|
It hits close to some aspects which make me, personally, sad. But I would not take this simplified story too seriously. It's meant to elicit chuckles among teenagers, and it cuts corners. While there are clearly Vatniks in Russia (and in the surrounding countries, like Estonia), and there are also people with only a few Vatnik traits (such as wanting other countries to think of Russia as great, i.e., fear-worthy), there are phenomena that are not explained, such as the need for, and effect of the propaganda from the Kremlin.
|
Russian Federation40169 Posts
Well... i would say that Vatniks totally do exist, i've actually met a kind of vatniks that have all properties of true vatnik yet despise Putin. And they are sincere about it, as incredible as that is.
|
On March 08 2015 04:19 Ghanburighan wrote:As far as I can tell, the Kommersant reports that some policemen (or security service?) witnessed the murder and gave a description of the suspects. Anyone with better Russian want to expand on this? KOMMERSANT LINK
From the story it looks like the current suspects would be hard to fit into the conspiracy theories I mentioned. The Chechens from the theories were believed to be hating Russia, presumably they took part in wars in Chechnya on the rebels side, but were forced to leave the country when their forces were broken. Dadaev is a high-ranked police officer from Chechnya, and Gubashev lived in Moskow and worked in a security company. As far as I know random people don't get to be high-ranked police officers in Chechnya, this is a position of power and high loyalty towards Kadyrov should be expected.
|
Russian Federation40169 Posts
On March 08 2015 09:52 Cheerio wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2015 04:19 Ghanburighan wrote:As far as I can tell, the Kommersant reports that some policemen (or security service?) witnessed the murder and gave a description of the suspects. Anyone with better Russian want to expand on this? KOMMERSANT LINK From the story it looks like the current suspects would be hard to fit into the conspiracy theories I mentioned. The Chechens from the theories were believed to be hating Russia, presumably they took part in wars in Chechnya on the rebels side, but were forced to leave the country when their forced were broken. Dadaev is a high-ranked police officer from Chechnya, and Gubashev lived in Moskow and worked in a security company. As far as I know random people don't get to be high-ranked police officers in Chechnya, this is a position of power and high loyalty towards Kadyrov should be expected. I mean, some more digging leads to knowledge of one of suspect's commanders being uhem.... Kadyrov's personal murderer, involved/rumored to be involved in multiple of killings like Nemtsov's one.
|
the verdict is in on nemtsov: a politically bankrupt, authoritarian, and corrupt dr. frankenstein.
Boris Nemtsov: Death of a Russian Liberal - Mark Ames
...
Nemtsov was a very different kind of liberal or “ultra-liberal” than what we think of as liberals. In the best sense, that means he was never a mealy-mouthed coward. But as one of the leaders of the 1990s liberalization catastrophe, Nemtsov was much more the problem than the solution to that problem. And even when he was in power in the late Yeltsin Era, serving as the half-dead boozer’s first deputy prime minister and heir-apparent, Nemtsov represented the very worst and shallowest in liberal Russia’s “virtual politics,” a kind of precursor to the manufactured PR-as-politics that was perfected under Nemtsov’s choice for Russia’s president in 2000: Vladimir Putin.
...
Nemtsov joined the Kremlin as the anti-corruption “young reformer” who promised Russia a fair, clean, “western” capitalism. The first thing he did was push a law forcing government bureaucrats to ditch foreign cars for Russian Volgas — which just happened to be produced in Nemtsov’s Nizhny Novgorod region. Then he lobbied through anti-corruption decrees that, upon closer reading, featured “loopholes through which an entire fleet of Volgas could be driven.” The decrees were supposed to end one of the worst examples of Yeltsin era corruption: rigged tenders for state contracts. Nemtsov’s reform decreed that in future, government tenders had to be open, transparent and competitive — except in cases when a closed non-competitive tender was deemed “the best method.” In other words, not only was nothing changed, but rigging tenders now were given legal gloss, thanks to Nemtsov.
A few months later, Nemtsov pushed for a new law forcing bureaucrats to disclose their incomes (but not their assets or their families’ assets) — but then was caught on tape arranging a bribe in the form of an obscene book advance, $90,000, with a Yeltsin family bagman/entrepreneur named Sergei Lisovsky.
...
The problem with Nemtsov’s politics wasn’t so much his adherence to radical neoliberalism, but his shallowness, his grotesque elitism, and his authoritarianism. Nemtsov is one of the top-down Russian liberals, cut from the same authoritarian cloth as Chubais, though not as wily as “Bonecracker” (so nick-named because in 1996, when Chubais summoned a meeting of top Russian newspaper editors to the Kremlin, he told the uppity editor of the then-independent Izvestiya newspaper, “You will write what we tell you to write or bones will crack”; a few months later, after Izvestiya broke the story on Chubais taking a $3 million interest-free loan from a banker who rigged an auction, that editor was out on the streets, and today Izvestiya is a wholly owned propaganda organ of the FSB.)
After the financial collapse, it looked like the entire rotten Yeltsin-era liberal elite was heading for exile or jail, until their savior on the white horse — Vladimir Putin — rode in from Lubyanka to save Russia’s liberals. The Nemtsov of our fantasies would say that it was somehow out of character for him to support an authoritarian spook like Putin in 2000, well after Putin launched the second bloody war in Chechnya.
In fact, the liberals thought Putin was their Pinochet savior, and that they would essentially control him, that Putin was one of them. Which he largely was, and in many ways still is — cut from similar liberal authoritarian cloth.
Here are some choice quotes from Nemtsov’s op-ed, co-authored with Ian Bremmer, in the New York Times published in early 2000, after Putin was named Yeltsin’s successor:
" Some critics have questioned Mr. Putin’s commitment to democracy. True, he is no liberal democrat, domestically or internationally. Under his leadership Russia will not become France. The government will, however, reflect the Russian people’s desire for a strong state, a functioning economy, and an end to tolerance for robber barons — in short, a ”ruble stops here” attitude. Russia could do considerably worse than have a leader with an unwavering commitment to the national interest…
And it is difficult to see how to do better.
… Mr. Putin’s vocal support for a free-market economy boosted the prospects of reform candidates in the parliamentary elections last month and provided a firm footing for meaningful economic reform to be passed this year.
The reformers are back… "
Deep down Nemtsov had no problem with Putin’s authoritarianism. His problem with Putin came after being ignored for too long.
... src
|
Thank you for posting Kremlin propaganda. It's useful to see an illustration.
|
here's a little glimpse into what actually was:
Russia's Best Bet By Boris Nemtsov and Ian Bremmer
Vladimir Putin has seamlessly replaced Boris Yeltsin as leader of Russia, moving quickly to take advantage of his high approval ratings and his party's bolstered support in parliament. This is quite an accomplishment for a government that lacked a popular mandate only a month ago.
Yet many in the United States have expressed doubts about Russia's new acting president.
For one, it has been widely noted that Mr. Putin, a former K.G.B. officer, was a virtual unknown until Mr. Yeltsin made him his prime minister in August and that his Unity Party did not even exist then. The truth is, being an unknown is not only a distinct political advantage in Russia, it was a necessity for Mr. Putin, who had to amass credible popular support in a political culture tarred by cynicism and disillusionment. He neither made nor carried out government policies in the last few years, so he wasn't responsible for any of the mistakes.
Some critics have questioned Mr. Putin's commitment to democracy. True, he is no liberal democrat, domestically or internationally. Under his leadership Russia will not become France. The government will, however, reflect the Russian people's desire for a strong state, a functioning economy, and an end to tolerance for robber barons -- in short, a ''ruble stops here'' attitude. Russia could do considerably worse than have a leader with an unwavering commitment to the national interest.
And it is difficult to see how to do better.
Russia's neighbors grasp the importance of this point. The other former Soviet republics lauded Mr. Putin's appointment, mostly because of the pragmatism he demonstrated when serving as secretary of Russia's security council. His reaction to the formation of the ''counter-Russia'' alliance of Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldova was to state that Russia should craft a regional policy palatable to its neighbors.
In addition, Mr. Putin's vocal support for a free-market economy boosted the prospects of reform candidates in the parliamentary elections last month and provided a firm footing for meaningful economic reform to be passed this year.
The reformers are back. Given that the Communists' support comes overwhelmingly from those over the age of 50, the party's clout will diminish with each passing year. December's elections were undoubtedly the last in which the Communists will receive a plurality.
At the same time, a new middle class led by small- and medium-sized business owners is beginning to assert itself. And Russia is finally developing a political system that can begin to shape the direction of change instead of simply damming its tide.
A framework for real market democracy -- property rights especially -- can now be put in place, making entrepreneurialism less expensive and therefore less beholden to the oligarchs who held far too much sway under Mr. Yeltsin.
This maturation should gradually continue, eventually leading to stable parties with consistent platforms, a system of checks and balances and a real separation of powers. src
|
It would be nice to state that this article was written in 2000. How the times have changed...
|
Details of the report on Ukraine that Nemtsov was working on are starting to emerge. The crucial point is cooperation with 'soldiers' mothers'
After Nemtsov was killed, Ilya Yashin, a colleague of Nemtsov’s, said he would be publishing the report on Russian troops that his murdered colleague had prepared, and yesterday, the Reuters news agency, citing Olga Shorina, another Nemtsov co-worker, published several portions of that study concerning the participation of Russian troops in the fighting in Ukraine. Both Shorina and Yashin confirmed that Nemtsov was preparing to include in his report details of his conversations with the mothers and other family members of Russian soldiers who had fought and in some cases died while fighting in Ukraine and thus demonstrate that Putin is lying when he says there are no Russian troops there. Samoylova suggests that it is highly unlikely that the publication of yet another piece of evidence that Moscow has sent troops into Ukraine would unnerve the Kremlin given how many news outlets in the Russian Federation have already reported that fact. “However,” she adds, “in this situation, there is one ‘but.’ And that is this: “Nemtsov was not simply collecting information and preparing an information bomb,” the commentator says. “He was trying to work directly with mothers and with the soldiers themselves and thus creating a completely real threat of the socialization of the problem,” a far more serious development from Putin’s point of view. “In other words,” Samoylova argues, the accusation could acquire a face, that of the soldiers’ mothers, and that face “could elicit sympathy in society and a sense of injustice” because it would become obvious to all that the Putin regime was not prepared to show honor and respect to those who had died in its behalf.
|
On March 08 2015 16:48 Ghanburighan wrote: Thank you for posting Kremlin propaganda. It's useful to see an illustration. It's not Kremlin propaganda tho : a ministry for Elstine, with close ties to corrupted big business boss. Not really the hero all the western free marketist media wants him to be.
|
Didn't think nunez would fall so low. Kind of showing what kind of people we are dealing with here. Even russian media cancelled anti-Nemtsov propaganda after his death.
|
On March 08 2015 22:36 Cheerio wrote: Didn't think nunez would fall so low. Kind of showing what kind of people we are dealing with here. Even russian media cancelled anti-Nemtsov propaganda after his death. Posting an article the deceased had written is a really despicable act. Really brought the quality of the thread down from the amazing heights achieved with borderline schizophrenic 'the government wants to kill us' conspiracy theories and russophobic rants.
Logic and rational thought are the final stage of commie whataboutism after all.
|
thank you for posting anti-nunez propaganda. it's useful to see an illustration.
|
Seems a bit unnecessary to revive Nemtsov's "corruption" history, when it doesn't seem to have any connection to his death. Unless of course the goal is ad hominem.
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
The sad truth is, while Nemtsov is very certainly guilty of foul play, so is just about everyone else who has been around for more than 20 years (the 1990s were a time of much plundering, and there's more than enough dirt there to force those involved to serve many years in prison). That's why I said that he could be put in prison for crimes that he did commit - because those that had the power to do so, did steal.
The reason that they aren't all in prison? Simply put, the deal is, they keep out of politics, pay their taxes, and work for the good of Russia, and they get to keep what they stole. The problem is that if you get rid of all of these people, there won't be anyone left who is capable of running the country's businesses. So what we're left with is a Russia that strongly resembles the world during the early years of the Industrial Revolution.
On March 08 2015 18:03 Ghanburighan wrote:Details of the report on Ukraine that Nemtsov was working on are starting to emerge. The crucial point is cooperation with 'soldiers' mothers' Show nested quote +After Nemtsov was killed, Ilya Yashin, a colleague of Nemtsov’s, said he would be publishing the report on Russian troops that his murdered colleague had prepared, and yesterday, the Reuters news agency, citing Olga Shorina, another Nemtsov co-worker, published several portions of that study concerning the participation of Russian troops in the fighting in Ukraine. Both Shorina and Yashin confirmed that Nemtsov was preparing to include in his report details of his conversations with the mothers and other family members of Russian soldiers who had fought and in some cases died while fighting in Ukraine and thus demonstrate that Putin is lying when he says there are no Russian troops there. Samoylova suggests that it is highly unlikely that the publication of yet another piece of evidence that Moscow has sent troops into Ukraine would unnerve the Kremlin given how many news outlets in the Russian Federation have already reported that fact. “However,” she adds, “in this situation, there is one ‘but.’ And that is this: “Nemtsov was not simply collecting information and preparing an information bomb,” the commentator says. “He was trying to work directly with mothers and with the soldiers themselves and thus creating a completely real threat of the socialization of the problem,” a far more serious development from Putin’s point of view. “In other words,” Samoylova argues, the accusation could acquire a face, that of the soldiers’ mothers, and that face “could elicit sympathy in society and a sense of injustice” because it would become obvious to all that the Putin regime was not prepared to show honor and respect to those who had died in its behalf. I don't buy it. The common sentiment is that Russia's military is for the defense of the country from foreign security threats, not to take more land from others. This would change nothing. I think he was killed for something that had very little to do with Ukraine.
|
What do you mean LegalLord?
|
An interesting question, if all the Russians who committed crimes were jailed appropriately, how much of the politicians/leadership would remain?
|
United Kingdom13774 Posts
Well, that was strangely ambiguous. Edited.
On March 09 2015 00:27 zlefin wrote: An interesting question, if all the Russians who committed crimes were jailed appropriately, how much of the politicians/leadership would remain? Little enough that there would be no one left to stop another plundering of the country's assets.
|
Sounds like you need to import some non-corrupt people. Any allies with a good record you could import talent from?
|
Russian Federation40169 Posts
On March 09 2015 00:35 zlefin wrote: Sounds like you need to import some non-corrupt people. Any allies with a good record you could import talent from? Uhm.... I am afraid there are no countries that have available non-corrupt people to export.
|
|
|
|