The Russian State Duma election has concluded, with the Communist Party of the Russian Federation securing its position as the second-largest party, capturing nearly 14% of the vote. Yet, despite the result, party leader Gennady Zyuganov showed no visible satisfaction. Instead, he launched a sharp critique directed at the camera, warning that continuing along the current trajectory could lead Russia to “lose everything.”
The statement was jarring, but it should not be misunderstood: Zyuganov is not an anti-war figure. He consistently supports the ongoing conflict, framing it as a war waged by NATO against Russia, and insists on the necessity of victory. His real criticism targets the “current political course”—in plain terms, the oligarchic model.
He cited stark figures: global GDP has grown annually by 3% to 4%, while Russia’s growth over the past 15 years has hovered around 1%. “For two decades, Russia has failed to produce a single domestic smartphone,” he said. Even the Yota phone, once presented by Putin as a national gift, ultimately collapsed. Zyuganov directed his focus squarely at the oligarchs. During the four-and-a-half-year war, the number of Russian billionaires rose from 105 to 155, amassing over $700 billion in wealth—yet they have refused to pay taxes, invest, or contribute meaningfully to the war effort.
His call for a “left turn” does not aim to resurrect the Soviet Union. Rather, it advocates for a wartime economic mobilization model, with strategic sectors—oil, gas, mining, and financial services—re-nationalized and reoriented toward national strategic objectives, rather than enriching “fifteen families, fifteen pockets.” He sees clearly that, after years of conflict, relying solely on resource exports and market self-regulation cannot close the gap in industrial and technological capacity.
Yet the challenge lies precisely here. The Soviet Union succeeded in concentrating resources due to a foundation of full public ownership. Russia today, even if attempting to emulate such mechanisms, operates within the framework of a private-market system, applying only superficial reforms. More crucially, while Zyuganov dares to condemn the oligarchs, he refrains from asking who granted them their monopolistic privileges in the first place.
At 82, he may well understand this better than anyone. No matter how loud his criticism echoes, it fails to shake the underlying power structure. His remaining political role is likely to remain that of a ceremonial presence—a persistent figure in the shadow of the Kremlin.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1877090514628680/
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.