Publius Pundit

« Previous · Home · Next »

Russia Outlaws Democracy

Filed under: Russia

Two bills are moving rapidly through the Russian parliament which neatly encapsulate the tyrannical attitude of the dictator Vladimir Putin towards the institution of democracy and, indeed, the very concept of freedom itself. Amazingly, though Russia has just held a national election, neither one was any part of the campaign -- a neat testament to the reckless disregard for citizenship duties evinced by the people of Russia.

On Wednesday the Duma (Russia's lower house of parliament), as the International Herald Tribune reported, "backed new restrictions on foreign investment, limiting access to strategic sectors like oil and gas, aerospace and mass media." The bill passed by the overwhelming margin of 384-55, and the AP reports that it "is raising concern among foreign investors since it widens the powers of Russian security services in business transactions."

Then on Friday, the Duma voted 363-8 Friday to approve new restrictions on national referendums. To protest the measure, more than 50 members of the Communist Party got up and walked out of the chamber before the vote. Jurist reports: "Referendums are binding under Russian law, and the new restrictions effectively bar referendums on issues including the national budget, taxes and treaties. Communist party members objected to the proposal, saying it deprives Russian citizens of their right to voice their opinion on important national issues." The AP reported Communist lawmaker Alexander Kulikov declaring: "We, the popularly elected lawmakers, are practically stripping the people of being able to express their will and speak out at a referendum. Passing this bill will mean that we're asking people to shut up."

In each case, measures that should at the very least be controversial cruised through the 450-member legislature with at least an 80% majority. Though Putin's party of power, United Russia, won only 64% of the vote in the last parliamentary elections, it was awarded 70% of the seats in the Duma. Together with the sycophantic "Fair Russia" group, the Kremlin directly controls the votes of nearly 78.5% of the body, and on top of that can count on routine support from maniacal ultranationalists of Vladimir Zhirinovsky's party, which controls an additional 8%. As Michael Ivdov notes in the New Republic, this is what Putin's Goebbels, the demonic Vladislav Surkov, "terms suverennaya demokratiya ('sovereign democracy') and what's been rechristened, in liberal circles, suvenirnaya demokratiya: 'souvenir democracy'."

That creaking sound you hear is an iron curtain descending once again across the continent. Pay no attention to that little man behind the curtain.

Talk about neo-Soviet! The only "opposition" to speak of in the Russian parliament left after Putin's purges are the dogged Communists, who control 11.5% of the seats. They are hardly a beacon light of progressive thought, to say the least. Russia's "people's house" has become nothing more than a rubber stamp for the regime just as it was in Soviet times. Blind the consequences, neo-Soviet Russia hurtles once again into the abyss.

NOTE: Publius Pundit no longer accepts comments directly on our posts. Instead, once per week we will publish a "letters to the PP" feature in which readers with meritorious observations will get to see their views published on the main page of the blog. If you would like to have a letter considered for publication, send it to: kimzigfeld@gmail.com

Social Bookmarking:
Del.icio.us this del.icio.us | digg this digg | Add to Technorati technorati | StumbleUpon Toolbar stumble upon | Furl this furl | Reddit this reddit

Comments


Intelligencer says:

The only thing that makes Putin's rule at all legitimate to me is that, while he ignores the procedural aspects of democracy, he really does have strong support among the Russian people. The Russians, alas, have always had a soft spot for tyrants.

In some ways, it will be a good thing when the last vestiges of Russian democracy are swept away. As it is, Putin and his cronies still wear a mask of democracy. Let the world see tyranny's naked face.

"backed new restrictions on foreign investment, limiting access to strategic sectors like oil and gas, aerospace and mass media."

This is why I so dearly want us to develop a viable alternative energy source. Russia's strength stands on one leg -- oil. Let the price of oil drop and see how long his popularity and this new economic autarky last. . .


presumed guilty says:

once again, a superbly biased article, making no mention that the US, for instance, has no provisions for referendums on federal level at all. Does this mean that democracy has been outlawed in the US all along?! Wow, you've really opened my eyes, Kim Zigfeld, thanks!

Oh, wait, are you saying that Boeing and Lockheed are open for Russian ownership? Oh, no? ah, right, forgot, democracy never set foot in the US...


La Russophobe says:

Are you suggesting that Russia is obligated to follow the American model? If so, then I presume you admit Russia's most recent presidential election, with no debates and no opposition candidates, was illegitimate, right? And the Duma itself, by that standard, is illegitimate with its 80% pro-Putin voting. Right?

Biased? Under the U.S. Constitution, most real legislative power is allocated to STATE governments, and they DO have referendum. You totally ignore that fact. Putin has destroyed state government in Russia. Do you concede that his moves to appoint governors rather than have them popularly elected is also illegitimate?

National referendum was implemented in Russia as a bulwark against totalitarian backsliding. In your view, did America just emerge from a half-century of genocide under totalitarianism in which its government became the greatest mass-murderer in world history? Do tell. I must have missed that.

If you actually read this post before vomiting on it like an ape, you would have seen that it's point is not that Russia should not take these measures (although there's certainly a strong argument to be made that it shouldn't) but that it should not do so WITHOUT NATIONAL DISCUSSION and by NEO-SOVIET RUBBER-STAMP means. Your comments are so illiterate and dishonest that they bespeak psychosis. Drivel such as yours is what has destroyed Russia not once but twice in the past century alone.


Martino says:

PRESUMED GUILTY...You are my guy...objective contribution. Kim Zigfeld and Intelligencer have formed opinion about the Russian Leadership because it is either their countries are not benefiting from Russia's economy or Russia is capable of opposing the US now as against the 90s when Russia was on its knees dues to ill-conceived "western Economic Advice" it received from Harvard Experts recommended by Bush Snr. and Clinton or they have they have only "western" information sources about Russia. They readily label Putin a Dictator but fail to see the dictator in America.
Where were they when Russia collapsed and the West grinned with satisfaction. Where were they when a handful of Russian with solid "Western" backing snagged up all Russia's wealth? If oil is Russia strength, what is the US's. When any country not allied to the US advances they are quick to criticize it but will be silent on an ally.
Smart people understand western propaganda...


Martino says:

La Russophobe...It will be kind of you to be polite. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. The formation of Russia is different to the formation of th US. Under the circumstances, Russia cannot allow the election of Governors until the security of the country is reliable otherwise there will be several Chechynas. And The WEST will take advantage of that to dismantle a viable opposition to it. we don't want a unipolar world if you know what I mean...remember Iraq war, Russia was too weak to oppose the US and it's client-states who supported the war. But today Russia's opposition has humbled the US to pursue diplomatic solutions to the Iranian issue. Let Russia develop at the pace the Russians want it.


La Russophobe says:

MARTINO:

Let me see if I understand. The viewpoint YOU AGREE WITH is "unbiased" and the one you disagree with is biased. Ummm . . . OK.

Dude, your head needs major work.

It will be kind of you not to be so arrogant as to dare to tell me how to respond to comments on my own blog. If you don't care for my manner, don't read this blog. You will not be missed.

It would also be kind of you to actually read the things you comment on before commenting and to write only one comment, not many. This is my blog, not yours.

You've agreed with someone who says America should be the standard for Russia's conduct even as you attack America. That's just plain psychotic.

Russia isn't "developing," it's in retrograde. That's the whole point of this post. Russia has centuries more history than America but is less developed politically. By America's fifth presidential election it had already transitioned from one party to another. Russia doesn't even HAVE a party to transition to.

Would you have said "let Hitler develop Germany his own way"? Yes, I actually think you would.


misha says:

Russia and the Russian economy doing just fine. Russia is even experiencing a baby boom, strong enough to attract the attention of a "mainstream" media outlet such as MSNBC (a joint venture between Microsoft and NBC).

Link: http://mishasrussiablog.blogspot.com/2008/04/russia-experiencing-baby-boom.html

A small minority of US states allow referendums, such as California, but the majority of US states do not. US federal government has never allowed binding referendums of any kind (nor any referendums of any sort, binding or otherwise). This is probably because, as the US proudly boasts, "we are a republic not a democracy."

US also limits investment in "strategic" sectors of US economy, such as the recent move to block a Dubai-based company from operating US ports (US Congress literally lost its mind over that one, even though the Bush Administration pushed for it... Hillary Clinton and John-John both sponsored legislation to block it, as dozens of others did, before it was withdrawn...)


sparky says:

Misha, thanks for your comments. Russia's economy is doing much better. but is does have several problems (which is normal) that must be dealt with. Namely, the inflation. I think it is about 15% or higher. I last week, something that cost 70 rubles, now costs 80r (for those who do not the know the dollar is worth about 23 or 24 rubles now). And I will not even talk about how much housing prices have risen. and, you do know that most of the economic boom is due to oil and gas. That is why recently Putin put in measures diversify the economy. Putin is a very smart and capable leader.

That being said, what about the who will be the president in 10 years? No one knows what he will be like. He may be foolish and cruel (the opposite of Putin) and there will be no way to stop him. That is the problem; not necessarily Putin.

Ok, about the business stuff. first, the problem is not so much of Russia wanting to protect is vital business interests (military). It is the way that foreign businesses are treated. You know that this new law will be "interpreted" to apply to almost every foreign business in Russia. That is the problem more that anything else.

no referendums?? Not sure how to comment here. No, the US does not allow for many of them because we have other checks and balances. If referendums were part of Russia's checks and balances system than this is a problem. It's really that simple (IMHO).


La Russophobe says:

ADOLESCENT:

Your ability to comment on this blog is a privilege, not a right. Your childishly obscene language demeans this blog and I will not allow it to continue.

I have your IP number and can delete every single comment you have ever made on this blog with two keystrokes. I will immediately do so the next time you leave a comment of this kind on this blog.

If you can speak respectfully and in a mature manner, you are welcome to do so. If not, I will simply, instantly and permanently erase your presence from my blog.

This is your last warning.

UPDATE: Congratulations! You ignored my warning, so all your comments have been removed. If you apologize and promise to comment in a more responsible manner in the future, identifying yourself with a mature name and refraining from scatology and personal abuse, your comments will be republished. You had an opportunity to try to protest against what you disagree with, but like the ridiculous little child you are you abused your opportunity and lost it. Think about it -- if you can think.


presumed guilty says:

La Russophobe, since this appears to be YOUR BLOG ( you must be Kim's dad, or alter ego) I will have to censor myself in the best of the democratic traditions.

Here goes: learn to argue!

your posts are full of fallacies typical of murdoch properties, starting with straw man tactics, and continuing to various other distractions. I never implied any of the statements you "destroyed", I simply examined the main premise of the original article "a country with no federal referendum laws and no uncontrolled foreign access to any and all industries has outlawed democracy". Had distinctions been made in the original article, no commenting would have been necessary. But according to "Kim"'s statements, US does not have a democracy. Period.


La Russophobe says:

PRESUMED:

You certainly win the prize for the greatest ignoramus ever to comment on this blog. If you're not aware that I publish La Russophobe and respond to comments on this blog using that name, then you're the only one.

Not surprising actually, given how clear it is that you live in your own weird world totally detached from any semblance of reality. Kind of puts your comments in the proper perspective, I must say.


elmer says:

"Under the circumstances, Russia cannot allow the election of Governors until the security of the country is reliable otherwise there will be several Chechynas."

This is an absolutely astonishing, astounding statement.

It goes hand-in-hand with "Russia was on its knees dues to ill-conceived "western Economic Advice" it received from Harvard Experts recommended by Bush Snr. and Clinton."

Russia may have received some ill-conceived economic advice from Harvard experts, but that's not the reason Russia was on its knees.

The ungodly raping and pillaging of Russia by former sovoks, who magically transformed themselves into putrid oligarchs with no decency, no honor, and unlimited pursuit of excesses not even Caligula could have imagined is what ailed Russia.

And still does.

Except for the oligarchs that Putin has exiled or put into jail.

Given one of the most brutal totalitarian regimes in recent history - that of Stalin and his successors - it is simply amazing that Russians never run out of rationalizations to try to justify totalitarianism, while mouthing slogans about how, yes indeed, Russia is democratic.

After all, according to one such rationalization, electing a president of a country is no different than electing a chairman of the board of a corporation.

And in Russia - that's true.

Except that most well-run corporations don't have vote fraud.

It's probably why they don't understand that freedom of speech is a protection against abuse of power by the government.

A private blog is simply that - if one's comments are deleted on a private blog, one has other venues for expressing oneself.

But if the government bans free speech, and starts arresting people for putting comments on a blog and putting them in jail, that's an entirely different matter.

Some Russians just can't seem to think.


misha says:

Sparky wrote, "Putin is a very smart and capable leader... That being said, what about the who will be the president in 10 years? No one knows what he will be like. He may be foolish and cruel (the opposite of Putin) and there will be no way to stop him. That is the problem; not necessarily Putin."

I don't think that anyone doubts the necessity, or at least the desirability of strengthening and expanding Russia's democratic institutions. The idea is not that Putin is creating a new permanent system in Russia. But Putin's first order of business, after coming to power, was to stabilize the patient and stop the hemorrhaging, which he now seems to have accomplished rather admirably. (At least the vast majority of Russians think so and it is their opinion that counts).

The challenge is to build strong democratic institutions in Russia which will establish a representative democracy but also safeguard Russia's sovereignty and security from the foreign-based efforts to use Russia's infant democratic institutions as a vehicle to undermine and destroy Russia. President Putin understands this challenge acutely, coming as he does from a previous career in Russia's security services. Indeed in some ways it would be hard to imagine Russia having better leadership than it currently does. Putin has shown himself to be a remarkably able leader.

I think that the establishment of strong democratic institutions in Russia is a long-term project which may require years or even decades to fully complete; it's certainly not something to be done in an afternoon, or by simply sweeping away law and order and bringing back the regime of anarchy and oligarch rule which we saw in the 90's.

Making Russia fully democratic is not as simple as simply shifting a few dials and switches, or replacing one government with another. The root of such a project must be to change the thinking and the mindset of Russia's people, who are not accustomed to democracy. Certainly headway must be made in reducing corruption. The idea that government service should be seen as a way to enrich oneself must give way to the idea that government exists to serve the people. This is a years-long (if not decades-long) process, and it must be done with extraordinary care. Russia will move at its own pace and it will not be lectured to (or dictated to) by those in the west who should be focused on solving some of their own problems before they go putting their noses in places where they don't belong.

As I pointed out in previous posts, Russia is hardly the only country which is (or has been) ruled by a mildly authoritarian single-party state. This was true of Japan, which was ruled by a single party for 40 years after WWII. It was also true of South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Malaysia, and many many other countries almost too numerous to mention. The US supported these single-ruling-party states and in many cases even financed their rise to power and the suppression of opposition.

Egypt is a good friend of the USA and the recipient of billions of dollars in US foreign aid every year. How long has Egypt's "president" Mubarak been in power? 35 years? Now he is preparing his son to take over the throne. Many memebers of the Islamic opposition are in prison, and they certainly don't have anything like full rights to free speech and a free press. It's blindingly obvious that there isn't anything even like a real multi-party democracy in Egypt. But the US still supports the Egyptian government. Why? Could it be that the US values stability and order in Egypt more than any ideal of pure democracy (and the pandemonium and chaos it would invariably bring in Egypt)?

The Bush administration pushed for the Palestinian Authority to hold free elections. Who did Miss Condoleezza think Palestinians were going to vote for in these "fair elections"? Republicans? Libertarians? No, instead they brought Hamas to power in a perfectly free perfectly fair vote.

Notice that I didn't even mention all the outright dictatorships that the US supports and has supported (king of Jordan, king of Saudi Arabia, Shaw of Iran, Pinochet in Chile, and on and on...) I only mentioned a a few more or less "authoritarian" governments which the US presently supports. All these countries go through the motions of having elections, but the outcome is always certain. (The ruling party always wins, surprise surprise; I guess that's why they call it a "ruling party.")

So why does the US have the double standard with Russia then? It's obviously because the US can't control the Russian government, like it controls (or at least strongly influences) the governments in those other examples. The US is certainly not above sacrificing a few of its democratic ideals in favor of advancing its cynical geopolitical interests. The US only puts on the hat of a born-again fire-and-brimstone democracy preacher when it suits American geopolitical purposes.

Putin's mild authoritarianism cannot even be remotely compared to anything "totalitarian." That this blog tries constantly to make the comparison only shows the author has no clue as to even what real totalitarianism is.

Putin and Russia have no desire to conquer to world (which seems to be Washington's game these days). The Russian army is not engaged in a war on the opposite end of the planet, which was started under false pretenses ("WMD"). Russia is not trying to force its iron rule over foreign countries and their resources. Russia is not trying to impose its ideology or ideas on anyone else, as the ideological holly rollers in Washington do. Russia is content to live and let live and to respect the sovereignty of all nations (as Russia also insists on the respect for its own sovereignty). The people in Russia are free to say and do what they want and travel wherever they want, even abroad.

The main problem in Russia today is not President Putin's "totalitarianism,"--which exists only as a figment of one person's overactive imagination--but the the main problem is the economic one. There is an urgent need to upgrade Russia's economy and improve the standard of living of Russia's people. This is happening now, at long last, thanks in part to high world energy prices, sure, but thanks in no small part also to the skill and wisdom with which President Vladimir Putin has governed Russia over the past 8 years.

The average Russian is not the slightest bit concerned that the exiled oligarchs can't get their oil wells and TV stations back from the government (which were all stolen property to begin with--stolen from the people of Russia). The oligarchs only enriched themselves and laundered their ill-gotten wealth in foreign bank accounts, while the Russian people suffered through a humanitarian catastrophe. No one in Russia wants to create the political conditions which would allow for a return of the oligarchs to power. (To find such pro-oligarch views you have to look abroad, but certainly not in Russia.)

When concentrated wealth and power threaten the greater good of a society, then that society has the right to take action to break up that concentration. It's what happened in the US many decades ago with the enactment of the "trust busting" laws. Could Putin have done a better job in busting the power of the oligarchs? He probably could have put a better "legal" wrapper around the whole operation, and it might have looked nicer to certain foreign eyes. But the fact still remains that Putin was successful, and his oligarch-busting policy remains widely popular with the vast majority of Russia's citizens.

Yes, Russia has problems, to be sure. That's nothing new. But from where I sit it looks like Russia now also has a government that is focused like a laser beam on actually solving those problems. (and it's actually having a great deal of success as well).




TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/741