A Marxist-Leninist analysis on the Russian State Duma elections and the “Orange” opposition


English | Indonesian

By B.J. Murphy
December 11, 2011

The Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) leading over 5,000 in Novosibirsk against the State Duma election results, Dec. 10.

What has come to be one of the greatest upsets in Russia since the overthrowing of the Soviet Union two decades ago, thousands of Russian citizens have taken to the streets in opposition to what is believed to be rigged State Duma elections, which had occurred on Dec. 4. It was United Russia who came out victorious as a result, claiming 49% of the votes. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF) – the second largest party in Russia – reached almost 20%, which was double that of their percentage from the 2007 elections.1

Since the Dec. 4 State Duma elections, three major factors were presented to the still-ruling United Russia govt:

  1. Since 2007, United Russia’s percentage of support decreased from 64.3% to 49.3% (according to mainstream figures), which is a 15% downfall;
  2. The KPRF’s percentage of support increased from 11.6% in 2007 to 19.2%, which is an almost doubling in nationwide support; and
  3. Certain foreign aggressors – I’ll give you a hint: it starts with a U and ends with an A – have decided to not only latch onto popular discontent in Russia, but appear to have committed far more shady actions against the United Russia govt.

Regardless of whether or not the State Duma elections had, in fact, been rigged in favor of the bourgeois United Russia party, the first two factors presented above marks a very clear sign of increasing opposition to that of the ruling party, and instead are looking towards the KPRF in the hopes of establishing socialism in Russia once again, as it had been before the Gorbachev-Yeltsin counter-revolution.

The majority of discontent appears to be in favor of that of the KPRF, in which is being stated that the Communists had instead achieved the majority percentage in voting, rather than that of United Russia. Popular belief seems to claim that the KPRF achieved a voting percentage of 35, while United Russia had only achieved 32%2:

Though, this article isn’t to analyze the results of the State Duma elections, nor to state that the KPRF had, in fact, won themselves into parliamentary power. The reason for this article is to instead analyze a certain response to the alleged State Duma fraud, in which factor #3 goes into as presented above.

United States targets United Russia 

It was Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin who took the first step in declaring opposition to what appeared to be signs of imperialist propaganda – whether true or not – by that of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton by stating, “The first thing that the secretary of state did was say that they were not honest and not fair, but she had not even yet received the material from the observers.”3

Indeed, it would then force us to question why the U.S. would be toting the same line taken on by that of the Russian opposition. In which would then lead us to the conclusion that the interests of the U.S. do not correlate with that of the interests of, say, the KPRF in regards to the reasoning of opposing the State Duma election results. While the KPRF stand in opposition to the election results under the interests of the Russian working class and poor, the U.S. instead are operating under the interests of capitalism-imperialism.

Currently in the U.S. there have been a set of large nationwide demonstrations known as the Occupy Movement, in which has met fierce suppression by that of police, ranging between pepper spraying peaceful protesters, beating students with batons and shields, and even raiding occupied encampment sites while the protesters were sleeping. And yet, the U.S. govt. does nothing to try and stop the oppression. So it would then call into question why the U.S. is taking on the hypocritical line of demonizing the Russian ruling party for conducting in similar tactics, when the U.S. itself cannot even control their own acts of state-violence.4

The U.S.’s own mainstream media outlet Fox News, known for their already misleading news coverage over the Occupy Movement, were caught in the act when they tried spreading both photos and video coverage of a riot taking place in Greece, and then instead claim it was occurring in Russia as a result of the rigged State Duma elections.5

Though, when given a closer look, one could then conclude that the interests of the KPRF do not reflect that of other opposition forces inside Russia. When pressed on the issue of the State Duma elections by Russian journalist Andrei Sitov, it was the U.S. Press Secretary Jay Carney who confirmed the revelation that the U.S. weren’t just opposing United Russia by word only:

“Q … Americans keep trying to influence our internal politics, keep spending money on it — which is true, because I asked Mark Toner the other day at the State Department. He gave me a figure of $9 million that the U.S. spent on supporting the process of elections in Russia.

“MR. CARNEY: We support democracy.”6

Not much clarification was made at that time in what Mr. Carney meant by “We support democracy,” but was soon then clarified the next day when pressed on the issue again by U.S. congressman Chris Smith:

“Q … On U.S.-Russia relations, you and Andrei discussed yesterday aid that Putin calls “meddling” in his country’s internal affairs — aid for democratic elections. What does our $9 million buy us?

“MR. CARNEY: … I know that, broadly, the United States, through the State Department, supports efforts to help democratic organizations and democracy around the world, as we should, as administrations of both parties have. And I would — going back to that point, I will say quite affirmatively that the number here that the State Department has put forward is the correct number, in terms of money spent. And again, no one should be surprised that we speak out for and work for democracy around the world. We think it’s the right thing.

“Q Does that mean providing aid to opposition groups in Russia?

“MR. CARNEY: Again, I would refer you to the State Department for the specifics of the programs here. All we’re about here […] is support for democracy and holding those who participate in the democratic process around the world to standards of action as opposed to rhetoric […] because we believe that democracy is a good thing.”7

Of course, the U.S. sense of “democracy” is that of free-market profiteering via resource extraction from both domestic and foreign soil. Though, it isn’t Russia’s resources in which the U.S. is hoping to reap from, but rather that of Syria’s resources instead, particularly that of oil production. Today they’re still able to produce over 400,000 bbl/day and export over 250,000 bbl/day.8 None of which is reaching the hands of U.S. oil corporations. Gold is another valuable resource inside Syria, consisting up to $20.5 billion worth.

So why is Russia getting mixed into the conflict? Because it is Russia who stands in the way between Syria and the U.S. invading the country. As soon as it became clear to Russia that Syria was in threat of being possibly invaded by U.S./NATO forces, it had then sent a Russian warship into Syrian waters to defend the country from a “Libya-styled” military intervention.9

The “Orange” opposition?

So which opposition are we talking about here? To be quite honest, no one seems to know yet which fraction of the opposition the U.S. is funding from within Russia. Whomever they may be, Western mainstream press are now touting the various peaceful protests in being a so-called “orange revolution”.

A “color revolution” is always waged under the interests of capitalism-imperialism, as according to Eva Golinger, Venezuela-American attorney:

“Colored revolutions always occur in a nation with strategic, natural resources: gas, oil, military bases and geopolitical interests. […] The movements promoted by US agencies in those countries are generally anti-communist, anti-socialist, pro-capitalist and pro-imperialist.”10

To reach this understanding, as Marxist-Leninists in the U.S., it is up to us to stand in opposition against any imperialist aggression against the Russian State, whether it be media propaganda, economic sanctions, or outright military confrontation. We must always place the primary contradictions – that being national liberation – before secondary contradictions – that being social revolution.

As Marxist-Leninists in Russia, the KPRF know this vital fact very well, in which they had recently stated in response to both the rigging of State Duma elections and the so-called “orange revolution”:

‎”We appeal to the opposition parties, trade unions, youth, community organizations, and civic activists, regardless of their political affiliation, to unite in defense of democracy, justice, and human rights; to counter the omnipotence of corrupt officials, encroached on the property recently robbed from the people – their right to vote.

“However, we do not accept attempts by pro-NATO, ultra-liberal forces using popular resentment in order to push the country into “orange” confusion and chaos.”11

I do, however, find it highly unlikely that the U.S. will ever invade Russia as a result of their protecting Syria, nor do I believe they’d resort in economic sanctions. Instead, as it appears, I believe they’ll rely on funding internal sabotage via “color revolution”. In fact, they’d already taken their first steps by providing $9 million to a fraction of the Russian opposition.

Similar failed attempts were made in the last year in both Iran12, 13 and Belarus14 by claiming their elections were a fraud. The only difference is that in both Iran and Belarus, neither of their leaders had faced a decline in support among their people, and no popular discontent was waged against the elections. Instead there were pocketed sections of the minority receiving funds by that of pro-Western imperialist NGOs. Whereas in Russia the United Russia ruling party have lost a considerable amount of support among its people and a great portion of the opposition consists of both supporters and members of the KPRF.

Which then leaves us to a possible conclusion that the U.S. are sending funds to that of the, again pocketed sections of the minority, right-wing opposition who stand against both the Communist Party and the United Russia party. Why? Because both parties, although opposed to one another, operate under the interests separate from that of U.S. interests, whether it be the KPRF’s socialist interests to that of the Russian working class and poor or United Russia’s bourgeois nationalist interests which conflict with that of the U.S.’s foreign policy of profiteering.

Hands Off Russia! 
Down with Western Capitalism-Imperialism!
Long Live the Communist Party of the Russian Federation!  

1. “Preliminary outcome of the State Duma elections”, RIA Novosti, December 5, 2011.

2. Shamir, I., “What Really Happened in the Russian Elections”, CounterPunch, December 7, 2011.

3. Herszenhorn, D. and Barry, E., “Putin Contends Clinton Incited Unrest Over Vote”, The New York Times, December 8, 2011.

4. “Irony alert: U.S. calls on Russia to respect peaceful protests”, The Raw Story, December 9, 2011.

5. “FOX, lies & the wrong videotape: What’s NOT happening in Moscow”, Russia Today, December 8, 2011.

6. “Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 12/8/2011”, The White House, December 8, 2011.

7. “Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney, 12/9/2011”, The White House, December 9, 2011.

8. “Middle East : Syria”, CIA World Factbook, November 29, 2011.

9. “Russia sends warships to Syrian waters”, Press Tv, November 19, 2011.

10. Golinger, E., “OPINION: Colored Revolutions Made in USA”, Geopolitical Monitor, October 14, 2011.

11. “Заявление Президиума ЦК КПРФ. Прошедшие выборы в Государственную Думу были нечестными и несвободными. Мы считаем их нелегитимными, как с моральной, так и с политической точек зрения”, Communist Party of the Russian Federation, December 10, 2011.

12. Murphy, B., “Protests in Iran called for: A people’s revolution or “color revolution”?”, The Prison Gates Are Open…, February 14, 2011.

13. Murphy, B., “U.S. media playing with numbers in Iran”, The Prison Gates Are Open…, February 19, 2011.

14. Majidi, M., “Imperialists claim fraud in Belarus election”, Party for Socialism and Liberation, December 28, 2010.


6 responses »


  2. Great, Murphy! Then we just began with the translation in Bahasa (Indonesia language), and hope your analysis and Heiko Khoo’s opinion (Dec 8/would you please to answer our question/comment accordingly) will be posting together on Dec 14 onto our blog. What do you think?

  3. As someone living in Russia, I can tell you that this opposition movement is not an “orange” movement by any stretch of the imagination. Putin does not oppose the US and is a willing lackey of the EU. They have announced plans for more privatization and recently Putin spoke of possibly pardoning the oligarch and long-time enemy Khodorkovsky. Even if some groups in the US or Europe are funding the liberals, they are such an insignificant group that it really does not matter. They are a tiny, irrelevant minority. The KPRF can only be called Communists in name only, but in any case their victory would be a disaster for the EU and US.

  4. Pingback: Report: Russia’s Communist Party won 2011 polls | The prison gates are open...

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s