Putin and Russia
(History,Politics,Society)

Pity poor Russia. If you want to understand the Russian psyche, just look to her borders. Russia suffers from a paranoia about them. They always have. There are very few natural barriers on her borders to keep the jealous hordes (joke) out. This is why, during the period of the Soviet Union, she amassed a ring of "satellite" countries around her. In her own way, she thought that these countries, as part of the Soviet Union, would help protect her from invasion across her otherwise easily crossed borders.

When the Berlin wall fell, and Russia finally had to admit that they simply couldn't keep up with U.S. military and other spending (nor could they out-innovate us, because of communism, which discourages individual initiative), Gorbachev allowed a period of free fall in Russia. I'm not sure anyone in Russia quite knew what was going on, except the oligarchs. And this was the problem. Over night, Russia went from communism, to what was supposed to be a form of capitalism. Unfortunately, it was not managed well at all, and instead it became an oligarchy that no one has since been able to throw off. What should have happened- a gradual replacement of communism with capitalism- didn't happen.

Contrast this with China, which has, regardless of what the authorities in China claim, been purposely sliding toward capitalism. The Chinese authorities have been wise in their management of this transition. And lo and behold, China is doing quite well for itself. Of course, no "authorities" ever want to lose their grip on power, and the central government in China is no different. So they still suppress dissent to a large degree, and they still have an unfair justice system and all the rest. But they're starting to grasp what it will take to fully integrate with the rest of the world, like respect for patents and intellectual property.

Back to Russia, and now they have Putin. Putin, the ex-KGB cold warrior, has been an interesting study. He has not returned Russia to communism or socialism, which one might have expected. The peculiar hero worship of this fellow in Russia is a little odd, considering the guy is really just a dictator in disguise. But it makes a little more sense when you realize the FSB (the new name for the KGB) did and does a lot more dissemination of false information than it ever did actual spying. Having absolute control over that element of the government means that Putin can shape public opinion to a larger extent than if it wasn't there to do his bidding. Of course, the Kremlin still does not look favorably on large scale dissent, and controls it with well-placed assassinations and Russia's own home-grown version of "justice". In fact, oligarchs who get too far out of line end up dead, and I doubt you have to look much further than the FSB to find the culprits. One or two of these guys die under mysterious circumstances, and the rest of the lot get the Putin message.

And you have to hand it to Putin. Despite being more or less a despot, he's managed to leave the Russian people more or less alone. Pay your taxes, do your job and don't say too many bad things about Putin or the government, and you're probably okay. Remarkably, taxes are lower than they are in the U.S., last I checked. And their system of taxation is flat, unlike the U.S.'s system of graduated (suppressive) income tax.

Interestingly, I think Putin is willing to acknowledge that the U.S. is the superior power. That's not to say that Putin isn't willing to assert Russian power, which isn't small. But I think he's willing to be a lesser partner with the United States. There's no percentage in trying to oppose the U.S. at every turn, which was the case during the Cold War. And I suspect Putin is keenly aware of this.

You can complain that Putin is a de facto dictator and that the government of Russia is still in some ways over-controlling of its citizens. I'd agree with you on the latter point, but not necessarily on the former. Russia is not America. Before the Bolsheviks were the Romanovs, and a long tradition of kings, emporers or whatever you prefer to call them. Russia shares this tradition with the rest of Europe and China. The U.S. is unique in its position of never having had kings to rule it. Democracy was our condition from the beginning. Russia never enjoyed that privilege. We might wish that everyone everywhere could enjoy our form of government, but there are a lot of cases (witness the Middle East) where an exceptionally strong central government and leader are necessary.

Regarding strong leaders and less than democratic central governments, Iraq is an interesting study in how this works. Iraq isn't really a country. Yes, someone has drawn borders around it and pronounced it a "country". But in fact it's not. It is a region with three factions: the Sunnis, the Shia, and the Kurds. The Kurds more or less just want to re-unite with their brethren, who occupy land in other countries. They don't have much against the Sunnis and Shia. The Sunnis and Shia want to practice genocide on each other for reasons lost to centuries of history. So you have a "country" which is really just more or less three warring factions. How do you hold such a place together. One way is the Saddam Hussein method of killing anyone who made trouble or talked bad about you. Not particularly savory, but effective. Unfortunately, Saddam decided his neighbors' lands belonged to him, and was generally belligerent. Had he focussed his attention narrowly on his own country, no one would have said a peep about him. But American style democracy hasn't been kind to Iraq. So maybe it's worth asking if perhaps some in-between form of government might be suitable for Iraq. Perhaps an Egyptian style government, where the military is the final authority, but generally leaves the governing to the politicians. It's hard to say. The point is that Iraq isn't America, and neither is Russia. So it may be that America's "three-equal-branches" brand of republic simply isn't in the cards for the Russians or the Iraqis. Maybe they need a strong-man form of government.

Regardless of what you might think of Putin, there's really no percentage in complaining about him or his treatment of his people. Like any country, the Russian people have the responsibility to shape the government in the fashion they want. That's not our fight. And there's no point in trying to force American-style government on them, or any other country, for that matter. In this sense, I'm deeply libertarian. Let other people deal with their own governments and cultures in the way they see fit. American republicanism isn't suitable for everyone. In fact, I also object to Christians trying to enforce their morality on people who don't agree with them. I happen to agree with most of the moral tenets of Christianity, but not all of them. And where I disagree, I would prefer Christians not enforce their version of morality on me, particularly via government. This is one of my big beefs with the Republican party. To embrace the millions of Christian voters, the Republicans have incorporated many of the tenets of Christianity into their political platform. I've got an idea. How about if we leave morality to churches, and get the government out of the morality business?

In fact, this business of sanctions and embargos is vastly over-used. Look to Cuba as a prime example of how this works out in the real world. We've embargoed Cuba for over fifty years, because their leaders are communist and they're 90 miles off our border. Let's examine what effects our embargo has had on that country. As with any other country in this position, the leaders of the country are completely unaffected by this embargo. But the people of Cuba have suffered unspeakable poverty for fifty years as a result of our embargo. Has their central government come to their aid by loosening the reins of power? No, of course not. Why should they? Their lot is not that of their people. The point is that our embargo has mostly served to keep the Cuban people impoverished for fifty years. Again, it's up to the Cuban people to shape their form of government, even in the face of Cuban tanks under the control of Castro. We might prefer that Cuba have a more democratic government, like ours. But that's not our call to make. And it's certainly not up to us to ensure their impoverishment in the meantime.

In any case, we've just elected Donald Trump as president. It's anyone's guess how he will approach Putin. But I'd expect a well-deserved period of rapprochement. The Cold War is over. It's time to put the artillery and nukes away and make peace. Yes, there will be bumps in the road. But that's life, folks. Stuff happens.

Add Comment:

Name
Email
Comment