It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Democracy in Russia

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 9 2008 @ 12:47 PM
Russian leader and richest man in Europe ($40 billion) chooses his successor who in turn "chooses" Putin as Prime minister,jails his opponents, sends troops near Georgia.
And yet we hear little if none voice against Putin's beheviors, I suppose Iran is way more a threat to the world peace than Russia

posted on May, 9 2008 @ 03:45 PM
Well in the case of Russia i guess it is a case of the devil you know rather than a firebrand on the nuclear button. Iran however is too full of political hotheads....

posted on May, 9 2008 @ 03:58 PM
Yuo don't hear anyone complaining because it is not the USA. Anything the USA does is matter what........

All other countries can do as they please and it is all Ok.

Don't hear anyone complaining about the Junta in Burma stealing all the UN food either.......somehow it will turn out to be the USA's fault.

And acutally Iran is more of a threat........the extremeist islamic mentality is dead to all non-believers.

[edit on 9-5-2008 by ferretman2]

posted on May, 10 2008 @ 01:02 AM
Remember folks, George W. Bush is still the bigger fascist.

posted on May, 10 2008 @ 12:01 PM
The most important thing about Putin - is that the vast majority of Russians are satisfied with the way he has been running the country for 8 year. The same could not be said for Russia's two prior leaders - Yeltsin and Gorbachev. So the Western media can put up whatever stink they want against him and his policies, but at the end it is Russians who decide who will lead their nation. And they have overwhelmingly decided that Putin and his partners (Medvedev) should. Is that not Democracy?

Russia never had Democracy, so it is impossible to say Putin is backtracking on anything. The 90's were an Oligarchy not a Democracy - where the country was completely run by those who had the most money. What Putin is doing is setting the stage for future democratic reform. But in order to do that, the country needs to have a strong economy and be able to sustain itself.

Putin and his policies are grossly misunderstood. You cannot view what he does and compare it to U.S. or some other Western "democracy". You have to view his actions in the context of Russia and what happened there since the USSR collapsed. You need to understand how he came to power, and how and why he overcame the oligarchs. And finally you need to understand what the oligarchs and their Western partners were doing to Russia in the 90's.

Untill then any talk about Putin's actions is pure speculation. Putin has made major mistakes, just like any other leader of a large nation. He is in no way flawless. But to call him undemocratic would be a mistake - 70% of Russians will disagree with you.

posted on May, 10 2008 @ 12:57 PM
Well he jails his opponents or anti-putin demonstrators he can have 70% + aproval
, to me it's not what I call democracy, but I agree with you Russia is in a better shape than when Yeltsin was "leading" the country...let say he's doing a good job as dictator

posted on May, 10 2008 @ 01:05 PM

posted on May, 10 2008 @ 02:03 PM

Originally posted by Marmelade
Well he jails his opponents

What opponents would that be? Give some examples. If you say Khadarkosvky - then you probably know very little about his arrest besides what you heard from Western media. I am not gonna explain why he was arrested - but it will suffice to say he was not innocent. He was one of the oligarchs and thieves of the 90's who refused to give up power to the elected official who wanted to turn the country into a new direction. Khodorkosvky was never Putin's opponent - he was an opponent of Russia - one of the numerous individuals selling off Russia's assets and resources to the highest bidder in the West, escaping any taxation in the process.

Originally posted by Marmelade
or anti-putin demonstrators

If demonstrators break the law the obvious consequence is their lawful detainment - this goes for every single country in the world, including the U.S. In whatever light the Western media portrayed these "demonstrators" should not overshadow the fact that nation's laws pervail over whatever liberal or anachist ideas one may have.

Seemingly undemocratic treatment of illegal and semi-legal demostrations have occured in many democracies worldwide - including France, U.S., and Germany. These clashes only demonstrate that any democracy must have laws, for the lack of such would make it an anarchy.

If you say some of Russia's laws are "undemocratic" you would be correct. But every single democracy today has some "undemocratic" laws.

Originally posted by Marmelade
to me it's not what I call democracy

Democracy is what one makes of it. One person's or one ethnicity's idea of democracy may not be the same as somebody else's. If the vast majority of Russians view what they have as a democracy that works for them - thats great. In your view Russia may not be democratic, and in my view the U.S. is not democratic. Heck some may think that France and Sweden are undemocratic, despite being among the most liberal nations in the world.

And if your view of "democracy" is the common American ideal, then no - Russia is not and never was a democracy. But many Russians as well as others feel that what Putin is doing is paving the way for Russia to become a democracy, compared to what Yeltsin was doing - paving the way for Russia to become an oligarchist subsidiary of Western capitalists. To become democratic a country first needs to have a stable economy and self-sustainability. This is the first step, and one that Putin has been working on. Only after this is complete can there be succesful reforms.

Remember - a democracy that is made in a day, falls apart in a day.

Originally posted by Marmelade
let say he's doing a good job as dictator

If Putin was truly a dictator he would never risk turning over control to another individual (Medvedev). Putin had the power and the support he needed to alter the constitution and become reelected for third term. He didn't do this.

And "dictator" is a very vague and naive term. It can be used against any leader by any unsatisfied individual or party. Putin is no more of a dictator than Bush. Luckily Putin only "dictates" to Russians, while Bush "dictates" or tries to "dictate" to the entire world.

posted on May, 10 2008 @ 05:24 PM
reply to post by maloy

Ok thanks for answering,

I was thinking about kasparov as Putin's opponent being jailed amongst other protesters, but maybe western medias didn't do their job well (wouldn't be a big surprise...), I knew Khadarkosvky wasn't an angel (more like a mafioso).
In my opinion in any democracy people should have the right to express their feelings against their leaders, but maybe I'm too naive.
I really hope that you're right and that Putin is not another leader working only for himself and that he's really working for Russia, but well, I've long lost faith in our political leaders...
Oh and I think their is no longer any democracy in our Countries (biased medias, too much money needed to run for prez...), so if a dictator takes care of "his" people instead of his own bank account, why not...

PS : that's why I like ats, we can learn a lot on others' country =)

posted on May, 12 2008 @ 04:51 AM
reply to post by maloy

Russia's media is controlled by the government. Same reason no one voted for Ron Paul.

new topics


log in