos. They knew that God was on their side, and if there were not to be political rewards in this world, they had no doubt about the rewards in the next one. If there were a force like this in Russia, I would have not been so dismissive. There is nothing like that in Russia - alas, even Russian Jesus himself asks for a permission from the Kremlin.

And, then, when the 1988 election happened and the results had to be faked, there were crowds on the street - actual crowds in the street. Actually, when you have a crowd on the street behind you, there is no harm from negotiating either in Los Pinos or in the Kremlin. Still, BTW, PANistas did not - though the left did. But even the left, by then, was real. The ersatz opposition parties, like PPS, died out pretty much at the same time as the democratic transition started. They played no role in that transition.