- Joined
- Aug 23, 2019
I've read this critical post about the election on the last remaining decent subreddit. How valid is his concerns about how Strelkov was treated and the policy of squashing potential rivals to Putin.
I know this thread isn't for criticising Russia, but you all know far more about the real Russia than the NAFO thread.
Being elected on such lies is tantamount to being unelected.
What is there to elaborate upon? The power in the country belongs solely to the glowies and the Glowie-in-Chief, and has belonged to them for some time. Real opposition does not exist. The """communist""" party is a bunch of fat, content geriatrics marching in lockstep with United Russia on every single issue. The government is deathly afraid of the people uniting - around anyone, for any reason - that any notable non-establishment figure gets jail sentences in show trials. Criticizing the current conflict in any way gets you prison sentences, often worse than a murderer would get. The only freedom that I personally have is the freedom to jack off and talk about anime and video games on reddit anonymously. But I assume you want some specifics - some specific example of how does russian democracy work. Let's get into specifics.
This sub doesn't like Navalny, so let's not talk about Navalny. Let's talk about Strelkov (real name Girkin). Strelkov is (was) a soldier and a glowie. He was heavily involved in the 2014 events in Ukraine and according to my (and his own) opinion, he's the man most responsible for why things went a lot further than Crimea. He's quite a fascinating character, read up on him if there are any english sources that go beyond that whole plane situation, whatever happened there. Once upon a time, his approval ratings were higher than Putin's own in the official polls. Anyway, due to lack of support from the powers that be, Strelkov had to give up ground, then after some time, leave the region altogether. As years went on, he started losing relevance, and went from the most popular man in Russia to holding one-man protests.
It all changed when the conflict was reignited in 2022. Strelkov, formerly a military leader, became a military blogger - initially he was supportive of the state and its methods, but as things began dragging out, he started becoming increasingly critical - of the generals he decried as incompetent, of the minister of defense and, unthinkably, even of the Commander-in-Chief. It's important to note that Strelkov didn't disapprove of the special operation itself - he believed, and still does, that Ukraine's existence is a ticking time bomb that will destroy Russia, and that it must be reabsorbed as quickly as possible, whatever the cost. No, he had issues only with how things were done.
Strelkov, once again relevant and popular, kept railing against those he viewed responsible, until he decided that the time of blogging is done, and now is the time for action. He began forming his own political party that he called "Club of the Angry Patriots". They were talking about the coming collapse of Russia, unless the things changed on the front lines, about the dark times, that change was necessary.
...and then he got arrested, stood trial and received a prison sentence. What for? Well, Strelkov made a blog post about one of the regiment on the front lines not receiving any pay that was stipulated in their contracts. He said that the "firing squad [for the officials responsible] would not be enough". The prosecutors decided (or were told to decide...) that it was not empty rhetorics, but instead "calls for extremism", and soon enough he was in a jail cell. His fledging party didn't live long after that - although he did try for a presidential bid, probably thinking that they'd be forced to let him go. But that didn't last long either. Whatever happens next, I don't think he'll ever see the outside of a prison cell again. Four years is just a start - once you're in prison, there's plenty of time for new trials. Navalny has shown that.
In the end, Strelkov's former service didn't matter, his historic involvement in Ukraine didn't matter, and him ideologically and fervently supporting the whole thing didn't matter. He got political, and that was the end of him. Regardless of whether or not you support him, what he did (and he did a lot) or his views - does this sound democratic to you?
This sub doesn't like Navalny, so let's not talk about Navalny. Let's talk about Strelkov (real name Girkin). Strelkov is (was) a soldier and a glowie. He was heavily involved in the 2014 events in Ukraine and according to my (and his own) opinion, he's the man most responsible for why things went a lot further than Crimea. He's quite a fascinating character, read up on him if there are any english sources that go beyond that whole plane situation, whatever happened there. Once upon a time, his approval ratings were higher than Putin's own in the official polls. Anyway, due to lack of support from the powers that be, Strelkov had to give up ground, then after some time, leave the region altogether. As years went on, he started losing relevance, and went from the most popular man in Russia to holding one-man protests.
It all changed when the conflict was reignited in 2022. Strelkov, formerly a military leader, became a military blogger - initially he was supportive of the state and its methods, but as things began dragging out, he started becoming increasingly critical - of the generals he decried as incompetent, of the minister of defense and, unthinkably, even of the Commander-in-Chief. It's important to note that Strelkov didn't disapprove of the special operation itself - he believed, and still does, that Ukraine's existence is a ticking time bomb that will destroy Russia, and that it must be reabsorbed as quickly as possible, whatever the cost. No, he had issues only with how things were done.
Strelkov, once again relevant and popular, kept railing against those he viewed responsible, until he decided that the time of blogging is done, and now is the time for action. He began forming his own political party that he called "Club of the Angry Patriots". They were talking about the coming collapse of Russia, unless the things changed on the front lines, about the dark times, that change was necessary.
...and then he got arrested, stood trial and received a prison sentence. What for? Well, Strelkov made a blog post about one of the regiment on the front lines not receiving any pay that was stipulated in their contracts. He said that the "firing squad [for the officials responsible] would not be enough". The prosecutors decided (or were told to decide...) that it was not empty rhetorics, but instead "calls for extremism", and soon enough he was in a jail cell. His fledging party didn't live long after that - although he did try for a presidential bid, probably thinking that they'd be forced to let him go. But that didn't last long either. Whatever happens next, I don't think he'll ever see the outside of a prison cell again. Four years is just a start - once you're in prison, there's plenty of time for new trials. Navalny has shown that.
In the end, Strelkov's former service didn't matter, his historic involvement in Ukraine didn't matter, and him ideologically and fervently supporting the whole thing didn't matter. He got political, and that was the end of him. Regardless of whether or not you support him, what he did (and he did a lot) or his views - does this sound democratic to you?
The Germans don't even hestitate to call Xi Jinping president despite being effectively a dictator with all power now concentrated on him and his lackies.
Zelensky claimed he'd end the aggression towards Donbass and many trusted him because of his Russophone background.
Being elected on such lies is tantamount to being unelected.
Yes, I now see the logic of Russia building up instead of immediately invading post-Maidan.
