read it and condemned it

In the newspaper "16 April," there is a very interesting interview with Leonid Parfyonov. Among other things, it contains this: - Do you go vote these days?* No. Vote for whom? - Would you go if there were an alternative? If we imagine these were mayoral elections, and Navalny were running as the "virtual mayor," then yes, I would go and vote. Because this is the city I live in, and I’m tired of overpaying for everything here*. Of course, Leonid Parfyonov’s words are pleasant for me to hear—thanks for the confidence and all that. Nevertheless, that position deserves condemnation, censure, and a comrades’ court (a Soviet-style public shaming proceeding). It’s a very harmful approach: there’s no one worth voting for, but if X runs, then I’ll vote. That is not called "I* want to choose the mayor\president\head of the village council"; it is called "I demand that he be made mayor\president\village council head, and if it’s not him, then I’m not interested"*. We already chose Yeltsin that way (only him, because otherwise there would be red fascism), Luzhkov (only him, otherwise the pipes would burst), and so on. People tend to change, not to mention that they may turn out not to be who they claim to be. People write all sorts of things about Navalny on the internet. What if he really is a Kremlin agent, or is attacking Transneft on orders from Chinese intelligence? The only morally and politically correct position right now is this: I will* go to elections in which everyone who wants to run is allowed to run. This simple idea should become the foundation of the political reform that must be carried out after the fall of the regime of Crooks and Thieves. Fifty thousand people should have the right to register a party simply by sending notifications with digital signatures to the Ministry of Justice. The procedure should be declarative. A citizen nominated for election by such a party must not be denied registration as a candidate under any circumstances. He must not be removed from the ballot. Under any circumstances. No signature collection at all: what is it for if 50,000 citizens are already behind you? If a candidate is a terrible extremist or terrorist, those crimes are already covered by the Criminal Code, so let him be prosecuted through the normal criminal process. Elections have nothing to do with it. If some villain violates campaign finance rules, then prosecute the villain through the normal administrative process. The campaign finance rules themselves should be made as simple as possible. The monopoly on power held by the Crooks and Thieves rests precisely on this: they decide who gets to be a candidate in an election and who stands nervously off to the side smoking. In fairness, it should be said that this trick was not invented and first used by Putin or some Surkov. They merely copied the practices of Luzhkov, Rakhimov, Shaimiev, and other crooks of that sort—all those "strong governors of the first wave." This system must be destroyed. And all of us (including the wonderful Leonid Parfyonov) must be prepared for the fact that people we find completely unappealing may win elections. But everyone will know how to remove them—at the next election. Well, that’s enough about the bright future. But even in terms of the harsh present, L. Parfyonov is categorically wrong. Right now, people need to go vote in order to commit an act of civic sabotage against United Russia—by voting for any other party.