Russian Elections

The post that was quoted here has been removed

60% of the people voting a party in is a "charade of democracy"?

Originally posted by no1marauder
60% of the people voting a party in is a "charade of democracy"?

That's a consequence of the charade, cft never said that was the cause.

Originally posted by Palynka
That's a consequence of the charade, cft never said that was the cause.

There's 11 registered parties; that's a lot more choice than you get in the US and most "democracies". Whenever a country votes in a way that certain people disapprove of, the charge that the election is a "charade" is always trotted out.

Originally posted by no1marauder
There's 11 registered parties; that's a lot more choice than you get in the US and most "democracies". Whenever a country votes in a way that certain people disapprove of, the charge that the election is a "charade" is always trotted out.

Is that how you measure the quality of a democracy? Simply by the number of registered parties?

If you are going to argue with such facts, make sure they are relevant.

Originally posted by Palynka
Is that how you measure the quality of a democracy? Simply by the number of registered parties?

If you are going to argue with such facts, make sure they are relevant.

Of course that fact is relevant. If there was a choice of only one party, it wouldn't be much of a democracy would it?

Rather than cryptically criticizing without giving any reasons, do tell why Russian democracy is a "charade".

Originally posted by no1marauder
Of course that fact is relevant. If there was a choice of only one party, it wouldn't be much of a democracy would it?

Rather than cryptically criticizing without giving any reasons, do tell why Russian democracy is a "charade".

Not letting the OSCE monitor the elections freely is just the latest symptom. But it's you contesting the notion that these elections aren't a charade. So go for it.

Defend the qualities of the Russian democracy.

Originally posted by Palynka
Not letting the OSCE monitor the elections freely is just the latest symptom. But it's you contesting the notion that these elections aren't a charade. So go for it.

Defend the qualities of the Russian democracy.

This is tiresome. The person starting the thread made the assertion that Russian democracy is a "charade". According to you that now must be accepted as the starting point of the discussion and anyone questioning that premise has the burden of proof on them. That's not how it works.

EDIT: This type of gamesmanship is one of the many reasons why Debates is almost totally useless as a forum for any type of rational discussion.

Originally posted by no1marauder
This is tiresome. The person starting the thread made the assertion that Russian democracy is a "charade". According to you that now must be accepted as the starting point of the discussion and anyone questioning that premise has the burden of proof on them. That's not how it works.

EDIT: This type of gamesmanship is one of the many reasons why Debates is almost totally useless as a forum for any type of rational discussion.

I don't care how it works. The 'assertion' is not one I wish to contest. If you wish to contest it, do so. If not, then there's no debate on that.

Edit: The assertion that it isn't a 'charade' suffers from the same burden of proof as the one that it is. This isn't a courtroom where the defendant and the accuser are in different positions. Here both sides of the argument are symmetric and subject to the same burdens of proof.

Originally posted by no1marauder
This is tiresome. The person starting the thread made the assertion that Russian democracy is a "charade". According to you that now must be accepted as the starting point of the discussion and anyone questioning that premise has the burden of proof on them. That's not how it works.

EDIT: This is type of gamesmanship is one of the many reasons why Debates is almost totally useless as a forum for any type of rational discussion.

Given how they started the discussion, and you chose to get into it, then yeah, that's how it works. The OP already pointed out the obstruction of election monitors as an indication of what they were claiming. If you disagree, the burden of proof does indeed lie with you.
You may think that the debates forum is a useless forum for discussion, but if you're unwilling to support your point, then it is you that is the cause of it, not the OP

Originally posted by agryson
Given how they started the discussion, and you chose to get into it, then yeah, that's how it works. The OP already pointed out the obstruction of election monitors as an indication of what they were claiming. If you disagree, the burden of proof does indeed lie with you.
You may think that the debates forum is a useless forum for discussion, but if you're unwilling to support your point, then it is you that is the cause of it, not the OP

NFM; what a bunch of idiots.

Originally posted by no1marauder
NFM; what a bunch of idiots.

Pathetic, as usual.

Originally posted by no1marauder
NFM; what a bunch of idiots.

To quote the man himself...
"Debates is almost totally useless as a forum for any type of rational discussion."

Way to prove your point.