The State of Affairs in Russia

[Ed Anger]

Newly released footage of the shooter and getaway vechicle:

[KRonn]

And sometimes what happens is just a simple thuggish reaction, without any political calculation.

Especially when a country, like Putin's Russia, becomes the ideal of what a country looks like when it's run by the Mob.  Nazi Germany was run by street thugs, but today's Russia?  It's Goodfellas in track suits.

[Tonitrus]

And sometimes what happens is just a simple thuggish reaction, without any political calculation.

Especially when a country, like Putin's Russia, becomes the ideal of what a country looks like when it's run by the Mob.  Nazi Germany was run by street thugs, but today's Russia?  It's Goodfellas in track suits.

Probably.  One of my instructors once went on quite a bit about how Putin's mannerisms and way of speaking were in line with Russian "mobster" mannerisms.

[Razgovory]

Perhaps sometimes you just gotta kill someone to keep all the other pretenders from getting ideas.

And sometimes what happens is just a simple thuggish reaction, without any political calculation.  Maybe one day Putin was shown the video of Nemtsov mocking his height or cursing him out, and he just said "okay, that's enough, have that piss-ant killed".  When you have absolute power, you can get away with temper tantrums like that.

But he doesn't have absolute power.  He's not a totalitarian.  He's not a Hitler or a Stalin.  He's strongman with nukes.  He's a Caudillo.  He's not even a Mussolini.  He's a Noriega.  A Somoza. A Milosovic.  While I'm sure he'd like us to think he's unassailable in his power, he's not.  His victory in Crimea did a lot of bolster his power, but he must remain popular.  He must either deliver the goods, distract people with nationalism, or actually turn Russia into a totalitarian dictatorship to remain in power.  So far he has managed to deliver the goods.  The economy has been strong, he beat Georgia and took Crimea.  The war in Ukraine is uncertain and economy looks to weaken so we nationalism being played up more.  He might be able to turn it into a totalitarian state, but that takes an enormous amount of energy. 

[Martinus]

You have to also remember that Russia is a federation, which in this particular case means it is built along pseudo-feudal/mob-like lines. Local governors will slip away from Moscow's grasp the first opportunity they get - not necessarily going into an open rebellion, but keeping more and more of their lands' riches for themselves, thus starving Moscow of cash even more.

And if Putin no longer has cash, they will simply start pursuing their own politics - e.g. by getting closer with Japan and China (in the Far East, for example).

So I can imagine Russia becoming eventually a semi-totalitarian state (like today's Belarus) but with its de facto authority reduced to Muscovy.

[DontSayBanana]

Newly released footage of the shooter and getaway vechicle:

[grumbler]

Stalin killed because he feared so we can finally get beyond that comparison.

Wow!  You are just now finally getting past that comparison?    Welcome to the post-1955 world!

Putin wasn't that big in 1955.

And Stalin wasn't that alive.

[Sheilbh]

Shades of Thomas a Becket?

I think this may be it.

[Liep]

And Stalin wasn't that alive.

Once again I think we're talking about two different things, or at least I hope we are.

[grumbler]

And Stalin wasn't that alive.

Once again I think we're talking about two different things, or at least I hope we are.

The only proper noun you have used so far in your argument is "Stalin," so that is what I have to go on.  Generally speaking, Stalin hasn't been seen as a good guy since maybe 1955 - in 1956, the Secret Speech kinda made that impossible.

[alfred russel]

But he doesn't have absolute power.  He's not a totalitarian.  He's not a Hitler or a Stalin.  He's strongman with nukes.  He's a Caudillo.  He's not even a Mussolini.  He's a Noriega.  A Somoza. A Milosovic.  While I'm sure he'd like us to think he's unassailable in his power, he's not.  His victory in Crimea did a lot of bolster his power, but he must remain popular.  He must either deliver the goods, distract people with nationalism, or actually turn Russia into a totalitarian dictatorship to remain in power.  So far he has managed to deliver the goods.  The economy has been strong, he beat Georgia and took Crimea.  The war in Ukraine is uncertain and economy looks to weaken so we nationalism being played up more.  He might be able to turn it into a totalitarian state, but that takes an enormous amount of energy.

He is also a post soviet politician. A number of those states have developed into one party states that are ostensibly democracies with similarities to Putin's Russia. We think of democracy as tending toward competitive elections with turnover in government, and apply those expectations to Russia and expect Putin to be subject to the same forces. And  he might be--see Milosovic for a post communist ruler that was. But it seems in a lot of post Soviet countries that isn't materializing.

[Razgovory]

Most of the post Soviet Republics never really were democracies in the Western sense.  Russia never was.  As far as I know the only former Soviet Republics that turned in to liberal democracies are the Baltic states.

[alfred russel]

Most of the post Soviet Republics never really were democracies in the Western sense.  Russia never was.  As far as I know the only former Soviet Republics that turned in to liberal democracies are the Baltic states.

Ukraine and Georgia have also had competitive elections resulting in governments turning over, though in both cases epic levels of failure have been reached.

Azerbaijan and Armenia may be more informative. Both are deeply fucked up. Armenia is dreadfully poor, and while Azerbaijan is better off they are still amazingly uncompetitive considering the oil they are sitting on. Russia looks great compared to both of them. In both countries there are actually developed protest movements--especially in Armenia. The elections they have aren't necessarily fair--but then I don't think anyone believes the cheating is altering the outcome of elections. The opposition just doesn't have the popularity.

I really can't speak to what is going on in the mindset of the public, but I'm not sure they have the same mentality as us regarding their leadership. Russia is a country where Stalin ruled in living memory and a decent chunk of the population remembers those times as the good old days.

[Liep]

And Stalin wasn't that alive.

Once again I think we're talking about two different things, or at least I hope we are.

The only proper noun you have used so far in your argument is "Stalin," so that is what I have to go on.  Generally speaking, Stalin hasn't been seen as a good guy since maybe 1955 - in 1956, the Secret Speech kinda made that impossible.

I know, but I was referring to the previous post about Putin having no fear. Should I have quoted it? Perhaps, but usually a comparison requires two nouns so I figured people would know. Anyhoo, it wasn't really a serious post.

[grumbler]

I know, but I was referring to the previous post about Putin having no fear. Should I have quoted it? Perhaps, but usually a comparison requires two nouns so I figured people would know. Anyhoo, it wasn't really a serious post.

Ah.  I didn't get that it wasn't serious.  If your argument was "please don't compare Putin to Stalin," I'd agree.  That's a bad comparison by any intellectual standards.