6 ms·

A bit of OT, but based on what I read on Russian Internets this Navalny person is generally recognized as a US sock-puppet even in the anti-Putin circles. His t

A bit of OT, but based on what I read on Russian Internets this Navalny person is generally recognized as a US sock-puppet even in the anti-Putin circles. His trial is clearly political, but it's less about him personally and more about keeping pressure on other agents of influence. Facebook and Twitter though ... they don't have much choice, do they? They don't comply - they get a site-wide ban in Russia, which is hardly a headache they want being for-profit entities. Capitalism at work.

kunstmord 12y ago
Except that in 3 years I haven't encountered/read a single "sane" opposition figure's opinion who would consider Navalny a sock puppet.
geoka9 12y ago
"Anti-Putin circles" is rather vague. It covers anything from the extreme right to the extreme left. If a "circle" is xenophobic then, surely, most of the centrist/liberal opposition are US sock-puppets to them, simply by the virtue of having a similar political agenda to the Western mainstream politics. I, personally, am not a fan of Navalny (I dislike racial slur in his blog posts and some of his views that I consider chauvinist), but the trend is clear: he and Khodorkovsky have been the only viable opposition leaders in Russia in the recent years. Both of them ended up in jail on similar white-collar crime charges.
- huhtenberg 12y ago
  There's certain logic to what happened to Khodorkovksy (and earlier to Berezovsky and few other people) - they all were oligarchs, they blatantly stole their way into their riches, but they were allowed by the state to use them. That is until they tried to use their money to try and un-sit those who let them become obnoxiously wealthy. They weren't the opposition per se. They were just former buddies that got drunk on money power and decided to play against their own. And they lost.
  - geoka9 12y ago
    So your point is that Putin only represses the oligarchs that dared to "bite the hand that fed"? OK, Khodorkovsky has spent 10 years in prison, been stripped of his billions and forced to leave the country upon release. But Navalny and Kasparov are not, and have never been, oligarchs; however they are either in prison or in exile (I'm sure Kasparov would be prosecuted right now, but he chose to leave Russia in 2013).
    - raquo 12y ago
      Navalny and Kasparov are in trouble because they had a shot at gaining popular momentum. Khodorkovsky privately expressed desire for a more free Russia to Putin, and was shot down as a warning to others. Putin prosecutes everyone who goes against him apart from allowing a minimal opposition to exist for the sake of appearance and venting off angry people's steam. "Shut up, look down and you'll be allowed to live" is a very popular theme in Russia across all levels from the president down to local municipal offices. If you go against those in power you will be persecuted proportionally to their power. The important thing to understand about modern Russia is that there is no separation of power. Putin owns the parliament, the government, the military, and the judges. As a corollary, everyone is guilty of something, and if not, they are made to be.
      - p1esk 12y ago
        Putin owning the parliament, the government, the military, and the judges is not the problem. The problem is that he's not able to, or not willing to, use all that power to improve life in Russia.
        raquo 12y ago
        But that is the problem – he has no incentive to do anything good for the country because he has absolute power and controls mass media. He is not accountable to anyone. In fact, he sort of benefits from people struggling. When you're hungry you don't care about democracy that much. By the way, Russians' lives did improve relative to early 1990s which is what most people remember most vividly. It's just that Putin has little to do with it, it's just a matter of rising oil prices and increased trade.
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  Sockpuppet means more than aligned views - it implies collaboration. It's interesting to note here that in America the IRS is regularly weaponized to attack political opponents of whichever current administration.
  - xnull2guest 12y ago
    Despite downvote I do insist: sockpuppet does imply collaboration. And I do insist: the IRS is regularly used (with other capabilities) by American administrations to harass and discourage political opponents. This is not a contended fact and is very open to search and research.
    - geoka9 12y ago
      > sockpuppet does imply collaboration They do imply collaboration, too. Most of them see no reason to champion liberal values other than being paid for it.
- rev 12y ago
  > white-collar crime charges Agreed re Navalny, but Khodorkovsky was charged with three murder cases (and one case of attempted murder), so I'm less sure about the collar color.
  - ired 12y ago
    Have you ever seen any evidence to prove his or his associates guilt? Just because he was charged with anything makes him not guilty. Basically he was imprisoned for about 10 years for alleged tax evasion + for "stealing" crude oil. p.s. I have seen a lot of the original materials of the cases and I can assure you that State failed to prove his guilt. With Navalny cases (yes, he and his associates have been charged with many things including stealing a picture) it has reached the whole new dimension.
DenisM 12y ago
He is only recognized as "us sock-puppet" by those trying to smear critics of the regime. To add credibility to their baseless arguments, they often resort to tricks, such as ascribing the smears to some nebulous moral authority.
- kirushik 12y ago
  Also, those 'they' are typically on Putin's payroll: http://www.stopfake.org/en/putin-s-trolls/ http://www.stopfake.org/en/putin-s-trolls/
elementai 12y ago
Contrary to latter is an example of Vkontakte russian social network refusing to block ukranian EuroMaidan groups. Which subsequently led to it's founder Pavel Durov resignation.
- SpaceRaccoon 12y ago
  So apparently the narrative goes, he resigned, the network is owned by Putin's cronies now...yet all the Euromaidan groups still exist.

kunstmord 12y ago

Except that in 3 years I haven't encountered/read a single "sane" opposition figure's opinion who would consider Navalny a sock puppet.

geoka9 12y ago

"Anti-Putin circles" is rather vague. It covers anything from the extreme right to the extreme left. If a "circle" is xenophobic then, surely, most of the centrist/liberal opposition are US sock-puppets to them, simply by the virtue of having a similar political agenda to the Western mainstream politics. I, personally, am not a fan of Navalny (I dislike racial slur in his blog posts and some of his views that I consider chauvinist), but the trend is clear: he and Khodorkovsky have been the only viable opposition leaders in Russia in the recent years. Both of them ended up in jail on similar white-collar crime charges.

huhtenberg 12y ago
There's certain logic to what happened to Khodorkovksy (and earlier to Berezovsky and few other people) - they all were oligarchs, they blatantly stole their way into their riches, but they were allowed by the state to use them. That is until they tried to use their money to try and un-sit those who let them become obnoxiously wealthy. They weren't the opposition per se. They were just former buddies that got drunk on money power and decided to play against their own. And they lost.
- geoka9 12y ago
  So your point is that Putin only represses the oligarchs that dared to "bite the hand that fed"? OK, Khodorkovsky has spent 10 years in prison, been stripped of his billions and forced to leave the country upon release. But Navalny and Kasparov are not, and have never been, oligarchs; however they are either in prison or in exile (I'm sure Kasparov would be prosecuted right now, but he chose to leave Russia in 2013).
  - raquo 12y ago
    Navalny and Kasparov are in trouble because they had a shot at gaining popular momentum. Khodorkovsky privately expressed desire for a more free Russia to Putin, and was shot down as a warning to others. Putin prosecutes everyone who goes against him apart from allowing a minimal opposition to exist for the sake of appearance and venting off angry people's steam. "Shut up, look down and you'll be allowed to live" is a very popular theme in Russia across all levels from the president down to local municipal offices. If you go against those in power you will be persecuted proportionally to their power. The important thing to understand about modern Russia is that there is no separation of power. Putin owns the parliament, the government, the military, and the judges. As a corollary, everyone is guilty of something, and if not, they are made to be.
    - p1esk 12y ago
      Putin owning the parliament, the government, the military, and the judges is not the problem. The problem is that he's not able to, or not willing to, use all that power to improve life in Russia.
      - raquo 12y ago
        But that is the problem – he has no incentive to do anything good for the country because he has absolute power and controls mass media. He is not accountable to anyone. In fact, he sort of benefits from people struggling. When you're hungry you don't care about democracy that much. By the way, Russians' lives did improve relative to early 1990s which is what most people remember most vividly. It's just that Putin has little to do with it, it's just a matter of rising oil prices and increased trade.
xnull2guest 12y ago
Sockpuppet means more than aligned views - it implies collaboration. It's interesting to note here that in America the IRS is regularly weaponized to attack political opponents of whichever current administration.
- xnull2guest 12y ago
  Despite downvote I do insist: sockpuppet does imply collaboration. And I do insist: the IRS is regularly used (with other capabilities) by American administrations to harass and discourage political opponents. This is not a contended fact and is very open to search and research.
  - geoka9 12y ago
    > sockpuppet does imply collaboration They do imply collaboration, too. Most of them see no reason to champion liberal values other than being paid for it.
rev 12y ago
> white-collar crime charges Agreed re Navalny, but Khodorkovsky was charged with three murder cases (and one case of attempted murder), so I'm less sure about the collar color.
- ired 12y ago
  Have you ever seen any evidence to prove his or his associates guilt? Just because he was charged with anything makes him not guilty. Basically he was imprisoned for about 10 years for alleged tax evasion + for "stealing" crude oil. p.s. I have seen a lot of the original materials of the cases and I can assure you that State failed to prove his guilt. With Navalny cases (yes, he and his associates have been charged with many things including stealing a picture) it has reached the whole new dimension.

DenisM 12y ago

He is only recognized as "us sock-puppet" by those trying to smear critics of the regime. To add credibility to their baseless arguments, they often resort to tricks, such as ascribing the smears to some nebulous moral authority.

kirushik 12y ago
Also, those 'they' are typically on Putin's payroll: http://www.stopfake.org/en/putin-s-trolls/ http://www.stopfake.org/en/putin-s-trolls/

elementai 12y ago

Contrary to latter is an example of Vkontakte russian social network refusing to block ukranian EuroMaidan groups. Which subsequently led to it's founder Pavel Durov resignation.

SpaceRaccoon 12y ago
So apparently the narrative goes, he resigned, the network is owned by Putin's cronies now...yet all the Euromaidan groups still exist.