What Is Good for Subject Is Death for Citizen

Next crackdown of a meeting on Triumphal Square and similar crackdown near Gostiny Dvor in Petersburg visually showed that the authorities consider themselves strong enough not to change anything, to react in any way to "irritants from below", from citizens. At that there was no unexpectedness in what was going on as all occurred within the limits of the procedure already become usual. The day before yesterday the president Mitya wiped up with 32 article of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, yesterday authorities of the capital having received blessing from the Kremlin habitually wiped up with 31 article, today, probably, they will wipe up with some other - they still have time.

Every citizen who, though illogically still considers himself citizen, not subject of "raw empire" should get strong aversion of everything that is connected with this strange statehood based not on law and will of citizens but on pure arbitrariness and rudeness raised to absolute. The Jews call it "chutzpah", Russians should also enter similar concept - at that "lawlessness" in the given context sounds poorly and somehow not exhaustively.

However, it would be a lie to consider that signals from below aren't considered by authorities at all. No, they feel them, sometimes they even try to react to them but non-adequacy made a principle doesn't give any possibility to react normally any more. Unloved among decent people Alfred Kokh is, nevertheless, absolutely adequate person and he refuses to understand what's going on: "Our poor mind fails to understand the way (expressing complimentary) of thinking of present Russian leaders. And consequently it is senseless to guess: whether it is Medvedev having a dig at Putin, or Putin at Medvedev, or may be both of them stick something substantial into us..."

It is clear that irrespective of the first and the second - the third occurs regularly and to visible pleasure.

Natural question appears: if we in general can do something? Or only relax and take pleasure?

There exists, of course, such point of view among leaders of opposition from Zyuganov to Limonov (I don't compare them, I mention it only to illustrate range width) that power change is a question of quantity of citizens taken to the streets at "X" hour. Perhaps it's so but we are too far from Tahrir Square in the capital of world revolution - the city of Cairo and even there not everything is so definite. It seems to me that transition of quantity of holding the meeting into quality of revolution has no such linear dependence. It happened in our history that a lot of things took place but nothing changed.

While to create difficulties for authorities on fictitious elections organized by them is, perhaps, more impressive, than "Faust" by Goethe. Theoretically boycott of elections in Russia never succeeded though there never was such situation with elections as we have now. So extremely unscrupulous that even Putin has been compelled to recognize it openly - creation of his "people's front" with Shmakov and Lakhov is  acknowledgment of guilt: say, yes, elections in our country are fictitious but we will slightly correct situation...

Wrecking of elections hangs over the Kremlin like a sword of Damocles. I will remind that after parliament execution in 1993 (when existing mongrel statehood was formed) elections never took place as well as referendum under the new constitution. The data were frankly "far-fetched", especially as regards voter turnout which at that moment should have made not less than 50 percent and in reality was, of course, much less. What else could be expected from elections taking place under the gun barrel?

Actually from the very appearance of that mongrel statehood there appeared the problem of attendance at their fictitious elective procedures became the main for authorities which were elected by nobody, which chose themselves by right of the winner and since then self-reproduced themselves exclusively due to the institute of "succession".

All further steps of the power in the field of "perfection" of the elective legislation ended in decrease of the voter turnout up to its full cancellation; cancellation of the column "against all"; cancellation of practice of free promotion of candidates on all levels of the power (system of pseudo-party promotion).

Actually today voters are not necessary on elections in accordance to "laws". It's enough if a small group of specially chosen people come and vote. It agrees with "laws" - the word "laws" I quote not casually as all laws in the Russian Federation are based on those procedures which have been accepted god knows when following the results of revolution. To justify legitimacy of these procedures authorities have only one argument - a lot of time passed, it seems that all agree. Let's say that while generations of RSFSR are alive, the argument is frankly shaky. Authorities realize it perfectly well, that's why voter turnout is still important to them - in spite of the fact that it isn't regulated by "laws" in any way.

Whether you ever think why the Central Electoral Committee always gives figures of voter turnout? Moreover it constantly monitors it - as at 10 o'clock in the morning, at 12, at 17. It would seem what for to give this data in general? Just give figures for this or that candidate, in 3 days burn all bulletins (also following the "law") and that's all, procedure is observed. On the contrary!

All the same possibility for the voter "vote with feet", that is to neglect these fictitious elections together excites the Kremlin friends very much. Let's imagine that, say, only 1-2 percent of voters come to "elections". According to "law" elections are recognized accomplished - whether there will be no questions about quality of these "laws"? The question - who and how passed such "laws" - will be next. Whence did these "legislators" who several years ago were ordinary gangsters come from?

The main question - about legitimacy of all this "raw empire" appeared after revolution in RSFSR on October, 3-4rd, 1993. Where are 3 of 5 letters making the word and designating in the name of the country its basic distinctive features? "Soviet" is clear - councils were shot from tanks named after the hero of Russia Evnevich. "Socialist" - is also clear, whether a gang needs socialism? In fact "Republic" was also lost! Though if the Russian Federation - is the republic? Where is power of people in the Russian Federation?

Here you are the questions which will necessarily appear after boycott of these "elections" by citizens.

Now about boycott prospects. Here you are the poll on FORUM.msk:

Whether you intend to go to the polls to elect the State Duma in December?:

As we see, the number of citizens not intended to go to fictitious elective procedures is 2 times higher, than the number of those citizens who are ready to legitimize existing order by their presence. There are about 10 percent of undecided. If to speak about situation when there are still 4 months before the announcement of the election campaign the data is quite encouraging. There is still time to convince subjects that it's much more preferable to be citizens.

While to be subjects, especially loyal subjects - is a shame for citizen.

Send by mail

Print