“The strike must inflict maximum political damage on Vladimir Putin”

[music]

[music]

[music]

[music]

[music]

Good evening, Moscow. It’s 8:18 p.m. in the studio.

Navalny Live. Alexei Navalny, or rather—

one of those wishing to become a candidate, as

Dmitry Peskov quite aptly called me.

That’s the pure truth. I really am

someone who still wants to become a candidate.

I wanted to become a candidate. I entered this

election and demanded that I be

registered as a candidate, and I

continue to demand it. And no matter what,

I believe that we must take part in

this election, and I am a candidate in this

election—simply barred from it. In this connection,

our tactics have changed.

Today I want to begin by

explaining why I so badly want to be

a candidate. But it won’t be me explaining it—

a woman I spent some time with

this week will explain it to you. Let’s

just immediately play these few

seconds, and now she’ll tell you

why I wanted to be a candidate.

Remember, back in 1999 they already knew very well

how these technologies worked, how

to destroy political opponents. That’s

when this process began. And you know,

I got angry after the attacks on me, because I will not

allow it. I will not allow them to

bury me in concrete, as they did with others.

What a fine, brave woman—Ella

Pamfilova, the very person who, two

days ago, smirking in my face,

and in the face of the whole country, everyone who

was watching the broadcast—not only our

headquarters, but all those people who

believe there should be an alternative in elections—

was explaining to us why we

cannot take part in the election. And

look how great she sounded

not so long ago: “I said that I would not

allow myself to be rolled into the asphalt, as

they did with everyone else. So here I am.”

Repeating after Ella Pamfilova, I declare

that I will not allow myself to be rolled into

the asphalt like everyone else. I do not want

to live in a country where there is no political

system. I do not want to live in a country where there is no

political competition. I will fight for it.

I know for certain that in

our country there are millions of people—tens

of millions, in fact—

the majority of Russian citizens want

political competition, and we will fight

for it. Why wasn’t I

registered?

Because they truly understood that we

would win this election. I’m telling you this

not to stir up some additional

enthusiasm or anything like that. I am

actually convinced that in this election we

represent the majority of Russian citizens.

We would have won it. The Kremlin sensed that

very well. Let me show you

a map—a frightening map for Vladimir

Putin. You can see it now. Today

some guys simply made a map

showing which regions, over the course of this

year, I visited, and which regions

Vladimir Putin visited. You can see that, basically,

I outpaced him.

I traveled to a greater number of regions and

cities in Russia over the course of this year. But

I would still like to draw your attention

to the fact that during this year of the campaign I

spent 60 days in a special detention center.

We were constantly obstructed. My campaign chief

served five days—he’s only getting out today.

We were not allowed to conduct an election

campaign. Nevertheless,

we ran it quite successfully. Two hundred

thousand volunteers, the backbone of our headquarters across

the whole country—and having traveled all over it, guys,

I know for certain that we could have beaten

them in the first round. In the second

round—well, a second round definitely

would have happened if we had taken part in

this election. That is exactly why they didn’t

let us in. But in a certain sense we

found ourselves in an ironic situation, as

hostages of our own

effectiveness. Because we had to

show everyone that we were making good use of your

money, that we could run an election

campaign. We worked at full capacity,

and they saw all of it. They

got scared. So they interfered with us. We had

various managers and

headquarters coordinators

constantly under arrest, constantly.

They even arrested

businesspeople, businesspeople’s wives,

who gave us private venues for

speeches. But we did it anyway. Throughout the year,

on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays,

I was never in Moscow,

because I was constantly traveling and speaking

to people. They tried to stop me from speaking, but I spoke.

You saw those ridiculous shots of hidden playground

slides and so on, and so on. I would arrive

and receive support from voters.

Sometimes they criticized me, sometimes they

supported me more, sometimes they

supported me less. But all these people

knew that I was running an election campaign,

and in fact it was easy to run it

because politicians in Russia

completely ignore the Russian people, and

after 18 years, people were basically

reacting like, “Well, would you look at that,”

“some strange guy—okay,”

“some crazy guy comes here to us and

campaigns among us.” At first that shocked people,

but overall they appreciated it, because

that someone comes and talks about things

that resonate with us

not the kind of things they usually discuss there

on Moscow Facebook, but instead comes here

and discusses the things that matter to us

the minimum wage, the lack of

prospects, and the problems of education

and healthcare. But why was I talking about this?

Again, because I

traveled, because first I opened

headquarters, and I spoke with people, I gave

dozens of press conferences there

Well, I could hear what people were asking me about

what questions people were raising, what they were saying

to me in response. It was precisely on the basis of this

body of information, in direct

direct contact with people

every day, that we developed the program

that really

that the majority wants from us. We took this

program and tested it through polling

through numerous focus groups, and we

saw that every point in our program

was supported by the majority of Russian citizens

Therefore, the people in the Kremlin, who

were watching us very closely,

understood that there would be a second round, that they would not

be able to fake this popular

support. They can feed people as much nonsense as they want

on television about 86

percent, but in reality it does not exist, and this

rating exists only in a vacuum. They

understood there would be a second round, and until the very end we

believed we would force them

to register me. We tried

to increase political pressure. Possibly

we increased the political pressure

so much that they realized this was

important—vitally important for them—not

to let me onto the ballot, because if

I

we all—when I say “I,” I mean it in a general sense

all of us, of course; this campaign

was run together. You funded it, you

worked on it—all of that matters

this volunteer movement. When they understand

that we will get airtime, then there will be

an entirely different political

reality—not just some abstract

candidate on a list

in a pollster’s list, but a choice among five

people: please choose whom

to vote for—Navalny

or Putin, Zyuganov, or Grudinin

or Yavlinsky. They understood that in

that situation, there would be no 86 percent, and

no 70 percent either—not even

close. And so, simply to save their own

skin, they brought in all these

wonderful Panfilovas that I just

showed you

for the purpose of keeping us off the ballot. I

want to say, first of all, this is in no

way some kind of

summary or conclusion

to our campaign. On the contrary, the greater part

of our campaign is only just beginning, and I

want to say that right now, when I am

a person who, as Peskov said, is

one of those who would like to be

a candidate but is not a candidate, I

am proud of how we did all this together with you

We really did something very

impressive. But look: our movement alone

our nomination alone genuinely

scared them. How were all the other

candidates nominated, including Putin? Some kind of

vague events. In any case, they were

party functionaries who

gathered in some hall, listened to someone

passed a resolution

decided, nominated. Our nomination, by contrast,

was completely different. And I am also

proud that perhaps we even slightly

changed the political

tradition in Russia. What the political tradition

in Russia amounted to was this: some

people nominated someone and then

informed the country, informed

everyone else: guys, we’ve

nominated someone here, so just be aware

please, that you now have such a

candidate. We decided to do it completely differently. It

was a fairly risky undertaking

In the previous broadcast, I

said: come to the nomination events, all of them

in 20 cities

They could have been broken up, disrupted, there could have been

some kind of provocations

It was quite cold in many cities

People might simply not have come

But we went ahead with it in order to

show everyone, to prove once again

to ourselves that this is a grassroots people’s movement

from below, and that is why we held it

in exactly this way. In 20 cities we held

meetings where people came and voted

Huge thanks to everyone who stood for two and a

half hours in the freezing cold in line

to register, gave their

passport details so they could be recorded

just so that later, over the course of

half a minute, they could raise a hand and say: yes, I

support this candidate. But we

did it, and the nomination itself involved

16,000 people. Before that, no one had ever

done that here. In any political party we have

from United Russia to the Communists and the LDPR

the number of actual party members is an order of magnitude smaller

than 16,000 people. So we proved that

we have them, and that we really

represent a huge number of citizens

of Russia, and the Kremlin saw this huge

number of Russian citizens, got scared, and

said: no, we do not want to give them

political representation, because

because today they won’t just go to the election—there will also

be a second round, and they will also

They win; and if they don’t, that means they will

want tomorrow to create a huge

political party.

That political party would beat our

United Russia (the ruling political party); we don’t want that, and

that’s why we’ll throw them all out. This is a

paradoxical situation which, in fact,

comes down to the fact that they are tens of

millions strong — in fact, the biggest

real political and political

movement in Russia — and they have been thrown out, or are being pushed

out beyond the bounds of any

political field. This is actually their

only, only chance

to stay in power. Why? Because

they can’t do anything in the economy.

I said at the beginning of the program that

it was easy for me to campaign with the brothers

campaigns. Of course, it’s easy for me to run a

campaign because I didn’t even need

to make anything up about falling

incomes. As many of you probably saw,

my favorite poll: what is the average salary

in this city? I knew perfectly well

that people would not name a figure

that wasn’t much lower than

the official 36,000 rubles average monthly wage

for Russia — because it’s a lie, and

no matter how much Putin and everyone else

declare that Russia is experiencing

some kind of economic growth, we all

understand that it isn’t there. Please show

this: today experts from the Higher

School of Economics said — they released an entire

report in which they said that claims of

economic growth in Russia are an attempt

to pass wishful thinking off as reality.

Indeed, and there are many calculations there, and they give an indication

that there is no growth

in industrial production. None of this

exists; nothing is growing. So of course

it’s easy to campaign, but then you arrive and

you see people who dream of

a salary of 50,000 rubles — a laughably low salary of

50,000. You see people who, for

a full workday, earn 15,000–16,000 rubles

The main thing is: there are no prospects at all. You

can be the smartest,

the hardest-working, the craftiest, and

the most resourceful, but your ceiling will still be

those 40,000 rubles. So of course campaigning

is easy.

And they understood that if there was a candidate who

was actually campaigning, he would

beat us in this election, despite

television, despite everything else.

You can talk on television all you want

about Syria and things like that, but a person

first and foremost thinks about their

salary. And all a normal candidate needs now

is to connect two

simple things: Putin, who has been in power for 17 years

and wants to stay for another 6 years, and

this very salary that keeps falling,

these incomes that have been falling

for the fourth year in a row. I was connecting

those dots — and not just connecting them,

but also telling people about my

alternative program, about how we

can change a great deal, about how there is a huge amount of money in

Russia and it needs to be

redistributed properly; we need

to fight corruption. It was very

rewarding work.

They are afraid of that, but we will continue this

work now with double the effort.

The interesting thing is that

well, you know, obviously, we’ve been running this

campaign for more than a year, and of course

the volunteers are very tired, the activists are tired,

and that’s natural. But something remarkable is happening:

today I was just looking at the monitoring of

our meetings that are now taking place

at headquarters, and I see that volunteers — today,

at the evening meeting, even more came

than usual. People have probably gotten

a second wind, become angry — and quite

rightly so, because what is happening now

is no longer even about

saying, well, let’s support Navalny

so that he gets a higher percentage. It’s about

the fact that they have told us:

you will pay us with another

six years of your lives for our

desire to remain in power. In fact,

six years of life are at stake.

Only in six years will all of us

be taking part in presidential

elections again.

No one will ever

agree to this, and we will not agree. We

will do everything we can in the remainder of

this election campaign

to inflict on the party of power

— specifically on Putin — the maximum

political damage. Now, before I tell you

about the Central Election Commission,

I would like to show you

a horrible video. For the third program in a row, I’ve been telling you

that I

have this horrible video. It really is

a horrible video, and it motivates me in its own way.

Let’s watch it. It’s short; I

posted it on social media, so

some of you have probably seen it.

Let’s watch it again: the people who

came to the procedure for Putin’s nomination,

which Putin himself did not even attend — look how they

disgustingly humiliate themselves and grovel,

trying to prove something. Some of them are stars,

well-known people, actually. They are rich

people, people with great opportunities, but

how disgustingly they grovel,

trying to explain to themselves that, well,

it’s somehow right that Putin didn’t even come to

his own nomination. Here they are, without

him, voting for him. Let’s watch.

Polina and I spoke on the phone and decided

replace

summer

[music]

[applause]

He didn't come, and that's not the point.

It's not essential for him to be here today.

In any case, we're with him in spirit, and he knows that.

It's good that he's not here, because out of modesty

he wouldn't want to sit among his own people and listen to panegyrics in his

honor.

Because he's already tired of it.

It's not necessary. This isn't a performance, and there's no need

to confuse the genres. The president has plenty of work to do,

and he is doing what I respect him for.

That's why he is respected.

I don't want this. I don't want this

to be part of my country. I don't want

the authorities to be the rule of thieves. They are

surrounded by this layer of disgusting lackeys.

These are grown adults. My God, how do they look their own

children in the eye? They didn't come to see you,

they made you come to this event,

made you arrive and wait for several hours, and then

they didn't show up, and then someone with a camera comes up to you,

and you don't even say, "Guys, I don't

want to talk to you."

You don't turn around and leave; instead, you try

to prove to yourself, and to someone on camera,

that they didn't just spit

in your face, and that you are supposed to

smile obsequiously, as if this is actually

something you like, as if it's good, and as if this is how it

is how politics should work. What

we will be doing until March 18 and afterward is

to prove to everyone that this is not

right, that this is not normal. We are not

obliged to live like this. We don't want to. Why the hell should we

join these

disgusting bootlickers who have not the slightest

human dignity? We

do have human dignity.

We will never stand in line with them, and we

will never agree that this is

normal. It is not normal. It is

disgusting. They humiliate themselves, but we do not

even need to respond to their humiliation, and in

general—fine, they are weak people,

they are corrupt people, call them whatever you like,

but even they should not be put

in such a position. The very fact is disgusting

that some people have to

humiliate themselves to such an extent—for what, I don't know.

So they can be let onto Channel One (Russia's main state TV channel)?

So they won't be thrown off the radio

and out of rotation? It's filth, and we will fight this

filth. As for the meeting at the

Central Election Commission, I'll talk about that separately. Let me just

take a look now at what questions have been sent to me

with the hashtag #Navalny2018.

You can send me questions on Twitter.

Last time I answered questions

that were sent in right on the screen.

You can still send questions.

We're also still raising money. All the money

that we collect

will go toward the voters' strike.

But I'm not going to read every

question off the screen. Last time we kind of

turned the whole broadcast into trashy chaos.

Write on Twitter. Let me remind you that we

have an app for both iPhone and

Android, and today—hooray, hooray—we've

finally added transcripts, so now all

our broadcasts can not only be

watched but also read. Not all of them yet,

they're still showing the latest ones. So, anyway,

he's still with us in spirit. It's funny—

people are writing in the comments about what was just shown.

Yes, it's disgusting how they

invent this whole system of proving

to themselves that

they can still look at

themselves in the mirror and not think, "What

disgusting scoundrels we are."

"Mironov looks vile," writes Nonfactor.

As for A Just Russia (a Russian political party), in general

something strange happened. They actually

could have nominated a candidate. They could have

put forward a decent candidate, for example

Shein. If they had nominated him, it would have been

a good move. But they backed Putin.

And inside the party itself, they were practically spitting with disgust.

You remember how in 2011 they

effectively

more than anyone else in A Just Russia

used the slogan "United Russia

is the party of crooks and thieves," and now they

have effectively raised a banner over themselves saying, "We

are the party of crooks and thieves." Well, that's very

unpleasant. Of course, this is the funeral

of A Just Russia. What were they promised?

What was done to them? Why did they destroy

their own party? I don't understand.

Alexei, tell us, how exactly

will the European Court influence

Russia so that it complies with the ECHR ruling

that you should be allowed to run in the election? Forget it.

There will be a ruling from the ECHR, and they have already

expressed concern. Once again they will

say that

Navalny should be allowed to take part in

the election too. But can you imagine

special bailiffs from

Strasbourg coming here, walking into the

Kremlin? No, that can't happen, and it won't.

In reality, the European Union does not want to

solve our problems. They look at

all of this and think, "My God, what

is happening?" The European Court is, in fact, part of

the Russian judicial system.

It issues a ruling that Navalny was

tried unlawfully, that the case was fabricated,

that he must be allowed to run in the election, and that all

the verdicts should be overturned. Our authorities do not overturn them, but

then what?

The European Court can't really do anything,

to be honest. They don't particularly want to

do anything either, because these are our problems.

They look at us as if we were some kind of problem,

some wild country, and they think, well, what

is going on there? This man has been sitting

in power for 18 years. He robbed them, he

openly stole from them. They created

the second-largest number of billionaires

in their impoverished Russia, after the United States.

And still, somehow, the people put up with him. Well then,

let them. The people need to do something, so

we have to solve our own problems. No

European Court, and no European

Union is going to do it for us. Valitullin asks:

Will Alexei Navalny keep making

the same kind of videos when he becomes president?

I don’t know. First, I need to become

president. At the very least, so far I haven’t even

become a candidate, and I’ll keep making

my videos and keep fighting

for my right—my right at least to become

a candidate. You ask which song

from Skriptonit’s album I liked the most.

“Animal” is a great song. Speaking of

animals, let’s talk about the Central

Election Commission. Revolting

people. I didn’t start my speech

at the Central Election Commission

for nothing with the statement that I do not like

the Central Election Commission. I

really was speaking there for only the second time

in my life, and each time it was connected with being

barred from elections—first the regional

elections, now these elections. The Central

Election Commission, with very, very rare

exceptions—I mean, nearly everyone there, judging by

their work and their voting, are pretty disgusting

people. But that’s only

because, in the overwhelming majority of cases,

they are, in the literal sense, crooks—people with

stolen dissertations, I mean.

Absolutely vile, nasty people. And

in general, those two days of meetings—

when we submitted the documents, and then when

we came to the session the next day—

they had planned it as a kind of

additional series of humiliations. They

invited some specially selected

crooks—this bought-and-paid-for

Kremlin journalist Oleg Lurie, and

the former developer Polonsky, who

was tried for fraud. And their idea

was that I was supposed to sit

there with those two, and

they would tell us: well, here you are,

the three of you came here,

three previously convicted men, comma: Lurie,

Navalny, Polonsky. Now we’ll

explain why none of you can take part

in anything. When we came to submit

the documents, those two were deliberately waiting there

for us, circling around me and trying

to ask questions as if at some press conference.

Always right next to me, the Central

Election Commission kept trying to

seat us at the same table, side by side.

The next day, they were there too, and

it turned out to be something very funny:

the CEC took their documents and

considered their cases together with mine in order

to explain that, supposedly, they were denying all

people with criminal records, not just

Navalny. We’re not singling anyone out here—

we deny all convicted people. But for example,

this Lurie brought

only one document: minutes listing 26

people, whereas to be nominated you need 500

people and a whole stack of documents. We submitted, I think,

1,700 pages of documents. By the way, the CEC

said they were ideal

documents. Our lawyers were very

happy—many thanks to them. We submitted 1,700

pages of documents, and this Lurie submitted one

single page with 26 names.

Polonsky, as I understand it, brought something similar.

And they considered them together with mine, even though

the CEC should not have accepted their

documents at all. But that is the style of this

government: what matters to them

is this kind of ritual humiliation. But it seems to me

they failed. They

probably thought it would be like

a schoolboy standing there

while they scolded me and

explained that I didn’t understand the law. It

didn’t really work out for them. But

some of the things they said were remarkable.

For the second time on today’s

program, let’s listen to the wonderful Ella

Pamfilova and her colleagues. A very short clip,

51 seconds long.

What were they saying there? Every person

who is being discussed here has a serious

biography, and more than once, excuse me, has looked

hardship straight in the face. And if he

makes his choice, it is based on his own

principles and convictions. But as for me,

back in Soviet times, I spent years working hard

in industry, while all I’ve seen from you

is people who stole everything, spin things, and collect

money by illegal means,

and try to brainwash people, naturally. Well,

all right. And it seems to me that in this case

we, as adults, have a responsibility

toward these young people; we ought to

feel it. Maybe I speak this way

because I am a teacher. I worked for almost

thirty years in a school, and I know what it means

to deceive a young person who looks

at you and makes an idol of you. It has already been shown more than once

—it has been proven—that blackmailing us

is useless.

That was an astonishing statement

from the United Russia representative in the CEC (Central Election Commission), with this

simply magnificent phrase: “But I myself

am a teacher, I know what it means to deceive

a young person.” They simply

lost control—Pamfilova and

all the others—because of course they

suddenly

that I would come and tell them everything straight out

They were hoping it would go something like this:

I’d say, “Guys,”

“dear Central Election

Commission, I very much hope that you will

register me. We really want to work with you

like this. Please, take a look at the documents,”

“maybe we can revise them a little.” And they’d tell me,

“Well, Alexei,

come back in 10 years.” That’s exactly what they were

saying, and I was supposed to reply, “Well yes, I guess I

should wait until my criminal record

is expunged and then come back to you again, because I’m

the one violating the Constitution.” But what I said was

what I was supposed to say, what you had authorized me

to say, or so it seemed to me.

I just structured all of this a little differently—

my entire interaction with the Central

Election Commission today. MBKh (Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s media project) posted a very

funny video today; the new MBKh outlet

put it out. They compared

my speech with the speech

of Ksenia

Sobchak’s authorized representative, who came to the Central Election Commission.

That’s how they want people to speak in front of them.

Generally speaking, that’s more or less how everyone

did speak. And that emotional outburst—

all those stories about “I worked in industry for 12

years,”

“and you rob people and deceive children,”

“I was a teacher, I know what it means to

deceive”—that all happened precisely in response

to what, it seemed to me,

I said on your behalf. Let’s watch that

funny one-minute video from

Khodorkovsky—it really is

quite entertaining. I want to thank the

election commission for its coordinated

work in accepting the documents. I don’t like

using the full name “Central Election Commission,” but everything

was done professionally, efficiently,

and very quickly. You officials sitting on

my neck—and on the necks of those people whom you do not

want

want to let onto the ballot—and I want to express hope

for our harmonious and productive

cooperation within the framework of the election

campaign.”

Surely, once in a lifetime, it’s possible

to do something decent.

Not even heroically—after all, no one is standing there

with a gun to your temple. I hope we will all

act within the framework of current

law in the most agreeable way possible.

If you do not allow me onto the ballot, you will

be making a decision not against me,

but against those 16,000 people

who nominated me yesterday, against those

200,000 volunteers who have spent a year

working on this election campaign.

It’s wonderful, I think—I’ve already watched it

for the fifth time and I get great pleasure from it.

High Voltage asks me why I didn’t

call on people to take to the streets on December 25. But

when I was standing there, when I came out

of there, of course I had the temptation

to say, “Everyone, let’s go out into the streets

right now. Right now I’m going to Manezhnaya Square

and you come out there after me.” But

the experience of this election campaign has shown

me once again that things work only if

you put in the work. You have to prepare an action well in advance.

We announced our rally for January 28,

for January 28—let’s all come out.

We’ll discuss this in more detail

today. Spontaneous things can and

should also be done, but it’s better to prepare. The last

thing I wanted to say in the process was this:

what struck me was—well, I already

more or less know all these people.

Levichev, a member of the

CEC, ran against me

for mayor of Moscow, so I’m

somewhat acquainted with him. By the way, he did not

vote, and even said that since he

knows Navalny—though it sounded strange

to hear that—there was a conflict of interest, so he would not

vote.

But he stayed in the room. I roughly figured:

I thought, well, now these people

will criticize me, and those people will criticize me too,

and this one here

their legal expert will

talk about how I’m a criminal

offender and the Constitution forbids me

from everything. And that’s exactly how it was. But I thought maybe

the Communist would say something neutral

in my favor, and the Yabloko representative, of course,

would stand up for me. After that they would

vote, and

the Communist would abstain, while the Yabloko representative

would vote against—against the decision to

keep me off the ballot. And of course it was

an astonishing thing, because there is

this man named Bulyov (likely a garbled proper name),

he is a member of the Yabloko party in the Central

Election Commission. Formally,

he was appointed by the president, but everyone

understands that he is effectively from Yabloko.

And Panfilova herself, at the commission meeting,

said, “You have different kinds of people there,”

“including a Yabloko representative.” I know

this person; he had generally worked in the

anti-monopoly service, and he always

seemed like a decent guy to me. So I watched

with interest, and when

discussion of my case began, I

thought: now he’ll raise his hand and tell everyone

here what’s what.

Instead, he simply got up and left

and did not return until the moment of the vote.

In just a moment, right here, we’ll

watch the vote itself and see how they raise

their hands. You’ll see, on the left, an empty

chair—a very eloquent one. That is the

representative of the Yabloko party.

Dear colleagues, may I put this to

a vote? It has been put to a vote.

Colleagues, before you is a draft resolution on

the refusal to register a group of voters

formed to support the self-nomination

of a candidate for the office of President

of the Russian Federation.

Alexei Anatolyevich Navalny and

his authorized representatives. Please

vote. Who is in favor?

Who is against? Who abstained?

Or is it as if you’re not here at all?

Well, as if he doesn’t exist. All right, here is another

reason to keep fighting this whole thing.

The Central Election Commission has

what is supposed to be

representatives of the president, there are

representatives of opposition parties as well,

and supposedly there are different views there,

there are liberals, there are leftists, there is A Just

Russia, I don’t even know, social democrats,

and what are they supposed to say? But we can see that

in reality this is a manifestation

of United Russia and of Putin in various

different guises and through various figures

and forms, all of them voting the way he wants.

The most timid of them simply

are terribly afraid to speak out against it. They

step out at the very moment when it is time

to vote. It’s ridiculous—I poke my head out

because of the GIF that appears, but I

remember that GIFs cost money, and money

will be needed by us

to carry out our strike. All

the money you are donating now

will go toward organizing the strike. Everyone asks

me whether we will appeal in court. We

have appealed; we filed it today, on the 30th.

On the eve of New Year, the Supreme Court

will consider it. We did this because

we are confident that we are legally in the right. But I

won’t even go to that hearing. What’s the point?

We understand everything about the judicial

system, and that same Supreme Court, when

it received the instruction from Putin that they

had to shut the case down, simply

sent it back for reconsideration,

and I received exactly the same sentence. So

I know these puppets very well, and

we will carry out our strike and we will

keep it going. And now I am going to talk

about the strike that is written on

my cup. Let me just take a look now.

[music]

Alexei, that’s how it is. And people ask me:

we will prove that these elections are a farce, but

Putin’s gang will not leave; the entire National Guard

and the security apparatus of this anti-Russian regime—

nothing can be changed peacefully. So, the goal

of our strike, which includes

a boycott of the elections,

active campaigning for an election boycott, and

election monitoring and oversight, is

this—listen to me, guys—to inflict

maximum political damage

on Vladimir Putin, his party, and this entire

group. We do not have some technical goal

like: I have to reduce turnout

to 49 percent, and then the regime will become

illegitimate and then it will fall. There is no

such turnout threshold at which

they would automatically become

illegitimate. It is about creating that sense. We will

campaign,

tell people that these elections are

a farce,

that these elections are a disgrace, and that the authorities

that organized such an election

are insulting the people and should not

remain in power. And they do this

because they are

crooks and want to preserve their wealth. And

we will use all of this, we will use

our wonderful, amazing network in

the regions. I call on all volunteers

to take part in this in order to inflict

political damage on them.

They are very vulnerable at this time, but of course

they control everything. People say: where have you

written all this down? But still, one way

or another, they rely on the idea that the people

either support them, or do not see

any alternative, and therefore silently

put up with everything. In recent years it has been

the second option.

People simply believe that nothing

can be changed, that there is no

alternative. In this election, we

will prove that there is an alternative,

it is just not being allowed, and we will

fight them over this. Why do you think they are so

deeply, simply in a panic, because of

voter turnout?

It matters to them. No matter how much you

hear people say that there is no turnout threshold,

there used to be such a thing—a turnout threshold.

If fewer than 25 percent

of voters came to the polling stations, the election

would be declared invalid. Now

there is no such turnout threshold, and formally

it is impossible to derail the election. But the point is not

about exact percentages at all. In general, as I

have already said, sooner or later the feeling

among people that those in the Kremlin

are some incomprehensible, harmful people, and because

of them our lives are getting worse, because of them we

are becoming poorer—

that feeling will come. But we simply

have to bring it closer. We must campaign

very actively here, work very actively.

Besides, all this turnout, all these

figures—they are very fake. Now, who among you

believes in 99 percent turnout in Chechnya, or

in the North Caucasus in general?

No one has ever really done monitoring there. We

will try to conduct monitoring there,

and in the Volga region.

Really, who believes in 80 percent turnout in

Bashkortostan?

Who believes in that kind of turnout in Tatarstan? We

We ran an experiment that I, that I

talked about here recently, when in

Tatarstan, during the referendum,

and, well, in the places where our

observers were present, turnout everywhere was

absolutely minimal there: 15, 10, 12, 20

percent. But where there were no observers,

it was 80 percent everywhere. All of that

was fabricated, in my view, and having

for the first time in all of modern history, an enormous

number of volunteers, we are precisely

organizing this turnout, and in that sense we

will carry out

a huge amount of work. Those who criticize us and

say that we are, so to speak, couch

oppositionists—well, first of all,

they are mistaken, but they do not realize they are mistaken

because they themselves are couch

oppositionists, and they understand that they cannot do

even anything at all, whereas we are going to

work harder than anyone else, and the campaign will

become even more active, probably even

more aggressive, although of course they will fight us

even more aggressively.

Well, the upside is that what we

do gain is that we are not subject to any formal

restrictions. We can raise money anywhere

we want; we do not need to open those

election accounts. We are not subject to

campaigning regulations because

we are not campaigning for anyone. It is completely

legal to campaign for people not to

go to polling stations. We will do all of that

and we will do it very

actively. Now, naturally, there will be

an endless

and tiresome debate, familiar to everyone, about how

a boycott is bad, a boycott

is ineffective, and in general a boycott has never

led to anything. This discussion will be

rather hypocritical, because we will see—

indeed, we can already see now—that it is, naturally,

logically being criticized by those lucky

candidates who did nothing

and are doing nothing, but who were

registered because Putin selected them

for the electoral race. For example,

the Yabloko party, in particular, will

denounce us. But this is all very simple.

When they tell us that

it is impossible, impossible, under no

circumstances can one

fail to go to the polling station because

that would mean betraying everything, betraying

democracy, we should say to the

Yabloko party and everyone else: guys, you too

have had moments in your lives when you

acted honestly and on principle,

for example, in 2004.

The Yabloko party called for a boycott of

the presidential election, and of course here they

will object and say: well, back then there was

a turnout threshold; in 2006 the turnout threshold

was abolished, so after 2006 it became completely

meaningless to call on people not to go

to the polls. To that we should

say: guys, after all, in 2008 you

called on people not to go to the election, and

the statement about it on the party website and

on Grigory Yavlinsky's website is still there to this day.

They called for an election boycott.

Of course, after that they will say to us: well,

all right, in 2008 it was different, but

now it is definitely necessary. And to that

we will say: well, but you were even

brave and honest enough to, in

2017, make the absolutely correct

move and call for a boycott of the

Sverdlovsk Region gubernatorial election,

to which Roizman was not admitted, and I, together

with you, dear Yabloko supporters,

dear Yabloko members, called for this

boycott because it was the correct

position. In 2017, Yabloko

boycotted elections both in Sverdlovsk

Region and in Omsk Region because

the main thing about elections

is that you simply cannot

win, you cannot get anything good out of

these elections if you do not have

your own candidate. If there is no candidate, then

participating is pointless. When there are also

party-list elections to the State Duma

or to a regional legislature, when parties are running,

you can find some point in that because

look, United Russia may get fewer

seats, the liberals may get more, or the left may get more, or

a few more opposition

deputies may get in, or the first candidate on a list

may be bad while the second is good,

so yes, let's push and get the second one elected.

But when it is a presidential election and they have removed from

the country

the only independent candidate, then it

completely and absolutely loses

even the slightest meaning.

There is no point whatsoever in participating in it, and

today an absolutely outstanding article

was written by Maxim Mironov.

You will find it on the blog; do read it. He is

a very smart man,

a professor at a business school in Madrid. He

wrote something very true when he read these

lamentations of the registered

candidates, who naturally say

that no strike is needed, let's

all unite—Alexei, come on, let's quickly

join forces with you and go to the election

because we will achieve something. He

writes something correct: if we are fighting for

victory,

there is no need to unite. I mean, listen,

Yavlinsky just took part in an election

and got less than two percent.

Titov also just took part in

the election—he got about one percent there.

Sobchak's negative rating is also completely

off the charts.

Why do you need to spend your time on

uniting that half a percent when you have

a huge—truly huge and terrible—

source of votes. His name is Vladimir Putin.

Take votes away from him.

The purpose of an election campaign is not

to unite democrats, but to attack Putin,

to criticize him personally.

That’s what I did back then in the mayoral election. I

went after Sobyanin, criticized him for

corruption personally—well, not even

“went after,” if you can call it that. I was simply saying

the truth about him. I talked about the apartments,

the remarkable ones that appeared in his

daughters’ possession.

I talked about illicit enrichment.

I said that he was a corrupt

official and that he could not be mayor.

Sobyanin’s rating was falling, mine was rising, and

the task of any serious presidential candidate

is to run a normal election campaign,

criticize Putin, and increase their own

rating as his

rating falls. That way you can get 25 percent,

30 percent—that is, the share

needed to force a second round.

If you are not doing that, then you are not candidates.

That’s why they are not candidates, because

they say all sorts of things. Frankly speaking,

really,

they say, “Go ahead, write to me on

Twitter with the hashtag naval 2018 about what you

have noticed the candidates doing

lately.” Nothing. And how exactly are they

criticizing Putin in any way at all?

Are they exposing him personally?

He is personally a corrupt man. He has

the youngest dollar billionaire in

Russia—we know how he

got his money, completely illegally. Putin

personally signed the order stating that

they were to receive preferential loans, and there are

many examples

of Putin’s personal involvement in corruption, not

to mention his friends. There are many examples

showing how he is an incompetent president,

a complete failure.

A very poor manager—so say that.

This is the honest campaign that you

see in the picture right now—say it.

Go to Yekaterinburg, Novosibirsk, Perm,

or Arkhangelsk, gather a rally, and

say it there, and your rating will start

to rise. And you will not need to

unite with anyone. You will not need any

Navalny, because you will take away his

electorate. After all, voters are not

strapped to anyone, and the people who support me

will vote for whoever

tells the truth. But they do not want

to speak the truth. That is exactly why they were

carefully selected and deliberately

allowed onto the ballot—so that they could

put on some kind of show. I have quite a lot

of questions about Grudinin. As for the others,

I have spoken clearly enough, and it is hard for me—how do you

feel about him? Well, “Lady Bug” writes to me:

“LadyBug20: I watched his videos about the Lenin State Farm

(a Soviet-style agricultural enterprise). He lives in an ordinary apartment in

the same building as the tractor drivers. Really?

Navalny called him a corrupt man. I, like

you, have seen several of his speeches

on YouTube. They were good speeches. I am not

personally acquainted with him, but he struck me

as a very decent person. But I

cannot say that I know him in detail.

I do know that at all those economic

forums there are two or three

particularly fiery speakers: Potapenko,

Grudinin, and another one, Melnichenko.

They really tell it like it is there. I watch

them all—they are not afraid, and

they have always made a favorable impression on me.

I do not know—let’s see

what Grudinin will do. After all,

a person should be judged by deeds, it seems to me.

Right now, the situation is favorable for him

to run an election

campaign, but unfortunately it is not really noticeable

that he is actually running one. He is a new figure.

You and I know him from Facebook, and

you write, “I watched videos about

the Lenin State Farm,” but you watched them somewhere

on YouTube. The broader electorate does not

know him, and it is quite difficult for an unknown person to get a result

in that situation.

So far, what Grudinin is doing does not

impress me very much. I expected more from him.

I also expected from him a more

active campaign. But of course, at the same time,

I still do not consider him—I cannot

consider him a real candidate, a normal

candidate. Why? Yes, he speaks well.

I am sure he does very well in

debates, and he is not the kind of person who

searches for words. He can say, “Here I am at this

collective farm,”

or state farm, and so on and so forth. But a year

ago he should have started his election campaign,

done what we did, traveled through all

those cities that I traveled through,

done even more than that. But he did not.

He himself learned about his nomination

a week or two in advance, and

is that really worthy of such a huge country? It seems to me

it is not. But let’s see what

Grudinin will do. I am not going to

criticize him just for the sake of it,

or simply go on about how bad he is,

just because he is still in this election. But

nevertheless, I am not changing my position. I

believe that all these candidates who

are running and openly say that they

understand they will not win, but they are running

in order to campaign—first of all,

as we can see, they are not really campaigning at all,

but if they consider it so important

to campaign, then they should say so.

Fine, let them host it, let them.

Let them appear on television, let them appear.

at the debates.

Andrei Malakhov, Vladimir Solovyov, and...

And then, five days before the election, let them...

let them derail this election—they can derail it.

They can do it; they can withdraw their registration.

And then no one will be left there. Or let, let...

let only Zhir... remain alone there.

...in the end—that would be a great thing, and...

let the whole country choose: Putin or...

Zhirinovsky. That is what these...

candidates could do in the interests of the whole country.

That would be absolutely terrific.

But unfortunately, I’m afraid they won’t do that.

They won’t do it, again, because they were...

selected and allowed onto the ballot precisely...

with all of this in mind. And so...

we are declaring a strike. We do not consider this...

an election, and we cannot treat it as an election. And within...

the framework of this strike, we will do...

various things, and the most important of them,

of course, will be participation in mass...

actions, and we have already announced one of them.

It will take place in at least 83 cities. It...

will take place on January 28. Yes, January 28.

It’s cold—I remember I had only just written...

“I’m announcing a rally on January 28,” and someone wrote to me...

wrote:

“And here in Yakutsk it’ll be minus 40°C (minus 40°F), guys.”

Well, six more years under Putin are, in fact, worth...

going out for—even if...

the temperature is minus 40°C (minus 40°F)—and taking to the streets to say...

that I do not agree with this at all, because...

over six years, he...

will make it so that in your apartment it will be...

minus 40°C (minus 40°F), because your...

radiators will freeze up. They will...

continue...

to wreck the country. They will continue...

to steal your life. And of course here...

it is fundamentally important not to be like...

the people in that video I showed you,

where all those famous performers, famous...

public figures, say:

“Oh, we love Putin so much, he’s so...

good.” We do not want to be like them.

We do not want to be merely silent...

people who watch all this somewhere in their...

apartments and curse it in the strongest terms...

but are not ready to take one more step,

to come out and declare their rights. So I...

would like to call on all people who do not...

want to be silent slaves and do not want...

to wait six years until the next election,

who intend, together with me,

joining with everyone else, to demonstrate,

including by taking to the streets, that...

we do in fact exist here, that we...

are in fact citizens, and we have the right...

to political representation. There are...

definitely more of us than all those whom...

they allow onto the ballot. I urge you not...

to be lazy—come out on January 28. Then...

we will announce the next action; if necessary, then...

we will announce another one, because they...

have pushed us out of the political arena and...

want us to just, basically, hide somewhere...

under the bed. They do not let us into the election.

They do not let you onto television. And going out into the street feels...

scary, because they might lock you up for...

15 days, or for some other term, or simply...

fine you—or, most often, nothing...

will happen. But just in case, it’s scary,

and so we just sit at home...

and click “like” under videos. So yes,

you should like videos—but you also need...

to go out into the street. That is the right way...

to fight. They are terribly afraid of that. That is exactly...

why right now, while this...

broadcast is on, there is a trial of Yashin (Ilya Yashin), who...

is, by the way, a deputy, and within...

his authority, he announced his...

municipal holiday. And now they’ve dragged him...

into court—I think they’re about to arrest him and lock him up for...

the New Year in a special detention center. He...

was saying—we spoke with him the day before—he...

said, “Alexei,

I will keep doing all this. I know...

absolutely that I’m right. But it feels like...

I’m going to be...

sent for the New Year holidays to...

a special detention center.” And I said: “But Yashin is a deputy.

How can you lock up a deputy for the fact that he...

[music]

put it to a vote?

Yes, he put the question to a vote, and...

the majority of the other deputies voted for it.

It’s impossible, impossible even...

to imagine—some complete absurdity.

But nevertheless, most likely Ilya Yashin...

—our support goes out to him—and, well, I...

hope he gets away with some kind of fine...

or even nothing at all. He should, of course...

be acquitted, absolutely. But most likely we, nevertheless...

will not see him again until around January 12.

But I am sure, nevertheless...

that at the rally in Moscow on January 28...

Ilya Yashin will be with us. By the way...

there’s a funny sort of conservation law...

like the law of conservation of energy or matter:

the law of conservation of an opposition figure behind...

bars. Today, just as Leonid Volkov...

—come on, show him—I’m very glad...

that the head of my...

campaign staff has finally returned. He spent 30 days in a special detention center in...

Nizhny Novgorod.

Right now he is traveling from Nizhny Novgorod...

to Moscow; he’ll be here late tonight, and...

tomorrow, I hope, he’ll be on the air...

on Cactus and generally get back to...

active work, because we are not disbanding our...

campaign staff structure. We...

will continue to work actively, and right now...

the task of our headquarters is, of course,

to organize the January 28 actions. Help...

us, join these groups.

Today we were celebrating in all the groups.

Leaflets that you can simply

print on a home printer and

put up in your apartment building, around your neighborhood, here

and distribute. Don’t think this is undignified

work, or some kind of minor work, or

naive work. This is real

political activity. Right now, for example,

in modern Russia, taking a leaflet and

putting it up in your building’s elevator,

sharing a video and bringing

an acquaintance to a rally—this is the most important

political work. There is nothing more important—not

writing programs or platforms; there are

certain kinds of activity, you know,

in politics that people here perceive as

noble or glamorous—sitting there in a

tie doing something, that seems cool. But those who

hand out leaflets, or meet with people

on the street, or simply go to rallies—that is

seen as some kind of

lower layer of activism. Absolutely not.

Not at all. It is the main, the key

layer of activism. Without it, nothing can

be done. Without people in ties, you can

do a lot of things, but without those ordinary

people who, for the sake of preserving their

own dignity, for the sake of being able

later in life to think, “I

did the right thing back then”—without

those people who go out to

rallies and distribute leaflets,

print them out, and spread videos,

without them nothing can be done. Those people,

the foundation of the volunteer movement,

they are the most important thing. This is the most important

political work. Attempt number 2.

A viewer writes: “Alexei, how should

public-sector employees act in this situation? You know,

they’re being made to sign and threatened with dismissal

if they don’t show up for the election.” Viewer 63.

No one has ever been fired for not

going to vote. They scare people,

they say turnout is mandatory, but listen—

there isn’t actually a gun to your head, and no one

is going to fire anyone. If you don’t want to go to

the election, say, “I’m not going,” and

they’ll leave you alone, I assure you. You’ve seen

in our videos that a teacher, a

doctor, and even a police officer facing criminal charges

have appeared,

and they’re trying to portray him as some kind of

fraudster, and so on. But they appear on camera

and nothing terrible

has happened to them, and nothing terrible has happened to anyone

who didn’t go vote. Well,

if you’re really afraid, say, “I’m

sick, I don’t want to take part in this.”

Of course, now across the country there will begin

a whole frenzy, and 300,000

signatures need to be collected. In fact,

that is quite a difficult task, and when we

built our system for collecting 300,000

signatures, I realized just how monstrously

difficult it is. And I state once again that I am

absolutely, one hundred percent sure that

everyone who is now collecting even 100,000

signatures will bring in fabricated

signatures—they simply will not be able to collect real ones. They

do not have sufficient infrastructure.

I say this responsibly.

They definitely will not bring in anything but

forgeries, because if you didn’t start

building this system a year ago, you

won’t be able to collect them, because the signatures there

have to follow a very complicated format, with notarized

certifications and everything else.

As for Putin, signatures will be collected for him too;

of course they’ll pressure public-sector employees,

they’ll force students—yes, all of that

will happen. But let’s be honest:

no one will fire you if you simply

refuse to take part in all this.

The truth is worth standing up against

this pressure and these threats. Firmly

say no, and they’ll leave you alone,

I assure you. Look, I served 30 days

and came out perfectly fine, healthy and energetic.

Nothing terrible will happen. We

went out to rallies; there were thousands

detained, in fact.

There were really dozens arrested, but

yes, people were arrested, yes, they served time—but I myself spent 60 days in jail

in just one year. And look—I’m here with you

and

everything is fine. There are a few people

who ended up facing criminal cases; that is

indeed a major problem for them and

for their families, because this regime

always grabs random people

and really imprisons them simply to

intimidate everyone else. Those people, we

have supported

and will continue to support. But we must understand

that they imprison people anyway,

now simply for likes and reposts.

So when those in power are

a gang of thieves relying on repression,

they are always jailing someone, and the likelihood

that they will jail you simply for what

you write on the internet is much greater than

for attending a rally. So come out—nothing

terrible will happen to you in any

case. Six years of your life, your

own country, are worth more than

some potential

fine or arrest.

Alexei asks how printing houses

should respond to letters sent out by

the police. Yes, I published in my

Telegram channel a police letter that

is currently being sent to printing houses all across

the country, saying that if someone

prints something extremist, or in general

anything political, they should immediately report it

to the police. So how will they act? In

printing houses, reactions vary:

some printing houses don’t care, some

printing houses will comply—it depends on the people involved.

various entrepreneurs, or else

entrepreneurs who weren’t afraid and

who gave us their private venues—you

know very well that afterward they were simply jailed

under administrative arrest, and yet they still

kept offering us venues for my

appearances. So some printing houses

will still print. There are in Russia

quite a sufficient number of brave

people. We all just need to take part

in this—then there will be more people. stranger

pearls

What about other, more diverse

forms of peaceful protest—strikes,

various information-distribution

campaigns, taking to the streets?

Right now, those are the two key things that we

know how to organize, and we will. As for

strikes, directly within

workforces, that’s something that

so far no one has managed to do in the last

probably twenty years. But we think about

it constantly. But trade unions in Russia

—the monstrously corrupt Federation

of Independent Trade Unions—is one of the most

corrupt and cowardly

structures in Russia. The independent trade unions,

the so-called independent trade unions, they

work entirely for the authorities, against

the interests of working people. You could

count on one hand

the truly independent unions. There’s

the locomotive engineers’ union,

the locomotive crew union,

air traffic controllers, and a couple of others like that.

But overall, the trade union movement in Russia

has been crushed. A direct strike is a fairly

difficult thing.

It’s quite difficult. Alexei, please record

a New Year’s greeting—I have neither the strength nor the desire

to listen to another round of nonsense from our

elderly autocrat. But I’ll think about

it. Though honestly, I’ve always thought that

recording a New Year’s address by someone

who is not the president or an

official figure is a little, it seems to me,

comical. But you need a certain amount of

self-irony. Last time, last year,

I recorded one; maybe this year

we’ll do it. Andrei Ivanov: all right, if you’re

Saakashvili—well, people have called me that

before—will you use

the Georgian experience in police reform?

Why threaten visa-free travel and all that?

If you want to keep a visa-free regime, then

certainly the experience of police reform in

Saakashvili’s Georgia is very positive.

Everyone who has been to Georgia emphasizes that.

There may be corruption at high levels there,

but at the grassroots level, among

police officers—traffic police, ordinary

police—there is no petty corruption. It has

disappeared.

And sincerely, that is a tremendous achievement

for Georgia, one of the most corrupt

republics of the Soviet Union, and of course

this experience should absolutely be used.

Yes, we should seek a visa-free regime

with the countries of the European Union. As for

the republics of the Caucasus,

the North Caucasus, and Central Asia, I still

believe there should be a visa regime with them.

Georgia currently has a visa regime,

and again, no one died, nothing

terrible happened. We have a visa regime with a significant

number of countries,

a visa regime.

If we achieve a visa-free regime with

the countries of the European Union, and Georgia has

a visa-free regime with them, then that will probably

automatically mean some kind of

simplification of the visa regime with those

countries. There are countries that are, generally speaking, unproblematic—

Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan.

In some sense, no fewer migrants flee from there

in huge numbers

than from Tajikistan or Uzbekistan. Nevertheless,

I believe that, fundamentally, in the

migration sphere, we need to establish

order, and therefore introducing a visa regime

is an important measure. I’m not saying that we should

close entry off—God forbid—with Kazakhstan,

Armenia, or Georgia. Of course not.

But we should introduce a visa regime.

Alexei, please tell us why your

program devotes so little space to

foreign policy. Emil Kerimov

asks me. Emil, because I

believe that Russia should

concentrate on domestic

policy, and the idea of foreign policy should

be precisely rapprochement with developed,

wealthy countries, trade with developed,

wealthy countries, and directing resources

into the country.

That’s why I didn’t go into detail about all these

various geopolitical

series and all that nonsense that Putin now

loves so much, because the main thing

we should care about is the citizens

of Russia. Pavel says: Grudinin is a product

of the Kremlin. All politicians allowed

to take part in these elections are, of course, products of the Kremlin.

It’s just that some may conduct themselves more

decently, while others behave less

decently. But I hope—and I’ll repeat, I know little

about Grudinin apart from YouTube videos—

but it seems to me that he is one of the

candidates who, in this

election campaign, will try to conduct himself

more decently.

Igor Svyashchennikov asks: Alexei,

what do you think about the Supreme Court?

What decision do you think it will make?

Smiley. Well, with your smiley, you’ve already

answered that question yourself. We understand

what the answer will be. Foreign

agent writes: the real position criticizes

with specifics, naming names and figures

not spoiler candidates like Sobchak or Grudinin, but only

they just waffle and speak in vague generalities

but in fact, this is exactly how we will see

the real candidates. Those people who will

criticize Putin personally and try

to take votes away from him will be more

or less at least somewhat like normal

candidates. But simply

saying, well, we’ll criticize him, but not

make it personal—those are people who

are playing into Putin’s hands, and we need to understand that

they spent the whole summer in the Presidential Administration

and roughly calculated, basically,

that we need to get 70 percent

so who should we invite into the election? And so they

figured that, well, Zhirinovsky would

take 15 percent; let’s say Zyuganov

doesn’t want to run, so we’ll put someone else in, and he’ll get 12

percent, while everyone else will get

1 percent each. So the result in this

election has already been predetermined: there will be

more than 70 percent for Putin. So you can

go to the election, you can try

to stage some kind of

consolidated vote for

one of the candidates—it has

no significance at all, because the question of

Putin’s victory and a high result—70

percent or more—has already been decided. This is

not an election; it is the reappointment

of Putin. The only way

to break out of this matrix and not help

them in this election, but instead fight them

and inflict political damage, is to take part in

our voters’ strike. If they think

that we, as voters, are simply

their workers, who must silently

do whatever they decide

is necessary, that we have no right to nominate

our own candidate—if that is how they treat

workers, then we declare

a strike. We are no longer workers for

them. We are not, for them, some kind of

people in blue overalls who come running at the whistle

to the polling station and

vote, no matter what is written there.

So take part in the voters’ strike.

Come to the rally on January 28.

Join right now in your city.

Find your city’s group and join it.

Distribute the leaflet there.

Spread the information, sign up

to be election observers. We will fight for our

country. I’ll see you

on January 4, already in the new year. Happy

upcoming New Year to everyone.

[music]