"And here we are, for nearly twenty years: some, the few ones, however undisturbed by qualms, with a future bought on the beaches of Bahamas, and others, a lot of them dreaming of a more or less human existing...

A pessimist ending, no?

Pessimist, as long as those oppressed will not understand they have the weapon in hands because the current junta: the ballot is already shaking in fear of this weapon!”

Aureliu Busuioc, "In search of time loss," 2011, p.120

Less than two weeks remain until the first round of presidential elections in Moldova. Never since there is this page and I have the privilege to address an audience, maybe a not sufficiently numerous one, but I hope selective (who else has the patience to read it?), I did not have the nerve to come up with recommendations or to call openly to vote for a particular candidate or a certain party. I mean just the first round, of course, and parliamentary elections.

However, every time I insisted and I called to vote! The author of these lines is part of the generation that really dreamed of democracy. I dreamed that we can choose freely, in conscious of cause, the power to govern us. This teenage dream was transformed, paradoxically, in a kind of faith. I say paradoxical because of what we hoped for was something new, and those who have taken full advantage of the so-called "transition" do not cease to repeat that the fault of the today's status quo is namely the "democracy" ... Those who were elected democratically by some inexperienced and euphoric voters do not want to go and try to convince us that the dice are thrown and there was no point to "bother" them useless. Perhaps this is why is digging so zealously at the foundation of this building, that is so fragile already, because they are perfectly aware that only some genuine and healthy democratic processes can dethrone them.

However, are we not already convinced? It is becoming increasingly difficult, and not only in the East, to defend the democratic values. "If the elections could really change something, they would have been banned long ago" Who does not know this wheeze? And many others ... "They're all the same" it is another finding, with a smell of sentence, that you can hear everywhere... The latter argument would be quite easy to remove; it is enough to look more closely at the characters that launch themselves in the electoral campaign. In particular to those who fail to be elected. Even here, did not attempt a Branzan or a Brega (to mention not only them) to gather signatures to be able to formally register his candidacy? We can of course blame the impermeable "system", but the fact remains fact: with all the calls made, they failed to collect the necessary signatures. Whose fault is that? Theirs? Ours? Or the "system's"? And when we choose leaders whom we choose, is the fault of "democracy"?

In the fact that we deceive ourselves with vain promises is just the fault of the one who lies or is the fault of the believer as well? Nor can we complain of lack of information today ... The liar, certainty remains a liar and does not wash anyone's sins, but he lies just as long as we are able to believe. We can say that the politician is, without being too much wrong, a two-faced slut, but the limits of his hypocrisy are set by us. He is not a rogue and a thief only if and to the extent that he feels that he can be. Every time when we say that the politician it's a rogue, we should realize that we are talking about ourselves. In other words - every nation deserves their government ... Another cliche, isn't it?

What could be more comfortable for a good bolted power than a massive absenteeism? Don't you think? Did you see the last parliamentary elections in Russia: only 47% percent of voters went to the polls... You know the results: even those few MPs who opposed to the regime disappeared from "State Duma"... And the films which were exposing how were filled the ballot boxes in Russia were again in the tops on YouTube. And now, you think about it: when it is easier to falsify the election, when polling stations are empty or when is voting massively?

Today's omnipresent phrase is: "captured state". It is easy to understand that the politicians and scribes that uses the "journalists" (I cannot put quotation marks here) who they have in their pockets. However, the plague has entered everywhere. Even saint people throw the phrase: "captured state" to right and left without meaning. Only if you sit and think about it, this state has never been less "captured" than now! I cannot forget how in the times of daddy Voronin, even a guard at City Hall was hired only if he was a member of PCRM. Or let us remember the assault on Antena C with Euro TV? Or another example that I have not talked about it so far: in a village in the southern side of the country, a city hall received an extremely worrying alert from a veterinarian. A cow died. There was sufficient evidence that could be anthrax ...! Do you realize what this means? ... The mayor had only one interurban phone, but he was categorically forbidden to call aside from party stuff. Given the gravity of the situation, the mayor violated the "rule" and began to call relevant authorities in Chisinau. To his misfortune, just then he was called from the "center" (the party). The phone was busy. Let me tell you what happened, or not? ... What anthrax?! The Party was more important! (And Anthrax? To complete the anecdote, the mayor finally did what he thought is better to do. Alone. And it went well. But perhaps it never was anthrax...)

Do we still talk about "captured state"? But we like to think that this is it, to do nothing, to grumble and fall prey to all kinds of rogue. I.e. we behave exactly as expected and that some "captured" fellows, convinced from the start that everything is set in stone, everything is decided elsewhere. I could say also "slaves" but this notion has somehow lost from the semantics weight, as well as the phrase "principles and values", by the way. Here's a recent example: Gofman makes some startling statements to a television channel.The Prosecution Office calls him to testify. Did Gofman went to the Prosecution Office or not? What have we got, apart from speculations and lamentations about "captured state"?

We are the State and as few "captured" citizens are there, the less he is "captured" as well. And we should behave like free citizens! Do not pay where we must not pay, to defend our rights in court, ask for official explanations, to impose the respect of the law by all ... to submit, elementary, complaints and testimonies to the Prosecution Office. Even though we are aware that often it creaks and does not work. Even if the efforts we are making are triple from what it should be, it's just hard at the beginning, when the most of people are law-abiding, the politician has no choice ... Someone has to start to break this downward spiral! Or maybe it's easier as it is? Come on, honest, isn't it easier?

The elections and the voting act are part of exactly the same paradigm. Yes, it's much easier and more comfortable to say "everything is decided beforehand" and ... do not go to vote, watching the debate on politician's television whom you support and chewing your gallbladder, yet again. Don't worry, that television will prove that you are right to watch them, that the state is "captured" and everything is decided from the start. And what do we gain from this? Or, rather, who stands to gain from this?

There is another argument often invoked, which is brought by those who promotes absenteeism: "As if my vote would change anything ..." It's probably the hardest epidemic to combat. In the era of a (fake!) acerbic individualism, when absolutely everything is done to "showcase" the consumer's egocentricity, excuse me, the citizen's, I mean the voter's; when each of them are counting their likes and shares on social networks sites; where everywhere you are told "You are important! You decide what and when to buy" it becomes very difficult to realize and to accept that your vote is just one of millions ... The virtue of democracy is the collective expression in which the individual is diluted in the mass. And the value of each vote is similar to the value of another fledged citizen who does not gather hundreds of thousands of likes on Facebook or re-posts on Twitter... Even more complicated is when the "your" candidate does not come out in the second round. How to vote for another candidate? ... Especially when you come out of a campaign in which you learn to hate them all, apart from yours? It is not easy to go on the streets and try to overthrow an "illegitimate" power (because you, the man who believes that he is important, you did not voted for it)? ... And where we get? What if, once we are in the street, we encounter another band of protesters fighting for another "illegitimacy"?

Yes, my dears, as difficult as it would be to accept, democracy is nothing else but a social contract (the only one valid!) that involves humility (recognizing the value of its own vote) and tolerance towards a majority, that it is likely, have not voted the same way. And, last but not least, the individual and collective responsibility. Because democracy does not really work unless the vast majority of citizens are voting.

It is sad to note what was worn, year after year, government after government, our confidence in democracy. The political elites have managed, in time, to weaken those three pillars that keep a solid democratic system: the electoral process itself, access to information and the education.

However, to give up today the right to vote, to refuse to vote (even in current conditions and whatever of  each's motive), is an abdication. And an active participation in what is called today "captured state".

I for one will vote. Each and every time when I will have the opportunity. Even if I remain the last to still do it... At least to have the moral right to say that the elected ones do not fulfill their given mandate.