Search results

An examination of elections in Russia focuses on the 1988 law allowing a choice of candidates, the 1991 election of political outsider Boris Yeltsin as the first president, & subsequent Duma & presidential elections. It is argued that the Dec 1999 & Mar 2000 elections offered little to substantiate existence of an institutionalized democracy. Rather, Yeltsin & his supporters managed to manipulate the elections to get the results they desired despite a dire economic situation that favored their opponents. Personal behavior that contributed to Yeltsin's plummeting popularity is described, along with increasing support for Vladimir Putin precipitated by an incursion of Islamic fundamentalists from Chechnya into Dagestan. A description of various political parties emphasizes that they were still weakly articulated in 1999. It is contended that Yeltsin's early resignation & his support of Putin, his head of state security & designated successor, were contrived efforts to place other candidates at a disadvantage, as were Putin's refusal to participate in TV debates, cultural influences, & serious problems in electoral organization & administration. 2 Tables. J. Lindroth

It was one of the defining features of the soviet system that it allowed no legal challenge to party dominance. Elections took place at regular intervals; but from an early stage they were based upon a single slate of candidates, the 'bloc of Communists and nonparty people'. Voting was not compulsory, but it was difficult to avoid – canvassers went from house to house, ballot boxes were set up in hospitals, long-distance trains and polar observatories, and constituency officials competed with each other for the highest turnout. In theory it was possible to vote against, but this meant using the screened-off booth in the polling station, since a vote in favour, with a single candidate system, could be cast without marking the ballot paper or even looking at it. Some called these 'Elections Paradise-style: as God said to Adam, "Here is Eve, the woman of your choice"'. Bertolt Brecht, commenting on the leaf lets that had been distributed in East Berlin after the rising of 1953 which announced that the people had forfeited the government's confidence and could 'only win it back by redoubled labour', put it more directly. 'Wouldn't it be simpler,' he asked, 'if the government dissolved the people and elected another?'

Europe's future will be shaped by one of two very different paths: either by the divisive intolerance that left Bosnia in ruins or by the democratic integration to which most nations in this region aspire. For the right choice to prevail, there is a challenge you must meet, a challenge the United States must meet, and a challenge we must meet together.

For a considerable part of the political opposition in Russia, elections have been something to be watched from the sidelines. While opposition candidates are formally blocked for legal-administrative reasons, they have repeatedly claimed that registration refusals are politically motivated and that election committees apply the law differently depending on the candidates' political affiliation. By analyzing the perceptions of double standards as well as actual enforcement practice and structural incentives, this article identifies the core mechanics of this quasi-legal mechanism of political pre-election filtering in Russian elections. [Copyright The Regents of the University of California; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

For a considerable part of the political opposition in Russia, elections have been something to be watched from the sidelines. While opposition candidates are formally blocked for legal-administrative reasons, they have repeatedly claimed that registration refusals are politically motivated and that election committees apply the law differently depending on the candidates' political affiliation. By analyzing the perceptions of double standards as well as actual enforcement practice and structural incentives, this article identifies the core mechanics of this quasi-legal mechanism of political pre-election filtering in Russian elections.

The representativeness of the Soviet system of government can best be ascertained, not through abstract inquiry into constitutional provisions, but by means of an analysis of the electorate and of the elected. Only in this way can the contentions of Soviet apologists and theoreticians be given an adequate test of reality. Simultaneously, such data should disclose a number of sociological and psychological implications. A recent publication of the Central Electoral Commission of the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the U.S.S.R. gives a comprehensive view of the electorate and of the elected in the elections of Soviets held in the year 1931.

The word 'democracy' has predominantly negative connotations when referring to its practical implementation in Russia. However, Russians are favourable to the idea of democracy in principle, and support the establishment of genuine democracy in the country. Beliefs that elections ensure accountability of elected officials, allow public input on the policy direction of government, and give personal benefits to individuals would help to increase acceptance of the value of Russian democracy. A combination of factors, however, makes it doubtful that the current negative attitudes can be overcome quickly.