How Putin plans to stay on - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
#15104057
Atlantis wrote:How about leaving that to the Russian people?


IMHO he asked the wrong question.

If I were him I would ask:
1. Do they actually have a say now; or
2. Are there enough people who are capable to put up a challenge (without being slandered or arrested), THEN take over, THEN re-build the country as it should be?
#15104114
Wikipedia wrote:On 16 January 2020 president Vladimir Putin signed a decree that amended the relevant laws and established a new state office of Deputy Chairman of the Security Council. On the same day president Putin appointed Dmitry Medvedev as Deputy Chairman of the Security Council.

By which he practically made him deputy president too, I guess, which is a very interesting move and timing if he really means to be president for life. It seems Putin holds the reins of most of the Russian state through this council.

Wikipedia wrote:Composition

As of 13 February 2020:

Chairman of the Security Council — Vladimir Putin as the President of Russia (ex officio)

Permanent members:

Name___________________________________Post

Dmitry Medvedev______________Deputy Chairman of the Security Council
Mikhail Mishustin______________Chairman of the Government
Anton Vaino__________________Head of the Presidential Administration
Valentina Matviyenko___________Chairwoman of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly
Vyacheslav Volodin____________Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly
Sergei Shoigu________________Minister for Defence
Sergei Lavrov________________Minister for Foreign Affairs
Vladimir Kolokoltsev___________Minister for Internal Affairs
Aleksandr Bortnikov___________Director of the Federal Security Service
Sergei Naryshkin______________Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service
Viktor Zolotov________________Director of the Federal National Guard Troops Service
Dmitry Kochnev_______________Director of the Federal Protective Service
Nikolai Patrushev_____________Secretary of the Security Council
#15104618
Patrickov wrote:IMHO he asked the wrong question.

If I were him I would ask:
1. Do they actually have a say now; or
2. Are there enough people who are capable to put up a challenge (without being slandered or arrested), THEN take over,


Until here you were talking real facts


Patrickov wrote: THEN re-build the country as it should be?


Here you expressed personal opinion. And I'll have to object to this, because the only way to Russia turn into real proper state is only if America falls.
The reason is because, when and IF America falls, then it means Russia will finally be free from the American influence and they'll join the franco-germans alliance. And then by joining them, Russia will finally be able to focus towards her inside and build to proper state, as it is a huge interest for the Europeans for that to happen.

Thus, unless America has already lost to the Chinese, Russia will keep being that entity, between a state and a feud.
#15104621
But most likely America will win and the Russia will stay being an American subject.
Or even if they get into the hands of the Germans, maybe EU will treat them same way as the Americans did, because of fears that if Russia reorganise they'll start acting too independently.
Thus in any scenario, unless Russia decides she'll go to war with Europe (very unlikely, unless they submit to the Chinese, which is very impossible to happen), Russia for the next hundred or couple hundred of years will keep being someone's subject, either American either European either(most unlikely) Chinese.

And also, we don't have to make such big deal with what will become of the puppet vlad. He is literally a nothing in the big scene.
#15104623
By the way, what I've been saying all this time in this thread isn't sci fi, it's the realities of the current situation. But because they aren't being "advertised" much (which is really logical of course :lol:) for most people they sound really, "unexpected"?
#15104757
IMHO Russia will end up being the master of whatever rump state coming up in (northern) China if the current situation breaks down.
#15105575
Hellas me ponas wrote:But most likely America will win and the Russia will stay being an American subject.

Err ... Russia isnt an american subject.

Thats why the USA is pissed, after all.

The USA wants another Yelzin, and they want to get the russian resources.
#15105576
Atlantis wrote:How about leaving that to the Russian people?

Or have you adopted Putin's view of democracy?


That posting makes no sense.

The russian people have picked Putin again and again.

Putin is head of state despite not even being member of any party.

If thats all you're asking, you already got your answer.
#15105634
Negotiator wrote:That posting makes no sense.

The russian people have picked Putin again and again.

Putin is head of state despite not even being member of any party.

If thats all you're asking, you already got your answer.


I was wondering when the first idiot would say that.
#15109655
Putin is worth ten times any leader sitting in Europe at the moment.

European leadership are intellectually bankrupt and incompetent.

Europe is a lost continent at the present point in time.

Europeans forgot family, tradition and their faith.

Russia still believes in honour and good normal values. They are normal people whereas Europeans became strange.
Last edited by Political Interest on 24 Jul 2020 20:56, edited 2 times in total.
#15109730
Political Interest wrote:Putin is worth ten times any leader sitting in Europe at the moment.

European leadership are intellectually bankrupt and incompetent.

Europe is a lost continent at the present point in time.

Europeans forgot family, tradition and their faith.

Russia still believes in honour and good normal values. They are normal people whereas Europeans became strange.


Putin is one of the most corrupt leader in Europe who condemns his country poverty in the service of a corrupt oligarchy.

In any sense of the meaning, Europe today is the best place on Earth.

You have a thoroughly distorted perception of reality.
#15109739
Atlantis wrote:Putin is one of the most corrupt leader in Europe who condemns his country poverty in the service of a corrupt oligarchy.

In any sense of the meaning, Europe today is the best place on Earth.

You have a thoroughly distorted perception of reality.

@Political Interest is a conservative, in the true sense of that word. This means that he is horrified by modern society, just as conservative and traditionalist thinkers were horrified when modernity first reared its head back in the 18th and 19th centuries. What passes for 'conservatism' now is anything but conservative, being in favour of unrestrained free markets, libertinism and consumerism. @Political Interest simply cannot bring himself to accept these things. What is 'best' to you horrifies him.
#15109742
Political Interest wrote:Putin is worth ten times any leader sitting in Europe at the moment.

European leadership are intellectually bankrupt and incompetent.


Sometimes there is a price to pay to keep ourselves free. Inspirations or leadership do not necessary win votes, which can be sad, but one may perceive a system vulnerable to abuse ten times worse than "having a leader ten times worse than their expected standards".

It can also be said that, in Europe, many nations simply vote for custodians.

P. S. To me, the same goes for the United States or any other country.
#15109744
Atlantis wrote:Putin is one of the most corrupt leader in Europe who condemns his country poverty in the service of a corrupt oligarchy.


Considering the state of the country when he assumed leadership in 2000 it is hardly surprising that Russia still has problems. It was on the brink of civil war. They used economic liberalism to try and increase living standards. It's a long road, they do not want central planning or state capitalism.

Atlantis wrote:In any sense of the meaning, Europe today is the best place on Earth.


Materially perhaps, although this is not universally true and even less so in the peripheral states like Britain or in Eastern Europe.

Existentially though Europe is a hell on earth.

Material existence is not the only standard by which we can determine quality of life.

The UK is fast turning into a dictatorship, there's out of control violence, growing inequality and it's a country where police officers can be dragged through the street at 40 mph. Social bonds between people and general camaraderie are deteriorating. Individualism is rampant. What sort of country is this becoming?

Atlantis wrote:You have a thoroughly distorted perception of reality.


Perhaps this is true but it's still based on what I see around me.

Potemkin wrote:@Political Interest is a conservative, in the true sense of that word. This means that he is horrified by modern society, just as conservative and traditionalist thinkers were horrified when modernity first reared its head back in the 18th and 19th centuries. What passes for 'conservatism' now is anything but conservative, being in favour of unrestrained free markets, libertinism and consumerism. @Political Interest simply cannot bring himself to accept these things. What is 'best' to you horrifies him.


This is very true. And it very much is a literal inability. I've tried to accept the way the world is but it's proven impossible. That the current state of affairs is a source of unhappiness that is beyond my ability to accept is actually at least one source of comfort. I'll never be happy even if I try to force myself to be.

Patrickov wrote:Sometimes there is a price to pay to keep ourselves free. Inspirations or leadership do not necessary win votes, which can be sad, but one may perceive a system vulnerable to abuse ten times worse than "having a leader ten times worse than their expected standards".

It can also be said that, in Europe, many nations simply vote for custodians.

P. S. To me, the same goes for the United States or any other country.


We are not entirely free. In the West there is a public consensus that you get punished for if you oppose. The pressure is horizontal, it doesn't come from the government but from the society. People get obsessed by faddish political religions. If you go against it you can get yourself in serious trouble. I've heard someone from the former Yugoslavia say that even under Marshal Tito's leadership they had more freedom than in the West today because under communism it was the government you feared offending whereas in the West it is the entire society. The West is more free but not entirely free and in many instances it is even less free.
#15109746
Potemkin wrote:@Political Interest is a conservative, in the true sense of that word. This means that he is horrified by modern society, just as conservative and traditionalist thinkers were horrified when modernity first reared its head back in the 18th and 19th centuries. What passes for 'conservatism' now is anything but conservative, being in favour of unrestrained free markets, libertinism and consumerism. @Political Interest simply cannot bring himself to accept these things. What is 'best' to you horrifies him.


Thanks for the explanation. I truly don't understand people like that. They are like something that crawled out from some deep grotto from a long-forgotten past. I have tried to talk to him, but somehow we don't seem to speak the same language.

The conservatives I know are usually business-friendly, hence they approve of globalization and grudgingly accept the need for same-sex marriages and the like.
#15109747
Political Interest wrote:We are not entirely free. In the West there is a public consensus that you get punished for if you oppose. The pressure is horizontal, it doesn't come from the government but from the society. People get obsessed by faddish political religions. If you go against it you can get yourself in serious trouble.

I've heard someone from the former Yugoslavia say that even under Marshal Tito's leadership they had more freedom than in the West today because under communism it was the government you feared offending whereas in the West it is the entire society. The West is more free but not entirely free .


I'd like to know some example of horizontal pressure. I guess the current social trend on feminism and (anti-)racism can be seen as such.

However, I actually agree more on yielding to horizontal pressure, and see them often (though not always) more reasonable than vertical pressure. Horizontal pressure is also easier to evade, especially individuals usually do not have power to force others to express or not to express themselves. Also, in the information age it is far easier for people to find "comrades" if they want to.

I also do not aim for entire freedom. When we say the West is more free, it's the more that counts.

(On a side note, it looks like Yugoslavia had a weak government even during Tito's years)
#15109751
Atlantis wrote:Thanks for the explanation. I truly don't understand people like that. They are like something that crawled out from some deep grotto from a long-forgotten past. I have tried to talk to him, but somehow we don't seem to speak the same language.

You don't speak the same language, and never will. And you will never really understand him, any more than you will ever really understand Marxism. You are essentially a conformist, rather than actually having any worked-out political beliefs of your own. No shame in that - most people are just conformists.

The conservatives I know are usually business-friendly, hence they approve of globalization and grudgingly accept the need for same-sex marriages and the like.

Then they are not conservatives in any meaningful sense of that word. They just go along with whatever the leading voices in society happen to be saying at any given moment in order to be allowed to go on making money. In other words, they are conformists, just like you. :)
#15109755
Potemkin wrote:No shame in that - most people are just conformists.


In some sense, conformism is just another form of adaptation to the environment. It's one of the most basic survival instincts, isn't it?
#15109757
Patrickov wrote:In some sense, conformism is just another form of adaptation to the environment. It's one of the most basic survival instincts, isn't it?

Precisely right, which is why most people are just conformists. It is usually very much in their personal interests not to think too deeply about politics, but just to accept whatever the prevailing norms happen to be in their society at any given time.

Hmmm, it the Ukraine aid package is all over main[…]

The rapes by Hamas, real or imagained are irreleva[…]

@Rugoz You are a fuckin' moralist, Russia coul[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]