Russia Election: Opposition Crushed Ahead of Managed Polls

[jonnysensible]

Ramzan Kadyrov gets 98.5% of the votes in Chechnya. Thats got to hurt

[Low Hanging Fruit]

In side Russia, they just go to jail.

Poisons and falling over rails with unrelated holes in the back for people outside Russia

I see. Thanks for catch up!

[PC2]

It seems like the average Russian isn't really concerned about the integrity of their democracy, imo. Unlike Chinese folks Russians do have the ability to attain any information pretty easily so if they're not mad with the current political powers then that means they're doing fine, chugging along.

[JohnBrown1917]

Without context (and kinda even with...) this sounds quite silly.

The world needs more popular communist parties, could do without the nationalism though.

[Jastall]

Putin cares about the future of his crony elites and they care back for him - it's a symbiosis there.

I find this whole statement hilarious given Russia doing everything they can to alienate West and still seeing it as some sort of giga threat when they literally have China eyeing their far east parts for scrap.

In next 20 years, you will see Russia rushing back to the West, because China will grow bold enough to start making big demands - they already do bit by bit, whether its certain fishing rights and so on. China tussled with USSR back when power balance was reverse, in 20 years it will be capable of doing same shit to Russia as Russia can do to Ukraine.

Your elites are "caring about Russia's future" by sending their sons and daughters abroad and building up big parts of EU and such with their little palaces. It's just hilarious. Of course they don't want opposition or actual elections, because then they might get tossed off all the stairs by some unknown. The only future they care for is their own.

And Putin himself - is a dead man anyway. He's soon 70, he got what 3-5 more years max before he pulls out a Yeltsin? With every passing year he's less and less important - the real rule there is elites who will be all too happy to support the successor whoever it will be as long as they are safe and get their piece of the pie.

The population doesn't seem to care much. It feels like in their eyes, politicans are gonna be assholes by default anyway, so they might as well be assholes that make them feel good via nationalistic rhetoric and token foreign imperalism to show Russia stronk. Opposition being chronically imprisoned and/or accidentally falling into plutonium bullets is just the cost of doing business it seems. They then project this mindset into the world entire which helps to explain why they have difficulty understanding the West's reaction to some of their bullshit. At least that's how I see it.

As for Putin, I think he's got more than 5 years. Yelstin was a raging alcoholic, Putin isn't from what I know and while his fitness is exaggerated for the cameras he's still probably above average on that front as far as world leaders go and might still have a good 10 years of being functional ahead of him. It's not like politicians ruling nations while close to 80 is unheard of "waves at America".

[Easo]

And, of course, after the "counting" they have taken the absolute majority and will keep it, directly without making coalitions with other parties.
Thousands of complaints about every fraud imaginable, but of course noo, it was totally fine xD

Hey, Shalcker, still earning those turnips? You can stop know, what I said would happen happened.

The world needs more popular communist parties, could do without the nationalism though.

Oh boy... To laugh or to cry?

[JohnBrown1917]

Oh boy... To laugh or to cry?

More international communism and anarchism. But I suppose some people just prefer Putin.

[zorkuus]

More international communism and anarchism.

Name one communist state that achieved a utopian people's/worker's paradise and wasn't just a vehicle to enrich the elite at the top?

[JohnBrown1917]

Name one communist state that achieved a utopian people's/worker's paradise and wasn't just a vehicle to enrich the elite at the top?

Dunno, we have not achieved international communism yet, would be nice though.

[zorkuus]

Dunno, we have not achieved international communism yet, would be nice though.

How can you achieve something so grand if you can't make it work even in one frickin' country?

Better start with something much smaller before you start dreaming about the international level... like in your own home for example. In a few decades maybe you can extend it beoynd your backyard.

[Endus]

How can you achieve something so grand if you can't make it work even in one frickin' country?

Better start with something much smaller before you start dreaming about the international level... like in your own home for example. In a few decades maybe you can extend it beoynd your backyard.

I don't know if you know this, but most families don't make their kids pay rent from birth onwards, or otherwise work to earn their keep.

Family dynamics are not capitalist. They're fundamentally communist in principle. This is why "primitive communism" was a thing among early Humans; it's a baseline premise.

[zorkuus]

I don't know if you know this, but most families don't make their kids pay rent from birth onwards, or otherwise work to earn their keep.

The parents earn their income in a capitalist system. It helps when you have the "luxury" to take care of your young and let them be "lazy". Things weren't so in the past, kids worked back then.

[Endus]

The parents earn their income in a capitalist system. It helps when you have the "luxury" to take care of your young and let them be "lazy". Things weren't so in the past, kids worked back then.

Dude, you asked people to make a system work on the scale of a family's internal economics. Now you're shifting goalposts to the national economy, because your point didn't actually hold water.

Also, pointing to some of the evils of capitalism (forced child labor) isn't exactly the strongest anti-communist argument.

I don't even agree with JohnBrown1917 on any of this, you're just really not making a counterargument.

[zorkuus]

Dude, you asked people to make a system work on the scale of a family's internal economics.

That was partly a joke, you're taking this way too seriously.

Also, pointing to some of the evils of capitalism (forced child labor) isn't exactly the strongest anti-communist argument.

Child labor has always been a thing. Do you think in caveman days kids just sat around and did nothing?

[Endus]

Child labor has always been a thing. Do you think in caveman days kids just sat around and did nothing?

You realize there's laws against that today, right?

Also, there's a difference between "allowed to do some work" and "expected to produce for society to earn their keep".

[zorkuus]

You realize there's laws against that today, right?

Sure. But why would a communist state have them?

Also, there's a difference between "allowed to do some work" and "expected to produce for society to earn their keep".

When a society's survival depends on everyone contributing to it, it is kinda expected.

But anyways, this small family group stuff is besides the point. The argument was that communism has never worked in a larger scale. Never ever. Zero succesful attempts. Nada. Zilch. So I don't get what the fuck people are talking about when they obsess over this total failure of a model so much. It's always some hypothetical utopia. They can never show it actually working in real life.

[Shalcker]

Name one communist state that achieved a utopian people's/worker's paradise and wasn't just a vehicle to enrich the elite at the top?

USSR wasn't "vehicle to enrich elite at the top" (as seen by that elite generally not retaining anything significant after USSR fall).

[Endus]

Sure. But why would a communist state have them?

This is a nonsense question.

When a society's survival depends on everyone contributing to it, it is kinda expected.

This has literally never been true of any human society, dating back to hunter-gatherers using stone tools.

But anyways, this small family group stuff is besides the point. The argument was that communism has never worked in a larger scale. Never ever. Zero succesful attempts. Nada. Zilch. So I don't get what the fuck people are talking about when they obsess over this total failure of a model so much. It's always some hypothetical utopia. They can never show it actually working in real life.

Do you apply this same pointless standard to other things? Where you directly oppose any attempt to test a policy, because it's a new policy that doesn't have a proven track record? Are you opposing any positive change on the basis that change is bad?

Because if not, you don't have any business pretending that's a valid argument here.

And if you do, well, you're debunking your own position for me.

You're making arguments exactly like those who railed against interracial marriage, or gay marriage, or desegregating schools, or universal healthcare, or any of a hundred other policy improvements. You don't make any attempt to argue that it can't work, you just make up stories about how it's never worked before (even if those "befores" aren't comparable for a host of reasons), and move goalposts whenever examples of it working do show up.

Not to mention that most of the same people claiming "Communism can't work" are the same people who fearmonger about how the USSR (in its time) or China (these days) is gonna destroy the West. Cause, y'know, if those countries are threats, you're kind of debunking your own argument.

Note that I'm talking about economic success in maintaining the nation and encouraging strong growth, not defending social policy (for which capitalism is no fuckin' angel, either).

[zorkuus]

Do you apply this same pointless standard to other things? Where you directly oppose any attempt to test a policy, because it's a new policy that doesn't have a proven track record?

Communism isn't a new policy and it has a proven track record of being terrible. How many more times does it need to fail before people will see it? Maybe try something else instead of repeating a failure (doesn't have to be capitalism)?

You seem to get very emotional about this. Are you a communist?

[Milchshake]

In Russia Election Results, Online Votes Sweep Putin Opponents Aside
The official tally gave a strong parliamentary majority to President Vladimir V. Putin’s United Russia party. Opposition leaders cried foul, pointing to earlier signs of gains.

MOSCOW — Russia’s ruling party retained a two-thirds majority in the lower house of Parliament and claimed a sweeping victory in opposition-minded Moscow — a stark display of Kremlin power as the authorities on Monday announced the results of a nationwide parliamentary election that opposition leaders denounced as blatantly falsified.

Partial results released after the polls closed on Sunday evening had shown significant gains by opposition parties and potential victories by several candidates supported by the imprisoned opposition leader Aleksei A. Navalny. But by the time Russia’s Central Election Commission revealed a nearly full count on Monday, those gains were largely gone — prompting anger from Kremlin critics, claims of large-scale fraud and scattered calls for protests.