Russia’s democratic window, never pried open very wide following the Soviet Union’s demise, is slamming shut. Citing a summer wave of terrorist attacks that killed 430 people, President Vladimir Putin last month ordered sweeping changes to the country’s political system that will effectively abolish regional gubernatorial elections, sharply reduce the space for independent politics and accelerate the pro-Kremlin United Russia… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (4)Page 1 of 1 pagesA recent report by the BBC on Russia supports this claim 100%. And, ironically, Putin threw his lot behind Bush and Co., which is hardly astonishing, since he stands to gain by the neocon unilateralism and isolationism. Again, however, the media net is cast on only a single country. The problem is far greater: many of the more conservative stamp are deeply suspicious of democracy as we think of it, as it could mean losing control over events and especially people. Also, they lack the trust that people can actually think and decide for themselves. In part they may well be right, and that is one of the reasons we, in America, have the electoral college. Had several electors in the 2000 election been honest and upright, they would have simply cast doubt upon those Florida results, which the media all too often suggest were problematical because of a chad problem: False: Even before Gore cravenly conceded, there was evidence of ballot tampering by the Bush machine in Florida. That is one purpose of the electoral college, a kind of built in safety system.
Democracy is a very delicate creature indeed and must be cared for at all times. In fact, it requires that we who live under such systems be continuously alert not so much from terrorists (that has a lot to do with our foreign policy in the past and present), but from the internal woodworm. Power is an attractive thing, and in a demopcratic system, just about anyone can attain it given the right lobbies. In the USA, it has become a system full of fascinating contradictions and suspicions. Republican voters are suspicious of “Big Government” infringing on their economic lives while Republicans lawmakers are the first to become involved in our private lives, because they believe we, as individuals, are incapable of deciding for ourselves what is right and wrong (W is extreme here, since he follows some parochial moral code dictated by Billy Graham and his trainée of conservative christians: there is no debate with him, he is convinced, as Kerry rightly said, even if he is wrong). Women of course are to be most suspected, and again this goes deep into the roots of organized Christianity, no space here to debate that)… The only presidents in the past decades who have infringed on people’s personal lives have been, I suspect, Republicans. Democrats, however are more likely to leave people alone in their personal lives, but will demand regulation in the corporate world. The man who sold it best was Roosevelt, and many Americans, even conservative yahoo Christians in the Bible belt don’t realize that they have a lot to thank FDR for. But maybe the people of Tennessee don’t want electricity and TVs and brightly lit malls. Perhaps prayer works best with hookworms by the kerosine lamp. But even the Dems have moved right in the past years. Silly them. Still, they are less of a threat to democracy than the neocons, who should be washed out of washington. I am afraid they won’t be.
Posted by Marton on Oct 19, 2004 at 12:12 AM it frightens me that this man supports bush--and more than that i’m very much concerned that there will even more of the ballot tampering Marton mentions in the above post. it sounds odd, perhaps, but i’m hoping that (Dem.) lawyers are preparing for the election as much as the Repub. laywers undoubtedly are!
please vote for kerry!
virgin mobile sponsored a contest encouraging young people to create PSAs on why it is important to vote in November. please go to http://www.psaupload.com and vote today (just vote, nothing else involved) for one of the five finalists.
Posted by sms81 on Oct 19, 2004 at 10:30 AM As Stalinism was the birthchild of Western interrerence so to would be moves back, to counter a state of chaotic anarchy fuelled by further interventions to undermine post Stalin progress. Where in the world are direct interventions by the self appointed global policemen of the West not a negative influence?
The post war support of undeveloped lands that achieved so much has been reversed by the righteous parties antipathy to cooperative Socialism. Sea’s of lunacy are the natural element of such, with the works of balanced reason some kind of anathema to them.
Posted by Niall on May 24, 2008 at 2:44 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Fred Weir
- Putin Is Gone! Long Rule Putin!
With new president, Russians continue to forgo political voice for economic security - From Autocracy With Love
- Ethnic Cleansing in Russia
Putin stokes the flames of xenophobia by targeting non-Slavs in Georgia. - No Reason to Exist
- ‘Managed’ No More
Russians take to the streets to protest the privatization of their social welfare system. - Deep Divide
Ukraine's contested election reflects Russia's push to reunify
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2004 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
