Is Russia really any better with Democracy/Capitialism?

[Inverse Icarus]

I'd like to see honest statistics if anybody has them.

From my somewhat limited knowledge of world history, Russia never really was as powerful as it was under Communism. I've read about all the "enlightened despots" and whatnot, but Russia always seems to be playing "catchup" with Western powers, even when it was Communist.

Was Russia ever the main power in the world? Did they ever achive the same levels of power that they had under Communism? What are the differences in standards of living?

I don't want this to turn into yet another Communism/Capitialism debate, but I'll be listening to both sides. As said before, I'd really like to see statistics.

edit: also, links to sources would rock.

[mrmitchell]

During the Cold War, I would call Russia, in parts, the leader in power.

However, geography (as many neighbors to be nice with), and environment (lots of Russia is just frozen unfarmable wasteland at least in the winter ) works against them. Plus vodka. Vodka is the greatest productivity loss to hit Russia since the cold.

But you couldn't say Communism was good for Russia, because it wasn't technically Communism--it was more of a brutal and oppressive, but industrialized, dictatorship.

[Inverse Icarus]

I'm well aware of all the possible explinations of why the USSR failed, and I give many of them much merit, but that is another discussion entirely. I simply want to know if at any point in history, was Russia "better" than it was during the Communist rule.

[JohnT]

No, for their influence spanned the globe for the first time in its history.

[PLATO]

http://fpeng.peopledaily.com.cn/200102/11/eng20010211_62060.html

http://newsfromrussia.com/main/2004/01/22/51978.html

http://newsfromrussia.com/main/2004/02/24/52455.html

It appears that the initial effects were pretty bad, but that the long term aspect looks good.

However, your original question does not address the human benefit of freedom.

[JohnT]

He's a communist. There is no benefit to freedom.

[Agathon]

If only you lived in a free country, JohnT.

I mean one which doesn't lock people up for selling sex toys.

[JohnT]

Sheit, with my wife it's not like I'd ever find out if that were the case.

[ErikM]

Catherine the Great - Alexander I period comes close.
After Napoleonic wars, well, Russia probably was not #1 power but one of top three powers for sure and probably a premier continental power.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Uber KruX
I simply want to know if at any point in history, was Russia "better" than it was during the Communist rule.

No.

[Serb]

Originally posted by ErikM
Catherine the Great - Alexander I period comes close.
After Napoleonic wars, well, Russia probably was not #1 power but one of top three powers for sure and probably a premier continental power.

Peter the Great kicked some arses as well.

[ErikM]

Originally posted by Serb
Peter the Great kicked some arses as well.

He did, but Russia under Peter the Great was more like what is now called "an emerging power". Catherine to Alexander I was a golden age of the Russian empire. From then on until the October revolution it was mostly downhill

[mrmitchell]

No.

I am nominating this post for

MOST PREDICTABLE RESPONSE OF THE CENTURY

[Serb]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
During the Cold War, I would call Russia, in parts, the leader in power.

Thanks.

However, geography (as many neighbors to be nice with)...

Russia is the coldest country among its neighbours (well, almost, only Mongolia is worse).
However, it is a plain and unbeatable fact, that no one else, ever build such great, long-lasting and powerfull civilization in such enviroment as Russians did.
Perhaps in terms of enviroment Canada is closer to Russia than any other country (though Russian enviroment is more hostile and it is colder in Russia).
And how many people live in Canada? 30 millions?
In USSR lived more than 300. Today in Russia live about 150 millions.
Was Canada or any country with more or less Russian alike climate a superpower?
I don't think so. Actually, I think you can hardly name any other big countries except Russia and Canada that located in such hostile enviroment.

... and environment (lots of Russia is just frozen unfarmable wasteland at least in the winter ) works against them.

Sure. Btw, I live in this frozen unfarmable wasteland.

Plus vodka. Vodka is the greatest productivity loss to hit Russia since the cold.

Vodka, vodka, what the hell is so wrong with vodka?
It's stereotype about Russians. In fact in accordace with statistic Russians are not European top drinkers and average Russian consume less alcohol per year than some of his european neighbours.
Anyhow, every country has its national sport. Germans have beer, French and Italians have wine, Russians and Finns have vodka, so what? It's damn cold here and in such enviroment people have to eat food which contains many fats. Vodka helps to digest such kind of food. National alcohol preference comes from enviroment where people live.

But you couldn't say Communism was good for Russia, because it wasn't technically Communism--it was more of a brutal and oppressive, but industrialized, dictatorship.

Like anything else could save Russia in its darkest hour. Everytime when Russia is in grave danger it turns to brutal dictatorship and mobilize itself. That's the only way if you want to build a great civ in such enviroment.
Because:
1) Russia in its natural form (I mean as big and strong country) cannot be like its european neighbours, because of enviroment.

2) Thanks to favorable conditions, it is natural for european countries to be technologically superior in comparison with Russia. And since in human history more advanced civs were always "eating" backward civs, there comes time when more advanced civs attack their backward neighbour. However, Russia always survived those invasions, because it's mobilized itself. And this period of mobilization was always:
a) a period of brutal dictatorship, beacuse to survive, state had to find resources somewhere and the only source of resources for the Russian state, was its population.
b) started from Russians taking technologies from the West.
That's for example, how it was during three greatest periods of mobilization in Russian history, during: Ivan the Terrible, Peter the Great and Stalin.

3) After mobilization, Russia usually reaches/exceeds technological level of its enemies and kicks invader's arses. After that comes period of relaxation, because population cannot be such epxloited forever. People have to rest time after time.
When Russia is in period of relaxation, it starts to lose competition with its neigbours and become more and more backward in comparison with western powers.
Then everything repeats.
Nobody proved to me yet, that this theory of mobilization/relaxation cirles is wrong.
Russia cannot survive as Russia without those circles, because it is impossible.
Without those circles, it is impossible to create such country as Russia in such hostile enviroment .
Without those circles Russia would never exist and it's territory would be populated by 15-20 millions at best.
In other words, without those circles, in this enviroment, it would be country like Canada, poor populated, but still more backward in comparison with real Canada. And during its history, this Russia would never be among world's top powers and there would never be Tolstoy, Dostoevsky or first space flight, as well.

[Serb]

Originally posted by mrmitchell

I am nominating this post for

MOST PREDICTABLE RESPONSE OF THE CENTURY

Well, thank you. Where I can get my prize?