Electoral Rerun
By Sean at 16 October, 2009, 10:12 am
Last Sunday’s municipal elections in 75 of Russia’s 83 regions were like a bad rerun. Everyone played their role well in the latest stage production of managed liberal democracy. United Russia trounced its rivals, most importantly in the coveted Moscow city government where UR took 32 of 35 seats. The country’s real opposition, the Communist Party, got a mere three. Similar results were reproduced across the country. Overall numbers show that the Party of Power averaged around 70% of the votes nationwide, while the Communists hovered around 13%. The rest–Just Russia and the Liberal Democratic Party were in the single digits. The liberal party meld of Yabloko and Right Cause got nothin’ worth mentioning.
Of course, every oppositional faction–which ranges from those who could participate like the Communists, LDPR, Just Russia, and Yabloko and those who couldn’t like Solidarity–hemmed and hawed about election fraud. No Russian election can occur without it just like no sitcom sounds right without canned laughter. And especially the city Duma elections in Moscow. Did anyone actually think that the United Russia was going to allow the Communists, LDPR, and Yabloko have any say so in Moscow’s $40 billion budget? Democracy–shmocracy. This election, like all of them, was about power and money.
But Russia isn’t alone in this. It seems that no election anywhere can occur without someone committing or pointing to fraud. In an age void of mass social movements where “democracy” holds global hegemony, crying electoral fraud has become the sole “revolutionary” act in a very anti-revolutionary world. Well, I guess that and blowing yourself up. A century ago, politics was a bitter struggle between the have-nots and the haves. Economic crisis brought some nations to their knees; while others simply imploded. Now, “oppositional” politics has been reduced to the presence or absence of ballots.
Committing and claiming electoral fraud, therefore, has become integral to the logic of liberal democracy itself. For those in power, fraud serves as a soft means of reproducing their power. For those in opposition, it provides a safe raison d’etre where “democracy” is a rallying cry that never questions the foundations of the social-economic system it rests upon: capitalism. So for opposition parties in Russia, the political contest is relegated to the superstructure: the accuracy of ballots, equal access to the polls, equal participation in campaigning, etc. The ballot is a political end in and of itself.
How else can one understand the “protest” by Duma deputies from the LDPR, Communists and Just Russia? On Wednesday members from all three factions staged a walkout to protest Sunday’s election results citing the mass falsification of votes in favor of the Party of Power. The deputies demanded a meeting with President Medvedev. When the President phoned LDPR hetman Zhironovsky and KPRF batka Zyuganov with a promise of a future meeting, the “revolutionaries” signaled that they would return to their stations, though Zyuganov says that his KPRFers won’t do anything until they actually meet with him. “The fight goes on,” he declared. Spoken like a true heir of Lenin.
The action is rightly being hailed as nothing more than a stunt staged by the factions or possibly even by the Kremlin itself. United Russia dominates the Duma so thoroughly that it could function just fine without them, making the opposition’s walkout utterly meaningless. The scandal will unlikely move any passions among the populace. One thing you can say about many Russians, they are hardly naive when it comes to the tenor of this political dance. According to a recent Levanda Center poll, 62 percent of Muscovites see elections as “simply imitations of a battle” between political elites. Or, as Anton Orekh writes on Ekho Moskvy, “The mutiny has been staged, just like the elections. First we were shown an imitation of elections and now an imitation of fury with the results of the elections.” It’s like a revision of the Soviet adage: “You pretend to govern and we pretend to support you.”
Perhaps the most interesting comment comes from Eurasianist philosopher extraordinaire Alexander Dugin:
“I think that a high level of depolitiization exists in the country. This means that both the people and those in power agree that serious political questions that would demand including the public are not on the table. Therefore interest in parties is sapped and party politics is transformed into a kind of ceremony, a ritual.
This has an impact on elections, because I think that people simply don’t participate in them. It is clear to everyone in the elections: no intrigue, no interests, and no enemies and no friends. In this sense, I think that interest in elections is totally absent.
Dugin went on to conclude: “Therefore I think that elections [are] very uninteresting, boring, and predictable, and naturally United Russia will win. It’s possible to not hold elections at all. [They should] simply announce that United Russia won.”
We should listen to Dugin. Instead of participating in the ritual of pointing out (yet again) the fraud of Russia’s elections (oh, the horror!), perhaps we should sit back and think of them as if they’ve already “jumped the shark” and hope that the Kremlin at some point cancels this bad sitcom so we can move on to other business.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
No question, the elections are riddled with fraud. But I would certainly say that those who advocate a more democratic course for Russia need to insist that the country keeps holding them, and cry foul over fraud. This has at least two beneficial consequences: 1) It keeps reinforcing the ideal, if not the reality, of the democratic process, and thus underlines the gap between reality and official discourse; 2) During times of tension and tribulation, which will certainly occur in the future, elections provide a means to oppose the party of power
Alleged fraud of Russia’s elections does not reach the degree of election fraud in the US where the last two presidential terms were served by the selected and not by the elected president.
I did not hear about “UR” robocalling Central Asian migrants and promising to deport them if they show up at the polling stations. Nor ruling party was involved in disenfranchising campaign aimed at ethnic minorities.
For Moscow municipal elections, according to the polls, the alleged fraud would not change the outcome, i.e. at least 2/3 majority of “United Russia” in Moscow Duma. So it’s not “UR” but voters who prevent opposition, communist or otherwise, from controlling the city budget.
Committing and claiming electoral fraud, therefore, has become integral to the logic of liberal democracy itself.
Ah, so although there was fraud in the Russian election, it happens everywhere? Except, to take just one example, the recent election in Germany.
I’ll come back in another 3-4 months.
Sean’s article reminded me of Special Propaganda courses I took while doing mandatory ROTC back in Leningrad University. First, Sean applies an inappropriate term to Russian political system, calling it (not managed but) liberal democracy. Then comes a substitution that all liberal democracies are the same and finally a conclusion. Thanks Tim for pointing this fallacy out. A transparent straw man. Поздравляю Вас, гражданин, соврамши!
Otherwise, a good article, Sean. Your incessant urge to go on anti-capitalist tangents is quite peculiar to witness.
Alleged fraud of Russia’s elections does not reach the degree of election fraud in the US where the last two presidential terms were served by the selected and not by the elected president.
Pyotr, do yourself a favor and read the US Constitution to grasp how Presidents are elected. It has never been about popular vote and will never be based on it unless the Constitution and the current federal system is changed quite a bit.
Ha, ha, Sean ponders the question whether Russia can do without the holy grail of liberal democracy and the dogmatists come crushing in, demanding political correctness on this blog…
I will tell you that as long as we cannot talk about Russia’s democracy from a practical point if view, but keep repeating ideological mantra’s it’s never going to change.
Democracy will not be instituted because it’s fair, it will develop because the ruling elite realizes that to stay in power, it needs to be effective and to be effective it needs to renew itself through political competition.
This amongst others means that little will happen as long as the ruling elite fears that there are opposition parties who threaten to revise the power structure, start another redivision of property.
The manner in which for example the media is jumping their guns to discern splits in the tandem, only reinforces the idea that Russian society, bureaucracy and business are not ready for more democracy yet.
Democracy is not about the fight for power, it’s about power sharing. As long as the larger part of the players don’t understand that, the top deciders will think it a risk to introduce more democracy.
More democracy could be easily created by allowing UR to split along the ‘clubs’ or ‘wings’ fault lines.
Sean, the essential role of the election is bloodless transfer of the power to the most popular group of politicians.
If by any sort of failure the United Russia becomes a political bankrupt, the current system at least guarantees that no civil war would occur as the result.
If the elections are cancelled, it would result in murders of millions perhaps, just in a decade or two.
That was a simply unwise comment, IMHO.
I hate the people who act as mere criticists of the United Russia, but do not join into a different party, even if it was simply like United Russia #2.
The future failure of the UR is to be blamed on the people who failed to form a second major party.
the question whether Russia can do without the holy grail of liberal democracy
What is there to ponder? Russia most certainly can do without liberal democracy. Every country managed to do without it at some point. Some evolved, some have yet to evolve.
demanding political correctness
Care to site an example?
Democracy … will develop because the ruling elite realizes that to stay in power, it needs to be effective and to be effective it needs to renew itself through political competition.
You are confused. That is not a liberal democracy. In order for a liberal democracy to appear you have to have at least two ruling elites, not two parts of one. For a fully functional liberal democracy a country has to have a fully functional capitalist system with competing private property and other special interests. Russia has neither.
Democracy is not about the fight for power, it’s about power sharing.
No, it is not.
I hate the people who act as mere criticists of the United Russia, but do not join into a different party
For once, Evgeny, we are in a total agreement, except the hating part.
the essential role of the election is bloodless transfer of the power to the most popular group of politicians.
And another agreement. This however is skewed when one group of politicians essentially control most of the economy and thus most of the political structure. Comparative popularity of such a group is questionable. Unanimity or almost unanimity is not a good thing. If any election in the US (local, state or federal) result in a 70%+ popularity of either one party, I get very concerned. Consider the mess that is California.
The political system of the United States was established after more than a hundreds years work of humanitarian researchers, while that country was yet a British colony. So they managed to create a system that works good for two centuries.
While here the political system was organized by people who were pressurized against time and resources, and overall is one huge mistake, the scale of which is only overwhelmed by their economical and social mistakes.
Evgeny, political system in the US has changed since its inception in a large part reflecting liberalization of property rights and support infrastructure to exercise such rights.
When it was established, it reflected the current state of social-economic structure of the country. In the same way the current political system in Russia reflects the current socio-economic structure of the country – a pyramid (or maybe a cone… SNL anyone?)
I, for one, has never advocated forcing a liberal democracy on contemporary Russia – it is an impossible feat without changing the underlying system. I have a problem with Putin’s politics because it takes Russia in an opposite direction from capitalism (back towards some sort of government control of means of production)and thus away from expansion of freedoms/choices
As living and working almost 20 years in Russia, however not a citizen, I can say that there are not any kind of democracy or freedom for people to speak.There won’t be either those two most important issues for happiness live of people. If some one says something else, it is totally lie.
Pekuchka: Great. And what about you? Are you also deprived of any kind of democracy and freedom, while you live in Russia? Do you actually think so? Did you try to act differently?
heh Evgeny, that’s all what you can ask me? Tell me what kind of freedom you have as a citizen of mother Russia?
Pekuchka, to answer this question, please, make a read of the Russian Constitution, Chapter 2, “Rights and duties of a citizen”.
I have the rights stated in the Chapter 2, and abide to the duties explained there.