Found this short and sweet article by the guy we know after looking at my own view on elections and how to articulate my criticism of engagement in electoralism better.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/apr/09.htm

There are two points he makes, one about what dual power is in a three points list. Another one about what to do with the bourgeois government that has entered into an agreement with the soviets. When talking about "majority" he does not mean elections, although some people might think that. He means within the workers' soviet. He's also calling out specifically to this proletariat & peasant government, so bourgeoisie and such are excluded by nature.

Here are my thoughts:

Bourgeoisie elections would be entirely excluded as a possible avenue for this power. Does that mean never ever participate in elections? Obviously not, since such sweeping statements are abstract and anti-dialectical, but if you ever were active in ANY party that does participate in them, you know how much work they take and how much they expose you not just to the political system, security apparatus scrutiny and last but not least, the societal power apparatuses, among other things what Althusser called "the ideological state apparatus".

All of these things will severly hinder you in doing mass work and building the party. Bourgeois politics separate the elected people from the party apparatus as much as possible, making it hard to keep them integrated within the aims of the party, which are opposed to the existence of said system. Not going to get into the details of opportunism here, they should be known. This is very obvious with struggles in typical soccdem parties against established parliamentarians, but it would be naive to not assume that to extend to parties that wear communist symbols or names.

To give an example:

Looking at a non-marxist group that has dual power and participates in elections, namely hezbollah, we can see how they got to the place they are in, being effectively the "kingmaker" of lebanese presidential elections and controlling parts of the judiciary as well as having a kind of veto power in the lebanese parliament; they achieved mass popularity by a combination of fighting the Israeli occupation, straight out murdering other parts of the opposition and doing incredibly efficent mass work that also serves purposes of political education as well as gathering intelligence for them.

Only with these prerequisites they achieved electoral success. The lebanese electoral system is also uniquely fucked, so take that with a grain of salt. The power they wield in established structures is a symptom of the actual base of their power, not the source, although it helps them stay on (the relative) top.

Edit for typos