Masha Lipman - Russia's Hidden Power Struggle - washingtonpost.com:
Aside: when I entered the editor's note '[Russian]' in the blockquote, I found myself instead wanting to enter '[Soviet]'. To me, any action in Russia that effectively restores 1-party rule is really a Soviet thing, because even without communism or socialism as the popularist excuse for such abuses, the political mindset that permitted the Soviet civil-rights abuses for so long continues unabated. Really, it's the same system that existed under the Czars for centuries before, people so used to oppression that they simply can't do anything but lived oppressed even when given the choice not to.
The truly successful democratic revolutions in England, Holland, and America all required an unwavering adherance to Englightenment philosophy to work. The democratic reforms in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and other western & northern European nations all required one simple thing: a fear of war so strong that they would embrace political uncertainty to avoid that death ever returning.
For Russia, unlike the west, the death didn't end when the war did, so the people never could unite for democracy under the fear of that alternative - you can't unite to avoid death in the future if you still have to live with it (in the form of Stalin's madness) in your present. Decades later, the light-weight reforms of Gorbachev, mostly cultural rather than civil, that led to the revolution of 1992 may have done more harm than good, because now there is an entire generation that simply don't know how bad it was in the 40s and 60s and as such are dooming themselves to recreate it.
One of the innovations of the new [Russian] election bill is a ban on creating a "negative image" of political opponents. This is one way of depriving a campaign of any meaning whatsoever, as just challenging the policies of the incumbent authorities can now be interpreted as a violation of the law.Negative ads and negative campaigns may suck, but the alternative, the "all positive" world, sucks worse. I would rather at least be allowed to SAY a negative truth, even as others can and will say negative lies, than to not be permitted to tell any truth when only positive things are allowed.
So while there is always a constituency that dutifully turns out on Election Day to vote "as the bosses say," a great many others will choose to stay home, since they assume their vote will make no difference.
Aside: when I entered the editor's note '[Russian]' in the blockquote, I found myself instead wanting to enter '[Soviet]'. To me, any action in Russia that effectively restores 1-party rule is really a Soviet thing, because even without communism or socialism as the popularist excuse for such abuses, the political mindset that permitted the Soviet civil-rights abuses for so long continues unabated. Really, it's the same system that existed under the Czars for centuries before, people so used to oppression that they simply can't do anything but lived oppressed even when given the choice not to.
The truly successful democratic revolutions in England, Holland, and America all required an unwavering adherance to Englightenment philosophy to work. The democratic reforms in Germany, France, Italy, Spain, and other western & northern European nations all required one simple thing: a fear of war so strong that they would embrace political uncertainty to avoid that death ever returning.
For Russia, unlike the west, the death didn't end when the war did, so the people never could unite for democracy under the fear of that alternative - you can't unite to avoid death in the future if you still have to live with it (in the form of Stalin's madness) in your present. Decades later, the light-weight reforms of Gorbachev, mostly cultural rather than civil, that led to the revolution of 1992 may have done more harm than good, because now there is an entire generation that simply don't know how bad it was in the 40s and 60s and as such are dooming themselves to recreate it.