PDA

View Full Version : In Soviet Russia, Democracy Breaks Down You


Delthayre
09-14-2004, 12:07 AM
It is not unexpected, but it is still disheartening to know that once again Russia is falling out of the grasp of her people.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is proposing a number of radical changes to the Russian administrative structure (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17838-2004Sep13.html).

The basic jist is that Putin intends to strengthen the already powerful presidency and centralize authority while reducing the power of the voters.

As Kevin Drum notes, there's a sort of eerie parallelism, if to fiction.





President Vladimir Putin outlined plans Monday to "radically" change the Russian political system in a way that would increase his own power, portraying the moves as a means of combating terrorism in the aftermath of this month's deadly school seizure.



Putin's plan would eliminate the popular election of governors and individual members of parliament. The president would appoint governors, subject to the confirmation of regional legislatures. All members of the lower house of parliament, known as the State Duma, would be drawn from party lists rather than elected in individual districts.

As Kevin Drum (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/) notes, there's a sort of eerie parallelism to events close to our minds, though ones from fiction.

GRAND MOFF TARKIN: The Imperial Senate will no longer be of any concern to us. I've just received word that the Emperor has dissolved the council permanently. The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.




COMMANDER TAGGE: That's impossible! How will the Emperor maintain control without the bureaucracy?


TARKIN: The regional governors now have direct control over territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line.





It's someting of a glib comparison, I know, but the similarities ring fairly true. I've known that Putin was well on the way to returning Russia to a more or less dictatorial state by shutting down independent media and establishing de facto absolute rule through dominance in the Duma, but it still rankles me. It is especially worrisome that he does this under the auspices of fighting terrorism. I think it could well make a cautionary tale that warns of the potential for manipulation that terrorism can allow.


I want it to be clear, however, that while I think both parties have amply exploited terrorism, I would suffer no hackish parallels to either candidate. Not even in my most partisan and hackish would I ever stoop so low as to place President Bush at the level of Putin. However, I think we lose nothing and gain some greater security in our liberty to be wary of what those in power can do with public fears.





"Under current conditions, the system of executive power in the country should not just be adapted to operating in crisis situations, but should be radically restructured in order to strengthen the unity of the country and prevent further crises..."



This quote stands out to me because of a historical parallel. The Russian Czars of the nineteenth century often claimed that Russia's brutal autocracy was necessary for governing and maintaining the unity of so vast an empire. Putin is making a similar claim, but with the more modern crutch of security. That he is pressing ministries to prepare anti-terror plans is laudable, but they hardly outweigh what strikes me as a fairly brazen effort to turn Russia away from rule by its own multitudinous people once more.


Poor Russia, she has never really known the good times, only the least awful ones.
</B>

ZorBrak
09-14-2004, 12:23 AM
Yay he's voting himself emergency powers. This is bad. Next thing we know he's going to manipulate the world into a full scale war that will result in the deaths of thousands of Jedi and the dissolution of democracy in the galaxy...wait we don't have any Jedi...or starships...yet. But I have an idea. BRB. :goes off to construct a light saber:

Squall
09-14-2004, 01:02 AM
Putin is doing for real in Russia after its biggest terrorist attack what people claimed that Bush would do in the U.S. after Sept. 11, 2001. This should illustrate that no, Bush didn't do anything like that. (Not that he could even if he wanted to; unlike Russia, the U.S. has seperation of powers...)

Leaping Larry Jojo
09-14-2004, 12:29 PM
Different countries work better in different systems. Some countries are not ready for democracy and vice versa. I learned it from Sid Meier's Civilization! :p

Artimus Gigan
09-14-2004, 12:41 PM
Does this mean they go back to only having two TV channels?

Channel one has anothign on and Channel two tells you to switch back to channel one.


However communists hate terrorists so they'll probably wipe each other out...

guinaevere
09-14-2004, 09:25 PM
Different countries work better in different systems. Some countries are not ready for democracy and vice versa. I learned it from Sid Meier's Civilization! :pWhile I'd hate to argue with the great Sid Meier or any of his killer games :D , it really insults millions of people to claim that they're not ready for freedom. It's equilivant to saying they're less than human, IMO.

However communists hate terrorists so they'll probably wipe each other out...Well, they hate terrorists who oppose them, so that's half right.

Artimus Gigan
09-14-2004, 11:37 PM
Well, they hate terrorists who oppose them, so that's half right.We did in 100 days what they tried to do in 10 years(and they even used immoral ways)

they're going to try and take the whole mid-east

Czar Gato
09-15-2004, 08:48 AM
Well, they hate terrorists who oppose them, so that's half right.But they hate everyone who opposes them, or at least the higher-ups in the USSR did; I wouldn't be surprised if part of the reason why the gov't collapsed was because they put so many people in prison there weren't enough people to work regularly. :sad:

Not that that has anything to do with what we were talking about, but still...

EDIT: Oh look, post 666. :evil:

Leaping Larry Jojo
09-15-2004, 12:24 PM
While I'd hate to argue with the great Sid Meier or any of his killer games :D , it really insults millions of people to claim that they're not ready for freedom. It's equilivant to saying they're less than human, IMO.

Well, they hate terrorists who oppose them, so that's half right.Seriously, though, freedom is a relative concept. To tighten authority and laws sometimes gives people security. Laws in particular are about limiting freedom, so no one will ever have true freedom anyway. And I am not directing this at Russia in particular, as I have VERY mixed feelings about what's going on there, but sometimes nations really ARE not ready for total democracy yet. This is not to say that they're less than human, but some there are so many political factors that must be taken into consideration. You can't, for example, take a 3rd world country and then introduce democracy and capitalism and expect it not to collapse. You have to ease it onto the path towards the "ideal" government.

Communism as a term is also relative. Some consider it evil, some consider it a concept that could be used for inappropriate ends. Heck, my friends always joke that Canada is almost a communist country because we always need to go to America to get rich! BWAHAHA :D

fuchikoma
09-15-2004, 06:25 PM
Democracy and communism have never truly existed.

guinaevere
09-15-2004, 07:04 PM
Laws in particular are about limiting freedomDepending on the government. In socialist/communist/dicatorial countries, they are. In countries such as ours, laws are in place to keep people from harming others. (Yes, I know there are tens if not hundreds of old laws still on the books in some states which are absolutely absurd and serve no real point. I'm not talking about those, and I don't think you are either.)

but sometimes nations really ARE not ready for total democracy yet. <snip> You can't, for example, take a 3rd world country and then introduce democracy and capitalism and expect it not to collapse. I disagree. I believe Man has in him a drive for freedom and the ability to establish and maintain a structured and beneficial environment for him and his community.

No, I don't mean to just wipe out the manor of life they were used to living, giving them a 'rule book' and walk off. It takes a mentor of sorts to help lead the way. In some cases. In other instances, there are plenty of wise men who have been kept silent, but who are ready to lead the way.


You have to ease it onto the path towards the "ideal" government. Spot on. Different way of saying it, but we're in agreement on that. :D

Communism as a term is also relative. Some consider it evil, some consider it a concept that could be used for inappropriate ends. I'll say this. On paper, socialism & communism has appealing concepts. But unfortunately, there are always those who get to power in such instances who become tyrants, and the system is designed whereby there are no recourses for those suffering in his wake. (To quote Douglas Adams, "people are a problem.")

And, I believe that helping ones neighbor should never be dictated. You can't force one person to give what they've worked for to another who has less. That's absurd. And before you know it, those who are working harder, earning more, only to have it taken out of their hands, smarten up, and stop producing.

But don't take my word for it. Read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. A reading rainboooooooooooooooowww!!! :D

Leaping Larry Jojo
09-16-2004, 11:17 AM
And, I believe that helping ones neighbor should never be dictated. You can't force one person to give what they've worked for to another who has less. That's absurd. And before you know it, those who are working harder, earning more, only to have it taken out of their hands, smarten up, and stop producing.

But don't take my word for it. Read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. A reading rainboooooooooooooooowww!!! :DIt's more complicated than that. Capitalism by nature sometimes and sometimes often requires a person to take advantage of others, who are sometimes less privileged, to attain success. I don't necessarily think this is wrong myself however, I do kind of like the inbalance because it gives everyone a shot. But I can see where people can suffer under this system despite being hard working, despite even in cases being educated. And sometimes the hardest working people don't get what they even NEED to live decently.

But then, I don't believe in absolutes so I tend to see good and bad in everything. (Although me being a cynic I tend to think everything is more bad than good) I know your positions on many issues from your past posts, so I'll probably never totally see eye to eye with you. So no, Rand's philosophies will never jive with me.

wrenchien
09-18-2004, 12:38 AM
actually, they do have some choice in russia, more so than other days when they were more brutal and cruel....
on channel one, they have the weather.
on channel two, they have the sports.
on channel three, they have the cartoons.
on channel four, they have the soap operas
on channel five, they have the news.
on channel six, they have all reality shows, and
on channel seven, they have a infomercial about the other 6 channels 24 hours a day.
it's if you turn to channels 0 or anything higher than seven they beg you to turning back to the other 6 channels after watching channel 7 for a while for inspiration... because what do you think this country is..

.. wyoming?

guinaevere
09-18-2004, 12:26 PM
But I can see where people can suffer under this system despite being hard working, despite even in cases being educated. And sometimes the hardest working people don't get what they even NEED to live decently.This is true. I never said that capitalism and democracy made for a perfect system. Unfortunately, life, being what it is, often makes those who should succeed, struggle just to make ends meet.

But then, I don't believe in absolutes so I tend to see good and bad in everything.This is a realistic attitude, Larry. Nufin' wrong with that.

(Although me being a cynic I tend to think everything is more bad than good) Ironically, I'm a cynic on a LOT of issues, but when I look at the big picture, I see it through an optimistic view.

I know your positions on many issues from your past posts, so I'll probably never totally see eye to eye with you. Well, it makes for a more interesting discussion. It gets kinda dull when two people sit around and do nothing but agree with each other. :D