Putin to combat terrorism by...how else?...taking away rights

[OneFootInTheGrave]

ah Russians, what rights? 10 years of some freedom, .. they won't mind,

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Serb, what about the national republics? Won't they deeply resent no longer being able to elect their own leader? Their leader being appointed by Moscow will eventually lead to more nationalism and separatism. WTF is Putin thinking about?! Rather than saving Russia, he will only destroy it.

Exactly. It is this kind of centralism that stirred so much nationalism in the Societ Republics, which effectively killed the USSR.
When Yeltsin made Russia a federation, he avoided the territory to shrink again. The USSR that fell in front of Lithuanian or Georgian independentists was much stronger than today's Russia, which cannot even deal with the spearatist wishes of a small Republic like Chechnya. What will happen if centralization is back?

Hell, this is actually my first ever serious disagreement with Putin's policies (after the anthem issue at least). But this issue is so huge and decisive that I wonder whether I can still consider myself a supporter of Putin. [/QUOTE]

[Az]

Exactly. It is this kind of centralism that stirred so much nationalism in the Societ Republics, which effectively killed the USSR.

Nationalism didn't kill the USSR.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Azazel

Nationalism didn't kill the USSR.

It sure weakened Gorby's power enough in order for him to become the toy in Putshists and Yeltsin's games. The USSR had other problems, notably economic ones, and the opposition between conservatives and reformists, but nationalism is the reason why it dissolved like that.

Centralizing the power again is the best way to durably weaken the Russian State at its fringes, and to have the Russian territory dissolve again at the next crisis.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Exactly. It is this kind of centralism that stirred so much nationalism in the Societ Republics, which effectively killed the USSR.

Better to say that the history of centralism made the republics so drunk with their newly gained freedoms that the process went out of control.

[Az]

nah. Not really. Nationalism was a symptom. not the desease, which was the ailing economy, and the lack of personal freedoms.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Exactly. It is this kind of centralism that stirred so much nationalism in the Societ Republics, which effectively killed the USSR.

USSR had been killed from outside, not inside.

[Sprayber]

Do the various ethnic groups identify with Russia? Do they think of themselves as Russians first and whatever ethnicicity second? Sure they fall under the control of the Russian Federation but do they think of themselves as Russians? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't get that impression.

That's what Russian should be working towards not central control. With Russia's history with leaders, they should be devising a system that has a less powers in one hands as they can possibly get. That's the only way you will get those people in the Caucuses from starting wars every decade or so..

[Serb]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
The more I think about it, the less I like it. It's a huge mistake. I am very disappointed.

Serb, what about the national republics? Won't they deeply resent no longer being able to elect their own leader? Their leader being appointed by Moscow will eventually lead to more nationalism and separatism. WTF is Putin thinking about?! Rather than saving Russia, he will only destroy it.

So what about them? To become president/governor the candidate should be approved by local parliament first. If they do not like the candidate, they are free to decline his candidature. Local parliaments elected by locals, they are representatives of local population of those regions/republics. So where is the problem?
Not to mention I believe that head of state will be smart enough to chose his candidate from locals.

Hell, this is actually my first ever serious disagreement with Putin's policies (after the anthem issue at least). But this issue is so huge and decisive that I wonder whether I can still consider myself a supporter of Putin.

As for me, I like him more and more. Perhaps I even can consider myself as his supporter.
Go, Putin, Go!!!

[Az]

There are two different terms:
"Rossiyani" and "Russkiyi". I find it difficult to explain the difference...

[Serb]

Originally posted by Sprayber
Do the various ethnic groups identify with Russia? Do they think of themselves as Russians first and whatever ethnicicity second? Sure they fall under the control of the Russian Federation but do they think of themselves as Russians? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't get that impression.

That's what Russian should be working towards not central control. With Russia's history with leaders, they should be devising a system that has a less powers in one hands as they can possibly get. That's the only way you will get those people in the Caucuses from starting wars every decade or so..

They indetify themselvs as Rossiyane. You don't have such word in your monkey language. Russians are people of Russian nationality (which is basically a mix of hell knows how many nationalities). Rossiyane are citizens of Russia, regardless of their nationality. You can be of Indian or German natinality and still can be Rossiyanin if you are citizen and consider Russia as your Motherland.
I indetify myself as Rossiyanin, Russian (despite I have Russian, Ukranian, Beylorussian and unfortunately a small drop of Polish blood), then Siberian (because I live in Sibeira).

[Serb]

Originally posted by Azazel
nah. Not really. Nationalism was a symptom. not the desease, which was the ailing economy, and the lack of personal freedoms.

And degrodation of elite I should add.

p.s. And of course lack of Gorby's balls.

[Saras]

Originally posted by The Vagabond


Better to say that the history of centralism made the republics so drunk with their newly gained freedoms that the process went out of control.

If you mean the Baltic States, you're talking bollocks.

[Az]

If you mean the Baltic States, you're talking bollocks.

Since the Baltic states are about 5% of the population of the SU, no I don't think he talks about you.

And degrodation of elite I should add.

And the fact there was an elite to begin with.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Serb

So what about them? To become president/governor the candidate should be approved by local parliament first. If they do not like the candidate, they are free to decline his candidature. Local parliaments elected by locals, they are representatives of local population of those regions/republics. So where is the problem?
Not to mention I believe that head of state will be smart enough to chose his candidate from locals.

I understand that. But you have to recognize that it' s a huge difference for their national pride (loosely speaking) whether they elect their leader directly by themselves or just approve/disapprove Moscow's appointee. In relation to national republics, it's not even a matter of democracy, but rather a matter of their national autonomy. Putin is playing with fire here. I am really afraid for Russia.