Elections are the central institution of any democratic state. The right to choose and be elected is constitutionally enshrined. Nevertheless, no one has the right to force a voter to come to the polling station and vote. Therefore, one gets the impression that elections are not needed.
Russians lose their desire to come to the polls also because from year to year the same people are at the helm of the government, pursuing the same policy. And the opposition, losing its ardor in battles for at least one more seat in the Duma or the regional Legislative Assembly, also inspires confidence in few people. The politicians who appear from time to time are still far from the people with their extraordinary or, on the contrary, ordinary programs that are yawning. And they do not appeal to the people, but to civil society. A chimera that exists only in the inflamed minds of those who are trying to put together this society from the young and the early ones, carrying out their electoral policy: did not join a party (movement) - did not pass the session or lost their job. I didn’t go to the polls - I lost, I didn’t have time, I gave my vote to the "enemies".
But in fact, civil society should consist of people who consciously go to the elections in order to thereby express their civic position. However, now there is no real force capable of resisting the chaos that is happening at all levels of government. Therefore, since the candidate “against all” was deleted from the ballots long ago, the turnout percentage is constantly and steadily adjusted downward. It turns out that elections are also a chimera? Or is it only in our country that a policy is being implemented in which an individual citizen cannot decide anything, unless he joins the crowd (not the people, and even more so not the society) advocating for a party or candidate? And to the crowd - because few of those casting their vote really understand the programs (not pre-election, but real) of those whose names are indicated on the ballots.
In Western countries, known for the oldest constitutions, it is not personalities that are in the foreground, but precisely the programs of parties, the number of which is limited and reduced to a minimum. Europe has been taught by bitter experience: it is known how the political leapfrog ended in the first half of the 20th century. In the USA and Great Britain, in this regard, everything is regulated once and for all: two parties - either / or - neither of them is the ultimate truth. And, therefore, there is a chance that next time another will come to power, just as imperfect, but seeing the country's political course from somewhat different positions. The balance in government policy maintained in this way allows these countries to cope with the growing protest, which, alas, is inevitable even in the most law-abiding society.
So, elections, of course, are needed. At least, as an illusion that everything can still change for the better, not this time, so next. However, until there is really worthy opposition in our country, represented by one or two parties with a clear program and real goals, the problem of civil society and the legitimacy of democracy will remain unresolved.
