Putin has been making me nervous for a while. He really caught my eye with the arrest of Khordokovsky, and fortunately the American government noticed too. Bush and Putin were looking like pals for a while there, but it looks like that is over.

quote:

"I have some concerns, but I don't think democracy is in trouble in Russia," Powell said on "Fox News Sunday." "But Russians have to understand that to have full democracy of the kind that the international community will recognize, you've got to let candidates have all access to the media that the president has. You've got to make sure people are not in any way kept from participating in the open, full democratic process." The comments irritated Putin and his advisers. "Many so-called developed democracies have a lot of problems with democracy, including in their own electoral procedures," Putin said. "Almost four years ago we were amazed to see the American electoral system fail. That's why I hope that while criticizing us they'll . . . work toward improving their own electoral procedures."

Cold War II anyone? I hope this isn't allowed to grow to those proportions, but Putin really does appear to be taking the country back in the Communist direction. As the article mentioned, there's more proof in Chechnya. But that's another thread.

He is not doing anything for the country. He only tries to be a focking role model.

___________________
Blip, blip, blip...

Putin has the overwhelming, and I mean OVERWHELMING majority of the vote and popularity. Obviously no contest. But that's only because his quasi moderacy is better than some of the stupid things the dozen random other "candidates" advocate. Plus, many Russians out of the big cities don't know about and don't feel the impact of what Moscow does/tries to do/pretends to do for them. Fuck, people are so poor and still remembering the hunger of less than *fifteen* years ago that all they want is a president who will at least preserve tentative peace and let them put some bread on the table.

quote:

Originally posted by Miss Bliss Putin has the overwhelming, and I mean OVERWHELMING majority of the vote and popularity. Obviously no contest. But that's only because his quasi moderacy is better than some of the stupid things the dozen random other "candidates" advocate. Plus, many Russians out of the big cities don't know about and don't feel the impact of what Moscow does/tries to do/pretends to do for them. Fuck, people are so poor and still remembering the hunger of less than *fifteen* years ago that all they want is a president who will at least preserve tentative peace and let them put some bread on the table.

Did you blatantly ignore the article or are you just chosing to exempt certain parts of it? What are you talking about majority vote of the POPULARITY? More like of the FEAR. He's changed the laws so no independent news stations could broadcast support for any other candidate but himself. He also made sure that the ads that DID get put out publicly were only his own. It was a non verbal threat that Russian's had to vote for him. That president that is preserving tentative peace and putting bread on the table is the same president who is falling quickly in the footsteps of Stalin.

___________________
aka Tits McGee
aka Chesty LaRue
aka Busty St. Claire

quote:

Originally posted by anuneventrade Did you blatantly ignore the article or are you just chosing to exempt certain parts of it?

Did you blatantly ignore the wording of my post or are you just choosing to twist certain parts of it?

All I said was that Putin advocates "moderacy." Yet I certainly concede that his government is no Yeltsin's, which took many more steps toward democracy. I am not a huge supporter of Putin's.

I said that "many Russians out of the big cities don't know about and don't feel the impact of what Moscow does/tries to do/pretends to do for them." This is true. This is true in any country, the US included.

I said that "people are so poor and still remembering the hunger of less than *fifteen* years ago that all they want is a president who will at least preserve tentative peace." The common man doesn't know what politics is. He doesn't understand that a leader's number one concern is to keep himself in power. He will vote for a leader who he sees brings benefit to himself and his family: a leader he sees is not bringing war upon the country and is not starving the people. Putin is not putting out mass pro-dictatorship propaganda nor is he slaughtering millions of people (hence your Stalin analogy is quite inappropriate). Many people, my grandparents included, realized that Stalin was bad news when this started to happen. All of Russia realized Communism was a joke; it didn't take Stalin too much time to thoroughly screw everything up. And if Putin starts screwing it up royally (and what leader would DARE to repeat Hitler's or Stalin's actions in running a country as a dictatorship or as a pretend communist society, what with all the repercussions their respective countries faced as a result of their policies), with all the world involved in everything any one country does these days, and with Russia being quite conspicuous (not being, say, Malawi or Qatar), well... Putin won't get far.

Last edited by Miss Bliss on Mar-16-2004 at 07:05

He is not getting far anyway. People actually care more about getting decent meal on the table, than some "democracy". I am against him not because he might be a would-be-Stalin, but because during his presidency, he did not do much for the people.

"Oooh look at me I am an ex-KGB, I know a whole bunch of fighting styles, bow to my 1337ess."

Although, I agree on his stand about Chechnya. That is another topic, unrelated to the thread.

___________________
Blip, blip, blip...

i didnt read the article, as im not going to sign up for the washington post...

but many in Russia also seem to think that changing leadership isnt going to change much. most things seem so hopeless that choosing the lesser of two evils isnt much of a change at all and it wont amount to any good with the Mob running everything anyways.

that being said Putin does exercise way too much control over a Russia he only expects to become another military superpower, without concern for the regular persons plight - tho most of his activities in print and televised are just 'goodwill' stunts|

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

quote:

Originally posted by Miss Bliss Did you blatantly ignore the wording of my post or are you just choosing to twist certain parts of it?

No. I read your post, and replied to it as I saw fit. Whether or not you agree with the way I answered, is not my problem.

quote:

All I said was that Putin advocates "moderacy." Yet I certainly concede that his government is no Yeltsin's, which took many more steps toward democracy. I am not a huge supporter of Putin's.

I'm going to give you the definition(s) of "moderate" which I suppose is what you imply when saying "moderacy" because if you look in the dictionary, there is no such word.

Main Entry: 1mod·er·ate
Pronunciation: 'mä-d(&-)r&t
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin moderatus, from past participle of moderare to moderate; akin to Latin modus measure
1 a : avoiding extremes of behavior or expression : observing reasonable limits b : CALM, TEMPERATE
2 a : tending toward the mean or average amount or dimension b : having average or less than average quality : MEDIOCRE
3 : professing or characterized by political or social beliefs that are not extreme

Now, from this first definition, I would hardly consider Putin's actions to be "avoiding extreemes" considering he blocked all candidate's options of broadcasting on independent television, and limited the amount of broadcasting, if any was given AT ALL on public television.

Main Entry: 2mod·er·ate
Pronunciation: 'mä-d&-"rAt
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): -at·ed; -at·ing
transitive senses
1 : to lessen the intensity or extremeness of
2 : to preside over or act as chairman of

Once again, I hardly think Putin's actions could be described as "lessing the intensity of extreemeness" of actions.

Main Entry: 3mod·er·ate
Pronunciation: 'mä-d(&-)r&t
Function: noun
: one who holds moderate views or who belongs to a group favoring a moderate course or program

Yeah.... I don't think so.

quote:

I said that "many Russians out of the big cities don't know about and don't feel the impact of what Moscow does/tries to do/pretends to do for them." This is true. This is true in any country, the US included.

They fully know that their options are limited, just as Americans do. They also fully realize that their government is extreeme. But in fact, how are you able to change anything if you don't even know the other options that exist because of the fact that your government is ensuring that you will not know by blocking all ways of communication?

quote:

I said that "people are so poor and still remembering the hunger of less than *fifteen* years ago that all they want is a president who will at least preserve tentative peace." The common man doesn't know what politics is. He doesn't understand that a leader's number one concern is to keep himself in power.

I think you're underestimating the knowledge of a person. Do you want to tell me that you honestly think that they don't know that their government is worsening things for them? They do know. They just don't know how to change it, and they are full of fear of the consequences that come with attempting to change.

quote:

He will vote for a leader who he sees brings benefit to himself and his family: a leader he sees is not bringing war upon the country and is not starving the people.

Yes, but if he doesn't know his options, how is he able to vote for the correct person?

quote:

Putin is not putting out mass pro-dictatorship propaganda

quote:

nor is he slaughtering millions of people (hence your Stalin analogy is quite inappropriate).

Actually, my Stalin analogy is not inappropriate in the least. Did I mention anything about mass murders? No. I was discussing the tactics of Putin in regards to government. Mass controllation, check. Mass conformity, check. Mass manipulation, check.

quote:

Many people, my grandparents included, realized that Stalin was bad news when this started to happen.

Geee, that's a shock! Why on earth would anyone think Stalin was bad news? Couldn't be because he was shady on alliances, attempted to spread Communism, and brought the country down to flames?

quote:

All of Russia realized Communism was a joke; it didn't take Stalin too much time to thoroughly screw everything up. And if Putin starts screwing it up royally

Ding ding, he's starting to.

quote:

(and what leader would DARE to repeat Hitler's or Stalin's actions in running a country as a dictatorship or as a pretend communist society, what with all the repercussions their respective countries faced as a result of their policies),

Actually, many countries. In fact, I do believe the main fear after WWII was that Germany would rise again with Hitler's ideas, that was why there was so much control from the influences of other countries in post WWII Germany.

quote:

with all the world involved in everything any one country does these days, and with Russia being quite conspicuous (not being, say, Malawi or Qatar), well... Putin won't get far.

You go ahead and keep thinking that. That was the same method of thinking the world had in regards to Stalin. He couldn't get too far, this wouldn't continue too much.

quote:

They fully know that their options are limited, just as Americans do. They also fully realize that their government is extreeme. But in fact, how are you able to change anything if you don't even know the other options that exist because of the fact that your government is ensuring that you will not know by blocking all ways of communication?

Even if there was complete freedom of the press, no persecution of dissenters President Putin still would have won convincingly. The Russians have a traditional respect for strong leadership and they perceive he gives it to them.

I doubt most ordinary russians care if the government cracks down on the media owners. Most of the media owners are the "oligarchs" and they are hated. When russians here the words "liberal democracy" they think of a system that benefits the rich at the expense of the state and ordinary people. The "oligarchs" by and large didnt get their vast fortunes during the Yeltsin years by hard work, they got it by colluding with the government.

The average russian doesnt view politics and business the way westerners do, the average Joe on the street thinks, quite correctly they are a bunch of swindlers.

The analogies comparing President Putin to Stalin are quite false, from all I have read about Putin, he genuinely believes in the free market( or at least a russian version of a free market, and he knows that Communism is a mistake, but he believes in Russia. I have read some of his speechs and if he means what he says, he knows what is wrong with Russia, but the problems of 70+ years dont get changed overnight, especially in a society as conservative as russia