Потому, что это как раз Сталин подготовил заговор против Троцкого и сверг его. Троцкий с самого начала революции был по своему положению в партии и правительстве выше Сталина. В политике всегда так ... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Printable View
Потому, что это как раз Сталин подготовил заговор против Троцкого и сверг его. Троцкий с самого начала революции был по своему положению в партии и правительстве выше Сталина. В политике всегда так ... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramil
Officially - there was no cheating and no violations. But you just need to see how it was :)
There are a lot of interest things to say but I'll try to show how it was in couple of words.
First interest thing - it's a "early voting" (досрочное голосование) - it's a several days before main elections when people votes voluntary-compulsory (добровольно-принудительно) i.e. you may not vote but if you are student, soldier, state employee or anybody other who depend governance - they'll tell you "you'll have a problems if you'll not vote early". For example, if you are student and you are living in hostel - you could be excluded (I've lived in hostel and I know this authentically). I don't say, what could be if you are soldier.
But it's not important for who you'll vote, they need only your sign. During this several days ballot boxes protected only by one policeman and observers have access to them only in day. In the night they stay only with the policeman. Сontinuation think of by self.
So, for election day ~30% electorate already have voted (easy to guess for who). But it's not all. The election day begins.
http://naviny.by/media/2010.12_w3/do...st-spion/3.jpg
It's an observers, they are using binoculars because they are really far from election process :)
http://forum.onliner.by/files/201012...ca1935a612.jpg
and it's an election commission :)
and...
http://n-europe.eu/content/uploads/2...os_400x250.jpg
Votes counting! (Something like this observer sees) :)
After this simple manipulations he have >= 80% votes. No cheating, no violations.
BTW, people protested exactly against this "percents" (according to alternative exit-polls Lukashenko has only ~35%), but somebody have broken the door in the government house :)
Very interesting information! Thanks for explaining.
Who (or what party) would you have preferred win, and why?
35% is still a lot though! They probably would win whether they cheat or not... It depends on whether there is one opposing party (like in the USA) or many (like in most Western European countries).
For example, while I was growing up in Sweden, the Social democrats always won the elections because 35-50% voted for them (approximately) in every election. And if they didn't get a large enough majority on their own, then they invited the communists to form government with them... Which was exactly what their opponents did not want. They were almost unbeatable and many people got very fed up with them. But the opposition could not agree enough to defeat them, and despite what some people thought, it was what they majority preferred.
It seems like if Lukashenko was to be beaten, then everybody who doesn't like him have to vote for just one other party... otherwise he'll just keep winning!
Is there one party that could challenge him in the future? If so what is that party and what do they stand for?
According our laws, if nobody got >= 50%+1vote, elections going into second round with only two candidates (1st and 2nd places). I don't think that he would win in second round.
We have a little bit strange situation with parties. We have several pro-government parties but nobody knows their names, their leaders or any other information about them (I mean that nobody talks about them in media. Media is totally filled by one person). Also we have several opposition parties but they haven't access to media at all (except BelSat (oppositional sat-channel, hosted in Poland, not translates through cable network)) => nearly nobody knows something about them (only who have affairs with politics or strongly interested). Also they haven't places in parliament. Sometimes they drops leaflets or organizes protest actions but rarely. So, only in election time people have ability to get some knowledge about political state. On this election out TV even showed every candidate twice (first time individual and second time on debates (without one of course)).
So. On elections we have only two parties: "Lukashenko" and "Other candidates". On previous elections opposition promoted a single candidate - he found him in prison after election. On this - there was 9 candidates (except L), 5 of them now in prison.
Most "famous" party - it's BPF (Belorussian Popular Front), also we have BCD (Belorussian Christian Democracy), BSDP (Bel. Social-Democracy Party) and some other.
On this elections second place taken by Sannikov, third - by Rymaschevsky.
I think on next elections will be somebody new but if he will be the similar to the previous (by political power) - Lukashenko will be elected for the next time again... and then Nikolay Alyaksandravich Lukashenko will grown up...
I have to agree with that. My aunt who is rather old lady, but still works (she lives in Vitebsk and teaches students Latin and French at medical university) and always was a strong supporter of Lukashenko is started to doubt about him. She still voted for him at this elections, but just for the reason that "there is not any decent alternative", not because she is still great fan of him.Quote:
Originally Posted by bsod
35% would simply have meant they would have to hold the second voting, and the other candidates (or at least some of them) could have united and created a coalition that would have beaten the dictator.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
I think anyone with common sense could challenge him. If you don't think so, you might not have seen all his brilliant speeches, and might not be completely realizing what his regime looks like.
By the way, if "there is not any decent alternative", the choice is usually made in favor of "none of the above", or is not made at all - the election is just ignored.Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
And your one in charge declared that according to some official investigation no one of the asked had recognized Sannikov, and only 0.3% had recognized Nekliaev.:ROFL:Quote:
On this elections second place taken by Sannikov, third - by Rymaschevsky.
Oh, rly? How smart. And who do you think will be a president if people vote for "none of the above"? Nobody? Or maybe the one who is now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
Voting for "nobody" or ignoring elections may seem like a good choice, but in fact it's just a lack of ability to use your vote wisely. And in the worst case scenario an "ignored" ballot may be used in falsification.
But votes for him are one hundred percent going to become his votes. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by gRomoZeka
I'm not sure what exactly is going to happen in case of voting for "none of the above", but I thought ignoring the "election" was the best choice, as they need your signature or something anyway. And they just wouldn't have gotten material for falsification.
True. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
But if some people, like Basil's aunt, believe that there are no better options it's their right to vote for the best available (Lukashenko). They choose him with their eyes open, so to speak.
Very interesting to hear bsod's insights into the political situation in Belarus.
The reason I seem like I "defended" Lukashenko was simply because I thought he was managing to protect people in Belarus from all the really terrible things that went on in Russia in the 1990s... For example when regular people were so desperate that they turned to prostitution, selling their personal property and memorabilia, gangster criminality... That is just so tragic and undignfied! And for what... so that a few people can cruise around in luxury cars and stuff away money in Switzerland and the IMF can say that "conditions conducive to a good investment climate have been created" (at the cost of human dignity)...
I understand that there is a "middle class" in the large cities of Russia now... but there is still so much poverty and destitution in rural Russia, isn't that right? Same in Ukraine. I just can't support any politician who wants that to happen and I got the impression that Lukashenko's policies had prevented that, and that he was trying to introduce market reforms at a slower pace. That seemed sensible to me at least. But really, my understanding of all this is not that great...
Are you kidding?! Do people really think that would happen? Surely people would not put up with that?!! It's outrageous.Quote:
Originally Posted by bsod
That's funny but you've just repeated word-by-word what Alexander Prohanov said several hours ago at "Echo Moskvy" radio:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
Радиостанция "Эхо Москвы" / Блоги / Видеорадио / "Особое мнение" Александра Проханова + кардиограмма эфира / Комментарии
And btw, I agree with most of this, although I don't like Lukashenko at all.
I could only understand bits here and there of what Prohanov was saying and he's using a lot of "difficult" words...Quote:
Originally Posted by Basil77
But as a general observation, it seems to ME that many things that happened in the early 1990s in the ex USSR was not generally in the interest of most people. Seems that Lukashenko was the only CIS leader who realised that and put the brakes on.. Whether what he did after that was right or wrong.. is the question. Perhaps he allowed the country to stagnate.
I guess guess there WAS no easy solution, but the idea of "freedom" at the price of poverty, suffering and degradation for so many in society simply can't be what the majority would really have wanted! Doing the reforms slower might have prevented a lot of that.
And look at the ex Soviet republics how things have worked out there... In Central Asia they certainly don't have any more democracy now, than under the USSR, but now they are also much poorer also have less opportunities to improve their lives.
BBC makes pretty good and transparent surveys. Here is what they found in 2009, in the survey "Twenty Years after Fall of Berlin Wall" (full survey with questions and methodology)Twenty Years after Fall of Berlin Wall
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBC World Services Survey
If you turn your face to commie hell, you should be ready for all its features, not only for those you'd prefer to take out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
And what makes you think there's no poverty or prostitution or criminal gangs there? When some people get paid around $80 - 100 a month, what is it called? I just don't wanna get myself disappointed finding out you're working for their official TV channels or so... tell me it's not true :) But then, I just fail to see what makes you see the things going on there through rose-colored spectacles...
What people are paid is quite irrelevant, it is what they get for their money and the general standard and quality of living that is relevant.
I am sure there is some prostitution and criminal gangs in the "commie hell" of Belarus... but as far as I understand there has been less of that in Belarus than in Russia and Ukraine. It is certainly not something Belarus is known for outside it's own borders anyway.
If Belarussians themselves think it's a good idea to go the same way as Russia, then that's their problem and none of my business. They are quite welcome to do it as far as I am concerned. But it seems like the majority still vote for Lukashenko; people like Basil77s aunt.
If there are problems with Lukeshenko, then frankly I think the Belarussians should sort that out themselves, without interference by the US, EU or Russia. They elected him, they should also get rid of him if they don't like him anymore. It's nobody else's responsibility or business. Belarus isn't doing anything that is causing any problems for any other country. The main reason the US and others have a problem is that the market was never wide-open for exploitation like it was elsewhere in the former CIS and Eastern Europe.
In case you didn't know (which seems likely...) power inherited within one family is certainly not what what any of the socialist or communist political philosophers supported. They would have been strongly against that.
Now you can throw around a few more phrases like "commie hell" if you like but if you want to play cold war, I doubt you'll have much success here.
Eric, have you ever been there, little hater? "Commie hell" is only in your wet dreams. "Socialist paradise" as say from my impressions :-).
I, pace moderators, would like to get the thread back to the subject.
People from Belarus, cast light on the issue, please. Are you really in ecstasies about your "socialist paradise"? Would you change anything about it? If so, what would you change?
Hi, people. I live in Brest. I want to write some words about elections in our country, previous, current, and as it looks like - next.
I know nothing about candidates. How are they? What is their policy? What have they already done for the country? How they want to rule the country without understanding of situation, skills and practice?
They always scrumbles out from somewhere before elections, and hiding after it. If they are real opposition, why do they do nothing? Они хотят стать президентом не слезая с печи.
And I should notice that may be this situation is usual in Western Countries, when prime-minister or president is a signboard of certain group of people, who has the same political course. But in our country president is the person who decide everything, others are just advicers.
Thanks for reading this, and correct my mistakes please.
So, what's your point here? Do you think the country needs stronger opposition? Or are you just satisfied with your Shklow wise man?Quote:
Originally Posted by Khomitchuk D.V.
I think the country should have several groups with their own understanding of Belarus future. But they should (I don't know how to say it in English) болеть сердцем за страну.
But current situation is following: stable goverment and some groups of clowns. And nothing more.
As for the expression, I guess it will be "their hearts should ache for the country".Quote:
Originally Posted by Khomitchuk D.V.
As for the current situation, I think clowns can be found on both sides. Like "a stable group of clowns vs unstable one". (btw, have a think about who created the last group)
1. OSCE didn’t recognise the result of these “elections” as legitimateQuote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
2. Some Belarusians keep voting for Lukashenko because they are compelled to do so. Yes, elderly population doesn't have the access to the Internet and they believe every word of belarusian state TV channels. There are also a lot of people who work in the state sector of economy and they are forced to vote for Lukashenko and they vote because they are afraid of losing their jobs.
3. By the way, Lukashenko always raise salaries and introduces benefits for some time (e.g. free public transport for students and pupils) just before the election. Actually students, pupils and pensioner have NO social benefits in Belarus. Lukashenko tries to please people before the elections. But after the elections everything becomes worse again.
4. Those who serve in the army or in the police force don't have their own choice and have to vote as their commanders tell them to do.
5. rural Russia lives much better than rural Belarus. At least, in Russia and in Ukraine you may start up your business with no problem. In Belarus, everything belongs to the state.
6. "The "disappeared" people apparently largely left the country and can be found in London, Moscow, Paris etc. " - TELL THIS TO THE MOTHER, WIFE AND SON OF ANDREY ZAVADSKI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Some years ago the wifes, mothers and children of the "disappeared" people often gathered in the center of Minsk and stayed in silence for an hour or two keeping the photos of their "disappeared" sons, husbands and fathers..... Now the police doesn't allow them to do so.
7. The US and Soros sponsor the Belarusian opposition. But where can the opposition find money if they lost their jobs just because they are "enemies of the regime".
8. I'm also not sure that Belarus would be better without Lukashenko but why are we always afraid of any change???!! WE NEED CHANGES! If you are interested, watch the video about the elections 2010 and everything after it, there are subtitles in English
Those who want to find the information about the candidates, find it easily in the web. As for me, a saw a lot of people in the streets agitating the citizens to vote for this or that candidate. Lukashenko has no skills how to rule the country! The president is not an expert in economics and business. He just listens to the advisers and decides what to do. There were some good candidates in 2010 who could successfully replace Lukashenko.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khomitchuk D.V.
Всегда хотел узнать как "заставляльщики" проверяют, чтобы их не обманули? Заставляют рабов ставить галочку не в кабинке, а под их присмотром?Quote:
Originally Posted by belarusnews
I guess it was about the so-called "early voting" when each vote doesn't matter and goes to the "wise man" anyway...Quote:
Originally Posted by BappaBa
Yes, you are right. There are groups of people at state enterprises that agitate their collegues to vote earlier. If they disagree, they can loose their jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
Oh, it’s me. When I was a student I was interrogated several times by the KGB agents because I went to the “Human rights” conference in Belgium. They asked me for the information about the other participants who were the members of different Belarusian political parties. I didn’t tell them anything. Then the agents blamed me of being linked with FBI and threatened to expel me from the University. I showed no reaction but I was really shocked. Fortunately, I graduated from the University.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
After the University I have to work for a state company which is going bankrupt. My salary is $ 200 and it’s too low even in Belarus. But I can’t quit this job because of the so-called “career assignment” that obliges me to work for a state enterprise for 2 years earning $ 200 per month. If I don’t follow the rules I’ll pay a fee (as much as $ 10 000). This is because I got free higher education. I entered the University with better grades than the others and I passed the entrance exams better. I deserved free higher education. Why should I work for the state company like a slave in order to compensate it?
And if you had a son or a daughter for whom there's no good future in Belarus? What would you do?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanna
Oh, yes! Judging by what i wrote above, the situation in Belarus drives me into ecstasies )))))))Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
Oh, you deserved! Just so! Do you mind if some don't give a sh!t what you deserved? You know, there are a lot of countries (and wealthy ones as well) where there is no such a thing - free higher education. The kids there don't deserve it?Quote:
Originally Posted by belarusnews
I assume there was an option to have paid studying, if so, why didn't you take it? Things have to be paid, FYI. Work off your study and do whatever you want.Quote:
Originally Posted by belarusnews
Of course that things like disappearing people are atrocious and I don't really know what's going on there but I don't know where's your "living in hell".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Romik
I also don't give a sh!t what you desrve. If you think that free higher education in Belarus is a great advantage, you are mistaken. The government don't give a sh!t to students and graduates sending them to villages for "career assignment". You can have a great career if you move to a village from the capital city, can't you? LOL!
Everybody deserves free higher education. But you don't understent that FREE means "without any payment or other kinds of compensation". According to the Constitution of Belarus "everyone has a right for free higher education". "Career assignment" is a violation of the Constitution and everybody's rights for FREE education.
Like Belarus. But their regime for some reason is boasting of providing anyone who wishes with free higher education while it's a total lie. So maybe you will be so kind to name this reason?Quote:
Originally Posted by Romik
What can impede you to move back after those 2 years to the capital and do your career? It's not a very long period of time. Do you think, right after the university, without experience, you would be offered the most prestigious jobs?Quote:
Originally Posted by belarusnews
You are a commy, aren't you? In the UK, USA the education is paid and they don't demand it to be free.Quote:
Originally Posted by belarusnews
I see 2 reasons for this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
1. To stop youth from going abroad (brain-drain)
2. The state companies that are going bankrupt need young labor force. So the government forces graduates to work there. The state enterprises (plants, factories etc.) are financially supported by goverment (actually by the taxpayers). If they close large plants (even those that don't bring any profit) a lot of elderly people will lose their jobs and there will be a chaos. So they continue to support unprofitable state companies.
Among the workers of belarusian state plants and factories there are a lot of people who are over 50 (I think 70 - 80 %). But there are very few young specialists.
Another interesting thing:
If you graduated from Pedagogical University, for example, you'll have to work at a school in a village and, perhaps, in Chernobyl area because nobody wants to work there. But a lot of people still live there and they need to be educated.
Do you read their constitution and other rules? I don't. If telling only of the thing itself - I don't think it's unfair to work off that 2 years after unpaid study (I suppose there is some scholarship while it, isn't it?)Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric C.
So what? If you are a diligent student and get good marks at the exams why not to get a scholarship? By the way, the average scholarship in Belarus is about $40. You may not have the scholarship if you get bad marks, but anyway you'll have to pay the same fee ($10 000 approximately) if you won't work off. Is it fair?Quote:
Originally Posted by Romik
The thing is thatQuote:
You are a commy, aren't you? In the UK, USA the education is paid and they don't demand it to be free.
almost allsome of the western universities provide a lot of scholarships to those who study well. So much so that in practice you only have to pay (partially) for your bachelor degree. The master's and ph.d. are in fact free (and you're usually left with some extra money as well). Without any kind of allusion to the "commie" ideology. Indeed, it might make sense for the government to pay for your education if you agree to take on the government job for two years or something like that. However, that situation should not be officially titled the Free Education (TM) as the government gathers tremendous political dividends from that title while, as it turns out, requires their fee in just another way.