Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.

Russia kinda sucks nowadays.

No explanations needed here. Just read any paper.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Russia will never be truthful, not under putin or anyone else.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The big problem with Russia is that it has still to enter the modern world. Until 1917 it was a feudal society under the Tsars, backed up by the Russian Orthodox Church. Between the February/March revolution and the October/November coup there was a fledgling democracy (which never held any elections, so it doesn't really count). Then, back to feudalism under the Commmunist party apparatchiks. Finally, to bring us up to date, feudalism under the Mafia.

    The above relies heavily on the Marxist feudalist-capitalist-communist theory of deveopment, but explains the basic point. The people of Russia hold no expectations of themselves - they are sheep expecting the people at the top to make everything okay in five seconds flat. The people at the top, well, in the words of Mel Gibson's Braveheart, "[They] think the people exist to provide [them] with position." They do not consider themselves in any way responsible to the people, and so act entirely in the interests of themselves and their families.

    C'est la vie...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by MacKenZie:
    Between the February/March revolution and the October/November coup

    Nice post. Just one thing: I was under the impression it was a coup (knocking the Tsar off the throne) in February/March and a revolution (the Bolsheviks) in Oct/Nov. Or am imagining things again?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The February/March revolution wasn't much of a revolution, true, since the only major change was the replacement of the Tsar with the unelected Duma. However, it does have more right to e called a revolution than the Bolsheviks' seizure of power in October/November, which was a straightforward 'storm the governmental buildings' effort.

    After the F/M revolution, the 'Dual Authority' of the Duma and Petrograd Soviet was fairly instantly recognised both at home and abroad. The Bolsheviks' government was not so recognised; they had to fight a Civil War to impress their authorty on the territory of Russia. That's really why I'd call one a revolution and the other a coup: the level of acceptance.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ok. Interesting. You're definately a history student (or a good essay writer - stating something and then backing it up with undisputible facts, manipulated to a greater or lesser extent to back up your theory.

    I've just started IB History, which is focusing in part on the Russian Revolutions. You sound like you know your stuff. I take it that you've done all this before? Where and when?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just finished A-level Modern History. Covered Nazism, Fascism (both general and the Italian Fascisti), Russia 1905-1955, Gladstone, UK Politcs 1900-1918 & 1939-51, The Decline of the Liberal Party.

    I found it a very useful course, both in terms of explaining much of the current state of the world and in formulating a structured argument.

    Good luck to you on your course - it'll be hard work, but I think you'll find it rewarding for the same sorts of reasons.
Sign In or Register to comment.