TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- In Praise of Vladimir Putin
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

In Praise of Vladimir Putin

You certainly won't read this in the dumb American press, but I specialise in its British counterpart, as always, so I bring you some fresh perspective from The UK Times. This was written by an Oxford professor of Modern History.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/co...icle2582598.ece

quote:

Yet again President Putin�s fingers are being rapped: he has apparently been trying to hang on to power. Russia�s Constitution was written more or less to Western order, back in the days when free markets and democracy were supposed to reign. Models were consulted. The French one has a president with powers such that the prime minister is a glorified office-boy; but, in Russia, as in the American model, presidents are not supposed to run for office more than twice in case it goes to their heads. Vladimir Putin may retire to run Gazprom but instead, quite astutely, he is finding a way to hang on to power. He can put himself forward as deputy for the reigning party, then become prime minister, and push forward, as nominal president, a man in his mid-sixties whom he can control. Such devices are not at all without precedent in Russia. Moving an older or even an aged man, without ambition, into a high office so that he can be controlled from behind has long origins, beyond even communist times. If Vladimir Putin is finding a way to hang on to power, then he is doing so within the tradition. And the very first thing to be said is that he has been a very successful leader of the country. Not so long ago, Russia was being written off. Wise persons shook their heads. Moscow was like Berlin in the latter days of the Weimar Republic � Cabaret, complete with rampaging inflation, old women selling their husbands� medals in the underpasses of the ring roads, prostitutes all over the place (every businessman had his story), a collapsing birthrate, gangster-capitalism raking it in and making whoopee in hotels in Monte Carlo. There was even a school of thought to the effect that the whole of Eurasia was turning into a Latin America: a Slavonic culture disintegrating as the overall Spanish culture of Latin America had done, into oil-rich turbulent Venezuelas on the one side, and weird, atmosphere-poor Bolivias on the other, while wars went ahead between assorted Hondurases and Nicaraguas. Under Putin, Russia has not turned into Latin America. Quite the contrary. Reality on the ground in Russia nowadays is different, and this is not just to do with the recent rise in oil prices. If you go to the provincial towns east and south east of Moscow � Vladimir, say, or Saratov � you can see a successful change going ahead, as people set up businesses such as furniture factories to make up for that lack of consumer goods that marked the old Soviet Union. The university in Saratov has state-of-the-art computers; even agriculture is said to be improving. The horrors of Chechnya are receding into the past and the International Herald Tribune, not a lover of Putin, recently carried an article about the return of order there: the planes fly back and forth and Grozny is being restored after two decades of vicious nonsense including that horrible massacre of schoolchildren three years ago. Of all things, tourism is being encouraged, and the Chechen insurgency seems to be a horror story of the past. There are other encouraging signs. In old Russia, the Tatars were a very important element, not backward Muslims as was sometimes casually supposed: they were good traders, and their habit of sobriety made them stand out. Now, Tatars have been adding their creative element (two instances that will have British resonance: both Nureyev and Barishnikov are Tatar names, Nur from �light� and Barish from �peace�). The Russians are even marketing an aircraft that will challenge Boeing and Airbus. So if Putin thinks that he has done well by his country he is not wrong, and masses of ordinary Russians agree. Now, Russia is recovering, and is back on the world�s stage. Why should a successful president be held back by some constitutional formality? There is no real reason for constitutions to be set in tablets of stone. Referendums were staged elsewhere in the old Soviet continent for successful and popular presidents to stay in office, and it is maybe a measure of Putin�s lack of self-confidence that he shrinks from that. Does he really have to fear the criticism of Europeans, let alone Americans, who now seem to be settling into their own pattern of dynastic politics? Of course his regime is not pure, in the approved Scandinavian manner. It has had to deal with horrible problems of terrorism, and no government can ever be entirely without sin in conditions of that sort. But Putin has highlighted an aspect of Russia that anyone in London should recognise. Russia, like Britain, is a country with a capacity for tissue regeneration. In the Seventies, you would have written Britain off. And then, lo and behold, in the Eighties she struck back � many, many things wrong, of course, but back just the same. It is an odd fact that English literature translates best into Russian, and vice versa. Two countries on the European edge, with the same diagonal approach, and very interested in each other. We should not be criticising Putin: rather, encouraging him to stage that referendum.

Thanks for posting that. I've been looking for another side of the Putin story but almost all the media I see regularily has the same slant.

There's a reason why Putin's popularity in Russia is at around 80% ... and its not a propaganda figure.

"Hello Good Times for Russia"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/co...icle2584595.ece

quote:

Vladimir Putin�s announcement that he will �consider� becoming Russia�s prime minister after stepping down as President next March raises two troubling questions: does this mean that Russia is moving back towards some form of post-Stalinist dictatorship? Or is the transition from communism to some form of free-market capitalism really an irreversible fact? The answer to both these question is yes. Russia, after its brief flirtation with ultra-liberalism under Boris Yeltsin, is again becoming an authoritarian society. But in saying this, we also have to acknowledge that the failure of democratic politics will not bring back communism and may do the Russian economy no harm. The Putin regime�s economic management has been surprisingly competent and has turned the global energy boom to generally good use. In fact, the Putin dictatorship has a serious chance of creating a successful capitalist economy in Russia in much the same way that the Deng Xiaoping dictatorship turned China into an economic superpower. The statement that �free markets create free people� may have been treated as axiomatic in the idealistic heyday of Reagan and Thatcher, but it was never really more than a rhetorical trope. History has seen plenty of tyrannies that have run their economies on broadly free-market lines. There is a natural tendency for economic freedom to create competing centres of political power, but the link between economic and political liberalism is far from a one-to-one correlation. And even to the extent it is valid, it operates on a timescale of decades or centuries, not years and months. It is wishful thinking, therefore, to suppose that Russia will pay a price economically if it succumbs to a Putin personality cult. It is even more fanciful to imagine that Western investors will flee Russia if it continues to stray from the democratic path. Western oil companies and banks have a long history of profitable cooperation with dictators in the Middle East, Asia and Latin America and they will have no problem working with an autocratic Russia. This is particularly true at present, because Russia�s economic outlook is surprisingly good. Its economy has grown so strongly throughout this decade that it has built up a large reserve cushion, as well as developing a self-sustaining momentum that is independent of the global energy boom. Its GDP is forecast to grow by 6.5 per cent this year and a similar performance is confidently expected for 2008, which will be the tenth successive year of growth of 6 per cent. Given that Russia�s population is declining by 0.5 per cent annually, per capita living standards and productivity are now rising almost as fast as in China, while starting from a base that is three times higher than China�s in dollar terms. The combination of rapid economic growth and a rapidly rising rouble has boosted Russia�s GDP to $1.2 trillion, making it the world�s ninth-largest economy and the biggest developing economy after China. More surprising even than Russia�s rapid growth rate has been the prudence of its economic management under Mr Putin. Essentially all public debt has been repaid and Russia�s $400 billion foreign currency reserves are the third-largest in the world, after China and Japan. The trade surplus, at 5 per cent of GDP, is bigger relative to the economy than Japan�s and the Government has a huge budget surplus, with half the revenues from energy exports sequestered in a $150 billion foreign currency stabilisation fund, where it is kept away from government ministries and politicians. And Russian policymakers, from Mr Putin downwards, have shown impressive awareness of the �natural resource curse� that has blighted such richly endowed economies as Nigeria, Venezuela and Iran. While Mr Putin has bragged provocatively about his country�s �energy superpower� status, he has tried to diversify the economy away from its excessive reliance on natural resources. And as any visitor to Moscow and St Petersburg can testify, these efforts to diversify have produced some results, with wealth from mineral extraction gradually trickling down from energy to other businesses; from the big cities to the provinces; from the oligarchs to the middle class � and even to ordinary proletarian households, which are finally seeing their living standards restored to the levels they enjoyed under communist rule. If all these favourable figures seem too good to be true � a bit like the Soviet output and construction statistics in the good old days of Nikita Khrushchev � they probably are. Russia has many economic vulnerabilities not captured by the favourable statistics: corruption in the legal and tax system; weak protection of property rights; political mismanagement of energy resources; the small size and inefficiency of the service sector and a vast backlog of underinvestment in transport and social infrastructure. Worst of all is the country�s demographic outlook. Russia suffers from a unique combination of collapsing birth rates and rising death rates. It is the only country outside Africa where life expectancy has fallen in the past ten years, mainly because of alcoholism, accidents, suicide, crime, drugs and Aids. Whether Mr Putin has any real ideas on how to tackle these social problems is an open question, but at least economic growth will create enough resources to restore the health and education services that were destroyed in the Yeltsin period. Of course, it might have been preferable for the future of liberal capitalism in Russia if Mr Putin had consigned himself to a monastery and handed power to a triumvirate of Gary Kasparov, George Soros and Alan Greenspan. But realistically, there was a serious risk that Mr Putin�s departure would trigger a new battle for power and a scramble for control of Russia�s mineral wealth. It now seems probable, instead, that stability and property rights will be guaranteed � not by democracy or the rule of law, but by the desire of ruling politicians and business oligarchs to protect the wealth and power that they have already have, instead of trying to grab even more. In a historical context, the gradual stabilisation of Russian politics and economics is starting to look like an accelerated version of the transition of the 12th century in Western Europe � when the anarchic tribalism and organised robbery of the Dark Ages gradually gave way to the feudal system and the rule of law. Russia was Europe�s fastest-growing economy from 1900 to 1914. Politically, this was not a happy period; but had it not been for the incompetence and miscalculations of the Romanovs, Russia might well have avoided the Bolshevik revolution and managed to reform itself from an agrarian feudal economy into a modern capitalist state. Russia now has a second chance to complete this transition � and Vladimir Putin, for all his faults, seems determined not to blow it.

Fucking Jesus Christ. Pardon my language. That article is shit.

Reason:

"Do svidaniya democracy, and hello good times"

"Vladimir Putin�s announcement that he will �consider� becoming Russia�s prime minister after stepping down as President next March raises two troubling questions: does this mean that Russia is moving back towards some form of post-Stalinist dictatorship?"

WTF does that mean? Where is the evidence that Russia is moving back to dictatorship? This article is absurd. Its comparing Russian current trend to that of 1900-1914, which is incorrect - its like comparing apples to oranges.

I am so tired, so unless someone wants to raise a point for discussion, I dont feel like bothering wasting my time arguing this yet another Russophobic article ... but I am still laughing at the fact that remaining in politics in A DIFFERENT FORM (prime minister) is considered to be authoritarian. LOL! For a country like Russia, where there's not a single political force that can continue the great work that Putin did, Putin needs to stay in a different form in politics to continue the course of raising Russia's levels of prosperity. All other candidates are incompetent, and they will need Putin's advice and help to continue steering the country in the right direction. Or else, Putin's term could turn out to nothing more than a waste of 8 years of hard work ... even in the West its not considered breaking the law, especially when approved by popular vote / Congress / Duma / whatever, and Russians have 80% trust in Putin right now. Me included.

EDIT: The only way Putin's actions can be considered as authoritarian if he does something against the votes, wishes, constitution of the country and its people. Which HAS NOT happened. If the Russian people vote (internationally monitored) to change the constitution, its not authoritarian. If Putin is chosen by the succesor (who is elected democratically monitored by international groups) as his prime minister to help him continue the course, there's no breaking laws there.


So why the f*** does the Western media keep talking about return of authoritarian regime to Russia? Where's the logic, the evidence, why do they scare the Western public? Why the propaganda? Seriously ... its quite evidence that articles like this are bunch of lies. British tabloids.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium So why the f*** does the Western media keep talking about return of authoritarian regime to Russia? Where's the logic, the evidence, why do they scare the Western public? Why the propaganda? Seriously ... its quite evidence that articles like this are bunch of lies. British tabloids.

Because the people who are in charge of the media still don't trust Russians?

Because the western world needs an enemy to justify certain spending and legislation?

Because "everybody happy" doesn't sell news papers?

I've run into a few people in business who've quite openly told me "never trust a russian", usually with little reason. By the same token, if that's the attitude of western business I'm assuming there would be a similar but apposing attitude in Russia toward westerners.

quote:

Originally posted by atbell I've run into a few people in business who've quite openly told me "never trust a russian", usually with little reason. By the same token, if that's the attitude of western business I'm assuming there would be a similar but apposing attitude in Russia toward westerners.

Exactly. Recently (well, sort of - few months ago) I was following the developments of the Russia's OAO Severstal and Luxembourg-based Arcelor SA merger, which was approved on the Russian side, and Seversal was to have a 33.2 percent share in it, which is pretty good for Arcelor.

"Under the $16.6 billion deal, Mordashov, 40, would become Luxembourg-based Arcelor's biggest shareholder, with a 33.2 percent stake, while Arcelor would acquire 89.6 percent of Russia's biggest steel company, plus mining assets AND 1.25 billion euros in cash."

"Severstal is a private company. It's up to the shareholders to decide its course," Mordashov said. But he added that "we have talked about the deal with many people" and he felt the reaction from the authorities was "very positive."


Mordashov said in his conference call that the bid proved that "Russia is an open country" and Severstal's case would be a precedent for more international mergers as "many Russian entrepreneurs want to become global."

http://www.templetonthorp.com/en/news1257


BUT, the fear of Russia instead resulted in the annulation of the merger deal by the board and the investors who instead decided to pact with Mittal Steel Co. NV of India on worse terms for Arcelor, and now it seems that deal with Indian giant will have to be annulled because the Arcelor shareholders are not comfortable with a lot of power of the Indian company. Heck, even Chinese have little problem gaining to the European markets.

BUT, on the other hand, when the Western companies head to Russia and get refused for reasons that make more sense, its against democracy,Russia is heading towards dictatorship, state control, bla bla bla bla ... I am sick of the double standards.


"If more than 50 percent of Arcelor shareholders vote against Severstal, Dolle said Mordashov's offer would be rescinded and he would be paid a break-up fee of 140 million euros. "

^^^ Oh, thats not too bad then for Severstal.

Here's how many hatred there is against Russia, against Arcelor TAKING OVER most of the Russian company, and instead they decided TO ALLOW Mittal TO BUY 51% OF ARCELOR ...


"Arcelor shareholders dumped Severstal owner Alexei Mordashov's offer at a Friday meeting in Luxembourg -- with not a single shareholder voting in favor of his merger bid. "
http://www.templetonthorp.com/en/news1292

This whole thing really hurt the image of Russian business, and its not the first case. Russians have realized that they're not welcome on Western markets, so they are not too friendly at home with foreign companies either, I suppose. The Russian government has every right to be sceptical and very careful with making sure that the 1990s era of blatant corruption and fire sales is not repeated again.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Fucking Jesus Christ. Pardon my language. That article is shit. Reason: "Do svidaniya democracy, and hello good times" "Vladimir Putin�s announcement that he will �consider� becoming Russia�s prime minister after stepping down as President next March raises two troubling questions: does this mean that Russia is moving back towards some form of post-Stalinist dictatorship?" WTF does that mean? Where is the evidence that Russia is moving back to dictatorship? This article is absurd. Its comparing Russian current trend to that of 1900-1914, which is incorrect - its like comparing apples to oranges. I am so tired, so unless someone wants to raise a point for discussion, I dont feel like bothering wasting my time arguing this yet another Russophobic article ... but I am still laughing at the fact that remaining in politics in A DIFFERENT FORM (prime minister) is considered to be authoritarian. LOL! For a country like Russia, where there's not a single political force that can continue the great work that Putin did, Putin needs to stay in a different form in politics to continue the course of raising Russia's levels of prosperity. All other candidates are incompetent, and they will need Putin's advice and help to continue steering the country in the right direction. Or else, Putin's term could turn out to nothing more than a waste of 8 years of hard work ... even in the West its not considered breaking the law, especially when approved by popular vote / Congress / Duma / whatever, and Russians have 80% trust in Putin right now. Me included. EDIT: The only way Putin's actions can be considered as authoritarian if he does something against the votes, wishes, constitution of the country and its people. Which HAS NOT happened. If the Russian people vote (internationally monitored) to change the constitution, its not authoritarian. If Putin is chosen by the succesor (who is elected democratically monitored by international groups) as his prime minister to help him continue the course, there's no breaking laws there. So why the f*** does the Western media keep talking about return of authoritarian regime to Russia? Where's the logic, the evidence, why do they scare the Western public? Why the propaganda? Seriously ... its quite evidence that articles like this are bunch of lies. British tabloids.

Did you actually read the article? Did you actually understand its meaning? What I actually took from the article, is that Putin is inspite of Westerner's perceptions of him, is a good leader, he has done wonders with russian economy and has created more opportunities for his people. His popularity is well earned and if he wants to dance around the semantics of words like "democracy" and "autocracy" - let him, and don't worry - this won't drive western inverstors away.

Read again. By far, this is perphaps the least "russophobe" article I've read in a while.

To quote one of the commenters:

quote:

First unbiassed and rational article about Russia recently. Very logical and "Russophobe hysteria" free. Thank you. Anna, St. Petersburg, Russia

P.S. I just love all these "Patriot" Russians who live abroad and froth at the mouth about "RUSSIA - WOW, WHAT A KOUNTRII!". Wanna be patriotic? Move back to your country, make your fortune there, invest it back into your nation. It's all nice and good to sit from a privacy of your posh apartment/house in Canada, typing away on your new laptop that you purchased with your Canadian dollars, studying in Canadian University, and praising president who didn't create the same opportunities for you back home - you had to travel abroad.

Know what? NE PIZDI, a PIZDUI. Zaebali nah, chesslovo.

quote:

Originally posted by atbell I've run into a few people in business who've quite openly told me "never trust a russian", usually with little reason. By the same token, if that's the attitude of western business I'm assuming there would be a similar but apposing attitude in Russia toward westerners.

quote:

Boris the Blade, or Boris "the Bullet Dodger." As bent as the Soviet's sickle, and as hard as the hammer that crosses it. Apparently, it's impossible to kill the bastard.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Did you actually read the article? Did you actually understand its meaning? What I actually took from the article, is that Putin is inspite of Westerner's perceptions of him, is a good leader, he has done wonders with russian economy and has created more opportunities for his people. His popularity is well earned and if he wants to dance around the semantics of words like "democracy" and "autocracy" - let him, and don't worry - this won't drive western inverstors away. Read again. By far, this is perphaps the least "russophobe" article I've read in a while. To quote one of the commenters:

Hahah, the title of the article is "Do svidaniya democracy, and hello good times" Einstein, do you know what DO SVIDANIYA means? It means good bye. "Goodbye democracy, hello good times", yes, thats very good praise of Putin.

In case you're not paying attention, I was replying to HardTranceProd's link, the first one (opening post of the thread) is OK with me.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 P.S. I just love all these "Patriot" Russians who live abroad and froth at the mouth about "RUSSIA - WOW, WHAT A KOUNTRII!". Wanna be patriotic? Move back to your country, make your fortune there, invest it back into your nation. It's all nice and good to sit from a privacy of your posh apartment/house in Canada, typing away on your new laptop that you purchased with your Canadian dollars, studying in Canadian University, and praising president who didn't create the same opportunities for you back home - you had to travel abroad. Know what? NE PIZDI, a PIZDUI. Zaebali nah, chesslovo.

Ummm, first - you dont know me. I moved to Canada not by choice, but with my parents when I just turned 13. No, I dont live in a posh house/apartment. No, I am not in a university, but college. I also praise Canada and its reputation around the world, its foundations, and I live in Canada, and I love the country. Just as any serious Russian-Canadian would. For example, I voted today in the elections/referendum (and many people my age dont vote nowadays or even follow politics).

So take it easy, OK? In case you're really insisting, I will likely end up back in Russia sooner or later. But I will never forget Canada, I love this country for the things that make Canada so good, though things are slipping here (the reason for Canada slipping to 6th in world rankings as best place to live since Chretien left, and not done slipping yet, it appears). I am a very proud Cossack.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium [COLOR=FF7F50] Ummm, first - you dont know me. I moved to Canada not by choice, but with my parents when I just turned 13.

Proud Cossacs leaving the Motherland? Shocking! I guess must have been from the excess of all the potential Mother Russia had to offer. The fact that once you venture outside of metropolitan areas, such as Moscow or St. Petersburg and end up in slums, with poverty and rampant lack of basic necessities - such as access to reliable utilities (clean running water, electricity, trash removal) - you end up in what the West rarely sees, yet construes nearly 90% or higher of "stanard Russian setting". You see uneducated, unemployed masses with very little opportunities or means to sustain a "normal" life. That's why there's such a large portion of population that's comprised of alchoholics, depressed population, disinfranchised remnants of post-socialist "2nd class citizens", whose country could give two shits about their fate. Many of whom turn to crime, prostutution, extortion, drug trafficking, theft, rape, murder, drug use, alchohol and suicide.

quote:

In case you're really insisting, I will likely end up back in Russia sooner or later.

Glad to hear it, hope you end up in the true "heartland" of Russia, close to the Cossac stomping grounds, near the "needy people" the Cossacs so heroically protected from bad, stealing, Russia-hatin' Jews:

quote:

There were few contemporary eyewitness accounts of the Ukrainian pogroms during the Russian Civil War period. Former Felshtiner Mina Yuberman visited her hometown in 1931, twelve years after the massacre. From her description, it seemed as if the pogromchiks had only just completed their bloody work. The most authoritative and objective descriptions of the Felshtin and Proskurov pogroms were provided by delegates of the All-Ukrainian Relief Committee for the Victims of Pogroms under the auspices of the Red Cross. The aim was not only to supply money, food and clothing to the victims, but also to determine and document the true character of the events. Committee members interviewed people, set up special bureaus, held conferences and assiduously sought out every detail. They prided themselves on their impartiality. The chairman, Elias Heifetz of New York, acknowledged "the moral satisfaction of work done together in aid of the wretched victims of the pogroms and ... the stupendous, tireless work of gathering the evidence..." The Committee carried out its field work during 1919 and prepared a report prepared the following year that was published for the Jewish People's Relief Committee of America in 1921 (The Slaughter of the Jews In the Ukraine In 1919, by Elias Heifetz, New York: Thomas Seltzer). The pogroms of Podolia, including Proskurov and Felshtin, were investigated by "the well-known lawyer" A.I. Hillerson. The following insights are primarily derived from the Committee's report. Twice before Ukrainian Jews had been persecuted and plundered in the land where they had settled at the end of the 16th century. First the Cossacks of Bogdan Khmelnitzky ravaged the land (1648-1658) and in the 18th century, another Cossack band known as the Gaidamaks matched their predecessors in brutality. Gaidamak leaders spoke of a holy war against the traitorous and accursed Jewish people. According to reliable accounts, 50,000 to 60,000 Jews lost their lives. The 1919 pogroms cannot be compared to earlier waves of violence against the Jews during the 1880s and early 20th century. After the assassination of Alexander II in 1881, the Jews had been represented as exploiters and bloodsuckers who robbed peasants of the fruits of their work. The aim then was mainly the destruction of Jewish possessions by robbery and plunder. True, there were beatings and rapes, but rarely murders. During the "first" Russian civil war, Jews were depicted as leaders of unrest and rebellion against the Fatherland and the "Little Father" (the tsar). Again, loss of life was relatively small compared to what came later. For example, in the famous pogrom of Kishinev in 1903, there were 49 Jewish deaths out of a Jewish population of about 50,000; in Bialystok in 1906 70 deaths out of about 48,000 Jews. Moreover, the pogroms of the tsarist period were almost exclusively confined to the cities. Not so the pogroms of 1919 when the Ukrainian village played the main role and starting from the periphery, waves of violence embraced the whole land. In all, over 700 localities were annihilated and the main oppressors were a mix of peasants and bands of undisciplined military irregulars and insurgents. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "... one of the most tragic episodes in the dark history of the much-suffering Jewish people." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No doubt many political and social factors accounted for the events of 1919, but the tenuous balance between Jews and peasants seems to have been unsettled during the German occupation during World War I, when for a time the well-being of the Jewish population improved disproportionate to that of the peasants. Jews were represented as "bourgeois", yet at the same time as advocates of Soviet communism. The Russian Revolution had unleashed strong nationalist feelings both in Poland and Ukraine. Among the combatants were a new generation of Gaidamaks who for so long had been hostile to the Jews. There also were so-called "clans of death" who loved fighting for its own sake. Since they fought so well, their chiefs permitted them to plunder. Amidst the chaos, Petlurists (Petliurists) characterized the Jews as Bolshevik sympathizers and used this as a pretext to justify their destruction. On January 11, 1919, the following announcement was posted in Felshtin by the head of the Information Bureau: "The first warning to the Jewish population. I have learned that the Jewish population is confusing the minds of the peasants. I warn the Jews that the Information Bureau is well instructed. They will all have to pay dearly for this offense, and the peasants themselves will make them pay. You have no one from whom to expect help!" Proskurov was one of the major towns in the province of Podolia. According to Hillerson's report, its total population was about 50,000, of which nearly 25,000 were Jews. To be sure, there were Jews among the local Bolshevik units, just like there were Jews in the Petlura government. On February 15, Bolsheviks who held in the town of Vinnitsa resolved to initiate revolts throughout the region. In fact, Proskurov was the only town where plans for the uprising actually proceeded beyond the talk phase. Ten days before the pogrom, a brigade of Cossacks and a regiment of Gaidamaks commanded by the Ataman Semosenko, in the name of Petlura arrived in Proskurov and informed the municipal government that he was assuming local authority. Indeed, a feeble Bolshevik uprising was initiated on schedule in the early morning of Saturday, February 15, but it was easily suppressed within a few hours. In the aftermath, Semosenko plied the Gaidamaks with vodka and cognac, exhorted them that the most dangerous enemies of the Ukrainian people and the Cossacks were the Jews. He demanded an oath that the Cossacks fulfill their sacred duty to extirpate the Jewish population, but not to destroy property. Later that same day, the carnage was accomplished efficiently in three hours and, true to their word, the Gaidamaks cut down without mercy, but did not loot. Roughly 1,500 of Proskurov's Jews were killed within about three hours. The next morning an emergency meeting of the municipal council was called. Semosenko spoke and vowed to continue to massacre the Jews, who he claimed were all Bolsheviks and had plotted to kill the Cossacks. At this point, one brave voice was raised in protest. Verkhola, a member of the council who had only escaped from prison in Tarnopol two days earlier, delivered a long speech in which he declared that the events in Proskurov were a disgrace to Ukraine. Speaking of the past good services of the Cossacks, he declared that Semosenko had clothed thugs in the uniforms of Cossacks and made himself their chief. Turning to Semosenko he said: "You are fighting Bolsheviks; but were these old men and children Bolsheviks whom your Gaidamaks cut down? You assert that only Jews produce Bolsheviks; but do you not know that there are Bolsheviks among other nations, too, including the Ukrainians?" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "... the basic purpose of the pogroms in Ukraine appears as the total destruction of the Jewish population." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The municipal council supported Verkhola's demand that the mass murders stop; indeed, only sporadic killings occurred in Proskurov during the next few days. However, Semosenko had spoken of dispatching Cossacks to Felshtin and other towns and the council insisted that he call them back. He grudgingly agreed, but according to the Red Cross report, probably never issued the order. In any case, the Gaidamaks probably did not even set off for Felshtin until early on the next morning of Monday, February 17th. During the Felshtin pogrom, which lasted several hours, about 485 people were killed outright and more than a hundred of the 180 wounded died soon afterward, making the death total about 600, or nearly one third of the town's Jewish population. Moreover, the number of rapes and robberies was greater than in Proskurov, for as Hillerson remarked, "this time the sanctity of the oath, apparently had evaporated from the consciousness of the Gaidamaks. In Felshtin robberies went hand in hand with murders." And when the trumpet sounded the end of the action, the best houses in town were set on fire. The Proskurov/Felshtin incidents in February marked a turning point from the immediate preceding period, which had been primarily intended to destroy property. Now the object was annihilation. According to Hillerson's Report, "Beginning with Proskurov the basic purpose of the pogroms in Ukraine appears as the total destruction of the Jewish population." As for the Felshtin massacre, three days later, "the Gaidamaks having tasted Jewish blood (in Proskurov) got a liking for it, and showed a desire for further slaughter.... the debauch of the Gaidamak horde in Felshtin was irrestrainable." Hillerson's report closes with the following mordant comment: "Thus these champions completed their work for the welfare of the Ukrainian fatherland, and thus ended this bloody bacchanalia in Proskurov and Felshtin." According to the Red Cross data, if one adds to the pogroms of the first nine months of 1919 the later violations attributable to the White forces led by General Denikin, which were even more numerous, there were at least 700 incidents; some communities had multiple pogroms. A second wave of killings struck Felshtin on June 6. In Podolia alone there were at least 55 pogroms with an estimated 15,000 people killed by the troops and bands loyal to Petlura. The Red Cross Report noted that it was impossible to give more than an approximation, but calculated 120,000 deaths directly due to pogroms, about 600,000 others who suffered material loss and all told more than a million people who were seriously affected. In town after town, thousands of ragged, barefoot, diseased men and women with decaying clothing, or no clothing at all, squatted in the synagogues, in empty barns or simply on the streets. The report concluded with the observation that "The pogroms in the Ukraine in the year 1919 form one of the most tragic episodes in the dark history of the much-suffering Jewish people." After the Proskurov debacle, Semosenko was forced to resign his leadership. Hillerson suggested that he might have disliked the moral satisfaction that his going would give the Jews and so let it be known that he was forced to leave because of a chronic venereal disease. Later, he was arrested and tried; witnesses described him as a weak young man of 22 or 23 who was "half-witted, nervous and unbalanced." Semosenko was executed in May 1920. From the perspective of history, one issue that has been particularly contentious, even unto the present, concerns the responsibility of Simon Petlura. Ukrainians still think of him as a hero who was unfairly accused of being an enemy of the Jewish people. Indeed, many consider him to have been an idealist and even pro-Jewish. Without repeating all the charges and counter-charges, it is true that Petlura was not personally present during the pogroms. In August 1919 he did issue an official statement that deplored the pogroms. Some argued that this was a self-serving statement written in order to ingratiate him with the Western nations when it was evident that his cause was lost. Later day apologists, such as Rutgers historian Taras Hunczak (Symon Petliura and the Jews: A Reappraisal, Ukrainian Historical Association, 1985), are equally as strident as those whom they accuse of having vilified an innocent man. Whatever Petlura's ultimate responsibility, or that of others, it made no difference to the many thousands of victims of the pre-Holocaust that occurred in the Ukraine in 1919-1920. Indeed, it has been said that after tsar and vodka, pogrom may well be the Russian word most widely understood and used by non-Russians.

Source: http://www.west.net/~jazz/felshtin/redcross.html

quote:

I am a very proud Cossack.

yeah.. definitely something to be proud of

Well, I have always liked the 4 year model (though 2 consecutive terms is pushing it), since it allows freshness into the government, which theoretically should spur on progress.

Then again, I never imagined that someone like Bush could come along and single-handedly destroy our country in the span of 5 or 6 short years.

Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.. but when it comes to politics, I imagine every country on the planet has a lot of fixing to do.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Proud Cossacs leaving the Motherland? Shocking! I guess must have been from the excess of all the potential Mother Russia had to offer. The fact that once you venture outside of metropolitan areas, such as Moscow or St. Petersburg and end up in slums, with poverty and rampant lack of basic necessities - such as access to reliable utilities (clean running water, electricity, trash removal) - you end up in what the West rarely sees, yet construes nearly 90% or higher of "stanard Russian setting". You see uneducated, unemployed masses with very little opportunities or means to sustain a "normal" life. That's why there's such a large portion of population that's comprised of alchoholics, depressed population, disinfranchised remnants of post-socialist "2nd class citizens", whose country could give two shits about their fate. Many of whom turn to crime, prostutution, extortion, drug trafficking, theft, rape, murder, drug use, alchohol and suicide. Glad to hear it, hope you end up in the true "heartland" of Russia, close to the Cossac stomping grounds, near the "needy people" the Cossacs so heroically protected from bad, stealing, Russia-hatin' Jews: Source: http://www.west.net/~jazz/felshtin/redcross.html yeah.. definitely something to be proud of

Go fuck yourself. I am not Ukrainian, OK? Not all Cossacks (and there were many denominations, for example: Don, Kuban', Terek, Zaporozhye, Altay, etc. Cossacks) were involved in pogroms, just a few brainwashed Ukrainian Cossacks - Gaidamaks, who were manipulated by Ukrainian nationalist movement which was taking advantage of Civil War and fighting for independence.

Bogdan Khmelnitzky - Ukrainian Cossack - ravaged the Jews in mid-1600s when that part of Ukraine was still in Poland/Lithuania's dominion, asshole - and he slaughtered both the Poles and Jews and others who supported Poles! He simply turned to Russia for help to escape Poland's dominion which Russia used for its own purposes ...

I relate to the Kuban Cossacks, never heard of them? The Jewish atrocities were carried out in Ukraine by nationalists who armed a radical Cossack group called Gaidamaks of the Ukrainian Zaporozhye Cossacks (who then in WW2 joined arms with Nazi troops and killed some more). My Kuban Cossacks are not in Ukraine (go check your map). By the way, my family and my grand-parents havent lived as Cossacks since many of Kuban Cossacks were forcefully resettled into cities and into other parts of the country away from traditional Kuban Cossack lands ... you know jack shit about Russia. We weren't involved in Jewish pogroms. Kuban, Don and Terek Cossacks, on the other hand, were bitterly slaughtered by the communists.


You are an f*ckhead for pitting communist and Ukrainian crimes on Russia. Communists killed everyone - Cossacks, Jews, Chechens, Tatars, Russians, Abkhaz, etc., resettling populations, massive crimes against humanity. Ukrainian nationalists killed and slaughtered anyone who opposed their independence drive. Just like their slaughter of Poles in Volhynia, 1919 pogroms were a mistake - and it was carried out by the nationalist fervour of Ukrainian forces who recruited Zaporozhye Cossacks PITTED AGAINST POLES and their Jewish "sympathizers". The ultimate goal was indepedent state between Poland and Russia (and they fought against Russia for another 20-30 years, mainly the Ukrainian Insurgent Army or "UPA", AND Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists).

Other famous Ukrainian massacres of Poles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massac...les_in_Volhynia

"The Massacre of Poles in Volhynia was an ethnic cleansing conducted in Volhynia (Polish: Wo�y�) during World War II. In the course of it, up to 80,000 Poles are thought to have been massacred by the nationalist Ukrainian Insurgent Army (Ukrainska Povstanska Armiya, or UPA). This took place in 1943 and 1944, with the bulk of victims reported for summer and autumn 1944."


So go fuck yourself. If you dont know history, shut the fuck up, OK?

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium RANT RANT RANT, CURSES CURSES CURSES, YADA YADA YADA

Looks like I touched a raw nerve there, eh buddy?

Why don't you have a nice, cool sip of SHUT THE F*CK UP juice from POSHEL NA HUI cup? Davai, davai - pizdui obratno, na rodinu, ubludok ty ne ottesanyi. Patriot herov, blyad'. Gnida ty - vot i svalivai nahui, zhivi v gnil'e, urod!

I implore you to consider these alternatives to visiting TA:

When two Russians get together, they always fight

But I gotta say, emc^2, you should be banned

quote:

Originally posted by HardTranceProd When two Russians get together, they always fight But I gotta say, emc^2, you should be banned

Here's a puppy, go play with him

Emc is not really Russian. He treats Russia like scum. He'd rather send the country back to the chaos of the 1990s, dubbed the "Real Russian Democracy" where most of the population was poor, crime syndicates ran the country, Yeltsin bombed his own parliament and forcefully changed Constitution and put down impeachment attempt, a land of lawlessness that my family had to leave, along with the famous "Brain Drain" of mid-1990s. Thats progress!

Now, back to the Cossack discussion, since I feel more clear. In addition to my evidence I presented in previous post, the events around the Civil War and their outcomes and crimes cannot be pitted against the Cossacks, like EMC did for the 1919 thing in Ukraine. Why? As the Russian government was deposed, some regions activated their nationalist fervour and decided to deal away with the problems that brewed for many years by fighting brutal wars - like what happened in former Soviet Union once it collapsed (Chechnya, Nagorno Karabach, Abkhazia, Transdnistria, etc.). Because of pride, nationalist aspirations and plans to settle old scores. Heck, same scenarios unfolded in Africa when the imperialists left ... Back to the topic:

In Ukraine, the nationalist party and UPA took advantage of their branch of shocked and demoralized Cossacks who lost their identity and their spiritual leader in St. Petersburg, by convincing some Cossacks to join their ranks to fight for independence, which sounded pretty cool. Cossacks are strong and warry people, so they couldn't sit there and watch chaos unfold without acting. Some Cossack groups refused to join in pogroms. Others, like the Gaidamaks who were very radical Ukrainian branch of Cossacks, decided that it was time to resurrect the Khmel'nitsky days. Once again, as the Bolsheviks were approaching to retake Russia's empire and its lands, Gaidamaks and some other Cossacks were convinced by the nationalists that the Jews were conspired to help the Bolsheviks and end Ukrainian independence. Regrettably, mass murders happened.

Now, that doesnt mean that ALL Cossacks were guilty of these crimes. The reason why those Ukrainian Cossacks massacres the Jews is because after the collapse of Russian government, they were taken advantage of by the local forces, with them they participated in the crimes. But all other Cossacks didnt participate, like the Don, Terek, Altai, Kuban' and even the Orenburg Cossacks. Cossacks were very trusted and feared people, fearless in battle and strong in mind and spirit. They defended Russian frontiers for centuries, that was their job, not settling scores internally. They had a unique culture with their own rituals and ways. They were very respected, achieving many heroic deeds for the country that was probably never going to become without them.

The reason why Bolsheviks won is because Cossacks didnt mobilize in time to fight the Bolsheviks ... how could they? They couldn't imagine ever fighting their own countrymen, and they were hoping things would fix on their own. By the time they realized that the Red tide has turned, the resistance that began was too little too late, and Cossacks were bitterly slaughtered by the Bolsheviks. Very bitterly, I cant even go into details here, its really shocking. A genocide against Cossack people.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium ..Cossacks were bitterly slaughtered by the Bolsheviks. Very bitterly, I cant even go into details here, its really shocking. A genocide against Cossack people.

Interesting how history has a way of turning...

quote:

(Cossack) Chmielnicki was one of the biggest anti-Semites in human history, on par with Hitler. His aim was genocide and his forces murdered an estimated 100,000 Jews in the most horrendous ways: Here is one description (from Yeven Mezulah, pp. 31-32): "Some of them [the Jews] had their skins flayed off them and their flesh was flung to the dogs. The hands and feet of others were cut off and they [their bodies] were flung onto the roadway where carts ran over them and they were trodden underfoot by horse ... And many were buried alive. Children were slaughtered at their mother's bosoms and many children were torn apart like fish. They ripped up the bellies of pregnant women, took out the unborn children, and flung them in their faces. They tore open the bellies of some of them and placed a living cat within the belly and they left them alive thus, first cutting off their hands so that they should not be able to take the living cat out of the belly ... and there was never an unnatural death in the world that they did not inflict upon them."

Source: http://www.aish.com/literacy/jewish...s_of_Poland.asp

lol

great reading, thanks guys

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium Emc is not really Russian. He treats Russia like scum. He'd rather send the country back to the chaos of the 1990s, dubbed the "Real Russian Democracy" where most of the population was poor, crime syndicates ran the country, Yeltsin bombed his own parliament and forcefully changed Constitution and put down impeachment attempt, a land of lawlessness that my family had to leave, along with the famous "Brain Drain" of mid-1990s. Thats progress!

You have no idea... No, I'm not Russian - I was born in USSR, Ukraine. I also left that hellhole when I was 13, just like you and came with my parents.

I want to love my "old" country - I had many friends I left behind, one of the most beautiful cities in the world, and one of the richest cultures full of classical writers, painters, sculptors, architects, musicians, scientists, phillosophers, and even military leaders. A history rich with adventure, world-impact, and full of vigor. I used to love history - it was my favorite subject. I don't get much practice lately, but I used to fluently read/write/understand Modern, Pre-revolutionary, Medieval and even ancient (circa 700AD) Russian.

In highschool, I fought with American classmate because he told me I was a filthy Russian. I teach my son and will teach my daughter Russian when she's old enough. I consider myself "Russian" by upbringing and my background. My wife's family lives in Moscow, her brother was deported from US to Moscow and he's actually quite happy over there, saying it was a good thing. My friends are in Russia 50% of the time, running prosperous businesses. I take more interst in Russia's politics and affairs than I do in America's.

I think Yeltsin was a destructive force on Russia, he was a brute, zhlob, and alchoholic. A typical mis-representation of what Russia is all about. Now, Putin - with all his "ingenuity" and "brilliance" is still a KGB spook, longing for the days of the Iron Curtain, with very Soviet-like world ambitions.

I cannot entirely place blame on him. U.S. did a large part in quickly occupying the power vacuum that was once occupied by Russia, when USSR fell apart. Russia, being a proud (and quite Imperialist) country could not just idly stand by. Furthermore, a nation full of people who's memory is still fresh with Communist era could not just flip the switch one day and become a "free" country. Several generations of people who were raised in authoritarian regime, learned to rely on it for stability, guaranteed social care, guaranteed employment, guaranteed basic necessities like free education and medical care, subsidised housing, etc. - could not just become free enterpreneurs overnight.

So, it's easy to understand why so many said "f*ck democracy, give us food" and quickly retreated to the relative safety of "USSR, under new management" mentality. Sure there were some freedoms to be sacrificed, but who gives a crap about freedom to vote when there are no viable candidates, the entire system has been built around years of corruption and nepotism? What to aspire for, when there are no opportunities exist but for the ones who can steal the quickest, bribe the most powerful, get the perks of being "untouchable"? How does a common man/woman fend for herself, on her/his own merit?

How does a nation of slaves, used to monarchy or totalitarian dictator who had 1/2 of population in jail and 1/2 of population as jailers, become free?

Not to side track, but I found Matrix (1) to have a deeply profound meaning that could easily be super-imposed on Russia. Especially the part about that there's a certain age, past which the mind cannot accept the reality of being free and cannot be liberated. What's more intersting, relating further to Russia, is that once freed - what is outside the confines of "the matrix"? A world in ruin, full of toxicity and waste? "Nah, thanks", said Cypher - "I'd rather be someone rich and famous in the matrix, rather than poor, hunted bum in the "free world"".

So, in a sense, most Russian's mentality is somewhere along the lines of Cypher - why be hungry and free, when you can be well fed and better off in "the matrix"?

Furthermore, a nation that still has fear and hate encoded in its DNA towards "outsiders" - e.g. rotting, decadent and capitalist west, cannot just do a 180 and say - WOW, WE LOVE AMERICA! Taught to hate borgois, to live as commoners, to have a system where capitalist skills were not valued nor even permitted, we can't expect most Russians to freely embrace the concept of capitalism right away and start chanting WE WANT TO BE CAPITALIST JUST LIKE YOU! A country where people were taught that rich are bad and proletariat is the suffering class that needs to rid the world of the rich and share their (earned) wealth CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO RESPECT THE BASIC CONCEPT OF CAPITALISM - RESPECT FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY AND PROTECTION OF IT BY THE LAW.

You don't need to go very far - just see how Putin "nationalized" Yukos and got rid of a very serious political threat - all in 1 shot, under premise and fabrications that Khodarkovsky "stole" the natural resources from Russian people without paying "market price".

A country where government is the biggest thief and has no respect for private property, has loose concept of "eminent domain" (which is currently unfolding in Sochi and about to start unfolding in Moscow, as Casinos are being forced out of the city) - cannot possibly expect any foreign investor to view the government as nothing more than a big bully, who will let you come and prosper, only to take it away once you do. Typical russian mentality - "what's mine is mine, and what's yours is also mine".

The corruption goes from the lowest government peon to the highest ranks of the government. Abramovich, with his $50 million dollar yacht gifts to V.V. Putin is currently presiding over Chelsea, living in his multi-million dollar mansion, multi-billionaire, free to do whatever the heck he wants. Meanwhile, Khodarkovskiy is in jail, denied basic human rights.

I can go on and on and on but I won't waste any more of my time. Russian people deserve the government they have. After all, you can't have a word "slave" without "SLAV"...

Magnetonium, I also find your sig EXCEPTIONALLY ironic, down-right HYPOCRITICAL, considering current state of affairs in Russia and your avid support of Putin. Feel free to cast the first stone, though, Mother Russia Hath Not Sinned, as you shall say.

quote:

Originally posted by emc^2 Magnetonium, I also find your sig EXCEPTIONALLY ironic, down-right HYPOCRITICAL, considering current state of affairs in Russia and your avid support of Putin. Feel free to cast the first stone, though, Mother Russia Hath Not Sinned, as you shall say.

Sigh ... ok, first, I admit that Putin is no angel,he could've achieved so much more (like any leader should in any country, btw) and there are double standards like when it comes to people around Putin like Abramovich - but you dont really expect Putin to jail all the oligarchs, do you? He wont last a month in power. The levels of corruption and crime in Russia right now (still rooted in communist days) are so deep you wouldn't have enough Russian guards to jail them all. He cant jail everyone, the country's prisons are full already - and not with innocent people. He is simply attacking the most dangerous elements, and using other criminals to benefit himself, his goals and the country. And yes, there are people who would like to overthrow all that for "real democracy and people's freedom" *cough* *cough* reminds me of 1917 Revolution. You dont get it, do you - another revolution in Russia wont do it any good. Just look at Georgian and Ukrainian revolutions in the last few years - pretty much decimated and of their progresses and economic growth, and things are still shaky.

You havent actually provided any solutions or positive aspect other than criticizing and brutalizing Russia, thats very effective and productive. Surely, things arent perfect, and Russia has had a very violent and brutal history. You have to admit, that Putin's democracy is the best one Russia has had to date. Time to build on that. Russia cant be fixed overnight and in one term, it will take decades. Your focus is an example of forces that are undermining Russia from within and from outside. Thats how Russia is struggling, because even some Russians are against Russia. There's no unity. Thats worse than foreign intervention. No matter how bad things are over there, over time criminal elements will be reduced, weakened and true democracy will set in.


OK, how am I hypocritical? Tell me, which great experienced and smart Russian politician there's in Russia right now who is even capable of replacing Putin and continuing his success? Ever ask that question to yourself? Please, dont give me any name of Western puppets who will only seek to secure things for their counterparts abroad, as Yeltsin's cronies easily sold off for fire prices lots of critical resources, like oil and gas fields (Sakhalin-1, for example). He wasnt a Russian leader. He was merely a despotic puppet.

quote:

Originally posted by Magnetonium OK, how am I hypocritical? Tell me, which great experienced and smart Russian politician there's in Russia right now who is even capable of replacing Putin and continuing his success? Ever ask that question to yourself? Please, dont give me any name of Western puppets who will only seek to secure things for their counterparts abroad, as Yeltsin's cronies easily sold off for fire prices lots of critical resources, like oil and gas fields (Sakhalin-1, for example). He wasnt a Russian leader. He was merely a despotic puppet.

Let's start from the end. First, to answer your question: Kasparov, for starters. Shenderovich. Hakemada. Where's opposition? Nowhere to be found. Why?

1. Open season on opposition. It doesn't have to come in the official form, like it does in the press, when meetings are disbursed, organizations are deemed "illegal" for some bureaucratical reason, etc. All it really takes is few phone calls, threatening relatives or person themself. How can opposition exist in the environment of government-sponsored lawlessnes?

2. Total control of the media by Putin. Again, how does one gain a platform from where to speak, if that platform is occupied by the current "man in power"? Even Kasparov's cable TV talks were cancelled, for unexplained reasons.

3. It is very easy to present people with a candidate they should vote for when you have an endless pool of wealth and TV, press, mass media that you control. To an average voter, one who relies on TV and other mass media to base his/her decision - the choice is clear. The person they see/hear/read about the most, furthermore endorsed by the "savior" Putin gets the vote.

4. A government without any system of checks and ballances cannot be considered a democratic government. Furthermore, a government where laws are only as "static" as the "man in charge" would allow them to be cannot possibly have any credibility with a sober and sane voter, looking for fair chance to vote for the person they thing is going to further their beliefs, cause, and mentality. So, you end up with a voter whose mentality is "well, which of the candidate is a lesser of (all) evils?"

5. How do you even breed a generation of youth that believes in freedom and democracy, when you strangle it in school by re-introducing classes and books based on Soviet-era mentality, beliefs, and lies? How do you allow your youth to take process in the shaping of their country when you bribe underpriveledged and uncaring students by paying them to attend mock-up protests agains the so-called "opposition".

6. Taking it a bit further, how do you convince your average voter that it's not just a hoax? Well, easy... Introduce some STRAW MAN opposition, someone who doesn't have anything they can offer and stand no chance of winning. It's simple.

Listen, like it or not - Russia is back on track towards what appears to be a Chinese model - e.g. Capita-communism. Meaning, state-controlled capitalism, with authoritarian system where human rights are just an illusion.

What makes me even more sick, is a sheer portrayal of Putin as re-incarnation of Stalin - the saviour of Russian peoples. The media broadcasts, showing some cripple, rolling on a stage in front of the Duma, saying that Putin is a true leader of russia and best choice for Russia. Or a woman from the "heartland" - e.g. somewhere bumfuck in Russia, who pleads on behalf of her people to the members of duma to change the consistution to allow Putin to run for a 3rd term.

I can go on and on.

Let's be real, please. I have volumes and volumes I can bring up but I am afraid it all falls on deaf ears.

quote:

The levels of corruption and crime in Russia right now (still rooted in communist days) are so deep you wouldn't have enough Russian guards to jail them all. He cant jail everyone, the country's prisons are full already - and not with innocent people.

Hey, how about using some of those reserves to provide enough incentive for the law enforcement not to take bribes? To have an "internal affairs" bureau crack down on corruption? To show the people that LAW DOES WIN? How about starting with a due process? What about offering some constitutional protection and court system independent form the influence of the person in charge?

that'd be a start. there can be no law in a place where government itself has no respect for it and changes it as it suits them. What ever happened to Ivanov's son, who killed a woman with his car, while speeding? NOTHING. He got off scold-free. The witnesses dissapeared, the report was altered, the prosecutor had "nothing to go on". Jee wiz. How convenient.

At least in U.S. the politicians are not immune from criminal justice code. Fuck, I'm not even starting with Luzhkov and his wife (who just strangely happens to be the richest woman in Russia - worth about estimated... um... $2.5Bln USD. Not to mention that Luzhkov himself (being a government worker) has a huge share of property and realty in Sochi (worth estimated $1Bln USD).

Meanwhile, the people are told that true enemies of the state are enterpreneurs like Khodarkovski - a person who first established a transparent corporate reporting system in Russia, subsidised schools, offered above average pay to his employees, and "took care of his people", knowing people were his biggest assets. What happened to him?

What about Russian government killing their own people? Beslan. Dubrovka. FSB bobmbing of homes to re-open Chechen front?

How about murdering the voice of opposition and free press? Politkovskaya. Safronov. Klebnikov. the list goes on and on.

quote:

You havent actually provided any solutions or positive aspect other than criticizing and brutalizing Russia, thats very effective and productive.

You, yourself admitted there are problems yet offered no solutions. Well, quite honestly - the only solution in russia can be found at the end of the gun. Sadly, only massive public upheval would bring about change, nothing short of revolution, mind. The youth of today has become very complacent. They have embraced the relative freedom and some sort of pseudo-capitalism and full-on consumerism. Quite effective. Unlike the population that came before them, one fed up with communism and oppression, this one has been silenced or coherced into silence. No change is forthcoming in Russia in any near future, I'm afraid.

quote:

Russia cant be fixed overnight and in one term, it will take decades.

Decades? I'd say CENTURIES. Yet, at the rate it's going, it will just engraine the current "modus operandi" into future generations. I say that Russia will forever remain what it is right now - a faux-democratic, clandestinely or openly authoritarian, pseudo-soviet country.

quote:

Your focus is an example of forces that are undermining Russia from within and from outside. Thats how Russia is struggling, because even some Russians are against Russia. There's no unity. Thats worse than foreign intervention.

That sounds vaguely familiar... there was at least one individual who saw people who were unhappy with the things the way they were as "enemies of the state". His name was....... oh. that's right. Josev Vissarionovich Stalin! I don't consider healthy opposition as being "against Russia". I see the government that chokes it in every way possible as a threat to Russia, region, and rest of the world.

Communist cancer ain't dead. It just went into recess and mutated. It now came back stronger than ever, in new form with new methods to choke the victim - e.g. being the rest of the Europe and world.

And that's not Russophobia. It's a cold, sobering and damn right clear shot of reality.

Let's hear your solutions, mate.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.