Homesick for a dictatorship

Originally Posted by Schroeder

Maybe we should remind them that they would have to drive cars again that were build like this:


And wait 14 years to get one btw.

Go ahead and remind "them", you make the former East-Germans sound like aliens or something. I'm beginning to understand why they don't like to live subjugated to the west.

A lot of the architecture that was hastily built in the unified Berlin isn't really for the ages, a bunch of glass, metal and other boring stuff. I'm not saying that the socialist system was working out, it had come to the end of it's road. However, I did expect quite a bit more from the 'winners' or 'conquerors'.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

Go ahead and remind "them", you make the former East-Germans sound like aliens or something. I'm beginning to understand why they don't like to live subjugated to the west.

Subjugated? Subjugation was the intent of Moscow for Finland as I recall. Seems Finland fought pretty hard to avoid that. The alien sounding "west" tries to let people help themselves once given the opportunity, and it can be very uneven. But if it did more, the cries would truly be subjugation or a welfare state.

Buddahaid

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Subjugated? Subjugation was the intent of Moscow for Finland as I recall. Seems Finland fought pretty hard to avoid that. The alien sounding "west" tries to let people help themselves once given the opportunity, and it can be very uneven. But if it did more, the cries would truly be subjugation or a welfare state.

Buddahaid

The way I look at it is from the point of view of simple geography. Certain ways of thinking, political ideologies, work in some places and conditions and don't really work elsewhere. Socialism kind of worked in many places in the former USSR and other places. For someone to say it doesn't work IMO should at least give something that works better in that particular place instead.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

The way I look at it is from the point of view of simple geography. Certain ways of thinking, political ideologies, work in some places and conditions and don't really work elsewhere. Socialism kind of worked in many places in the former USSR and other places. For someone to say it doesn't work IMO should at least give something that works better in that particular place instead.

Granted. The good old US has many places where a form of socialism is endemic. There are people who use the system of welfare permanently, with no intention of ever working to support themselves, and this has been handed down for a generation or two. The safety net for hard times is being gamed to the detriment of all and sticks in the craws of many who have worked hard all their lives. The claim of social inequities is growing thinner, as a basic education is guaranteed by the state, and many of these lifers will not even try, while many others just as poorly off , will gladly work to better their lives and their children's lives. The state is hard put to correct this as there is a moral obligation to help the poor, and some are simply unemployable. How do you tell from a bureaucratic point of view who is who.

Buddahaid

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Granted. The good old US has many places where a form of socialism is endemic. There are people who use the system of welfare permanently, with no intention of ever working to support themselves, and this has been handed down for a generation or two. The safety net for hard times is being gamed to the detriment of all and sticks in the craws of many who have worked hard all their lives. The claim of social inequities is growing thinner, as a basic education is guaranteed by the state, and many of these lifers will not even try, while many others just as poorly off , will gladly work to better their lives and their children's lives. The state is hard put to correct this as there is a moral obligation to help the poor, and some are simply unemployable. How do you tell from a bureaucratic point of view who is who.

Buddahaid

Yea ok. In modern day Russia there are more billionaires then there are in any other country in the world, or there was awhile ago. So clearly some people are very well off. But a lot of people are also at the bottom of the barrel, kids living on the street, elderly people many of whom went through WW2 as young kids etc. struggling for a pension. Alcoholism not even being seen as something that should be treated is culling the numbers of Russians and the birth/death rate of Russians is declining.

So there is free reign for a certain type of capitalism, and the majority has to suffer. It's kind of like the Czarist rule, few at the top and a lot in positions like serfs etc. It's a volatile situation from the start but as long as Russia is where the west wants it to be nobody seems to be interested in making Russia a more humane country.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by OneToughHerring

So there is free reign for a certain type of capitalism, and the majority has to suffer. It's kind of like the Czarist rule, few at the top and a lot in positions like serfs etc. It's a volatile situation from the start but as long as Russia is where the west wants it to be nobody seems to be interested in making Russia a more humane country.

It seems you are putting the onus on the west to pressure Russia into solving the social issues that have arisen from the collapse of the Soviet state, as if it were the fault of the western countries. Also, although the west may enjoy an overall better social sharing of wealth, it has many similar problems. In addition, I don't think the Russian government wants the west telling them how to run their country, or even helping to a greater degree. The problems really must be solved from within to succeed, and the west will help if asked. Give it more time for the legacy of the communist system, and cold war policies to evolve. It may be a long bumpy road, and if people are allowed, they need to feel the empowerment of helping themselves, and the sense of self-worth that brings.

Buddahaid

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

It seems you are putting the onus on the west to pressure Russia into solving the social issues that have arisen from the collapse of the Soviet state, as if it were the fault of the western countries. Also, although the west may enjoy an overall better social sharing of wealth, it has many similar problems. In addition, I don't think the Russian government wants the west telling them how to run their country, or even helping to a greater degree. The problems really must be solved from within to succeed, and the west will help if asked. Give it more time for the legacy of the communist system, and cold war policies to evolve. It may be a long bumpy road, and if people are allowed, they need to feel the empowerment of helping themselves, and the sense of self-worth that brings.

Buddahaid

Yes but the thing is, I know that the US can wait almost indefinitely for things in Russia to 'fix up all by themselves', countries right next to Russia kinda can't. I'm just worried that the things that are wrong in Russia don't have to do with Russia alone but also with it's position in the world and where the west decides it should be. It's always kind of been like that, nothing new there.

To me it seems that you think of Russia as a kind of human (?). Well as much as empty platitudes of "selfworth" etc. may work when talking about humans, with an entire nation the situation is a bit more complex. Not completely different by different enough.

But like I've written here before, the intrests of Russia and the US aren't entirely opposite, they have many parallel goals and have had for a long time. So I think the US doesn't really want Russia to become any 'wussier' as a nation, the US needs it's ol' cold war buddy. Russian natural resources are also being profited on by a minute part of the population and the really big wealth is being taken out of the country by people like Abramovich. I guess the Russian people don't own the natural resources of their nation like for example the Norwegians do.