Russian Communist Presidental Candidate

Currently the biggest opposition figure in Russia with even bigger support than Navalny is Pavel Grudinin. The guy just published his political program.

In sum: he wants to make a sovchoz out of Russia again by coming back to bolshevist ideals: nationalize everything, because according to him private property in Russia belongs only to oligarchs and thieves, he also wants to rise minimal salary in Russia from 6.000 to 30.000 roubles and come back to 8 hours work day, because he is fascinated by Nicolás Maduro. He wants Russia to become a champion in production of electronics and other high-tech stuff and replace selling oil with it. He wants to rise a level of industry in Russian economics from 15 to 80%. He wants to make a cultural capital of the world out of Russia by investing a lot of money into libraries and cultural centres. Instead of investing money into American debt documents, he wants to invest it in Russian minds. He also wants to rise pensions x3, guarantee all public services for free to Russians, like kindergartens or hospitals. He also plans to build millions of new flats for Russians, so finally Russian people wouldn't have to wait for death of parents and grandparents to take over flats.

The main source of money for his political program is - according to him - a monopolisation of production of ethanol by Russian state. He says that if Russian state destroys private companies producing vodka in Russia and takes them over, then Russian state will have enough money to make his program come true.
Oh yeah they also say something about his Jewish origin, but I can't find anything on it, even with my limited Russian knowledge, so I guess it's just a gossip.

I'm honestly surprised they didn't let candidate Zyuganov again, guy was apparently in United Russia in 2002-2010.

Also kinda disappointed Putin didn't let Poklonska candidate instead, it's just like with Merkel lel.

Well what do lefty/pol/yps here thinks about it?

Other urls found in this thread:

He sounds absolutely based, amazing. What an economic plan, I love it.

I would blow my load if Russia went communist again. Sadly there seems to not even proper bourgeoisie liberal elections in Russia anymore from what I hear.

That program sounds almost too ridiculous to be true, it's too sudden a change within bourgeois democracy

adding to that, it would require some Stalin era-tier mass movilization to even begin it's implementation (see "Socialist industrialization" in the attachment), and expecting that from modern day Russia is asking it too much

He gon end up dead

Russia isn't spooked about this, "conservatives" in Russia are positively predisposed towards communism, of course such a radical program isn't possible in the West but could be very well in Russia. You also wouldn't need a collectivization program of Stalinist dimensions, Russia isn't as backwards as it was in the 20s, the biggest industry in Russia have heavy ties to the state already. I'd say going back to socialism would totally be possible after a few years filled with potholes and hick-ups, of course. But in the end, you can't have socialism without a mass movement. The people must be willing to organize and seize the MoP.

Sorry to be "that person," but it's "hiccups" rather than "hick-ups."

Unlikely, Putin doesn't kill opposition, that's a CIA meme. Most of the opposition leaders who did get killed were heavily involved in illegal businesses and Mafia activities. Stop consuming imperialist media.

However, Putin is still very mich liked in Russia. I can't see Grudinin gaining majority unless there is a major crisis (unlikely) or Putin resigns and leaves a vacuum. That's the problem when you do politics in the style of Putin or Merkel: You surround yourself with followers, not with leaders.

Thank you, English isn't my native language

It would be pretty cool if he actually won and implemented his program, but does he actually have a chance at winning?

And even if he won, how much would he actually be able to do? I wouldn't imagine the Russian oligarchy will let him do anything without significant opposition or even a coup attempt, since his plan revolves around striping them of there property.

Absolutely based; unfortunately Putin is going to rig the election like usual and the KPRF will end up with something from 40 to 90 seats.

It's not Putin I'm worried about, it's some nameless vodka plutocrat hiding a hitman.

No need to do something like that when Putin rigs the election every time.

*hiring, sorry

Putin isn't immortal, though, and AFAIK he doesn't have any proteges. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility for someone to act on their own to try and stamp out a popular resurgence of Russian communism. Hell, maybe even a foreign government.

Putin already centralized power out of the hands of the oligarchs into the Kremlin. If you have told me that in the 90s I'd agree with you, but the Russian state has been growing in power and seizing main industries away from the oligarchs. There will be still be resistance, but it'd be cheaper for the oligarchs to just fuck off to Switzerland or something instead of trying to put up a fight with almost no popular support (oligarchs are seen as gangsters and tieves amongst the population).

I'm Russian political activist, and he's our best shot in 30 years to seriously swing left.

Communist Party of Russian Federation was in crisis: people there were fighting over leadership, so they manage to force the outside bet.

United Russia is the establishment. Any person benefits to become a member for better legal protection and contacts and all that, especially a businessman.

Putin is very limited in how much he can actually tamper the elections - he he did not, actually, rig them this much at all. What he does is using political technologies beforehand to favourably mold political landscape in the first place.

I said, the rigging was happening, but not much at all. How does it contradict it?

Isn't supporting anyone other than Putin for head of state in Russia essentially playing into the hands of imperialism?

kys immediately you are a disgrace to that lenin hat


you're all just a bunch of delusional socdem retards

he's gonna make a sovchoz out of us, my ass
he is the same nomenklatura that put SU for sale at nominal prices in the first place
with russian politicians it is simple, look at what a particular person did in the wild nineties, and you will see him for what he is, like Putin for example who was a Sobchak's lapdog in St Petersburg

he's gonna nationalize alcohol production? I have a much better proposition dipshit, how about we nationalize oil and gas production? how about we renationalize Norilsk Nickel?
he is just a fucking populist, and if you buy into this bullshit, then your lot is to be a sucker like you are

Putin said it, so there are no misunderstandings
that's really all you need to know about russia

The Russian state already holds 50%+1 shares of Gazprom.

It is when the people who will be in charge are communists.

just look at the composition of state budget and quit taking me for a fool
you can bullshit delusional euros, but I'm close to the earth so suck it
and when I talk nationalization, I'm not talking about control packet


also the sheer hypocrisy of trying to fund healthcare with profits from selling alcohol

it's like trying to fund the Red Cross with profits from arms trade

Dumb critique.

No reason healthcare shouldn't be funded through any and all means necessary.

yes, pointing out that alcohol consumption increases costs of healthcare is dumb, huh-uh
pointing out at the conflict of interests where state would be interested in increasing profits from selling alcohol, and decreasing costs in the healthcare system is "dumb"

Yeah and guess what offsets the cost dumbo?

This imaginary conflict of interest doesn't happen in Canada, where liquor is only sold in government stores.

Stop being retarded.

lel, I can talk shit too about how when I get into office I will bring lemonade rivers
KPRF was talking about ebil oligarchs and renationalization for the past 20+ years and look where we are now

we're talking not about retail here
we're talking about production
stop being retarded

start making Make Russia Soviet Again hats

What fucking difference does it make? According to you, the government has a "conflict of interest" either way.

I support this idea. Do it.

They're still talking about it? Doesn't help that Putin rigs every election.

where in canada do you live? I can't speak for the east but albertas been privatised for a long ass time and sask is privatising now

Alberta is classcuck central so no surprise there. Didn't know about sask. Doesn't matter for point of discussion since they were state held for years with no issues of rampant alcoholism.

No. I know that you're a Slav, and Slav """"""communists"""""" are conservatives with a hammer and sickle fetish, but you're fucking stupid if you think that Russian oligarchs are somehow special and don't possess the same bourgie mindset that every other bourg on the planet does.
That's fucking ridiculous. This is so undialectical, you get million years gulag.
1. You do know that Russian industry had pretty much completely collapsed over the nineties, and it's got even worse since then, don't you? Sure, it's not as bad as it was back then, but it's still pretty fucking awful.
2. With world rate of profit steadily dropping, state capitalism became impractical. You can't expect to fix Russian economy with an industrialisation program like you could at the beginning of the previous century.
And? Almost every US president had ties to the military-industrial complex, you'd think that that would instead ring an alarm bell.
Let me guess, you think that the Union was a perfect Utopia under Stalin, and then Corn Man came and ruined everything, right? My hands don't have the span for the jerking motion appropriate for this.

I've seen this graph bandied about so many times but never any math to back it up. Capitalism has survived for centuries, and yet this would have people believe that the end is near. I'm going to say no to that.

What makes you think this? Low-profit industries or easily monopolized industries are pretty much rife for state-takeover. I rather think the Volcker shock titanically shifted the economic geography of the world in a way that post-war state-focused economies could not adjust to particularly since finance became so heavily favored and its returns were so high.

One American tech company (Apple) has a market cap of 900 billion whereas Russian GDP is at 1.2 trillion. What does that mean? It means just one American company is worth almost as much as Russia's yearly output. And furthermore, just 28 years ago Russia was the world's second largest economy and today Russia is something like 12th in terms of economic output. It's smaller then Italy, Brazil, Canada, South Korea and I've even heard speculation that its smaller then Spain. It's economy is smaller then it was in the late 80s and early 90s and the dollar was worth more then than it is today.

If any developed country needs a reindustrialization program it would be Russia.


the difference is that if you control production AND tariffs and alcohol excise policy you control the market
compare this to controlling some retail chain

it doesn't matter who rigs what
all KPRF ever wants to do is just talk and bitch
it wants to be in a perpetual state of opposition, just like an eternal leftcom
if someone really starts to implement a renationalization program, shit would hit the fun like you couldn't even believe
expect secession movements on the ethnic grounds and consequent civil war funded by local elites across all country
hello Chechnya gain, but at a much bigger scale

Pray tell, how did you manage to misspell it so badly?

No, he doesn't. Put the goddamn text into google-translate or whatever. Not only there is no "nationalize everything", bits about nationalizing oil and gas companies (traditionally present in KPRF program) had been removed.

Minimal wage in Russia seems to be almost 10k.

AFAIK they have it already.


Learn the goddamn words, will you? "Nomenklatura" means posts within CPSU - which neither applies to Perestroika leaders, nor to Grudinin.

See above and below: currently absent.

Yes, he is. He also seems to be appointed by Kremlin. He is also the most nominally Left candidate.

No. As I was told, it was explicitly spelled in KPRF programs before.

For example, text of KPRF program circa 2016:
It's mostly the same, but this bit is absent in Grudinin's program:

I'm not saying that capitalism will collapse within the next couple of years or decades, or that what will come next will necessarily be communism, only that, one, capitalism does have an expiry date, just like the modes of production before it, and two, you can't hope to replicate the success of the Soviet program under the current global circumstances.

Can Russia double or triple its GDP with a reindustrialisation program? Yes, it can. Will it help the country in the long term? No, it won't. What I'm saying is that state capitalism is an evolutionary dead end, not a stage that has to be passed.

T-that's mean.

Oh, yeah, and didn't the Soviets implement it immediately after coming to power? And they also have parental leave, as in for both parents, and free medicine and education (albeit they've gone straight to shit after the collapse of the Union), and many other things that make people from most other countries have a heart attack. And yet Russia's still a far right shithole. Of which I was never able to convince anyone if they know about the free medicine and education, even nominal leftists. Idealists, the lot of them. They, too, will get gulag.



eat shit, dictionary autist
nomenklatura in the popular mind means the upper echelons of CPSU separate from the rank and file members

which is the current worldwide standard way to "rig" an election, albeit indirectly as you say

state holding majority of shares != nationalization

after some rev image search, I found that the source seems to be a 2014 paper, which explains the methodology used. Go check it if you want:

Wouldn't building a larger industry help after capitalism reaches it's end?

Because one does not go Revisionist without paying for it.

< does not notice that "upper echelons" did not consist out of people who benefited from Perestroika/privatization, nor did they include Grudinin
< calls someone autist
Go away.

Free medicine/education is mostly shreds of what it was in USSR. Internet tells me they have quite good (as compared to US) maternity leave (not parental):

Not really. What's important is maintaining capacity for autarky and for pushing scientific research and technological advancement; after reaching a certain stage, communist growth must turn intensive rather extensive, just like capitalism, albeit for different reasons. Yes, this does overlap to a point with industrialisation, but simply increasing quantity of production rather than focusing on reorganisation of economy is the wrong approach.

I'm not sure any nation that needs (re)industrialization should be called "developed country".

Why wouldn't it help? We need industry everywhere, and lots of it.

While it is possible (and preferable) to skip it, it would be an improvement over current state of affairs, no?

What is the rationale behind this?

No, they definitely do have parental leave. I know that Russian MRAs love to whine about maternity leave, and I know that they get shut up every time by being told that Russia does have parental leave.

See the above post.
It would be a distraction. It's a significant undertaking, and as such it would result in a bad case of skewed priorities for years and decades for the country if implemented.

how can you do this without an industrial base?
any country without capacity to produce its own MOP is fucked if its gets separated from the global financial system
it would need five year plans again with all the pleasantries that come with it

Sounds great but he'll probably get assassinated

Yes, obviously, there's no communist economy without an industrial base, but as I already said, it's more about setting the right priorities. State cap is hopeless, and an industrialisation program implemented for the purpose of making USSR 2: Electric Boogaloo is not the solution.

What does this mean exactly?

Same here. I'm not sure I understand the meaning implied.

AFAIK, nobody argues that "MOAR industry" alone would be sufficient. But there is simply no way heavy industry will not be required.

Yes. It doesn't explain much.

I was not suggesting sacrificing Revolution in favour of State Capitalism. Nor did anyone (again, AFAIK). However, it would be an improvement over current state of affairs and legal bits of the Communist movement (as per ML tactics) could and (as a rule) should argue for it, since it both proves Marxist theory and creates basis for implementing Socialist policies after the Revolution.

For whom? For Capitalist state. Why should we be bothered about it spending energy (albeit inefficiently) on creating something that could be used by us later? Unless we are talking about creating basis for Fascism, but that is more complicated topic.

Imo, current status quo is clearly worse.

Stop reddit spacing you spastic.


It means that at some point, there's going to be enough shoe-making factories that any more would not be needed, and in the third millennium, increased production efficiency has already made it so that there's already enough such factories, and we should instead focus on shortening work hours and reinventing Cybersyn for the digital age, and other predictable commie fuckery like managing work shifts and responsibilities in a satisfactory way.
This way easy to understand?
Are you a Slav? Slavs seem to have a weird fetish for heavy industry.
As I already said, increasing production efficiency makes demand for hueg factories making hueg machines in great quantities obsolete.
I'm not saying that it wouldn't be, only that it's a suboptimal route to take. It's fine for a socdem or marsoc to suggest this, but not for a "full" commie.
It doesn't. When NEP was implemented, it was explicitly acknowledged as a compromise solution, and that the SU failed to move beyond state cap doesn't prove that Marx was talking about state cap as the necessary step all along.
All right, this is going to sound crazy, but just hear me out, okay? So, here goes: the Party is not the working class. They might overlap completely and totally, but even that would not make the Party the working class. The working class owning the means of production does not mean the Party owning the means of production. And what is state capitalism? It's the Party owning the means of production. Which isn't the working class owning the means of production. That clear enough?
As for an alternative: every try syndicalism? It's some good shit, very Marxian, too.
Which would be ruled by a nominally socialist party at that point. You seem to have gotten lost in your own thoughts. Take a few steps back and think this over again.

Ah. Is that a post-dissolution reform, or has it always been that way?

As you autistic newfags had been told on numerous occasions:
a) "reddit spacing" implies use of two empty lines
b) in the absence of paragraph indentation your wall-of-text formatting is unreadable
c) kill yourself

Correction: found where I was wrong. There is additional post-birth parental leave at 40% of the salary.

Fair enough.

I'd suck daddy Keynes off tbh.
You need to purge yourself of commodity production think. Transition to a proper socialist economy would alleviate the problems of production and distribution greatly; again, I'm not saying that nothing should be done to increase industrial output, only that it shouldn't be the focus.
Not really. Ever hear of diminishing returns?
See, the thing is, the US has long passed the point of achievability of communism. Right now the country does nothing but waste resources on a scale previously unimaginable.
Again, I'm not saying that extensive growth is bad and evil and that you should just say "no" to it, only that it should be done within the framework of a socialist economy, an economy that doesn't focus on growth for growth's own sake.

We are talking about industrialization, which primarily means heavy industry - not light. It creates flexible supply that could be used in many ways. Moreover, it is highly unlikely it's going to get to such extremes.

Are you retarded? Retards seem to have a weird fetish for ad hominem.

Mass production got debunked at some point? Marxism no longer relevant? Or is this yet another case of wishful thinking about Second Coming nano-replicators that permeates Petit-Bourgeois fantasies?

Realistically speaking, there are no any better options until there is a Party ready to overthrow the Capitalists.

NEP was not Capitalist State Capitalism we are talking about and it is wholly inapplicable to the context discussed (Russia-2018).

What is this nonsense? I never made such claims. I was talking about reducing anarchy of production that is touted by many Liberals as something positive. I.e. objectively and publicly admitting that private property is harmful to economy - which inevitably leads to conclusion that the existence of Capitalists is unnecessary and there are no excuses for not nationalizing the shit out of MoP.

The fuck are you talking about? Also, this is in no way relevant to my point.

Remove your LeftCom flag, you larper.

I think you should try reading Marxistbooks, not Marxian.

can't you see that your "m-muh revisionism" sperg outs don't explain shit?
talk about concrete policies or shut the fuck up, delusional zealot

Now you're just being rude.
Soviet-style state cap is pretty fucking unrealistic if you ask me, mate.
Now this is just embarrassing. You going to prove your working class credentials next? I have to tell you, I'm so working class, when I asked my employer to lower my work hours from twenty four hours a day to twenty two, he immediately pulled out his revolver and shot me in the eye, killing me instantly. I am now dead, a martyr of the movement.


It's not rude since you switched from Marxism to pink-ish Liberalism. So far there is no reason to think the that costs of Capital will somehow fall (which is what your argument against "huge factories" is about). Nor is rejection of abolition of private property (which is what syndicalism is about) somehow Marxist.

NEP existed for 10 years. I don't know how are you going to prove that it didn't.

Ad hominem again.

I.e. "constant capital".

what about depreciation of constant capital, what about technological progress and new production processes?
what about new kind of goods, new industries?

because it is the foundation on which everything else is built, including your beloved meme service economy

Do you seriously believe that a surplus of goods is such a holy grail that it must take Star Trek level technology to achieve? Capitalism has been struggling with overproduction for a fucking century by this point, what could possibly make you think that a more efficient economy would perform worse?

Look, I realise that you're a ☭TANKIE☭ and I'm wasting words on you, but do try to understand that you denouncing revisionists and liberals is bloody hilarious when at the same time you support fucking state cap.
______the point______
______your head______
Are you a fucking lolbert? What's your problem?

Nanofabricators and tailored bacteria. Also fifteen minute work days.

for some goods? no
but it nevertheless requires already built industry so that marginal costs are marginal
just imagine that you need to build all the water infrastructure from scratch
plus again you need to take into account maintenance costs

let's cut off Brits from the world trade and see all that "overproduction" in action, how about it?


Ah. You seem to be under the impression that I was suggesting that all the production in an economy should be done by farting out fairy dust. Well, that wasn't what I said. If the previous sentence didn't convince you, then sorry, do go on beating up that pile of straw.
Oh, don't even fucking try.

Oh, so you're actually neurodiverse. Should have guessed.

it is the logical conclusion from what you said
we don't need massive investment programs into the heavy industry and Department I in general because constraints of material world with its scarce inputs doesn't apply to our socialist economy
which is equivalent to production done by farting out fairy dust

lol, try what?
overproduction in a system as a whole doesn't mean overproduction in a particular part of that system
China may have productive overcapacity, but not Britain

and even then, it is overproduction in relation to the current effective demand
increase income while keeping the prices fixed and see where this "overproduction" and "overcapacity" goes



Do you have any reason to expect magic portable fast all-purpose nanofabs to become commonplace within a century? If not, then it is wishful thinking to expect them before the Revolution - which what "Left" Petit-Bourgeois hope for.

And I mean full and complete one here.

No, really, what kind of answer are you expecting? I already told you that you're misrepresenting my position, so unless you're within driving distance from me and are willing to tell me your address so that I could come over and punch you in the face, there's nothing more that I can do to change your mind.

Does your care taker know that you're browsing image boards? You really should talk with them about that.

I love this praxis. Instead of having to risk or sacrifice anything of your own, you just sit around waiting until "nanofacricators" are invented, at which point communism is immediately reached.

it is wishful thinking to expect them at all
every case of some small scale universal constructor tries to cheat thermodynamics

Why was I not informed that it's a neurodiversity day today?

holy fuck, where do I sign up?

I think he’s pretty good, however when he talks about raising industry I hope he doesn’t harm Russia’s booming agriculture. Ans socialist nation in the 21st century will face lot’s of sanctions and must be able to feed it’s population without imports.

You do realise that IS the point, right? That because booze causes health problems that you use it to pay for healthcare? Most countries do this with both booze and tobacco.

I live in a country with state-owned sale of alcohol, where the profits go to rehab programs and the AA, which seems to work out well.

and i don't even particularly like that guy, ya'll liberal faggots just need to stfu for once and kys

inb4 KGB assassinates him

If the KPRF took over Russia, would it be the RSFSR or the USSR?


This one i think
Thats what OG soviet russia was called before it United with Ukraine to form the USSR iirc

Wow this is the WORST thread I've seen on Holla Forums.

lol chill out this isn't even top 20

the trip you are arguing with is BO's. Retarded LARPing is to be expected. If they can't back up their position they'll yell some Marxist sounding words and fuck off like a squid spraying ink at a predator

#Grudinin 2018

I don't think it will happen.
Putin will probably have him poisoned long before.

It was a good discussion until leftcom got so btfo that his only recourse was to shout autist at everyone and call it a day.


You must be new here.


I can't see Ukraine coming around to bolshevism without an invasion, there's a reason there aren't any Jews in Ukraine.

the mistake Hitler makes here is that it's actually true for all civilization, drugs, sex, and booze literally power everything humans do and it's great. We're gonna have Brave New World style orgies without class stratification, who with me?

Since this will basically be the russian election general, interesting thing from the Moscow Times:




Who is the girl?

Alexey Navalny, the pic related candidate for Russian opposition. He's a typical neolib whose only gimmick is maintaining that it's either him or Putin.

Gudin’ face is blurred.

He's almost like a spectre.

Nope, it's just that this thread really stuck out in my mind as bad. I know there were (even are) lower quality threads, but this one stuck out in my mind to where I had to mention it.

He's a social democrat but a pretty interesting one

Utopian. Production output and distribution isn't an isolated mechanistic factor, it's influenced by hundreds of variables developing arround the dominant mode of production, the material conditions, the human factor, the superstructure, etc. - it's true that capitalism overproduces a lot of useless shit but you are being straight out delusional if you think that we could suspend of even half our current production capabilities to even maintain the current living standard. On what do you base your assumption? It's a falsifiable claim, and I'm sure there are studies about it, so it would help you if you'd post them, because it sounds like utopian babble to me. Like, really dude, you need to proof this.

Sounds like a plan, I would vote for him

Inb4 the absolute madman actually does it.

If this man wins I'm going to learn russian

Товарищ, сейчас я учу русский язык. Я проучусь в России в 2019 е.

what's his stance on Crimea?

I hope it's better than china cause china is ass

Who the fuck cares? Crimeans obviously don't want to be part of Ukraine, and I can't blame them.

Me? That's why I asked? If he wins he won't I might actually consider returning to Crimea depending on his policy. I have absolutely no interest being there while Putin is in power.

Ooh, spicy.

so it's "putin" that drove you out but not the earlier western sponsored right wing coup in kiev?
afaik russia still has legally operating communist parties. kiev outlawed the communist party.

where did you leave to?

No one drove me out, my family left during the economic crisis of 1997. I've been there several times (last time being 2016), literally nothing changed there besides the flags, coin and a heap of bureaucracy. I'd come back if the government wasn't completely full of kleptocrats.
I'm a #NavalnyMissle but Grudinin is good too.

You do realise he is no better than the oligarchs that raped Russia in the 1990s?

how so?

He is a part of the "РО-ССИ-Я" wank generation of nats that followed the fall of the USSR, his anti-corruption "activism" is all about the people he doesn't like being in charge rather than the ones he does. He is basically Zhirinovsky but with a nicer face: calling for all the Georgians to be kicked out in 2008 & cruise missing Tbilisi, and stating "Russian foreign policy should be maximally directed at integration with Ukraine and Belarus… In fact, we are one nation. We should enhance integration." His political policy is to basically just make Russia like America; instead of an autocracy it is just a lovely liberal state where people are still fucked over by the bourgeoisie. A Navalny Russia would be just as bad as Yeltsin's and Putin's.

Lol I knew he had some beef with Kavkaz people but think this bad. Or are you quoting Zhirinovsky? That sounds too much like Zhirinovsky, if not then when did he suddenly flip his position on Ukraine? He's been mostly against Crimea's annexation.

*but didn't think it was…

No that is Navanly. I imagine he is more of a "WE ARE THREE SISTERS" than the "CRIMEA IS ETHNICALLY RUSSIAN" argument, thus wants Ukraine back in Moscow's orbit.

He is some more ebic stuff from him: "In 2008 during the Russo-Georgian War, Navalny called Georgians "rodents" (Russian: грызуны) and called for imposing of a complete blockade on Georgia and eviction of all Georgian nationals from Russia. He further stated that he very much wanted to strike the Georgian General Staff with a cruise missile.[186] "

That is legit Zhirinovsky tier stuff.

Crimea wasn't annexed.

If you aren't a utopianist, then why even associate with the left?
You know, I always figured it an argument against capitalism whenever liberalism cited Marxists' infatuation with the technological progress, but seeing your kind argue against it, I wonder if I'm even a leftist at all. Am I simply mad for thinking that anything at all could possibly have changed since Marx's time? Surely, no one person can claim to be the one sane person in the midst of a madhouse revelry taking place.
Careful, I might accuse you of sympathising with Popper.

Go too the wall…

Putin has been in power since 1999. You think he's going to lose the election now? lmao

happens in literally all western democracies

The Communist Party of the Russian Federation has nothing to do with communism. They are nationalist Orthodox anti-worker reactionaries with a Soviet fetish, and Putin's pocket opposition who are part and parcel of the United Russia nomenclature.

Look at the OP for fuck's sake, he's posing in front of an Imperial Russian flag, used by neonazis and monarchists. My pic is from the website of the org he was nominated by. It's like if Bernie Sanders used a Confederate flag as his campaign symbol. That tells you EVERYTHING you should know about Grudinin and the CPRF in general.

Even if he could somehow win and gain control of the Russian government, nothing would change. There would be some nationalizations and some more welfare, perhaps, but Russia would happily continue to be an oligarchic, imperialistic morass run by reactionary Orthodox schizos.

t. Russian

RSFSR, unless all these parties somehow took power

Thats why ☭TANKIE☭s and nazbols support them


And mexico used to (or still does ) own most of Pemex,


What happened to polonium man then? It’d not like any violent nonstate actor could pull that off, there was like six countries that could pull it off

The Absolute State of Putin's Russia.

first off, i do not like the KPRF other than for memes

but look at you fucking hypocrits, you shilled for SYRIZA even till they went into coalition with ANEL and many even into their total defiant kneeling to germans demands after the referendum
you guys are pathetic

Shut up trot false flag