Russia a democracy after all - sort of

[Terxpahseyton]

@Cutlass
Oh I agree. But am not sure you realize how diverse such reasons can be without engaging in bigotry.
For instance, some people may prefer a very strict society with enforced community gatherings, public mandatory clubs and stuff. Because they just value that kind of thing and find individualism not that attractive. Such a society would lack significant freedoms in some areas, but would also free you from the burden to establish/find an community of your own in order to have one. It would free you from the potential negative effects of a society without that stuff. Like loneliness. So in the end you just exchange one kind of freedom against the other.
Or well, maybe you actually dick loneliness and want an individualistic society. Or you just don't want the state to dictate a part of your social life.

It is all just a matter what people value as good for them. We can express this through relations of freedom. Or in other ways. But you Americans seem to be really fond of the freedom-approach. Just that you apply it very narrow-mindedly (but most do, it's just the thing in this day and age)
I am not sure what you mean by "objective" in that context. If it objectively actually is good for them? I guess that can at least theoretically be measured in an objective manner.

 

[Cutlass]

"I have a 'preference' so strong that it cannot tolerate you being free to choose" is not notably different from a bigotry Close enough in any case to have no validity in the making of laws.

The objectivity comes in with what can actually be analyzed. Objectively, the benefit of the public paying for schools and roads exceeds the costs. And so it should be done. Objectively the government has to regulate pollution, because the markets are not going to do so, and the courts can't. That sort of thing.

 

[Rulle_Kebab]

@SiLL and Cutlass

You caught me babbling with the afterwork spliff

But yeah democracy in its idea or concept is great but the way we do it I guess is faulty.
And yeah much of it is prolly down to our nature.
I myself haven't got any other idea of government that would be better, atleast not anything I can think of.

But how could we make an overhaul of the current systems? Be it in Germany, South America or wherever?
Institutions made for the common good or made to keep the politicians in check often end up doing nothing but trying to keep whatever power they might have and so on...
And I guess we need governance, we need an authority that can force us to take some responsability, to act decent towards each other, to wear a seatbelt and so on.

Nevertheless the way I see it here in Denmark, we might as well have a dictatorship or more or less a theocracy since, as I was rambling on about earlier, the difference between the parties and their politics is minimal and in the end it feels like we actually just have one big political party with smaller fractions. Same rules, same laws, same system, same officials and so on.
Nothing much changes when goverments change.
But we are just a tiny insignificant silly country and I also have the feeling that we are living inside a little bubble. So when it bursts there might be some real change for once - we can always hope!

About freedom, freedom to do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt others would be nice. But that is as well another topic and discussion. What might hurt others and what could happen because of actions you take that you aren't aware of and so on. The road to hell is paved with good intentions goes well with this adn freedom for yourself gained by taking it from others or causing grief to others because of your choices.

I guess a "perfect" anything, be it freedom, democracy or a reclining chair for that matter is not really an option.
So to end it all with somehting on topic, yeah! Russia definately a democracy after all - or sort of

 

[Terxpahseyton]

"I have a 'preference' so strong that it cannot tolerate you being free to choose" is not notably different from a bigotry Close enough in any case to have no validity in the making of laws.

Why is that? Because you don't like that approach? Well that's fine, but there is no objective reason to justify this. This is just a subjective preference of yours. Certain social concepts require choice to unfold. Others require mandatory attendance to unfold. You prefer the former, that's fine, because you value the advantages greater than the disadvantages. Someone else may not. And with morality being in its core always subjective, and human nature having the general potential to unfold in either system (in different ways of course), you won't crack that nut.

The objectivity comes in with what can actually be analyzed. Objectively, the benefit of the public paying for schools and roads exceeds the costs. And so it should be done. Objectively the government has to regulate pollution, because the markets are not going to do so, and the courts can't. That sort of thing.

I see, but that only works when you have already established what is desirable.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

But how could we make an overhaul of the current systems? Be it in Germany, South America or wherever?

We would have to invest our time and strength and money in getting a political movement going. That's democracy, too, after all. Would that actually bring about any change in the end? No way to know, probably not. But maybe it would. The only way to know is to try. But I am afraid I personally am not that dedicated. I prefer to spread my input about the ignorance of others and ills of the world from the comfortable position of my computer desk or other comfortable positions. But on the other hand, I am still young and my planned career may take me into the position to trigger some kind of small change. I'll see. But what I am trying to say is - in the end I am part of the problem because I don't get out there and demand change. That's democracy, too. Being personally responsible.

But I always thought of the Nordic European countries as quiet and commendable. So your portrayal of Denmark takes me by surprise.

 

[red_elk]

nvm..

 

[Virote_Considon]

Good luck to the Russians - their model of capitalism is also quite interesting, it serves as an example which we can look to for inspiration when we try to pull ourselves out of the current Bolshevist mess we are in here in Europa.

Yeah, I too like the way they've reigned in the excesses of capitalism and curtailed the expanse of the free market in the past decade. True "Third-Way¹" economics doesn't seem too far behind

¹ And I mean the good Third Way, the radical Third Way, not that Capitalism-in-a-poor-disguise crap espoused by the likes of New Labour and co.

 

[Winner]

actually, I think I'm getting slightly trite these days, although I'm willing to blame the problem on poor topic selection for OT threads by others

ANYWAY: just passing through

Slightly?

 

[Dachs]

Slightly?

's not my fault that you're incapable of giving a rat's ass about the greater preponderance of my body of work, or alternatively that you just don't know about it

 

[Winner]

's not my fault that you're incapable of giving a rat's ass about the greater preponderance of my body of work, or alternatively that you just don't know about it

Which is what, exactly? (to give an attention junkie his fix )

 

[classical_hero]

It seems like Russia has learned, that one shouldn't be too obvious when making up election results.

146.47% That is even better that the numbers you would expect from Fox News.

 

[Traitorfish]

Does it really make sense to treat freedom as an end in itself, without even defining freedom from what?

Freedom is not exclusively negative, and that's where democratic systems beat out the competition.

 

[Rulle_Kebab]

I read that the anti putin demonstrations are gaining momentum?! wooohooo man the barricades!

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Freedom is not exclusively negative, and that's where democratic systems beat out the competition.

I am not sure I understand. Freedom means a state of being freed - of something.
It describes a lack of something, a specific relation, not more. Hence, by itself it is meaningless.
Don't get me wrong, it of course is fine to just assume a common definition in specific contexts to make things easier. I.e. the meal is free actually means the meal is freed of a price. Everyone knows the price is meant, so we just leave it out.
But in a political context it gets bad when people forget that it always is just one possible definition of many. Then we have a powerful tool to mess with the minds of the people and have them focus on very specific forms of freedom while neglecting other forms. For instance focusing on being freed of public forces while neglecting private forces.

I read that the anti putin demonstrations are gaining momentum?! wooohooo man the barricades!

Rly? Would be awesome. The opposition always seemed a little tooth-less and small.

 

[Dumanios]

It seems like Russia has learned, that one shouldn't be too obvious when making up election results.

Russian newslady disapproves.

 

[luiz]

It seems like Russia has learned, that one shouldn't be too obvious when making up election results.

I don't know what is written so I won't draw any conclusions, but can any Russia enlighten me on what the hell those percentages that add up to nearly 150% mean?

 

[Rulle_Kebab]

Rly? Would be awesome. The opposition always seemed a little tooth-less and small.

Well thats what the Danish media were reporting... I searched on google and got this article... can't vouch for the source tho but they are talking about 100s arrested and the opposition leader arrested as well...
biggest in some years was what the danish media said...
http://www.rferl.org/content/russia_rallies_arrests_opposition_protests/24413923.html

 

[Rulle_Kebab]

Ohh that was from yesterday.... well I might have been too optimistic! Altho they were 1000s yesterday, I wonder if they all just went home today...

 

[Aleksey_aka_al]

I don't know what is written so I won't draw any conclusions, but can any Russia enlighten me on what the hell those percentages that add up to nearly 150% mean?

They mean corruption and/or stupid journalist work. And that TV fail is already legendary here


1. Unified Russia which dominates government.
2. "Christian" Communists, as one guy on another boards said.
3. Offensive "Liberal" comediants.
4. A party which is percieved by many to be a puppet of #1, and which has similar program.
5. Liberal innate losers.
6. 7. I do not know much of these two, there's the freemason clown in #7 who stood for last presidential elections and chanted about joining the EU in ~2012 in a low-budget and extremely hilarious TV advertising back then.

And the whole report is for Rostov Oblast.

The bottom green line tells that parties with 6%–7% would have 2 seats.

 

[Rulle_Kebab]

But no they are reporting violent riots in moscow tuesday nite here