Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yavlinsky's privatization plan (to let people buy whatever they please) would have the exact same consequences as the one that was implemented. He's a typical neoliberal.
Please elaborate what you are saying here.
( I am not going to comment the rest, since I can't take it seriously.)
But we all know that sentencing ***** Riot to hard labor in Siberia is clearly a throwback from good old days of soviet union when people were sentenced to hard labor or even death for simple act od defiance to the government...
Yes it is.
Quote:
Let's not forget Putin after all is a guy who's job was to operas Russian people and make sure no independent thinking takes place: isn't that what NKVD later renamed KGB was created for?
Wasnt Putin a colonel in KGB? Who's surprised? Lol.
Definitely not me.
Because that's precisely what I've warned the people on the Capitol Hill back in the 90ies, that after privatization "Gaidar-style" it's only logical that KGB would be back in charge. They were all smiles, they couldn't believe it.
( Of course I didn't know much at that point about Harvard's' involvement in Russian affairs.)
No, he didn't. He clearly said he didn't. He criticized the Stalinist tactics by which Udaltsov was accused. In view of the growing Stalinist tone of your posts, it's understandable why such subtleties would escape you.
But we all know that sentencing ***** Riot to hard labor in Siberia is clearly a throwback from good old days of soviet union when people were sentenced to hard labor or even death for simple act od defiance to the government...
He wanted to allow people to buy shares of any company at will. Who had the money? Some middle class and above. The same people, who got rich in 1990's.
No, he didn't. He clearly said he didn't. He criticized the Stalinist tactics by which Udaltsov was accused.
The video was aired, on which Udaltsov discusses payment for coup de tat and terrorism. Shortly thereafter the criminal investigation began, and he was summoned to police. Not even arrested.
Definitely not me.
Because that's precisely what I've warned the people on the Capitol Hill back in the 90ies, that after privatization "Gaidar-style" it's only logical that KGB would be back in charge. They were all smiles, they couldn't believe it.
( Of course I didn't know much at that point about Harvard's' involvement in Russian affairs.)
Erasure. KGB never stopped running Russia. KGB was not disbanded but simply renamed. KGB officers were not sentenced to prison terms for their crimes against Russian society but stayed with the FSB.
KGB has always been the right hand of the Party. The most trusted and reliable party members. Of course nomenklatura chose KGB to run the show.
Since, as Yavlinsky pointed out, Russia never went through formal de-communization what else would you expect?
And again, Harvard is as liberal and leftist as an university in the us can get.
Why are you blaming these naive Harvard eggheads for Russia failure to deal with its own past? By the way, Yavlinsky makes the same exact point and even calls the lack of proper decommunization of Russia the key to understanding the reasons why the democratic and economic reforms simply failed in Russia. This is from his PBS interview:
GRIGORY YAVLINSKY: Yes. That's the key, that's the key. So the story, from that point of view, was that one of the main reasons why in Eastern Europe the reforms were very successful and in Russia they were not. It was in 1991 in Eastern Europe that the real democratic revolution happened, which means that new people came to power. It was a real replacement of the political elite, like it was after the war in Germany and Japan, when the Nazi leaders were completely ripped out and new people came in. The same happened in Eastern Europe after 1991. In Russia, it was a nomenklatura termidor [a return to power of top Soviet Communists]. It was a kind of revenge, a very tricky one. The same people changed their jackets and changed the portraits in the rooms, and instead of saying "communism," "Lenin," and "Five-Year Plan," they started to say as keywords "market," "democracy," and "freedom," with the same substance that was behind "Lenin" and "communism" and "Five-Year Plan."
The video was aired, on which Udaltsov discusses payment for coup de tat and terrorism. Shortly thereafter the criminal investigation began, and he was summoned to police. Not even arrested.
Do you see anything Stalinist in this?
And how do you comment that:
Явлинский сказал, что демонстрация «Анатомии протеста 2» не может являться поводом для уголовного преследования. «Удальцов не представитель криминального мира, не занимается бизнесом и не совершал экономических преступлений, он представитель леворадикальной оппозиции, и он имеет право вести политическую деятельность», - уточнил яблочник.
It's precisely this type of persecution of a normal political party (I'm referring to Yabloko) that demonstrates why democracy in Russia might be a lost cause.
TO BRING THE DISCUSSION BACK TO TOPIC....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He counted all property, and treats it as cash.
