Is Russian democracy failing because it's Russian?

[Lancer]

I've heard it said that the Russian people need a strong oppressive central government, that no other government can govern such a people. Perhaps Putin is finding this out...

If this is the case, are there other nations that have a system of government that is natural? Perhaps Italy and chaos go together, or China and Holland as mercantile oriented...

What others?

[St Leo]

Racismland, perhaps?

[Lancer]

[Lancer]

I've heard it said that "CT has a big head" but I had no idea.

[St Leo]

Russian democracy is in trouble because of endemic corruption. Corruption is not an innate characteristic of any group of people -- it's learned. The system can be fixed, though I don't think Putin is necessarily doing a lot of good.

Communism did not so much collapse as it was sold off by the Communist Party bureaucrats, who used their profits to acquire private armies, get into the black market, and otherwise entrench themselves. The police can't do much against them without risking retaliation, and so the entrenched interest face off. The face-off won't last forever.

The best thing for Russia, just like for the US, would probably be to devolve into several independent nations. Or maybe not. Crime's kinda transnational these days.

[MrFun]

Corruption abounds in United States government and look how well we're . . . . . .



eh, on second thought . . . . . . .

[Saras]

Russia will be ok. All they need to do is get rid of Serb

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by St Leo
Russian democracy is in trouble because of endemic corruption. Corruption is not an innate characteristic of any group of people -- it's learned. The system can be fixed, though I don't think Putin is necessarily doing a lot of good.

It's cultural, but once it's there it's tough to get rid of it.

[Pekka]

It's in trouble because it's not a democracy anymore.

[molly bloom]

Might is right seems a natural state of affairs in the Holy Commonwealth of Bushdonia:

" Militia units were sent in by the governor to restore train service, but when the soldiers refused to use force against the strikers, the governor called for federal troops, the first time such troops had been used for strikebreaking since the 1830s. In the meantime, the strike had spread to Baltimore, triggering bloody street battles between workers and the Maryland militia; when the outmanned soldiers fired into an attacking crowd, ten people were killed. In Pittsburgh, as in Martinsburg, local law enforcers refused to fire on the strikers, and soldiers brought in from outside were routed by a ferocious crowd, which took control of the city until federal troops imposed order.

By then, sympathy strikes had spread out along the railroads in every direction, from line to line, from city to city, from railroad workers to other industries. In Chicago, demonstrations organized by the Workingmen's party drew crowds of twenty thousand; in St. Louis, a general strike put the city in the workers' hands for nearly a week. In towns throughout the country, streets were thronged with strikers and their supporters; there were battles and arrests, injuries and deaths. The struggle seemed to align all workers against all employers. To some, this was a hopeful sign, bearing the promise of future labor victories, but others saw it as a threat to the very foundation of American society. Federal troops were rushed from city to city, putting down strike after strike, until finally, a few weeks after it had begun, the great railroad strike of 1877 was over.

In the aftermath, union organizers planned future campaigns, and politicians and business leaders took steps to ensure that such chaos could not recur. Many states enacted conspiracy statutes. New militia units were formed, and National Guard armories were constructed in many cities. For workers and employers alike, the strikes had dramatized the power of workers in combination to challenge the most established structures of American life. "

http://college.hmco.com/history/readerscomp/rcah/html/ah_073500_railroadstri.htm

[Saras]

this one's about Russia.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Saras
this one's about Russia.

Not quite- he asked if other countries had a 'natural' system of government.


So- Bushdonia has an oligarchy with a light sprinkling of armed might and religious reaction slathered on the top.

[Pekka]

I don't think that's a valid comparison. Every democracy has its problems. But that comparison and concerning oglicarchy is just failing one. IF you want to take the American corporate world, the lobbyists and the interconnection of them and politicians, parties and thus how the country is run and whose benefits are more cared than perhaps the single voter.. might be, might be ... but it's still different, and the nature of the situation is completely different than the current situation in Russia. VERY different.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Pekka
I don't think that's a valid comparison. Every democracy has its problems. But that comparison and concerning oglicarchy is just failing one.

Well, whilst it was intended mostly as a joke, little items such as the Taft-Hartley Act and the previous decisions of courts in favour of employers and the collusion of state legislatures and employers against workers and unions would seem to contradict you.


Even if you go back before the American Revolution, those Protestant and Puritan settlers didn't believe in equality for servants or workers either.


Bias in favour of employers has a long history in the Colonies and States.

[Heresson]

Recently Russian duma issued a statesment condemning "falsifying history and rehabilitation of fascism" with only one vote against (because this declaration was too mild for him).
In general, it's directed against Poland and Baltic states and their insinuations that USSR did something wrong during the war period.
But I've read an interesting article about Russian history books and their approach to ww2, and I'm hardly suprised now. Nothing's changed in that matter since the fall of USSR