Beyond the Choice of Change vs. Status Quo in Russia: One More Thing About the Elections
Russian municipal elections jumped into the Western news mix this summer when thousands of protesters hit the Moscow streets to demand fair elections. The spark was the Election Commission’s rejection of several opposition candidates for the Moscow City Duma. While all this was going on, a more significant election appeared to be taking shape in Novosibirsk, Siberia, the third largest city in Russia. This Mayoral election was worth watching because it is one of only 10 major cities that still elect their Mayors (most are now using the City Manager model) and Novosibirsk is known as a region without a “system” (clandestine procedure for how to control the outcome). Five years ago, this lack of “system” brought the current Communist Mayor into office with an upset victory over the sitting United Russia Mayor. Nothing really changed beyond the continued blurring of party lines.
With enormous administrative resources,a large field that included spoilers to split the “opposition” vote, and an alliance with the United Russia Governor, there was little doubt that the Mayor would be re-elected. What was different is that two of the 15 candidates running against the Mayor were offering the 1.5 million residents a choice beyond status quo vs. change. Sergey Boiko is head of Moscow opposition protest leader Alexander Navalny’s local headquarters. Natalia Pinus is an Independent City Deputy. They represent two different strategies for change, revolution versus evolutionary reform. This was reflected in the tone of their campaigns with “Boiko puts up a fight” and a logo of a clenched fist grabbing a bridge and tall buildings versus Pinus’s “Election for a New Mayor” next to a stunning black and white portrait of the candidate. So, most of the buzz focused on these candidates and their race for second and third place.
I started following Natalia Pinus’s career ten years ago when she left business to devote herself to “improving life in the community where my children will grow up”.
As Executive Director of a community foundation, she became a leader in various protest actions. In 2015, she pulled off a surprise victory in a rough and ugly campaign for the City Council. Pinus became the first Deputy to live stream de-briefs after council meetings and monthly video reports for her constituents. She also started a campaign to make public the names of builders who owed the City more than $75 million. So, she entered the Mayoral race with some enemies and only 24% name recognition.
The increased name recognition Boiko’s association with Navalny brought came with plus’s and minus’s.
Structurally Boiko and Pinus ran modern, western retail politics campaigns. Both raised most of their funding from supporters, had centrally located headquarters, informative sites, and a comprehensive social network presence. They conducted meetings in courtyards throughout the City, got some press coverage, and participated in a series of TV debates that the Mayor refused to attend. No one expected a miracle with turnout predictions of 29–30%. Still, if you were tracking the election on social and other on-line media, there was actually a sense of electoral excitement related to 2nd and 3rd place.
The only thing worse than a storm on an election day in Siberia, is a perfect September dacha day.
That alone does not account for or diminish the blow of the record breaking dismal turnout of 20.55%. The people of Novosibirsk had all the freedom and choice you could possibly want and 4 out of 5 of them choose not to vote. Equally unexpected, more than half of those who voted supported the Mayor followed by Boiko with Pinus coming in fourth behind a nationalist. Hardly a rousing victory for anyone but it was a considerable defeat for Pinus.
After all the protests and Navalny’s “smart voting” system where he told people who to vote for, the turnout in Moscow was only marginally better than Novosibirsk with 21.55% but Navalny and most pundits declared victory for the opposition. Boiko celebrated his second place live streaming about plans for the future including next year’s City Council elections.
What does this say about democracy in Russia? The person I was most interested in hearing answer that question was Natalia Pinus. She agreed to an interview three days after the election.
We met in a coffee shop joined by her son who just started the first grade and was a regular on the campaign trail along with his two older sisters. As I asked her that question, I noticed that great bone structure does nothing to mask exhaustion and disappointment.
“Now I have a serious question about this. What is democracy? Of course, people want an honest and open election. This election was connected primarily to technology and people make decisions without thinking very deeply about it. Their decision is not connected to what is going on and most importantly, people don’t understand that the election really depends on them. The Soviet period continues on in relation to a government that gives you something and you say thank you.”
In relation to the low turnout she believes, “The people do not feel connected to decision making. The relationship to government as an institute that works for you, that is just not part of our upbringing.”
I asked if the government was to blame and she responded, “Of course there is a place for government to support raising these cultural values, but they don’t do it at all. What could be developed, doesn’t develop, instead there are other things developing.”
This reminded me of her post-election thoughts on Facebook. They included the typical expressions of thanks and frustration at not doing better. Then there was a paragraph, “warning”, that gave voice to a contingent of the Russian opposition that we do not hear about. “The political situation in Novosibirsk scares me and it reflects the situation in the country. Obviously, major changes are needed, the old system does not work well. But, there are not enough people who are aware of the possibility for evolutionary change. Or, they are in sleep mode. In this situation, revolutionary political forces appear on the scene with actions that are rigidly tough and technical. Where does this lead? Hard to say.” She repeated these concerns during our interview, “I am afraid of that revolutionary approach, I see how people focus on provocations and I do not see that as productive.”
Throughout the campaign, Pinus demonstrated a remarkable ability to ignore what were at times very aggressive attacks from all sides. I asked if she learned anything about herself from this experience and after shrugging it off she said, “I guess I learned that I am stronger than I thought I was.” She did not want to leave the impression that these attacks were the only headwinds she faced or that they were the most important take-aways. “If we took out all the provocations and dirt, there still remains the issue of being a woman, it exists. Before the campaign, we conducted a survey and 60% of the people were ready to vote for a woman. Also, my last name isn’t good for elections, they say ‘that is not a Russian name’. So, considering all of that, my result isn’t bad.”
She did not think there should be a need for her to be a role model for other young women interested in politics, “Once a person knows his path, she just goes. There is a saying, if you can’t write poetry, don’t write it. What is important to me is to continue to be myself, to be independent, and to serve the interests of other people. These are my principles. Then you can look at everyone with open and honest eyes and live calmly through all that dirt and keep moving forward”.
Knowing it was still too soon and she was still too tired for deep reflection, I continued to push for advice, lessons learned. Pinus finally gave in, “You have to keep going. I will… I know there are great people, who are patriots who do not like what the government is doing but they don’t want a revolution either. There is no organized group for these people who understand fully that you have to do something, enough sitting around. My career will continue but I am not sure what form it will take”.
One thing that political pundits, journalists, and scholars might agree on is that political vacuums will be filled. So far in Russia there are only two visible forces battling to do that. Is there a place in politics for people who are tough but not mean? A place for those who want to dedicate their strength to reason rather than domination? It is left to be seen how many of Pinus’s sleeping evolutionaries are out there and if they are ready to become an organized force. Her concerns reminded me of a quote by the great American philosopher John Dewey.
“Wherever democracy has fallen, it was too exclusively political in nature. It had not become part of the bone and blood of people in daily conduct. Unless democratic habits of thought are part of the fiber of a people, political democracy is insecure.”
