Russian Democracy

[HydrogenBond]

Recent interviews with the Russian president indicates that he believes that American democracy may not be appropriate to Russia. If you think about it this may be true. The reason American democracy works is because we consumed a large share of international resouces. This means that the social pie is large enough to accommodate the American type of democracy. In Russia where the social pie is smaller, only the black market appears able to function affectively. There is not enough pie left over for American democracy..

 

As an analogy, if a dog had twelve pups but only six nipples, the most aggressive would get a disproportionate share of the milk. This would allow them to grow bigger, while the lack of nuitrition will cause stunted growth within the more docile. If the mother instead had ten nipples, the competition would not have to be so aggressive. There would still be some pups who would lag behind but more in the middle would get their fill.

 

Aggression alone does not equate with the best citizens or abilities. The Russians are trying to mediate feeding so the docile can feed better. This will allow all to grow together until the economic pie is larger.

[ughaibu]

I presume your title was a slip(?)

[Freddy]

Will western democracy take hold in Russia?

 

Probably not, for these two reasons.

 

First, democracy needs to be learned by a people for several generations to take hold both politically and socially. Putin wants to prevent this from happening.

 

Second, the history of Russia from Kievan Rus to the Soviet Union has been of a toltalitarian nation without freedom for the people. Russians have this in their blood and it will take time to change this. Putin wants to prevent this also by acting like a strong leader familiar to the Russians.

[Qfwfq]

It doesn't take as much as you think for democracy to take hold, but something always gets in the way. In Russia, the Tsars got in the way, and Moscow was Napoleon's greatest defeat. Then the Kremlin got in the way, and Putin is an ex KGB man.

 

I've read some amazing descriptions of the Russian people, apparently they tend to have a great spontaneous capacity of mutual cooperation and this made things work quite well for quite a while after the October revolution, at the popular level. Later it wasn't working well at all, in a way that smacks of bad management.

 

I really don't think the Russians are incapable of democracy, hardly a people is. Unfortunately most peoples are incapable of always making the right choice, this we see in Europe and in America all the time. You can't expect anybody to always know what's best, not individually, even less collectively.

[TheFaithfulStone]

I really don't think the Russians are incapable of democracy, hardly a people is.

 

Wow! Twice in one day!

 

Democracy can work anywhere, but like Q said, there are always things eager to get in the way. The "problem" with democracy is that it's one of the easiest forms of government to short-circuit.

 

Think about how easy it is to take over a democracy - all you have to do is be a)Rich or :beer: a really good liar, and you've got it.

 

Contrast that with a totalitarian state where you have to be a) paranoid :) secretive c) charismatic d) well-armed and e) lucky as hell.

 

Democracy can work in Russia, just like it can work anywhere. Whether or not it will? I don't know.

 

TFS

[Freddy]

Remember I said, "probably not". Also, my response was not original but the interpretation of a school of Russian specialists/scholars. Personally, I hope democracy takes hold in Russia. However, with Putin, a KGB man, in charge coupled with Russia's economic problems democracy is in danger. Putin controls the media and the government which is not a good sign for a representative democracy.

[Qfwfq]

Putin controls the media and the government which is not a good sign for a representative democracy.

Just like Berlusconi until April!

 

Ya should see him now...

[sebbysteiny]

It doesn't take as much as you think for democracy to take hold, but something always gets in the way. In Russia, the Tsars got in the way, and Moscow was Napoleon's greatest defeat. Then the Kremlin got in the way, and Putin is an ex KGB man.

 

I've read some amazing descriptions of the Russian people, apparently they tend to have a great spontaneous capacity of mutual cooperation and this made things work quite well for quite a while after the October revolution, at the popular level. Later it wasn't working well at all, in a way that smacks of bad management.

 

 

You have some very, erm, 'alternative' views indeed when outside the physics forums.

 

On the one hand you argue that democracy is easy to take hold if it wasn't for those pesky szars. Then you argue that because even the most controling dictators cannot stop democracy in other examples, this proves further that democracy is easy. Further you have completely failed to explain how large numbers of democratic projects in Africa and the Middle East fall apart so spectacularly whilst those in other parts of the world with Western culture seem to take it like a duck to water. Lets not even forget Israel which became a fully established democratic country the day it was created.

 

More thought needed perhaps?

[TheFaithfulStone]

Missing the point Stebby.

 

It's easy for democracy to start, and hard for it to last. THAT's the point.

 

TFS

[Freddy]

Missing the point Stebby.

 

It's easy for democracy to start, and hard for it to last. THAT's the point.

 

TFS

 

Pretty close, but I would change it to, "While it is hard for democracy to start, and even harder for it to last.

[sebbysteiny]

Missing the point Stebby.

 

It's easy for democracy to start, and hard for it to last. THAT's the point.

 

Pretty close, but I would change it to, "While it is hard for democracy to start, and even harder for it to last.

 

I believe I understood Qfwfq's wierd point perfectly well. He was suggesting that events and certain individuals define whether a democracy survives and not the culture of the people. This is patently false. It is the people and their culture who are responsible for the success or failure of a democracy.

 

Again, Israel set up democracy in 1 day and has no problems whatsoever. The difference? They all believed in Western Culture and have democratic values.

 

So my original advice stands. More thought needed.

[HydrogenBond]

One of the main points of western democracy is capitalism. With capitalism comes prosperity. With prosperity comes the means to make the choices one wants. Without prosperity one choices are limited, never allowing one to live the ideals of demoncracy. For example, the US is a democratic republic. It is not based on free demoncracy and majority rule but by the rule of elected officials. They can screw up for 2-6 years before one is able to do anything about it. The Russians seem to be heading to something further from true democracy more in line with the amount of freedom their economic prosperity can allow.

[Freddy]

I believe I understood Qfwfq's wierd point perfectly well. He was suggesting that events and certain individuals define whether a democracy survives and not the culture of the people. This is patently false. It is the people and their culture who are responsible for the success or failure of a democracy.

 

Again, Israel set up democracy in 1 day and has no problems whatsoever. The difference? They all believed in Western Culture and have democratic values.

 

So my original advice stands. More thought needed.

 

Last time I checked we were talking about Russia, not about Israel or anywhere else. Perhaps you could cite a Russian specialist's thoughts on democracy in Russia. I asked my web friend, a Russian who teaches English in Moscow, what her thoughts are on Russian democracy and the interpretation from Russian specialists I have refered to here. Below is my Russian friend's insight into her people, the Russians, at this point in time.

 

"Though I haven't got much time this week, just checking the boards, I'll try to express very briefly my points of view. I'm not a historician but to my mind it is more a question of mentality based on religion, in our case the Russian Orthodox. But on the other hand Vladimir who christened Russian people had chosen this particular church according to his understanding of Russian mind. This way or that, I think the true Russians (the 'old', not 'new' ones) can't get used to Western standards of market economy and business because they are collective thinkers, the community life is more natural to them and the belief in giving rather than getting is still very strong.

And as Russians are somewhere between West and East, perhaps even more Eastern in their mentality, they prefer to 'watch' the reality rather than 'make' it. There is a book by Russian writer Goncharov titled 'Oblomov', it explains all this in detail. And as Dostoyevsky wrote, 'A Russian person is too wide...'

As for the present, everything's got so corrupted that I just don't see any exit... Frankly speaking I don't think that anybody up there in our and other governments really wants to change our life for the

better, in many ways it's very convenient to have people in a mess... Maybe I'm just too cynical about it but I don't believe in idealistic politicians!

That's probably all I could think of right now, sorry if I didn't put it clear enough... Most people in Russia keep suffering from all these changes and even those who manage to make enough money can't get used to this kind of life."