Как голосовать против «Единой России». Общий список Навальной и Каца

Summary of main arguments and coverage

• Purpose of the video: Yulia Navalnaya (and her team) releases voting recommendations ahead of the State Duma elections. The subtitles indicate voting begins in less than five days from Sept. 14, and voting is recommended for Sunday, Sept. 20.

• Core claim about voting vs. boycotting: The message argues that boycotting doesn’t require authorities to falsify results because opponents’ supporters would still not reliably vote. By contrast, participating in a targeted, safe way is presented as a method to protest against Putin, the war, and United Russia.

• “Smart voting” strategy: The team continues the smart voting approach used since 2019, proposing one preferred candidate per electoral district. Candidates are selected not because they are the “ideal” choice, but because they are most likely to beat pro-war / Kremlin-aligned candidates and achieve the highest result against United Russia, even under administrative pressure and falsifications.

• Selection criteria:

  • Preference for candidates with the least involvement in Putin’s war.
  • The campaign states it avoids candidates who actively support the war.
  • The goal is to signal strength against the regime through electoral outcomes rather than endorse every candidate’s broader political views.

• This year’s list and collaboration: Navalnaya emphasizes that the recommendations are part of a common list developed through negotiation/compromise with Maxim Katz’s team, with the aim of maximizing nationwide impact.

• How to vote (as described in the subtitles):

  • Go to the polls, ideally at noon.
  • Use a paper ballot, if possible.
  • Party lists: If a systemic party is expected to pass the 5% threshold, voting for it is framed as a protest mechanism that can reduce United Russia’s share, even if voters do not support those parties.
  • Single-mandate districts: Vote based on the district-specific recommendations provided in the linked list.

• Rationale about obstacles and risk: The video portrays the election environment as deeply unfair, claiming that many independent/anti-war candidates were blocked or forced out, while supporters faced arrests, threats, and intimidation. Participation is framed as a way to reward those who took risks and to prevent authorities from getting an “easy win” without challenge.

• Reaction to disqualification and candidate restrictions: The subtitles criticize the removal of candidates for trivial or ideological reasons, and argue that the ballot features regime-loyal figures while independent anti-war options are excluded.

• Additional explanation from another contributor: A further speaker describes their role in compiling the list:

  • They claim to have reviewed “more than 3,000 reviews” of voter opinions.
  • They consulted opposition colleagues across regions.
  • They emphasize that the selection avoids candidates with a pro-Z orientation (with “Z” portrayed as a symbol of support for the war).
  • They state they used Yabloko as a primary source of potential alternatives, except in rare exceptions, and selected candidates most likely to defeat United Russia when possible.

• Intended impact: The argument is that even if authorities falsify results, voters should “throw in the wrong ballots” (as phrased in the subtitles) to create conditions where a regime victory appears illegitimate, potentially forcing broader recognition that the government lacks real consent.

Presenters / contributors

• Yulia Navalnaya
• Maxim Katz (referenced as part of the collaborating team)
• Another contributor/speaker (unnamed in the subtitles; provides additional details about compiling the list)