Open letter to:
Открытое письмо:
Vladimir Putin, President of Russian Federation
Vladimir Churov, Chairman of Central Election Commission of Russian Federation
Sergei Lavrov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Russian Federation
Gentlemen, I have no doubt that you are well aware that the free expression of the will of free citizens via free democratic elections can never result in 99.4% of the votes being cast for one party with a turnout of 99.5% of the voters.
Now obviously that is only impossible where there is open, transparent political competition between electoral candidates, with equal opportunities for public campaigning, where there is no administrative pressure on individuals and where one finds impeccable honesty and scrupulous accuracy from the election commissions.
Yet all these are surely the crucial conditions for democratic electoral procedure?
No need to prove to you that these very 99.4% votes “for” provide incontrovertible evidence of vote-rigging. You know that as well as I do, and as well as any remotely literate citizen with at least commonsense, not to mention a basic awareness of the nature and possibilities of the popular vote. You of course also know that such results far above 90% (i.e. the same fraud) did not happen in isolated polling stations, no, in several subjects of the Russian, if one may use the term, “Federation”. This unfortunate circumstance is more than sufficient to correctly assess the tasteless farce being played out by untalented directors on the entire boundless Russian stage on 2 December, and for good measure in the coming event on 2 March.
It is entirely redundant to tediously collect up the electoral commission protocols rewritten in retrospect, or evidence of shenanigans with ballot papers etc – it’s all clear enough anyway. The authorities (who by the way you represent, Gentlemen), mangled electoral legislation and then wantonly, with no finesse, came up with some kind of imitation of elections. In doing so they sneered at the Constitution and armed themselves with administrative resources. The simulation was not for us but for the West you so dislike.
I am not in the slightest claiming that “United Russia” would not have got into the State Duma without the rigging. For goodness sake, obviously they would have been in first place anyway. That’s quite another, also painful problem for the country.
However on another subject now. Through your deliberate efforts, Gentlemen, in a country where the democracy was only budding forth, we once again have no elections – the main criterion for a democracy. And for a long time. Not even Stalin could have dreamed of the Chechen record. In his “elections”, that sort of percentage was gained by a single candidate with no alternative. While in the present case this pathetic 0.1% was supposedly shared by virtually 10 parties.
It’s not by hearsay that we know what’s happening to a country which receives a sycophantic puppet parliament, a decorative Constitution, a justice system working to order and an uncontrolled leadership reappointing itself (like the profoundly expressive word “successor” which has sullied our political lexicon for a good 10 years). Details are hardly appropriate. It would seem that that does not frighten you and you have decided to try it yet another. Or maybe you simply don’t know anything else.
Well, the choice – conscious and well-thought-out – has undoubtedly been made –, and long ago, and I am quite well aware that I can’t stop it.
I do have a question, however: will you be able to stop if at some stage you don’t wish to follow things through to the all too familiar end?
It’s clear that the lies exuding from all your lackey screens, are powerless to hide the electoral shame. Yet despite that, you are forced to lie shamelessly and hopelessly, with arrogance and anger jumping down on any doubts (like “… let them teach their wives …”). You don’t have another choice, I mean you can’t say: “Well, we took over here, slightly corrected the results, and there they went overboard. Well don’t be too critical, it’s all though their enthusiasm and uncontrollable functionary zeal.
And in your step there are the adepts hurriedly bustling to get themselves onto the patriot register. Earlier our leaders quite often had to lie tediously and brazenly for decades, denying the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, or the Katyn Massacre of Polish prisoners of war, or the arrest of Wallenberg. In a word, what was obvious to all around them and now it’s you. History is unfortunately repeating itself.
The lie which you so decisively have again established in government use and which you are incapable of rejecting has an important and extremely dangerous quality – I would say a particularly corrupting force. The point is that the majority of your listeners don’t believe you, and that includes your convinced supporters. That is, they are of course pleased with “United Russia’s” victory, but they understand very well whatever you say how the mould for such a victory was set.
We have a paradoxical change – you lie, your listeners know this and you know that they don’t believe you, only pretend to believe, and yet they also know that you know they don’t believe you. Everybody knows everything. The very lie no longer aspires to deceive anyone, from being a means of fooling people it has for some reason turned into an everyday way of life, a customary and obligatory rule for living. You have a Mr Markov, supposedly a professor, supposedly a political expert, and in fact a hardened and dense cynic. Speaking with him about our “politics”, a journalist said: “lies have short legs”. “Human memory is even shorter”, was Markov’s response. Horrible, yet it would seem that this is in fact the case. Of course they’ll forget a lot about the two grubby spectacles in succession in a couple of months after 2 March. However they’ll never forget something else – that the top figures of the state lie through their teeth. And how could they forget when lying is your natural element?
This memory is catastrophic and its results irreparable because the customary lies of leaders always generate and cultivate cynicism in society and cannot achieve anything else. Whatever your people now say about freedom being better than lack of freedom, about the right to self-expression and so forth, these pompous speeches are fixedly (and fairly, by the way) perceived as a continuation of your untruth. They’re mere words. There is exactly the same attitude to the bombastic ambitiousness of your utterances about the guaranteed phenomenal and swiftest successes in all conceivable areas, matters and issues.
It would seem, however strange this may be, that for us, coming from the Stalin era, those in power also need public support. So you want to rely on cynicism? Yet cynicism is cowardice, the flight from burning problems and hard-hitting discussion. It is the lowest pragmatism, petty timeserving teetering on the verge of baseness, or having toppled over that edge. It is intrigue, preferred to competition, and a rejection of moral taboos.
Can any serious political force really base itself on such social tendencies? Well, yes, cynicism does not scorn obsequious enthusiasm. We all remember well enough the paid mobs of your “nashy”, 150 per body. So what do you expect – they’re your prop in the flamboyantly announced “innovations” and other achievements? Enough, after all you, Mr President, openly shared with us your devastating assessments of your main people – the party of power “United Russia”. What other “innovations”?
What then, do you expect with pitiful charms about “four and “to turn a mob into a creative force? Now that is foolish! From dishonesty, Gentlemen, nothing grows barring new dishonesty. On that road you have already achieved your real main goal. Publicly you name it ponderously as stability, whereas in fact its total power. Simply speaking, modernizing and improving (cynically, yet reasonably subtly one must say) Soviet ideology and political practice, you have built a political construction in Russia within which it’s impossible to win the elections.
Not even squeeze them in any way in parliament. Not even exert any noticeable political pressure. This is a blind alley that can no way lead to democracy. And gradually going back by the same path we came on is almost impossible since you are doomed to lie. As I said before, you can’t renounce the lies once spoken, or your whole system will come tumbling down.
What you are to do in this situation is of no interest to me. Most probably you’ll continue your course, perhaps on the way filling your pockets (those in the know say that you’ve long being doing this – I don’t know, I’m not an expert in this area). What the country is to do, having ended up under you, now that is the question. It is immoral and very dangerous to put up with you indefinitely. Since your present shameless “elections” are absolutely useless, we therefore need an entirely different instrument in other hands.
We don’t need “political experts” and “political technology specialists”, not economists and not politicians in the traditional sense of the word. We need intelligent, daring and extremely well-meaning leaders who instead of loud opposition noises, can create a decisive, calm, persistent and unwavering protest and not allow it to slip out from the tradition of the great peaceful Eastern European victories over despotism, to not allow bloodshed and the brown-shirt plague. This is incredibly difficult. It is much harder in Russia than it was in Poland or Czechoslovakia, harder even than in Ukraine.
Yet who promised that our life would be easy? I believe that these people will at some stage come. I see no other possibility for overcoming our shameful moral crisis.
However it’s not with you that these problems need to be discussed.
With the most sincere and unwavering lack of respect,
Sergei Kovalev
Sent!
Received! Will read this evening.
Does his Socialist Workers Party or whatever it was still exist?
Back to the piece at hand. I will now explicate the tendentiousness lying at its base. Kovalev is talking about the election results in Chechnya, though you have to read several paragraphs before he actually mentions the place.
Now, the Kremlin does not control Chechnya. Chechnya is controlled by the Kadyrov people, who are a bunch of frighteningly effective badasses who do whatever they perceive as being in their interests and/or the interests of Chechnya. The Kremlin does not give orders to Grozny; indeed it is the latter that is wearing the spiked heels in the relationship, as the Kremin knows full that the kadyrvosty can prance off back into the mountains, guns in hand, any time they want. The directive to issue these results was in all likelihood either issued by Kadyrov. Why?
1. Kadyrov does not appear to be a very sophisticated guy, and may not have realized how silly the elction results would look. He likes the status quo. He also knows many people in the Russian military hate him. Thus, he wants to demonstrate to the incoming president that he wants to continue things as they now stand and is the indispensable guy without which the republic will spin out of control (which is likely true).
2. Kadyrov KNEW how silly the results would look and issued them anyway in order to embarrass the Kremlin, and remind them that he wants to continue things as they now stand and is the indispensable guy without which the republic will spin out of control (which is likely true).
In either case, for the Kremlin to say, “hey! these results are impossible! do a recount, guys!” would be a slap in the face of Kadyrov, and slapping Kadyrov is not a smart thing to do.
Howver, none of this seems to occur to Kovelev. Either that, or it has occurred to him and he understands that it complicates his case, which is why he only uses the C-word once so as not to draw attention to it.
“Does his Socialist Workers Party or whatever it was still exist?”
I don’t know. I translated it as Socialist Party of Laborers so as to avoid it being confused with the British and US Socialist Workers’ Parties.
I noticed the number of Marxists being translated too. Particularly, Althusser, who’s For Marx came out when I was there. There is a lot of pomo stuff. Lots of Foucault, Derrida, and Deleuze. There is a great little books store upstairs at INION (profsoiznaya metro) that has all this stuff.
Agreed on Chechnya. In fact I think most of vote manipulation is locally inspired. I don’t think we should ever underestimate the chinovnik’s ability to suck up to the top. This is the argument I make in my next eXile article on the closing of European University (it should be out sometime soon).
Kremlin critics who put to much emphasis on an all controlling center just don’t understand how Russia works. I guess it’s easier to blame an all seeing eye, no matter how blind it may be, rather than trying to understand how a complicated system works.
The SWP still exists in the US. However sad that may sound. Though they are the most tolerable of the many loony Trotskyist sects.
Oh, Joy! Just what Russia needs, another deluge of Marxian gobbledygook.
Sean, when is enough truly enough? How many decades of stunted political development, how many millions of wasted human lives does it take to shame a Marxist?
Agreed on Chechnya. In fact I think most of vote manipulation is locally inspired.
So when some local functionary, whose job depends on the kremlin, inflates the numbers to keep his job, that’s just him being him, and nothing to do with the kremlin?
Get serious. Have you any idea how much pressure was being placed on these poor sods to make their numbers?
The elections were a sham, from start to finish. Vetted parties, approved lists, mobilized employees, mandated TV times — all of it. Why bother arguing about it?
The question is why. The kremlin feels Russians aren’t ready for the real deal. Do you agree with that view or not?
“Get serious. Have you any idea how much pressure was being placed on these poor sods to make their numbers?”
I don’t know about elsewhere, but I doubt any pressure was placed on Kadyrov. His job as warlord is safe whether he is pro- or anti-Kremlin.
Get serious. Have you any idea how much pressure was being placed on these poor sods to make their numbers?
I’m very serious. And yes the election was a sham, but I don’t think we should think that chinovniki didn’t work on their own magic in making it look like more of a sham than necessary. Oh I don’t doubt there was pressure. I only question whether the center completely directed how local officials respond to that pressure.
I read about this all the time in documents from Soviet archives. Local officials read the tea leaves and decipher what the center wants and they act accordingly, usually in excess to what the center wants. (I think collectivization is a perfect, though extreme example.) Sometimes they compete with other local officials just so they can show they are better clients than the others. I’m assuming that not much has changed.
Sometimes the center does send out a directive or at least create an atmosphere of one. I do think that the Kremlin created an atmosphere of pressure beginning with the Duma elections. There might have even been directives (which we don’t know since we don’t have the documents.)
But let’s just say there was a directive telling local bureaucrats to bring the vote for Putin etc. If said directive is anything like Soviet ones, they mostly lack specific instructions on how to carry it out or to what extent to fulfill it. We saw this again and again in Soviet campaigns.
But just because locals have initiative autonomous from or in excess of the center doesn’t implicate the Kremlin any less. On the contrary, I’m sure the Kremlin likes this very much. It shows that there are local officials that are very much invested in the system or at least willing to go the extra mile to show their obedience. You just give them the ball and they run with it.
So instead of having all the power concentrated in the Kremlin’s hands directing every move like Russia some kind of chessboard, we have a much more insidious system. For example, you can see local officials doing things all the time to protect their asses. Look how many local journalists get hassled, beaten and killed. Look at how many local activists get the same shit. By my guess, the real authoritarianism takes place in the provinces and not in the nice cosmopolitan center. (By the way, Golos Samara just won a case today in the Russian Supreme Court against local officials who made their life living hell. By god the law does work. Well, sometimes.)
By the way, I love how people (not you fh, mostly idiot American and British journalists) describe the Russian government as incapable of ruling while at the same time saying that everyone bows to Putin’s every whim. Not even Stalin could get his regional secretaries to do his bidding and stop running their obkoms like little fiefdoms. And he was like the granddaddy totalitarian of them all. This is one reason, among many, why he had them all shot.
I don’t know, maybe I’ve read too many Soviet archival documents and I’m projecting too much on the present. Maybe after all these years of Russian leaders talking like they have complete control, it has finally become a reality. Boy wouldn’t that be somethin’.
By the way, I love how people (not you fh, mostly idiot American and British journalists) describe the Russian government as incapable of ruling while at the same time saying that everyone bows to Putin’s every whim.
Far from being idiotic, it sounds as though the British and American journalists have simply opened their eyes. It is perfectly possible, common even, for a leader to issue orders which everyone follows enthusiastically, yet remain incapable of ruling the country.
There is little doubt that Putin’s decisions are implemented without too much question by those tasked with doing so, but Putin cannot personally make every decision required by the Russian government. Given that he has no decent system of government beneath him to make these decisions, the decisions either don’t get made at all or are made arbitrarily by thousands of individuals or government departments. The result, stemming from the lack of decision making capability beneath Putin himself, is that Putin stuggles to rule the country. Yet those decisions he makes personally are followed without question.
This is probably the first time in a long time we agree Tim.
But I just wonder about this:
Yet those decisions he makes personally are followed without question.
Or followed as local officials see fit. Plus there is old true practice of Potemkinism. I sometimes wonder about how Putin is said to have reestablished “vertical power”. Yeah he is said to have rebuilt the structure, but what about the content? Who are these people running provinces and provincial cities? Abramovich, for example, is like an absentee landowner. Granted it is Chukota, but someone is running things there.
Tim, who’s the political boss in Sakhalin?
Or followed as local officials see fit.
I would definitely say that they follow them enthusiastically, but usually incompetently. As you say, most of the instructions coming from Moscow to the provinces are hopelessly unclear and contradictory.
Tim, who’s the political boss in Sakhalin?
For a long time it was the Regional Governor, Ivan Malakhov, but he was never a Kremlin favourite and got removed from his post because he failed to prevent the Nevel’sk earthquake. Or something. In reality, it appears that he was put in power by Rosneft head-honchos, but fell out of favour with them for forging ties with foreign oil companies instead of working solely in Rosneft’s interests.
The new chief is his replacement, formerly mayor of Okha, Alexander Khoroshavin, who is a Rosneft man through and through. Sakhalin actually gets more attention than most provinces because of the strategic location and the oil and gas reserves. But the local administration is shambolic at best, not least because it is trying to implement ever-changing directions from Moscow, or ignoring them as they see fit.
Maybe after all these years of Russian leaders talking like they have complete control, it has finally become a reality.
Hmm, you’re right. It’s something I haven’t actually thought about much lately, in large part because (I think) both Putin and his critics have a stake in the image of complete control.
For me, the leitmotif of 1990s Russia was chaos and incompetence. Nothing worked. For many Russians, to be regarded that way in the eye’s of the world was way more humiliating than loss of empire or geopolitical power.
Then along comes Putin to get the trains running on time (as someone here said recently), and the image changes. Ordinary Russians cheer, and the critics charge “fascist!”.
But what’s behind the image? Tim – you say the administration where you are is shambolic. Is that still true elsewhere?
“Is that still true elsewhere?”
When I was 11 years old I was given some private tuition by the head teacher of a local state primary school (obviousy not enough). She told me that circulars from the Minister of Education regularly arrived on her desk telling her the latest policy she should adopt. She then put them in her desk drawer and forgot about them because, she said, before too long, another one came along contradicting it and going back to square one. She was a very good teacher and neither she not I were Russian. Nor is New Orleans. Bureaucratic chaos is international. Some administrations appear more organised than others and sometimes they are more organised but not often.
I actually think that the fixation of (some) rights groups, activists etc. with how everything is the Kremlin’s fault and their deathly fear of authoritarianism has the tragically ironic consequence of their attempting to weaken the only power center that is in principle at all capable of regional abuses — which are 99% of abuses.
This is a no-brainer. If the peasants’ problem is the local Baron, they want the power of the King to be strengthened, not weakened, because he’s the only one who can keep the Baron in line.
Tim – you say the administration where you are is shambolic. Is that still true elsewhere?
It’s a question of a degree, but I would guess yes. Robert is right that bureaucratic chaos is international, as politicians of any nationality or stripe are mostly incompetent. But Russian bureaucratic chaos is particularly bad, especially in the provinces.
At very low local levels – the ones people deal every day – this is still Soviet style.
So, Sean, your expertise in old Soviet practices is not outdated at all…
But do you expect? To re-built the whole country from top to bottom in 8 years? Скоро только сказка сказывается…
It was second time in last 100 years when Russia has person in charge who is willing and capable to change something and has time for this (first one was Stalin – but his “style” was …. you know).
Yet those decisions he makes personally are followed without question.
Or followed as local officials see fit. Plus there is old true practice of Potemkinism. I sometimes wonder about how Putin is said to have reestablished “vertical power”. Yeah he is said to have rebuilt the structure, but what about the content?
The structure is the content.
The main feature of the vertical of power is its resemblance of the feudal vassal-sovereign pyramid. People at the lower steps of the ladder directly depend on the higher ups for their livelihood. They are appointed to lucrative positions and serve there at the will of appointers. The higher ups do not need to tell them exactly what to do. They percieve what needs to be done and act. Sometimes this perception misfires. (which I suspect happened in the Litvinenko case)
Look at the chart somebody from ЖЖ compiled based on official Duma election turnout reports. Round numbers are reported significantly more often creating a shark tooth instead of a natural bell curve. The drawback of this feudalistic system is reliance on low lever bureaucrats with poor imagination for lies. Or so sloppy in their cynicism that they reveal the election process for the sham it was.
The sad thing is that Medvedev (or UR in case of Duma elections) would have had no problems winning. Why is it so damn important to hit the magic 70% threshold?
Also, apparently the number of eligible voters have increased by 2 million between June and December only to decrease by the same amount by March.
“People at the lower steps of the ladder directly depend on the higher ups for their livelihood. They are appointed to lucrative positions and serve there at the will of appointers.”
Do you mean this
“system”?
I doubt this is exclusively Russian “”system”
I doubt this is exclusively Russian “”system”
The link did not work but nowhere did I say it was an exclusively Russian system. There isn’t much that would be exclusively Russian, except Putin’s favorite cabbage soup.
The system is universal. Mexico under PRI looked exactly the same.
try this
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/3374/5a2db20fd95ftc7.jpg
I think this system is universal since the time of pyramids…