Since the recent Russian Duma election, some members of the Russian opposition have tied themselves in knots with a discussion of whether electronic voting played a positive or negative role in the outcome. But such discussions completely miss the point, Vladimir Pastukhov says. This wasn’t an honest election, and arguing about aspects of its dishonesty is a fool’s errand.
Electronic voting, the London-based Russian analyst says, is the wave of the future; but it will be honest only if the election is honest and won’t be if the election isn’t. This latest Russian election wasn’t honest, and so there is no reason to think that the dishonesty of the election could have been defeated by this or that action by those who took part.
Taking part is like betting in a casino where the house is always in a position to win, Pastukhov suggests. Thinking otherwise only shows one’s naivete or ignorance of the situation. Only those who choose not to take part have a genuine place to stand in their denunciation of the system.
Only a divided and politically immature opposition can think otherwise, and unfortunately that is what is on offer over the last ten days.
Such discussions suggest that among the opposition there are people who live under the illusion that they can outplay the cheating regime and “even hit the jackpot and win. Such hopes were false on the face of it, Pastukhov says. The regime, as the house in this case, wasn’t going to allow that to happen.
Read More:
- Putin’s party won less than a third of the vote and not the nearly half reported, Shpilkin says
- Russian elections in Ukraine’s Donbas: Annexing people before annexing territory
- Weak response to Russian Duma elections in Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia
- Kremlin’s panic over “smart voting” ends any prospect election will be viewed as legitimate, Pastukhov says
- Russia shuttles residents of occupied Donbas to vote in Duma elections amid accelerated passportization
- The Russian elections and hidden regionalist politics
