4 ms·

An interesting analogy to this is Stalin and the film Ivan the Terrible. Stalin commissioned the film because he admired Tsar Ivan, and thought of himself in hi

by navait 10y ago

An interesting analogy to this is Stalin and the film Ivan the Terrible. Stalin commissioned the film because he admired Tsar Ivan, and thought of himself in his mold. His version of Ivan was a great man who was surrounded by corrupt boyars intending to sell out Russia, and only he has the strength to unite the country against them. Ivan is loved by the common people, but hated by the sophisticated, "europeanized" nobility, who are traitors. Stalin loved Part I, but was unhappy with Part II, since it didn't fit his myth of Ivan. He banned the film and nearly had the director, Sergei Eisenstein executed.

geoka9 10y ago
> His version of Ivan was a great man who was surrounded by corrupt boyars intending to sell out Russia, and only he has the strength to unite the country against them. This is exactly what the "public"[1] public opinion is in Russia nowadays - Putin is talked about with respect, while his friends and local authorities all over the country are believed to by corrupt. Of course this suits Putin because people never blame him for anything, only his subordinates. [1] There's no way to know the "real" public opinion because people are reluctant to talk honestly about these things with random interviewers.
DominikR 10y ago
You might be surprised to find that many Russian emperors who are viewed in a positive light in the West are viewed negatively in Russia and vice versa to this day. It is actually quite logical since Russia and the West often have had conflicting interests for centuries. What was good for Russia was often bad for the West and what's good for the West was often bad for Russia. Current example: Putin. (not an exactly an emperor but certainly in power for decades) Insane support in Russia from the common people and viciously vilified by Western elites and media. (for common people though it is mixed here, they are not in a conflict with Putin)
- triplesec 10y ago
  This is mostly because there is no free press in Russia since Putin ascended to the throne, and the elections are all fixed.
  - DominikR 10y ago
    No it is not, Russians have a different mentality. Putin is stability, if they could somehow make him live another 100 years they would allow him to stay in power unless he makes a major mistake. In Russia you never know what chaos might come next. Before Putin there was Jelzin who oversaw one of the worst periods for ordinary Russians after the second world war. People are frightened at the prospect of what might come after Putin. There is a lot of media available that attacks Putin relentlessly but people themselves see them as traitors. It's not my opinion but it certainly is the opinion of the majority there. Like I said, different mentality, if a leader brings stability they rally behind him and (in an almost paranoid way) see behind every critic a traitor that is colluding with foreign powers. It's been like that for centuries. Edit: One thing that certainly doesn't help with having a strong opposition is the fact that every single opposition leader since Putin came into power has been caught having secret meetings with the US ambassador. I have no clue how they can believe that this will help in any way. It sometimes seems like the US ambassador in Russia is only there to collaborate with Russian opposition. Imagine how that looks to ordinary Russians. Or how would it look to you if all of the US opposition would regularly meet with Russian or Chinese officials to get support?
  - kafkaesq 10y ago
    "No free press" is a bit of an overstatement. There is still a comparatively free press in the RF -- but it's been successfully marginalized. And that's precisely the approach -- marginalizing dissenting voices, rather than automatically banning them (in all but extreme cases) which characterizes Putin's neototalitarian style. Because you just don't need to ban dissenting voices, when your propaganda is successful enough. And BTW, popular support for Putin really is quite genuine. To a point where he almost doesn't need to fix elections (it just makes him feel a bit "safer") or manipulate the press. This may not much much sense in the West, but it's the way things are, nonetheless.
    - triplesec 10y ago
      Yes, I agree with your descriptions with one caveat. Being on mobile I took extreme shortcuts, so thank you for the more detailed explanation. Also, re the question of a child post, Russia was politically its historically freest in the 1990s during the Yeltsin years, and even early Putin years, until he started murdering journalists. My caveat is that the people support him only because any free media is marginalised, and most self censor in any case. Many know exactly what he is, but have given up on there being any meaningful change. Because Russia had mostly had terrible dictators and repression.

by navait 10y ago

geoka9 10y ago

> His version of Ivan was a great man who was surrounded by corrupt boyars intending to sell out Russia, and only he has the strength to unite the country against them. This is exactly what the "public"[1] public opinion is in Russia nowadays - Putin is talked about with respect, while his friends and local authorities all over the country are believed to by corrupt. Of course this suits Putin because people never blame him for anything, only his subordinates. [1] There's no way to know the "real" public opinion because people are reluctant to talk honestly about these things with random interviewers.

DominikR 10y ago

You might be surprised to find that many Russian emperors who are viewed in a positive light in the West are viewed negatively in Russia and vice versa to this day. It is actually quite logical since Russia and the West often have had conflicting interests for centuries. What was good for Russia was often bad for the West and what's good for the West was often bad for Russia. Current example: Putin. (not an exactly an emperor but certainly in power for decades) Insane support in Russia from the common people and viciously vilified by Western elites and media. (for common people though it is mixed here, they are not in a conflict with Putin)

triplesec 10y ago
This is mostly because there is no free press in Russia since Putin ascended to the throne, and the elections are all fixed.
- DominikR 10y ago
  No it is not, Russians have a different mentality. Putin is stability, if they could somehow make him live another 100 years they would allow him to stay in power unless he makes a major mistake. In Russia you never know what chaos might come next. Before Putin there was Jelzin who oversaw one of the worst periods for ordinary Russians after the second world war. People are frightened at the prospect of what might come after Putin. There is a lot of media available that attacks Putin relentlessly but people themselves see them as traitors. It's not my opinion but it certainly is the opinion of the majority there. Like I said, different mentality, if a leader brings stability they rally behind him and (in an almost paranoid way) see behind every critic a traitor that is colluding with foreign powers. It's been like that for centuries. Edit: One thing that certainly doesn't help with having a strong opposition is the fact that every single opposition leader since Putin came into power has been caught having secret meetings with the US ambassador. I have no clue how they can believe that this will help in any way. It sometimes seems like the US ambassador in Russia is only there to collaborate with Russian opposition. Imagine how that looks to ordinary Russians. Or how would it look to you if all of the US opposition would regularly meet with Russian or Chinese officials to get support?
- kafkaesq 10y ago
  "No free press" is a bit of an overstatement. There is still a comparatively free press in the RF -- but it's been successfully marginalized. And that's precisely the approach -- marginalizing dissenting voices, rather than automatically banning them (in all but extreme cases) which characterizes Putin's neototalitarian style. Because you just don't need to ban dissenting voices, when your propaganda is successful enough. And BTW, popular support for Putin really is quite genuine. To a point where he almost doesn't need to fix elections (it just makes him feel a bit "safer") or manipulate the press. This may not much much sense in the West, but it's the way things are, nonetheless.
  - triplesec 10y ago
    Yes, I agree with your descriptions with one caveat. Being on mobile I took extreme shortcuts, so thank you for the more detailed explanation. Also, re the question of a child post, Russia was politically its historically freest in the 1990s during the Yeltsin years, and even early Putin years, until he started murdering journalists. My caveat is that the people support him only because any free media is marginalised, and most self censor in any case. Many know exactly what he is, but have given up on there being any meaningful change. Because Russia had mostly had terrible dictators and repression.