Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Petro Poroshenko

5 (29.4%)

Yulia Tymoshenko

2 (11.8%)

Oleg Lyashko

2 (11.8%)

Anatoly Hrytsenko

2 (11.8%)

Serhiy Tihipko

0 (0%)

Mykhailo Dobkin

0 (0%)

Other

6 (35.3%)

Total Members Voted: 17

[Helgoland]

a) USSR has crushed plenty of revolts in it's time; Remember Czech?
b) Ban on KPSS.
c) The Tatarstan was at one moment very close to achieving independence, thankfully Putin stopped that.
d) Changing the goal post, UR said nothing about democracy, only about truly democratical elections.
e) We (the common people) had exactly zero (ZERO) control over our government at the moment. China was an incredibly poor state at the moment, btw. The "liberal" economists have decided that the best way was to privatize everything, and that's what they did. They did not asked anybody if that was the best choice. They just did it.

Ah, you snuck an edit in!
a) Sure, but by the time there would've been any crushing the GDR was already reunited with Western Germany - the Russian troops stayed until 1994. Even if the USSR had tried to crush the reunification movement I don't think the NVA would've cooperated, and neither that West Germany would've had any scruples about equipping the resistance with modern weaponry. Plus the USSR wasn't doing too well at the time, with Afghanistan and all that jazz...
b) A ban says nothing. Who was tried for the Communists' crimes? Where was the Vergangenheitsbewältigung? (Something Germany has neglected regarding the SED, and right now it's turning around to bite us in the arse.)
c) How's that relevant?
d) 'Truly democratic' being the key here. For 'truly democratic' elections you need a free press, transparent elections, and the certainty that there will be more truly democratic elections. An isolated election is worth shit, the only thing that counts is the democratic culture, and that doesn't appear to be too developed in Russia.
e) Again, how is that relevant? We all agree that the Russian economic policy in the 90s was shite (in part because Gorbachev did the exact opposite of what Deng did), but - as I pointed out - there are other ways of going about it. Ways that Russia could try out instead of applying the same policies that failed in the end phase of the USSR.

Edit: I don't know about you, Knit, but I'm learning a lot - much more than I had expected. This thread is a blessing!

[Guardian G.I.]

Well, would you look at that! This thread has already pretty much devolved into prorussians and antirussians insulting each other!

Spoiler: Artistic depiction of a polite, friendly and constructive discussion of Russia at its typical end phase (click to show/hide)

[Sergarr]

a) USSR has crushed plenty of revolts in it's time; Remember Czech?
b) Ban on KPSS.
c) The Tatarstan was at one moment very close to achieving independence, thankfully Putin stopped that.
d) Changing the goal post, UR said nothing about democracy, only about truly democratical elections.
e) We (the common people) had exactly zero (ZERO) control over our government at the moment. China was an incredibly poor state at the moment, btw. The "liberal" economists have decided that the best way was to privatize everything, and that's what they did. They did not asked anybody if that was the best choice. They just did it.

Ah, you snuck an edit in!
a) Sure, but by the time there would've been any crushing the GDR was already reunited with Western Germany - the Russian troops stayed until 1994. Even if the USSR had tried to crush the reunification movement I don't think the NVA would've cooperated, and neither that West Germany would've had any scruples about equipping the resistance with modern weaponry. Plus the USSR wasn't doing too well at the time, with Afghanistan and all that jazz...
b) A ban says nothing. Who was tried for the Communists' crimes? Where was the Vergangenheitsbewältigung? (Something Germany has neglected regarding the SED, and right now it's turning around to bite us in the arse.)
c) How's that relevant?
d) 'Truly democratic' being the key here. For 'truly democratic' elections you need a free press, transparent elections, and the certainty that there will be more truly democratic elections. An isolated election is worth shit, the only thing that counts is the democratic culture, and that doesn't appear to be too developed in Russia.
e) Again, how is that relevant? We all agree that the Russian economic policy in the 90s was shite (in part because Gorbachev did the exact opposite of what Deng did), but - as I pointed out - there are other ways of going about it. Ways that Russia could try out instead of applying the same policies that failed in the end phase of the USSR.

Edit: I don't know about you, Knit, but I'm learning a lot - much more than I had expected. This thread is a blessing!

People foolishly believed at the time that simply banning the KPSS and the communist symbols would instantly cleanse the society from the "communo-fascist plague" (this peculiar combination of words was used very often in 90s).

It's a statement to how naive people have became in USSR, where people held so little individual responsibility, and some places (secret institutes, mostly) held so much power that a simple writing mistake could mean the difference between getting the normal air ventilation fan for lab need and the gigantic construct designed to ventilate huge mines, which required the entire train to transport (that is actually a true story; they later gave away that thing to miners nearby for IIRC food or something like that, because they (the miners) have been needing that thing for a long time and could not get it.

I'm finding myself in a thought that perhaps Russians make good scientists and engineers, but terrible rulers and bureaucrats. Maybe we should do what the ancient Rus did and invite somebody else to rule over us.

[Knit tie]

Edit: I don't know about you, Knit, but I'm learning a lot - much more than I had expected. This thread is a blessing!

Wait, I thought we were all just inflating our sense of self worth here by deriding those who do not agree with us?

And Vergangenheitsbewältigung is not nearly as good as you think it is. We've had oceans of mud poured on the USSR right after it fell, and the current Russian mass culture almost never says anything positive about that period of our history either, but that does precisely nothing about anything, just like the USA's rhethoric about Native American/black oppression or any other (former) empire's self - incriminating rhethoric at that. Meanwhile, Japan and Turkey, for example, keep steadfastly denying their Chinese and Armenian genocides respectively, and are none the worse for wear. Almost nobody was tried for communists' crimes because most of those communists who committed crimes were already dead from old age or relegated to the absolute political periphery, the ones that were at large were at worst simple fuck-ups. And I don't think the absolute majority of nazis were tried for their crimes either.

[Guardian G.I.]

I'm finding myself in a thought that perhaps Russians make good scientists and engineers, but terrible rulers and bureaucrats. Maybe we should do what the ancient Rus did and invite somebody else to rule over us.

It already (somewhat) happened in recent history - the disastrous economic reforms of 1990s were directed by American economists.

The blame for the catastrophic economic collapse of the 1990s can be put not only on Gaidar, Chubais and other Russian liberals, but also on the United States of America - the Clinton's administration has constantly supported the liberal reformers and their activities.

[Sergarr]

I'm finding myself in a thought that perhaps Russians make good scientists and engineers, but terrible rulers and bureaucrats. Maybe we should do what the ancient Rus did and invite somebody else to rule over us.

It already (somewhat) happened in recent history - the disastrous economic reforms of 1990s were directed by American economists.

The blame for the catastrophic economic collapse of the 1990s can be put not only on Gaidar, Chubais and other Russian liberals, but also on the United States of America - the Clinton's administration has constantly supported the liberal reformers and their activities.

There's a difference between "advisers" - who rule from the shadows, allowing them to shift all the responsibility to others, and "rulers" - who cannot do that.

That said, yeah, I would never invite an American to rule my country.

Somebody from Finland would be a much better choice, since they've
1) Pretty close to us in mentality .
2) Not super-uber hostile. (like Baltic states and Ukraine atm)
3) Have a long history of independence, semi-independence and defending their homeland effectively.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Chinese?

[Sergarr]

Chinese?

Their culture is focused under Confucianism, which promotes vastly different cultural values than Russian ones.

EDIT:
Also, the Chinise culture has a very strong sense of Chinese nationalism; they're not going to be benevolent rulers in Russia.

And finally, I feel like Chinese economy is very overheated at this moment, and there are non-zero chances of bubble burst.

[Guardian G.I.]

I'm finding myself in a thought that perhaps Russians make good scientists and engineers, but terrible rulers and bureaucrats. Maybe we should do what the ancient Rus did and invite somebody else to rule over us.

It already (somewhat) happened in recent history - the disastrous economic reforms of 1990s were directed by American economists.

The blame for the catastrophic economic collapse of the 1990s can be put not only on Gaidar, Chubais and other Russian liberals, but also on the United States of America - the Clinton's administration has constantly supported the liberal reformers and their activities.

There's a difference between "advisers" - who rule from the shadows, allowing them to shift all the responsibility to others, and "rulers" - who cannot do that.

That said, yeah, I would never invite an American to rule my country.

Somebody from Finland would be a much better choice, since they've
1) Pretty close to us in mentality .
2) Not super-uber hostile. (like Baltic states and Ukraine atm)
3) Have a long history of independence, semi-independence and defending their homeland effectively.

There's an alternative: Alexander Lukashenko. Say what you want about his current policies, but thanks to him, Belarus weathered through the storm of the 1990s without any major damage. Russia's default of 1998 hit us pretty hard, though, but it wasn't Lukashenko's fault.
There were rumours that he had signed the Union State agreement because he had planned to take part in presidential elections of the unified country. Back then, Yeltsin's approval rating was a single digit, and Lukashenko was already popular in Russia, so he would easily win. However, in my opinion his policies wouldn't succeed in Russia because of its sheer size: it would be difficult for him to control the state apparatus from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok like in Belarus, even with the help of state security. It's too large.

Russia's foreign policy under Lukashenko would not be pro-American, that's for sure.

[Sergarr]

Unless Lukashenko is an avid supporter of modern technology and promotes higher education, I'm not convinced that him ruling Russia is going to make things better.

I think that Russian are bad at ruling themselves because any good Russian does not wish to rule over large masses of people (it's a cultural thing), leaving the bad Russians inevitably ending in the seats of power.

EDIT: I wish Putin was less bureaucratic like he is now and more like in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN9ha0vhldM

Power corrupts

[mainiac]

And finally, I feel like Chinese economy is very overheated at this moment, and there are non-zero chances of bubble burst.

The Yuan has been appreciating and the inflation rate has been declining.  China's worries are more about middle income trap and declining rate of growth when the urbanization demographic shift ends and the aging one starts.

[Helgoland]

And Vergangenheitsbewältigung is not nearly as good as you think it is. We've had oceans of mud poured on the USSR right after it fell, and the current Russian mass culture almost never says anything positive about that period of our history either, but that does precisely nothing about anything, just like the USA's rhethoric about Native American/black oppression or any other (former) empire's self - incriminating rhethoric at that. Meanwhile, Japan and Turkey, for example, keep steadfastly denying their Chinese and Armenian genocides respectively, and are none the worse for wear.

Vergangenheitsbewältigung != just saying it was bad. It means looking at what's happened, and looking at why it has happened, and looking at how it can be prevented from happening again. It has little to do with punishment: As you rightly recognized, many Nazi officials went right back to working for the state after '45 - it was the only way to  keep our country running, since so many people had joined the NSDAP. If we hadn't had the process of denazification though, things might once more have ended up like in Weimar, with revisionists gaining popularity.
Another good example for Vergangenheitsbewältigung (why is there no English word for this?) is South Africe - the situation there may be more similar than Germany in '45 to Russia in the 90's. And most of Eastern Asia has huge problems because they still haven't worked through their history, as any newspaper article concerning Shinzo Abe or Chinese schoolbooks - not to mention the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands - will show you. And as I said, another good example for failure is Germany's ex-Communists.

I'm kinda surprised reading many posts here - do most people here dislike Putin?

[mainiac]

Sergarr seems to have a "nobody hits my little brother but me" view on his countries government.  Knit tie seems to hate all governments, Russian or otherwise.  Guardian seems to think Belarus is doing it better.  Most everyone else seems to think Russia should stop invading it's neighbor.  So that just leaves Lord Slowpoke as the Putinphile.

[Darvi]

LSP is too po-mo to count.

[Sergarr]

Sergarr seems to have a "nobody hits my little brother but me" view on his countries government.  Knit tie seems to hate all governments, Russian or otherwise.  Guardian seems to think Belarus is doing it better.  Most everyone else seems to think Russia should stop invading it's neighbor.  So that just leaves Lord Slowpoke as the Putinphile.

What about miljan and smjjames?