Skip to main content

Another crack in Putinism

The election result in Russia is hardly unexpected: Putin won.


Except he didn't.. quite.


The political system for elections to the Duma does not permit liberal parties to participate. The choice is limited to the neo-fascist "Liberal Democrats", the rump Communist Party and a party "Fair Russia" which has been widely considered to be another bunch of Kremlin stooges. Under the circumstances you would expect the Putinista vehicle "United Russia" to walk every election.


Just in case, however, the only free election monitors- Glos- were harassed and more liberal media outlets had their websites hacked. United Russia was advertised at every sports event and public gathering- its opponents were not. United Russia had the full resources of the Russian state behind them- civil servants and other state employees are compelled to support the party. Significantly, the non Russian republics, such as Chechnya had a recorded vote of 99% for United Russia, while large areas in St Petersburg and Moscow gave less than 30% of the vote to the ruling party.


So far so unsurprising.


However, as I have suggested here for some time now, even with the full force of the oppressive Russian state behind him, Putin faces some increasing challenges to his untrammelled rule. the majority of Russians, in the Russian Federation did not vote for Putin, even as the non Russians "voted" 99% for him.


Even with every card in his  hand, and a few stolen ones up his sleeve, the drastic fall in support for United Russia is all too obvious. It is an interesting legacy to leave for Medvedev, when he waltzes into the Prime Minister's office after Putins "re-election" as President. In fact it makes it all but certain that Medvedev will not complete his term as PM, even if Putin completes his term as President.


Of course that assumes that Putin is indeed returned to office in March. When even a manipulated choice between evils based in an biased media environment and harassed election monitoring can not hide Russian disenchantment with the kleptocracy that runs them, then it is fair to say that the stability of the regime can not be what it was.


While I think Putin may well re-enter the Presidential office on schedule, I am increasingly sure that his plans for two more Presidential terms will be disrupted. Having entered office promising stability, he has created stagnation and will leave in disorder.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...