"I love you, sleepy forest!"
Relatively recently, the capitalist authorities in Russia came up with such an innovation as “a single voting day”. Before that, elections in different regions were held at different dates. Now “one day” for this set the beginning of September. So in 2019, this “election day” was September 8th.
As this date draws nearer, some “left” leaders, primarily from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and those close to them, turned into zombie clowns urging them to go to polling stations and vote for “good” candidates.
Almost from the day of its foundation, the AUCPB has been boycotting and ignoring bourgeois elections for good reasons: no election can change the nature of the existing system, capitalists will not give up power or wealth because of some kind of “vote”. To rely on the fact that by casting ballots in ballot boxes you can achieve some real changes - it’s silly and naive. The calls of the left parties to take part in the elections, to stand for their party candidates, only distract the working people from the real class struggle, inspire them with the illusion that allegedly they can be defeated not by revolutionary means, but by throwing pieces of paper in ballot boxes. But in elections, everything is decided by money, as well as fraud. As correctly noted a long time ago: “If voting could change anything, it would be illegal” said Lenin in reference to the belief that workers can win the election parliamentary cretinism.
It is significant that the majority of workers who simply ignore this clowning and do not waste time going to the polls have long been disappointed at the election institute.
Nevertheless, figures close to the Communist Party continue to invite people to participate in these cheating games. Among ordinary supporters of “parliamentary parties” there are even sincere believers in the usefulness of the elections, even if they understand that the authorities cannot be won in this way.
What arguments do they make? The funny thing is that in their argument they try to refer to Lenin, hardly remembering that the Bolshevik leader said something about the fact that participation in parliament can be used to agitate and propagate his ideas. The level of references "to Lenin" in this case shows that they just did not read the works of Lenin and Stalin on this topic, but only heard the ringing, but did not know where he was.
First, in tsarist Russia, the emergence of the State Duma was a progressive phenomenon, a step forward - from the autocratic monarchy to bourgeois parliamentarism. The current bourgeois authorities are steps back from the power of the Soviets. Therefore, participation in the current bourgeois representative bodies of power is not a progressive phenomenon at all, as at the beginning of the 20th century.
Secondly, Lenin did send the Bolshevik workers to the State Duma, but he did not become a deputy of the Duma and did not aspire to become one. What do we see today with the example of the Communist Party and other “parliamentary leftists”? They do the exact opposite: their leaders strive to occupy deputy seats, but they cannot find workers in their ranks. (More often there you can see the bourgeois who are ready to sell seats on the electoral lists by the same Communist Party.)
Finally, thirdly, it looks especially curious when they try to apply Lenin’s statement about using the parliamentary tribune for campaigning in the case of elections to local representative bodies - city councils. The Bolsheviks, indeed, considered it possible to participate in the elections to the State Duma, but not the “struggle” for seats in local Zemstvos. And this is exactly what the same Communist Party offers us every beginning of September - to compete with the bourgeoisie for getting into local zemstvos, in the city duma.
If participation in the election of the all-Russian parliament still somehow allows you to talk about your political program, then the election of local deputies excludes this. Voters coming to local elections are practically not interested in the political platform of candidates. What does such a voter need? In order for the local deputy to help carry out gas in houses, asphalt a path on the street, etc. Who can do this? This can be done by a United Russia official who has the necessary connections, or a bourgeois who has money for this. But this is practically impossible for the deputy “communist”, who has no money and connections. As a result, when the term of deputy powers passes and the time for re-election comes, the voters look: which of the deputies did what. So, the official conducted gas to his voters, paved the bourgeois path ... And what did the deputy “communist” do? Did you talk about socialism? “Atu’s citizens, we won’t vote for the Communists anymore!” And this is how the authority of these fake “Communists” falls. Come on - only them. But they themselves discredit the title of communist.
Nevertheless, in every new election, the Communist Party and its clones are again and again urging to compete for deputy seats, either increasing their representation in city dummies or decreasing ... And so - for ages.
Moreover, the Communist Party also calls on supporters to vote for their candidates in the election of governors and mayors, trying to convince that the election of a mayor or governor could make a difference ... In fact, members of the Communist Party have repeatedly become mayors and governors. In the 1990s and 2000s, there was a whole “red belt” from regions where Communist Party members were governors. And where are they all? Either they lost the next election, or they were canceled, or they fled to United Russia, but they naturally did not build any socialism and did not remove the bourgeois from power. The election of mayors “communists” in small towns is very much in the hands of the regional bourgeoisie. Regional authorities simply cut off such cities from financing, and in cities where the mayor is a “communist," sometimes even traffic lights stop working due to lack of money. And then this fact is used for bourgeois propaganda: say, look, to what the mayor "communist" has brought his city ...
Does all of the above mean that the Bolsheviks will always and in all conditions call for ignoring the elections? No, not like that, it's more complicated. There was a period when the AUCPB urged citizens not to go to polling stations. There was a period when the AUCPB called on voters to vote “against all,” and then spoil the ballots. In Ukraine, during some memorable elections, the organization of the AUCPB even called for a vote for Yanukovych to stop Yushchenko and the neo-fascists following him.
The position of the Bolshevik Party is built depending on the specifics of the political situation, and what was right yesterday becomes wrong tomorrow.
But the main thing to remember: do not get infected with parliamentary cretinism. The communists do not win the election; the communists will win the class revolutionary struggle.
Dar Vetrov
