Like americans have tons of black and white plus hispanics issues social changes positive and negative talks, russians have tons of ethnic issues which really impacts its social changes which is really complex one.

---

Mandtugai!

I wonder where Russia will be once oil prices either drop or Russia's oil resources prove to be difficult to extract? That flow of foreign capital masks a lack of progress in other areas. Between that and the limited options available to the Russia via Putin's opposition (they seem to run on the 'we're not Putin platform). It makes sense that Putin stays in power.

If Putin used that power differently, it is possible that Russia would be in a far better place, economically, demographically, and strategically. I guess that is the lament many of us westerners have. Of course that lament cuts both ways, as has been noted in this thread. That is, if Bush had effectively capitalized on the temporary unity that the US had post 9/11 to move a country to collective sacrifice to achieve important goals, the US might be in a better place than it is today. If European leaders had taken a sense of the collective and looked at THEIR pending demographic problems in 2001 with a view toward long term solutions , perhaps Europe as well would be in a better place today.

So any argument that goes 'bad Putin' -- needs to also recognize the sub-optimal governance in the west as well.

If authoritative power kills journalists and close free public medias then it is newer version of dictatorship than something civilized ways.

Some of journalists was killed, but hundreds journalists, who wrote articles against Putin, are alive and have not the big problems. Nobody of the protesters was killed on the gigantic meetings of opposition in December and March. Presidential elections is too the obvious indicator that it's not dictatorship in Russia, but an authoritarian plutocratic power. This is very bad, but not dictatorship.
P.S. Sorry, maybe it was my misspelling in previous posts. My English is very poor. I meant authoritarian power, not the authoritative power.

Well few times a week I watch russian news and some russian talk shows that I clearly see some dictatorship impacted public reaction to its leader. Many foreign students in russia claim that russian media has very bubbling effects that isolate outside social news and effects.

The authoritative power is not dictatorship. It is the system of the power keeping decorative elements of democracy. BTW, the Internet community in Russia is free, and mainly it has very sharp orientation against Putin.

If authoritative power kills journalists and close free public medias then it is newer version of dictatorship than something civilized ways.

---

Mandtugai!

How nice it is to see a thread with civil conversation and discussion :-)

Well few times a week I watch russian news and some russian talk shows that I clearly see some dictatorship impacted public reaction to its leader. Many foreign students in russia claim that russian media has very bubbling effects that isolate outside social news and effects.

The authoritative power is not dictatorship. It is the system of the power keeping decorative elements of democracy. BTW, the Internet community in Russia is free, and mainly it has very sharp orientation against Putin.

Well few times a week I watch russian news and some russian talk shows that I clearly see some dictatorship impacted public reaction to its leader. Many foreign students in russia claim that russian media has very bubbling effects that isolate outside social news and effects.

---

Mandtugai!

All of us outside of russia make very naive conclusions because we are not tasting their real internal social dramas.

Kazakhstan is very close to Russia and I know what I say. BTW, Putin really is not dictator. Possible it would be better for Russia if he was the dictator. But he is not the real dictator, not the real reformer, not the real conservator. He is imitator in his pseudo-activity on reforms and modernization. Activity imitation is a congenital immanent feature of bureaucracy, whose interests he represents. His only real business which he does seriously, it's business to keep the domination of bureaucracy and to keep herself at the top of governance.

Barry I'd say 90s mad society suffered russians are simply choosing dark dictatorship to avoid another mad decade. And Putins opponents are not finding russian domesticated effective democracy approaches.

There are huge differences between western democracy and eastern domesticated democracy. Just look at japanese and s.korean kind of democracies which hugely under american political influence.

And now starting from hungary numerious eastern european countries beginning largely opposing western political influence and changing their constitutions to modify eu dictated limitations. Because except poland all of eastern europe has very shaky economic state, even in poland each month thousands are immigrating all over western side of eu.

For example japan has switched 5 prime ministers in last 6 years which seemingly american exported democracy since WWII period is still in not perfect shape including japans 220% of domestic debt ratio to its gdp vs america's 100% debt. Plus mafias in japan were legalized!! But its social mentor in america mafia is not legal although pots are in its way of legalization.

Even uk political parties have some level of american parties influence yet they've got 400% of debt.

---

Mandtugai!

But those conditions mask the lack of real progress that *could* have happened in Russia.

Exactly!

I am not a Putin supporter. Within past 10 years russia is really changing from 90s mad society. Maybe it is dictators effect but russian strategic moves kind of improving multipolar balances in the bigger politics. Although still millions of russians are suffering mad society desease.

I am ethnic Russian, and the situation in Russia is one of my interests, naturally. All successes of Putin are reflected in the diagram of the world oil price. Nothing more. Neither real economic reforms, only possibility to spend the increasing incomes from oil and gas. If the oil price falls, the economics of Russia will fall next day. Putin hasn't made anything really good in the modernization of economics or something else (for example, the situation in science and education in Russia are slowly fixedly degraded), he is the dexterous imitator. I'm very sad that the majority of voters in Russia don't understand it. They want stability and as a result they have voted for "put in" pseudo-stability illusion, fake.

Maybe since Stalin russia has been governed by dictators until Gorbachiev whose less dictator approach combined with Yeltsins non governing ways produced 90s mafia ridden mad society. So for majority of russians to avoid 90s mad society they are simply choosing a dictatorship which originated from Stalin or Tzar whoever so hoping for some kind of stability.

All of us outside of russia make very naive conclusions because we are not tasting their real internal social dramas.

In different world Bush has brought down america to its knees that every negative possible things occurred there in the last 4 years. So for shaky west perhaps dictatorship stabilized russia might play some positive role who knows. In some ways it is political nature itself making its own atmospheric changes.

---

Mandtugai!

Orgil, no argument that Putin is a more effective autocrat than Yeltsin -- especially when compared to the end of Yeltsin's 'reign'.

And I suspect Russia would be worse off with more of a Yeltsin like leadership.

The thing is, to a large extent, Russia's 'resurgence' can be pinned to oil and natural gas revenues. Also, Putin's 'war' with Chechnya, and invasion of Georgia, and manipulations with Ukraine seem, by comparison with Yeltsin's fecklessness, to be at least 'actions' by Russia.

It certainly has helped Russia that the US has been mired in Iraq and Afghanistan (when will ANY country truly learn how useless Afghanistan adventures are).

Also, the big crash of financial markets along with the real estate bubble burst certainly have trimmed the top off of the developed world's capacity to push back at Russian activities in with bordering countries which Russia seeks to dominate.

But those conditions mask the lack of real progress that *could* have happened in Russia. That it hasn't is on the autocrat at the top.

I am not a Putin supporter. Within past 10 years russia is really changing from 90s mad society. Maybe it is dictators effect but russian strategic moves kind of improving multipolar balances in the bigger politics. Although still millions of russians are suffering mad society desease.

I am ethnic Russian, and the situation in Russia is one of my interests, naturally. All successes of Putin are reflected in the diagram of the world oil price. Nothing more. Neither real economic reforms, only possibility to spend the increasing incomes from oil and gas. If the oil price falls, the economics of Russia will fall next day. Putin hasn't made anything really good in the modernization of economics or something else (for example, the situation in science and education in Russia are slowly fixedly degraded), he is the dexterous imitator. I'm very sad that the majority of voters in Russia don't understand it. They want stability and as a result they have voted for "put in" pseudo-stability illusion, fake.

---

Just compare Yeltsins russia and Putins russia.

I am not a Putin supporter. Within past 10 years russia is really changing from 90s mad society. Maybe it is dictators effect but russian strategic moves kind of improving multipolar balances in the bigger politics. Although still millions of russians are suffering mad society desease.

---

Mandtugai!

Orgil, well Gorbachev and Yeltsin did push the Soviet Union / Russia away from single party communist rule, and Putin seems to have pushed Russia back to single party rule -- true enough.

Also, Yeltsin was weak enough to increase a sense that the country might not work with a single autocrat in control, and Putin has reversed that trend.

State sponsored corruption is about the same over the full range -- oligarchy, nomenclatura -- not really much different there.

Of course Gorbachev did lose the various empire acquisition states (Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Georgia, etc.). Putin hasn't yet 'reacquired' them.

As to the economy, well if you have high priced oil, a lot of things can be improved.

I do understand that the demographic hole that Russia was sinking into (1990 to 2006 or so) has in the recent couple of years been slowed down -- that's probably a good thing -- The rest of Europe has a similar problem -- but lacks oil income to offset that.

I'd say Putin kind of halfway fixed what Gorbacheiv and Yeltsin did to russia. But what Bush did to america is almost same as what Gorbacheiv and Yeltsin did to russia. There is some fate twisting going on among the super empires looks like.

---

Mandtugai!

Putin have no strong ideas, he is the representative of interests of a parasitic bureaucratic administrative layer. Therefore he is not the reformer and not the conservator, he is the dexterous imitator of ideas and deeds.

I do not think we have any Putin defenders here.

Putin have no strong ideas, he is the representative of interests of a parasitic bureaucratic administrative layer. Therefore he is not the reformer and not the conservator, he is the dexterous imitator of ideas and deeds.

---

According to their local callings Putin is new Stalin, Bush is total destruction, Blair is Bush's pudel. I mean just in 1 decade historic events really enriched by interesting figures or leaders according to social scientific calling.

---

Mandtugai!

Nah we take it in turns,

You let the Tory party in
You kick the Labour party out
You have a coalition
And you shake it all about
You all say Oki Doki
And you have another vote
That's what it's all about.

It's the UK way!