A growing number of Russians believe their country does not need
democracy, a nationwide survey by one of Russia's leading polling
agencies suggests.
The poll by the Levada-Centre showed that 57% of those questioned
considered that Russia needed democracy - the lowest number since
2006.
...
The majority (60đ” also said it would be better for Russia if the
president controlled both the courts and the parliament, which can
hardly be described as a democratic aspiration, our correspondent
says.
The poll also suggested that 43% agreed with the question that the
country sometimes needed an "iron fist" leader.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8311189.stm
Will this spark the debate about certain societies having cultural
characteristics that simply can't fit with a democratic societal lifestyle?
Or is it that Russians have not lived in an advance form of democracy
so they are confusing what they have now with a real, vibrant and
operational democracy? Moreover, can democracy be 'exported' or
'learned'?
What are your thoughts?
Originally posted by SeitseKazetNagorra is right. Because 'democracy' was bundled with the disastrous Friedmanesque shock doctrine and "free" market reforms, ordinary Russians understandably came away with a rather dim view of democracy. The country's public institutions were so thoroughly pillaged by the rapacious oligarchs that they were left pining for the old days. The fact that democracy and casino capitalism are not synonymous was too fine a point for most Russians.
A growing number of Russians believe their country does not need
democracy, a nationwide survey by one of Russia's leading polling
agencies suggests.
The poll by the Levada-Centre showed that 57% of those questioned
considered that Russia needed democracy - the lowest number since
2006.
...
The majority (60đ” also said it would be better ocracy? Moreover, can democracy be 'exported' or
'learned'?
What are your thoughts?
The post that was quoted here has been removedAh, the well known Russian love for the knout.
"Our historical pastime is the direct satisfaction of inflicting pain. There are lines in Nekrassov describing how a peasant lashes a horse on the eyes, 'on its meek eyes,' everyone must have seen it. It's typically Russian. He describes how a feeble little nag had foundered under too heavy a load and could not move. The peasant beats it, beats it savagely, beats it at last not knowing what he is doing in the intoxication of cruelty. He thrashes it mercilessly over and over again. 'However weak you are, you must pull, even if you die doing it.' The nag strains, and then he begins lashing the poor defenseless creature on its weeping, on its 'meek eyes'. The frantic beast tugs and draws the load, trembling all over, gasping for breath, moving sideways, with a sort of unnatural spasmodic action - it's awful. But that's only a horse, and God has given horses to be beaten. So the Tatars have taught us, and they left us the knout as a remembrance of it.
"But men, too, can be beaten. A well-educated, cultured man and his wife beat their own child with a birch rod, a girl of seven. I have an account of it. The father was glad that the birch was covered with twigs. 'It stings more,' said he, and so he began stinging his daughter. I know for a fact that there are people who at every blow are worked up to sensuality, to literal sensuality, which increases progressively at every blow they inflict. They beat for a minute, for five minutes, for ten minutes, more often and more savagely. The child screams. At last the child cannot scream, it gasps, 'Daddy! daddy!' By some diabolical unseemly chance the case was brought into court. A lawyer is engaged. The Russian people have long called a lawyer 'a conscience for hire'. The lawyer protests in his client's defense. 'It's such a simple thing,' he says, 'an everyday occurrence. A father punishes his child. To our shame be it said, it is brought into court.' The jury, convinced by him, give a favorable verdict. The public roars with delight that the torturer is acquitted. Ah, pity I wasn't there! I would have proposed to raise a subscription in his honor! ... Charming pictures."
Ivan Karamazov
Originally posted by Bosse de Nagesick.
Ah, the well known Russian love for the knout.
"Our historical pastime is the direct satisfaction of inflicting pain. There are lines in Nekrassov describing how a peasant lashes a horse on the eyes, 'on its meek eyes,' everyone must have seen it. It's typically Russian. He describes how a feeble little nag had foundered under too heavy a load and ...[text shortened]... a subscription in his honor! ... Charming pictures."
Ivan Karamazov
but anyway, I don't see why the russian people would prefer authoritarian regimes even if they view democracy as a weakness or whatever other reason they dislike it, considering the fact that under authoritarian regimes many innocent russians were killed.
It sounds very disturbing, but maybe its true, maybe russians are comfortable with oppression, its how its always been in the past, and maybe they want to keep it that way.
From a human rights perspective I have absolutely no problem with non-democracies (IF) they didn't force their citizens to live there by force. Unfortunately, in dictatorships this is never the case.
Borders are imaginary and man made, and as cohabitants of the same planet it's a crime against humanity to forcibly hold people captive. That's my take.
