[Luis Dias]

Dragon, you are so wrong it's not even funny. Putin has been a ****ing disgrace to Russia, only people who are distracted by his PR and others who either are thinking solely on anti-american terms or are even enjoying MACHOTALK from Putin can ever say the opposite. This is a country that is absolutely owned by the closest plutocrat friends of Putin and very little else remains from it.

I thought my example showed how change is indeed possible. I think it's an incredible example that just flat out proves your assertions are 100% wrong. And I will stand by them. Regarding NK's lack of sustainability and requiring China to support it, well, you talk as if Russia's life support doesn't depend on the existence of the wider world needing Russia's Oil and Gas to survive. Which of course it does. A market drop of these goods and bang you have a ****ing crash in the country with risible rates of inflation and a recession soon to follow, in a country whose GDP is already laughable compared to its potential.

[Bobboau]

...

I don't think he was implying it was a inate trait they were born with, I think he was saying it was an aspect of the culture. Granted he said it in an ambiguous enough way that I'm not completely sure.

[Mr. Vega]

Dragon, you are so wrong it's not even funny. Putin has been a ****ing disgrace to Russia, only people who are distracted by his PR and others who either are thinking solely on anti-american terms or are even enjoying MACHOTALK from Putin can ever say the opposite. This is a country that is absolutely owned by the closest plutocrat friends of Putin and very little else remains from it.

I thought my example showed how change is indeed possible. I think it's an incredible example that just flat out proves your assertions are 100% wrong. And I will stand by them. Regarding NK's lack of sustainability and requiring China to support it, well, you talk as if Russia's life support doesn't depend on the existence of the wider world needing Russia's Oil and Gas to survive. Which of course it does. A market drop of these goods and bang you have a ****ing crash in the country with risible rates of inflation and a recession soon to follow, in a country whose GDP is already laughable compared to its potential.

There are a lot of countries that have been sucked into the trap of letting themselves become completely dependent on raw material exports. Russia is just the only one with ambitions of being a world power.

I would be a lot harsher on Putin right now if I hadn't just seen even more inept statesmanship on the other side of the continent (by which the stupidity of the US Congress pails in comparison). For all his faults he is a million times better than Yeltsin and the material prosperity of the average Russian has improved considerably under his rule amidst all the corruption. Yes, he is now ****ing that up badly due to his complete inability to foresee the economic and political consequences of his recent policies, but there are an awful of lot of leaders who would have their flaws exposed if they faced the crises he is dealing with now.

Whenever we discuss Putin I keep thinking of the assessment Rictor gave of him back in 2008:

Simply put, he is what Hitler could have become had he been a shrewd, intelligent, ruthless mother****ing mastermind.

And you know what? At that point in time, I think Rictor was right. Alas, Putin held onto power long enough to run into the kind of situations he sucks at handling.

[Lorric]

I just thought I'd mention that while I've only met a very few Russians in my time (that I've known are Russian), they've all been really nice and friendly people, defying the negative stereotypes about Russians.

As far as Putin goes, I'm not in a position to be able to go into any real detail about him, but when it comes to Russians electing him, I don't know what Putin's competition is like. Maybe he's the best of a bad bunch. Or maybe it's a case of better the devil you know. He might get out-boogey'd by another boogeyman if he gets replaced...

My opinion on Putin probably runs closest to Herra's. And while like I said, I'm not in a position to go into any real detail, when it comes to the possibility of a grand strategy for Putin, I'm not sure if he has such a grand strategy. I wouldn't be surprised if it's more like Putin has views on things which would be good and desirable for Russia / himself, is not shy about trying to take these things when the opportunity arises, and he is simply a man who knows what he wants and is a good opportunist. Like this Ukraine situation. He imo seized upon a pretext in order to take territory he desired.

[Nyctaeus]

I'm actually interested what russian people REALLY thinks about Putin. TV, newspapers and other media here, in Poland are not quite believable. It's really big problem of Poland that in fact, we don't have any free media in mainstream. Only small, independent internet medias partialy speak the truth. Some of mainstream media think about russians as band of Putin followers, while the independent shows "massive" demonstrations and other signs of incoming riots. According to the Golden Mean rule, the truth lies somewhere between. I need impartial opinion based on facts and observations.

[Luis Dias]

Unfortunately, while there is a knowledgeable russian middle class who is very much aware of Putin's malfeasances, they are smothered by several issues.

The first is the total blackout of any opposition. Just the other day we had the number one opposition guy to Putin watching his own brother being thrown in jail for bull**** reasons. This kind of harrassment of Putin's opposition has been rampant ever since he took office (let alone the deaths of journalists who were "coincidentally" finding harsh truths about Putin's regime).

Then it's the total media blackout of any opposition. Putin runs all the media shows, and "Russia Today" is just Putin's version of old "Pravda". Even when mass protests arise, they are rarely shown on tv, and when they are, they are belittled or found unimportant, fringe, etc.

Then, it's the oil price going upwards for the past 10 years (except last year and the recession years) which he practically used to fill his and his pals' pockets, but also to bribe the populace with "social policies". The general populace sees all this and goes "yeah we know this guy is a harsh bad dictator, but he does good things too..."

Nothing to be done regarding the first. Regarding the second, Putin really tries to shut down "dangerous" things being said on the internet, but the populace knows better. The third is cracking right now.

[Mr. Vega]

There's also the fact that Russia's middle class exists mainly due to government employment (when your entire economy is exporting oil and gas that's the only way you're going to create one).

[Luis Dias]

Yes that's what I meant with "social policies", but a bit more accurate.

[IvKir]

Well, i'm sorry that i'm able to reply after such long time...

Well, someone asked about what we think about Putin. Well, it's hard to tell for sure - someone thinks he is oppressor, someone - that he a really good leader. Really strong leader.
I think that Putin is a bit of both. He can show a bit of force, to put things right and without much noise, but he can achieve something not just for him, but for his country.

And i just don't see a best person for Russia.

Someone said, that Putin ignores, sometimes, sovereignty of others countrys. Can't argue with that, but as russian myself, it's fun to watch, how, let say, USA barking about it with theyr inner policy.)

[Herra Tohtori]

And i just don't see a best person for Russia.

If I may share my thoughts on this matter - There is no best person to lead any country.


It's all going to be second-guessed by the history anyway. Maybe there could have been a better leader? Maybe there could have been a worse one?

Regardless of how "good leader" or "good person" someone is - or perhaps especially when it comes to "good leaders" - they shouldn't remain in a position of leadership indefinitely. Even when they produce great results with the best of intentions, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Even if you did get "the best person" to accept being a leader of a country - which, by the way, should never be a "one person job" to the extent it is in Russia - that person's not necessarily going to remain the best.


But even if you do get a good leader, if they remain in power for too long, then after some time the people are going to start thinking, "Who could possibly replace him?"

Which is a dangerous line of thought, because it can easily spread to the political thinking, and eventually the leader himself might end up thinking "Who could possibly replace me?" and then you have a real problem.

The former actually happened in Finland where one man remained the president from 1956 to 1982 when he retired due to health reasons - at which point he was already practically senile and we sort of got a wake-up call about who exactly had been leading the country when the man who was supposed to be in charge couldn't tell you what day it was, or what year.


So, more than worrying about having "the best person" for Russia, I would see it important to just having a fair election, and removing that ridiculous loophole from the constitution that allowed Putin and Medvedev to just neatly bypass the whole two-term limit on presidency. I think it would be better if it was, like, you have to skip as many terms as you've served before you're eligible as a candidate again...

[IvKir]

There is a reason in your thoughts, Herra.

But there is just one thing. There not enough people, who, in fact, think that Putin\Medvedev tandem is bad. So there even no need for "unfair" selection for them. We have different problem - who will replace them, when they got old? We really don't want another Elcin, Gorbachev or even Hrushev. Because of them Russia was made weak. With bad army, bad economy, with gangs on our street (and i'm still remember days, when i can't get to the shop after, let say, 11 PM), and etc.

i

[Herra Tohtori]

That's the problem, isn't it?

When it feels like it depends on one person (president) whether your country sinks or floats, I think there is a bigger problem in the structure of the whole country rather than how strong or weak the elected leader happens to be.


Ideally, the system should work in such a way that regardless of the success or failure of one person in their appointed duty, the amount of damage done should be limited.


No one position should be as important and influential as the Russian president's is.



A country shouldn't need a single "strong" leader to be "strong".


A country is strong when it's strong even with a "weak" leader.



And, for the record, I personally suspect that blaming Yeltsin exclusively for the bad things that happened after the collapse of the Soviet Union is a bit unfair. I suspect there would have been gangs on the streets even if Stalin himself had been revived and put in charge, because no one had any money to pay the Militsia, and the Militsia were busier surviving, and protecting their families than the law and order - which had just collapsed anyway.

Yeltsin had to establish a new state - the Russian Federation - with basically new social structure and legislation and economy. On the last one, they really dropped the ball. The privatization of national assets was done so badly that it can't even be described.

That meant there was no real hope for economic recovery during Yeltsin's terms. That single failure - lack of money - was probably the biggest reason for why he's seen as having "made Russia weak". Without money, there was no way to keep up a strong military presence. There was no way to keep up a good social system, or to even improve on what used to be.

But they did nevertheless establish an effectively new state. And during Yeltsin's terms, there were actually some steps towards a more democratic society. Unfortunately, the failure of economic restructuring came to bite them as the oligarchs formed the Yedinaya Rossija party, Putin became the president, and ever since the democratic values have been more and more eroded and degraded.


But, as it seems, Putin is starting to run out of money with which to fund his military spendings, social programmes, and propaganda media. We'll see how strong of a leader he is when he has no money...

[IvKir]

And again, you are right... but there is one more thing.

Most of my fellow russians don't even know who and what a Duma doing. They know only one name - Putin. And this is same from tsar's years. We identifying our goverment with one single man. Is it Tsar, or President - it's really does not matter. Thats, really, just the way, most of russians think about our government.  And it will take a lot of time, to change this. Especially when there is a little effort to change this.
And, sorry if i sound rubbish. -_- My english really need some work.

About Yeltsin (and my bad, for not knowing, how his name transcribed in english), well... he wasnt the one, who rebuild everything and set things right. And he really drinked too much vodka.