Thread: Is Russia a democracy? Плюс то же о некоторых других странах

Originally Posted by Lady Maria

the Euro was imposed upon us and has meant nothing but a loss in domestic purchasing power

I've heard a number of similar stories, I just don't get them, do you mean that after Euro was introduced as your local currency the prices began to rise, or do you mean your salaries went out of sync with the official rate of your former currency to Euro?

Originally Posted by Lady Maria

French people with a semblance of education would know that European laws are binding, from the CAP through budgetary strictures, civil protection, energy, tourism, police cooperation to national defence. We're sometimes reminded of it, with such innocuous phrases as "further to the European directive so-and-so...". Hell, we're even supposed to elect our national representatives in the European parliament! But let me tell you the absentions run high... None but Brussels-buffs and those with a keen interest in politics really knows who's on the lists. To most of us they're just names.

When the French people voted NO to a European referendum, the government sat on it. Just plain sat on it. We have had zilch say in European politics (how could it be otherwise?!) the Euro was imposed upon us and has meant nothing but a loss in domestic purchasing power (although if you were to go on holidays to say, Turkey, your purchasing power parity would naturally get a boost).

Another sad issue would be that our debt belongs mostly to China. Needless to say, when you are indebted to someone, you are obliged to them... making this democratic myth even lamer.

Never came across a French person with these types of views. Sorry to say that all French people I know, are corporate drones, anglophiles or just wealthy and clueless. So it's very interesting to read your posts! Hope you'll stick around in the forum, it would really benefit from your input, I think!

And for the record I share many of your views, even if I don't have the French perspective.

What happened to the CAP, by the way? The big hot issue when Eastern Europe was joining, was that they would not be allowed to get CAP assistance - blatant discrimination, really. I would have been too proud to be a 2nd class EU country, if I was them!
I think they all agreed to membership sans CAP anyway, didn't they? Or are we now supporting 1 pig farmers in places like Poland and Romania? Not that they are any less worthy than some of the millionaire farmers that are milking CAP in Germany and lots of other places.

Originally Posted by 14Russian

Это полная чушь.

Originally Posted by 14Russian

Так это шутка?

Originally Posted by 14Russian

No, it isn't.

Originally Posted by 14Russian

LOL.

I have to bring to your attention that posting this way you break the forum rule #6. Please take it into account and please follow the rules.

"6 - Do not turn this forum into a chatroom. Try to make posts that have some essence to them."

The question about democracy is neither here nor there, really.
In which Western country can you achieve real change through the ballot? None...
In Europe soon all political parties are equally New Labour-esque politcally correct clones of each other.
Turning democracy into a joke because no party is for any significant change. Those who are, are accused of being religious fanatics, clueless hippies, nazis,"stalinist" and similar by mainstream media to the point that nobody will vote for them.

In America it's already happened a long time ago and everyone is busy squabbling about the details of the near identical programmes of the republicans or democrates, while the corporations and elites are grabbing the wealth and the population is getting poorer and more unhealthy year by year.

I think that a much more interesting question is: Is Russia now a total nightwatch liberal country where you need money for everything from hospital care, university education. Are there decent paying jobs for people and pensions for pensioners? I don't really understand what the policies of Edinaya Rossiya are, what their ideology is, if they have one, and what their vision for Russia is.

What are the big differences in the politics of Edinaya Rossiya and the second largest party?

Originally Posted by Hanna

What are the big differences in the politics of Edinaya Rossiya and the second largest party?

This is what the second largest party is going to do:
Своей стратегической целью в долгосрочной перспективе называет построение в России «обновлённого социализма». В краткосрочной перспективе ставит перед собой задачи: приход к власти «патриотических сил», национализация недр и стратегических отраслей экономики с сохранением малого и среднего предпринимательства, усиление социальной направленности политики государства.

Originally Posted by E-learner

This is what the second largest party is going to do:
Своей стратегической целью в долгосрочной перспективе называет построение в России «обновлённого социализма». В краткосрочной перспективе ставит перед собой задачи: приход к власти «патриотических сил», национализация недр и стратегических отраслей экономики с сохранением малого и среднего предпринимательства, усиление социальной направленности политики государства.

Ok.. No version of real socialism can win an election anymore though. I think that's true for Russia too. The market forces against it are too strong.

There was a period, during which socialist parties won fair and square elections in Europe, but it's just too late. The forces that would oppose socialism are too strong, well organised and well prepared.

Plus, media has painted a (mostly false) horror vision of what life was like in socialist countries, using the worst examples, the worst periods and the most extreme excesses.

I think you are stuck with Edinnaya Rossiya then: If the closest opposition are serious communists/socialists. They can never actually win an election can they? Unless they set out for Revolution 2.0 they will never be in power.

It's a shame that it should be such a shambles democracy - but it's no worse than the USA. They can't achieve real change through the ballot either, for the same reason. They get essentially the same regardless of which party they vote for. Europe is getting closer to that situation every year.

Originally Posted by Hanna

Is Russia now a total nightwatch liberal country where you need money for everything from hospital care, university education. Are there decent paying jobs for people and pensions for pensioners?

No, it isn't. Of course there are decent paying jobs, especially in Moscow.

Eric, prices were rounded up by producers. It's as simple as it gets. The official conversion rate was €1 = F6.55957. But the practical reality was quite different, and there are even sketches (made by people my own age) where one chap goes to buy his baguette (французская булка) and is asked F4 for it; then comes 2000 and again he goes to buy the same baguette, only this time its cost has magically risen to €1. Naturally, he calls the baker a variety of unprintable names. But he still has to fork up.

Hanna, thank you for your kind words. I am sorry to hear you have so far been less than favourably impressed by French people. Please bear in mind that those Frenchmen you have not met yet may well have the most interesting things to say.
My opinions are shared by a number of Frenchmen (one only has to read the hilarious comments on yahoo articles; sadly, it's in French only) but the reason you may not be aware of it is that they tend 1) not to mix with foreigners much, if at all and 2) to know no other language than their own, and be content with it.
For the record, although I'm French born and bred, I do not have one drop of French blood in my veins.

The CAP was a joke. I'm no expert and have no notion about Eastern European countries, but how in hell can we have a common agricultural policy when the soil is different and varies wildly from country to country? Add to that the quotas they have imposed on us and you just see how much stupidity eurocrats can come up with.

As I would not appreciate being accused of wearing rosy-tinted specs when it comes to the USSR, I would just like to take this opportunity to mention that I am quite aware of the millions sent to the gulags and of such like unpleasantness. My own Greek ancestors (on my father's side) lived for some 15 or 20 years there (roughly between 1923 and 1940) and to avoid being carted away to Siberia by comrade Stalin, finally decided to pack off and move to the Greek mainland. So yes, times could be both undemocratic and unpleasant, I do know that. But that was in the worst days of communism.

As for Russia, I was diligently reading my Russian textbook and came upon the subject of "монетизачия льгот". I couldn't help crying out "but that's SO unfair!". I can only imagine the plight of poor Russian elderly pensioners, and I do feel they are being hard done by. I am not advocating a nanny state but I feel that if true democracy is to set in, then the people should at least be listened to. Same goes for the Chernobyl liquidators. You save the world from immediate nuclear destruction, you rise to the call of duty, sacrifice your lives, your health and your future and what do you get? Shameless reduction of your invalidity pensions, very little gratitude and a lot of medals. Is something rotten in the state of Russia... I remember one post claiming that we mixed up everything from welfare state to democracy, lumped everything together... well, it's all linked up. If the people truly had power, their voices would be heard. That's what vox populi is all about.
If I were to be cynical about my country, I'd say that at this level of unpopularity any king, any czar would have abdicated. But our president still will not resign! Even taken with a pinch of salt, that just goes to show... And what democracy is this when the prominence of two parties is such that in order to vote against the incumbent you have to vote for his opponent, your distrust for whom being only a shade less strong because he happens not to be currently in power?

Вот на что я наткнулась в интернете. Как-то заставляет задуматься.. Знакомо?

http://echo.msk.ru/blog/dymarskiy/1195352-echo/

http://echo.msk.ru/blog/shenderovich/1195058-echo/

Вопрос: а кому нужна демократия?
Пример: На Украине рейтинг президента 13% (рейтинг его партии 25%). Но это не помешает ему подписать важный договор с ЕС.

Originally Posted by Lakme

Вот на что я наткнулась в интернете. Как-то заставляет задуматься.. Знакомо? http://echo.msk.ru/blog/dymarskiy/1195352-echo/

Ну, а что делать?
Сначала кризис коммунистической идеологии.
Потом 25 лет без идеологии. Вернее, думали, что лозунг "обогащайтесь" заменит нам идеологию.
Теперь видим, что природа не терпит пустоты. Со всех сторон лезет чужая идеология. Русских девочек под идеологическим соусом успешно вербуют во "временные жёны" мусульманским джихадистам на Кавказе. Разве такое было возможно в советское время?
Давно пора самим заполнять вакуум в сфере идеологии. Иначе не выжить в этом добром мире. Идеология даёт сопротивляемость обществу. Это его иммунитет. Кстати, и в Германии, и в США, и во Франции есть своя идеология.
У нас в институте тоже проводилась идеологическая работа. Мы встречались с ветеранами отечественной войны, они рассказывали о ней. Причём, их слова часто выходили за рамки официальной пропаганды. Это были интересные люди: капитан первого ранга, экипаж подводной лодки С-13. И ничего страшного в этих встречах я не вижу.

Originally Posted by Юрка

У нас в институте тоже проводилась идеологическая работа. Мы встречались с ветеранами отечественной войны, они рассказывали о ней. Причём, их слова часто выходили за рамки официальной пропаганды. Это были интересные люди: капитан первого ранга, экипаж подводной лодки С-13. И ничего страшного в этих встречах я не вижу.

Ссылка та - это всего лишь один маленький пример, который, на мой взгляд, показывает, в каком направлении мы движемся.
Думаю, что слова тут не нужны - примеры говорят сами за себя. И таких примеров очень и очень много.

Originally Posted by alexsms

I'd like to introduce this simple question (simple in form) and I suspect the answers might be unexpected. I hope this could be a kind of a poll (YES/NO or YES, but.. NO, but style) with comments; I also hope the answers are based on reasoning rather than pure emotions.

Russia and Democracy by DanielM

Russia has never had a democracy in the western sense of the word because that type of democracy is rooted in middle-class notions of political freedoms and Russia has never had a well-developed middle-class. The Russian notion of freedom is radically different from middle-class freedom. Culturally speaking, the Renaissance was the flowering of middle-class values expressed in art forms which despite their great beauty were expressions of the need of the middle-class to alienate and isolate itself from other classes. Russia never passed through the experiences of the Renaissance. The goal of middle-class freedoms embodied in western democracies is to protect by laws rich individuals and their riches from the masses of humanity. On one level, the Russians conceive of freedom as union with other individuals in a group in a way that is unknown to the western bourgeois mind. It is summed up in the word sobornost which is untranslatable. On another level, Russians have always been passionate about freedom meaning total freedom materially, intellectually and spiritually. All the great Russian men who lived with this ideal of freedom are loved by Russians and they always lived tragic lives. Read Dostoevsky’s Notes From The Underground if you want a taste of this kind of freedom. A Europeanized Russian risks being no longer a Russian. A Europeanized democracy can not exist in Russia because only the freedom forever alive in the soul of the great masses of Russians is Russian freedom and it is impossible to organize politically such freedom using western logic.

Originally Posted by DanielM

Russia and Democracy by DanielM

Russia has never had a democracy in the western sense of the word because that type of democracy is rooted in middle-class notions of political freedoms and Russia has never had a well-developed middle-class. The Russian notion of freedom is radically different from middle-class freedom. Culturally speaking, the Renaissance was the flowering of middle-class values expressed in art forms which despite their great beauty were expressions of the need of the middle-class to alienate and isolate itself from other classes. Russia never passed through the experiences of the Renaissance. The goal of middle-class freedoms embodied in western democracies is to protect by laws rich individuals and their riches from the masses of humanity. On one level, the Russians conceive of freedom as union with other individuals in a group in a way that is unknown to the western bourgeois mind. It is summed up in the word sobornost which is untranslatable. On another level, Russians have always been passionate about freedom meaning total freedom materially, intellectually and spiritually. All the great Russian men who lived with this ideal of freedom are loved by Russians and they always lived tragic lives. Read Dostoevsky’s Notes From The Underground if you want a taste of this kind of freedom. A Europeanized Russian risks being no longer a Russian. A Europeanized democracy can not exist in Russia because only the freedom forever alive in the soul of the great masses of Russians is Russian freedom and it is impossible to organize politically such freedom using western logic.

Welcome Daniel!

Originally Posted by DanielM

Russia never passed through the experiences of the Renaissance.

Some shadow of Renaissance may have visited Russia in what they call the Golden Age (which gave rise to world famous literature, including Dostoevsky); it's not the European Renaissance in its pure sense, of course. With all that in mind, serfdom was abolished in 1861 only (cf, underground rail opened in London in 1863), tsar who abolished it was killed 20 years later (in the 5th attempt), reaction followed, turn of the century, 1905, 1917... Seems like no time for middle class to appear.

I'm no expert but it seems to me that Karl Marx and his "Proletarians of all countries, unite!" didn't have in mind the middle-classes or Germany alone... Had it been the case, surely the USSR wouldn't have stolen the motto.

Originally Posted by Lady Maria

I'm no expert but it seems to me that Karl Marx and his "Proletarians of all countries, unite!" didn't have in mind the middle-classes or Germany alone... Had it been the case, surely the USSR wouldn't have stolen the motto.

I don't think they took it so much. The problem that Russia had after the proper revolution, was that Marx theory didn't fit Russian conditions. Marx said the socialist revolutions will happen in industrialised states. His entire philosophy was based on that. But Russia was not industrialised at the time. So Lenin refined/tweaked it to fit the Russian conditions (Leninism).
And when they implemented socialism in Eastern Europe, they did it a lot more slowly and methodically, not in a dramatic revolutionary fashion.

Many people who were communists totally rejected the USSR because it had a motto which went something like "socialism in one country first", and said to defend the accomplishments with violence if necessary. I think that essentially goes against Marxism.

Marx was an internationalist and didn't believe in nation states or national armies. So there was quite a clash between what the USSR did, and textbook Marxism, early on. But some Communists thought Lenin was more practical than Marx, and became Leninists. There is also quite a big difference between Leninism and Maoism, but I must say I don't know precisely what that is/was about.

Meanwhile, interestingly, no industrial state has had a sponteneous socialist revolution unless you count election victories in a few South American states recently. It might still happen in the future, but as of right now, it looks like Marx theories remain theoretical...

In my childhood I used to wait for the bus home, next to a socialist bookshop, and lord almighty, were these people prolific writers, or what! They had exhibitions in the window with all books by so-and-so and it was mind blowing how much these political philosophers and statesmen managed to write. Anyone who's anyone in socialism has written at least 10 books and for every book there are 10 more books discussing the original. I wonder if anyone reads that stuff anymore?

Oops I just realised that this is a deviation from the topic. I suppose it might have to be deleted.

At least, this "evil western style democracy" won't let this happen:

Some creepy stuff

У нас в институте тоже проводилась идеологическая работа. Мы встречались с ветеранами отечественной войны, они рассказывали о ней.

Хорошо было бы замутить дела так, чтобы встречи с ветеранами были, а слова "идеологическая работа" к ним не применялись. Но нет.

With all that in mind, serfdom was abolished in 1861 only (cf, underground rail opened in London in 1863)

Yes, and slavery in the USA was abolished in 1865, and not without the influence of the abolishment of serfdom in Russia.
By the way, although de facto serfdom in Britain became obsolete much earlier, du jure the feudal copyhold tenure system was abolished only in 1922.
On the other hand, serfdom never was total in Russia. By the year 1861 only about 30% of peasants were serfs. And there were regions where serfdom never existed, that is Russian North, Siberia, Cossacks' lands.