Russia is teh democratcy!1!

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris


In some way, yes, in another, no.

Free speech is a paradox : on one hand, we assume we need it in order to ensure freedom and safety of individuals. But then a problem arises : free speech is bound to become, through evolution and culture, a term that, in and out of itself, creates its own paradigm of acceptable discourse.

Another paradox - you are contesting liberalism and liberal notions of free speech, while inside a liberal democracy (physically you are where? france, canada? virtually you are on a Greek-Canadian-American (I cant follow all the ownership changes) website while Im located in the US. I dont agree with you, but I dont hold your discourse unacceptable.

Or are we using discourse to mean rioting in the streets?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
That was a statement about a social fact. As DeT states in that quote "almost all" not all follow the same rules. Im not sure that DeT thought ANYONEs philosophical rules were not socially determined.

As for opacity, Im quite sure that the elite at the time was quite conscious of their philosophical roots in English liberalism and empiricism, and French enlightenment thought. That ordinary people are not conscious of the methods they use, is fairly banal, and I doubt really De Ts point - rather he is contrasting them to ordinary folks in Europe who are less inclined to philisophical method period.

You are correct while at the same time contradicting your premise. Tocqueville was a bit 'finer' than this, and also realized that the popular attitude was the product of an entire culture that also extended to the elites.

What Tocqueville thought was new about America, is not social deteminism, but a specy of it that was populist.

[Saras]

Wtg guys, turn a silly Russia bash into a search for Americas soul

[LordShiva]

Are those two not the same thing?

[Saras]

Close enough, apparently

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Saras
Wtg guys, turn a silly Russia bash into a search for Americas soul

Everything is about america. thats what its like when youre numero uno. Youve got alot to look forward to, Chinese friends.

[Kuciwalker]

ISTM that OB thinks the best situation is one where the sovereign is under constant threat of violent overthrow, and without that threat none of us are actually free. What a wonderful society.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
ISTM that OB thinks the best situation is one where the sovereign is under constant threat of violent overthrow, and without that threat none of us are actually free. What a wonderful society.

The problem is much more complex than this. You're so American, you can't tackle an issue without having to come to a conclusion in 5 seconds or less.

[BeBMan]

It's still kinda vague to me what your idea of "American totalitarism" actually means. The DeT quote is IMO not a good argument for it.

Of course you can find social pressure to conform to certain rules, but that's a phenomenon not unknown outside the US as well. Still that doesn't mean necessarily the same as totalitarianism.

Besides I'm always somehow suspicious about that kind of generalizations since a more detailed analysis could probably find that "they're doing everything in the same manner" (or so, I'm too lazy to go back and find the exact wording) is not exactly right.

[Kidlicious]

BeBro,

Think of yourself living in a "democracy" where your leaders lie to the people and the people believe them. How is this different from a society that is not democratic?

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Kidicious
BeBro,

Think of yourself living in a "democracy" where your leaders lie to the people and the people believe them. How is this different from a society that is not democratic?

We're talking about totalitarian stuff. Politicians/leaders not telling always the truth (or, if you're cynical enough, hardly ever tell the truth) happens everywhere, in various political systems. If that's totalitarian then we pretty much only know totalitarian systems, which makes the category kindy meaningless.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Referring to 1919? even during McCarthyism communists faced loss of jobs and blacklisting, not blood.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1745683,00.html

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
The problem is much more complex than this. You're so American, you can't tackle an issue without having to come to a conclusion in 5 seconds or less.

You're fake-French, so it's not worthwhile to pay attention to you in the first place.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris


Definitely. There is a very large number of ethnic groups in Russia,

True.

Originally posted by Oncle Boris

and your original ethnicity is written on your passport.

Not true.

Originally posted by Oncle Boris

There is even an intra-national passport that limits movement between provinces, which is an heritage of the multi-ethnicity of the Soviet empire.

Not true.

Originally posted by Oncle Boris

As for infrastructure, I'm not precisely certain which country had the best one. IIUC Iraq was doing decently before the war against Iran. In any case, if you go to Russia or any former Soviet Republic, you can easily see that the infrastructure there is deficient by Western standards : no highways,

Not true.

Originally posted by Oncle Boris abysmally inefficient rail network,

Not true.

Originally posted by Oncle Boris

unpaved roads, etc.

True.

Originally posted by Oncle Boris

A quick look at Russia's history shows that it has no real history of parliamentarism, that the feudal system was only abolished in the end of the 19th century, etc...

Russia abolished serfdom in 1861. USA abolished slavery in 1865, iirc.

[Serb]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


And a revived economy, driven largely by increased hydrocarbon prices, and a controlled media, have NOTHING to do with that, huh?

Yes.