Skip to main content

More on the Russian "election"

The background noise of protest in Moscow and St. Petersburg has continued, despite the severe clampdown. Over 1000 people have been arrested, which implies that the size of the protests is much larger than the few thousand that has been admitted by the regime. Significant figures amongst the opposition, such as the blogger Andrei Navalny, remain under arrest.


The problem for the regime is that evidence is growing that the declared results are so far out of line with the real tallies as to be utterly at variance. This is not just a matter of the vote stuffing in Chechnya helping United Russia over the line- it seems that even the results in the major cities, which were thought to be more accurate because they showed such a large fall in the United Russia vote- are false too. In some areas it is clear that United Russia was well behind Yabloko, the Liberal party that the official tally says polled so few votes that they did not qualify for the Duma.


While the state run television continues to ignore the protest on the utterly spurious grounds that "a protest of 10,000 is nothing in a population of 142 million", the chat rooms in Russia are extremely excitable. There is a groundswell of protest online and in the press, which is not under such strict control.


Obviously the Kleptocrats have all the guns and it is difficult to see how the protesters can force an early change, but it is now very clear that the Putin regime has lost its legitimacy, and that the "Prime Minister" will face increasing difficulties over the coming weeks.

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'...