5 ms·

Yeah, absolutely. Revolutions have worked out so well before, especially in Russia. What Russia needs right now is some serious destruction and civil war, follo

Yeah, absolutely. Revolutions have worked out so well before, especially in Russia. What Russia needs right now is some serious destruction and civil war, followed by a few decades of rule by hard men who know that their Cause comes before anything. Oh yeah.

PGenes 14y ago
A revolution is not guaranteed to fix it. Unfortunately a revolution(of some sort) is the only thing that has any chance of fixing it.
rdl 14y ago
I think they'd be best off with a "revolution" in thinking by the government and public security services. If they put rule of law as a high priority, and are able to extract enough. Everyone would be better off with Putin and the FSB crowd having their own licit and overt wealth, power, and perks, but then using their power to enforce fair laws on everyone else in exchange, vs. the system where they officially don't get as much benefit from their jobs, but extract personal benefit through corruption, and where others in society can use the state as a tool against other people. (which is why it makes sense to pay police, judges, etc. quite well, and to give them high social standing, in exchange for competence, professionalism, and lack of corruption) You could probably get that from the top echelon (I don't think Putin is at all corrupt, in the sense of taking bribes or anything like that, and would be surprised if his direct reports did), but it's hard to get that down to the lowest level of law enforcement.
- cousin_it 14y ago
  > I don't think Putin is at all corrupt, in the sense of taking bribes or anything like that, and would be surprised if his direct reports did Haha. Here's a little about Putin: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8175406/WikiLeaks-Putins-secret-billions.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8175406/... And here a little about his former minister of health: http://en.novayagazeta.ru/society/8682.html http://en.novayagazeta.ru/society/8682.html There's much more where that came from. You can pretty much pick any high-ranking official in Russia and start digging.
- yaakov34 14y ago
  Don't know where to start. First, you are seriously naive or uninformed if you think that Putin is not corrupt on a gigantic, unheard-of scale. Take a look at the so-called Putin's palace on the Black Sea, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac4bzpRhtVQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac4bzpRhtVQ (there have been really feeble attempts to deny that it was built for Putin, but the funds have been traced to companies owned by his associates - funds that they in turn got from government contracts). This thing cost a billion dollars. There is another one of these in one of the most remote regions of Russia - the Altai mountains - where the road to the place alone cost hundreds of millions of dollars (this time, simply taken from the federal budget), and a whole small town needed to be built to house the construction workers. (The story is hilarious, if you read Russian or if the G-translate can get you close enough: http://chistoprudov.livejournal.com/91316.html http://chistoprudov.livejournal.com/91316.html). The tiny village which appears in some of the photos is the official excuse for building the gigantic road through some of Russia's most difficult terrain; officially, the road is called a "junction". It cost more than the annual budget of the Altai Republic. Something like a dozen of Putin's classmates and friends have become multi-billionaires, in businesses related to government contracts or state-owned oil companies. In general, Putin's corruption makes the Shah of Iran look modest and tasteful. And that's just the financial corruption; there have also been several brazenly stolen elections, railroading of political enemies in the courts, and God knows what else. With all that, I still don't think that a "revolution", which is to say a violent seizure of power, followed by the displacement of the current elite, is called for. It would result in years of bloody war. (Do you think the men who own these billion-dollar enterprises built on nothing other than government connections will just settle down and start raising turnips?) And the elite which it brings to the top might be no better. You are unlikely to end up with true rule of law. The fact is that Russians are not without non-violent means of achieving change. The presidential elections were less corrupt than the preceding parliamentary elections, largely because far more citizens organized and became observers. Putin has had to allow popular elections of governors of Russia's regions, after years of personally appointing them, because of pressure brought about by the outrage over the elections. The idea of destroying everything and building a better version is tempting, but it has produced disaster again and again.
  - rdl 14y ago

PGenes 14y ago

A revolution is not guaranteed to fix it. Unfortunately a revolution(of some sort) is the only thing that has any chance of fixing it.

rdl 14y ago

I think they'd be best off with a "revolution" in thinking by the government and public security services. If they put rule of law as a high priority, and are able to extract enough. Everyone would be better off with Putin and the FSB crowd having their own licit and overt wealth, power, and perks, but then using their power to enforce fair laws on everyone else in exchange, vs. the system where they officially don't get as much benefit from their jobs, but extract personal benefit through corruption, and where others in society can use the state as a tool against other people. (which is why it makes sense to pay police, judges, etc. quite well, and to give them high social standing, in exchange for competence, professionalism, and lack of corruption) You could probably get that from the top echelon (I don't think Putin is at all corrupt, in the sense of taking bribes or anything like that, and would be surprised if his direct reports did), but it's hard to get that down to the lowest level of law enforcement.

cousin_it 14y ago
> I don't think Putin is at all corrupt, in the sense of taking bribes or anything like that, and would be surprised if his direct reports did Haha. Here's a little about Putin: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8175406/WikiLeaks-Putins-secret-billions.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8175406/... And here a little about his former minister of health: http://en.novayagazeta.ru/society/8682.html http://en.novayagazeta.ru/society/8682.html There's much more where that came from. You can pretty much pick any high-ranking official in Russia and start digging.
yaakov34 14y ago
Don't know where to start. First, you are seriously naive or uninformed if you think that Putin is not corrupt on a gigantic, unheard-of scale. Take a look at the so-called Putin's palace on the Black Sea, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac4bzpRhtVQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac4bzpRhtVQ (there have been really feeble attempts to deny that it was built for Putin, but the funds have been traced to companies owned by his associates - funds that they in turn got from government contracts). This thing cost a billion dollars. There is another one of these in one of the most remote regions of Russia - the Altai mountains - where the road to the place alone cost hundreds of millions of dollars (this time, simply taken from the federal budget), and a whole small town needed to be built to house the construction workers. (The story is hilarious, if you read Russian or if the G-translate can get you close enough: http://chistoprudov.livejournal.com/91316.html http://chistoprudov.livejournal.com/91316.html). The tiny village which appears in some of the photos is the official excuse for building the gigantic road through some of Russia's most difficult terrain; officially, the road is called a "junction". It cost more than the annual budget of the Altai Republic. Something like a dozen of Putin's classmates and friends have become multi-billionaires, in businesses related to government contracts or state-owned oil companies. In general, Putin's corruption makes the Shah of Iran look modest and tasteful. And that's just the financial corruption; there have also been several brazenly stolen elections, railroading of political enemies in the courts, and God knows what else. With all that, I still don't think that a "revolution", which is to say a violent seizure of power, followed by the displacement of the current elite, is called for. It would result in years of bloody war. (Do you think the men who own these billion-dollar enterprises built on nothing other than government connections will just settle down and start raising turnips?) And the elite which it brings to the top might be no better. You are unlikely to end up with true rule of law. The fact is that Russians are not without non-violent means of achieving change. The presidential elections were less corrupt than the preceding parliamentary elections, largely because far more citizens organized and became observers. Putin has had to allow popular elections of governors of Russia's regions, after years of personally appointing them, because of pressure brought about by the outrage over the elections. The idea of destroying everything and building a better version is tempting, but it has produced disaster again and again.
- rdl 14y ago