tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25230932.post229718541190755264..comments2023-10-06T10:10:06.982-04:00Comments on La Russophobe: Annals of the Beslan CoverupLa Russophobehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05672264388217953086noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25230932.post-21166594494331881952007-06-02T12:20:00.000-04:002007-06-02T12:20:00.000-04:00Putin's desision was the right one.That was a meas...Putin's desision was the right one.<BR/>That was a measure to consolidate the central power and to control the regional resourses and separatism. Russia is a country in transiistion to normal market economy and democracy. All this good things can not come at once and immediatly. When Yeltsyn was the President the governers were elected. Among them were a lot of people with criminal past, mafia type persons, concerned only how to get more fortune abusing their power. People in Russia did not have the experience of living under Western sort of democracy and could be easily manipulated. For example in early 90-ties they had Prsidential election in Kalmyk Respublic- rustic, sparsely populated part of Russia, where local ethnic group Kalmyks still use a lot of horses, which is part of their traditional lifestyle. One of the presidential candidates, I. Ilumzhinov organised his campain this way: he travelled in a big white limo (the thing local people had not seen before) and gave 100 US dollars to each household. He impressed the local folks by that, and was elected the President and has been since than.<BR/>In Krasnoyarsk, region rich with resourses there was a lot of shooting when a few mafia clans strugled for the governer's post. In Kursk region a popullist A. Rutskoy was elected. And who is Rutskoy? A principless man who sold his soul a few times, The former Yeltsyn's vice-president who joined the anti-Yeltsyn opposition in 1993 trying to become the president. No wonder he was a corrupted governer, abusing his post for his own and his clan enrichment. People had got nothing good from the governers being elected. It did not help to establish real democracy or for people to benefit from it by any other way, I mean to live better. The only positive case is the tundra located Chukotka. The Governer Roman Abramovich, Russian-Jewish oligarh loyal to Putin, one of the richest man in the world was elected as the Governer and have been doing a good job. He revived that previously neglected North-East corner of the Russia populated by Chukchi-the nation relative to the Eskimo people, and it looks like they will soon grow grapes there. He invested a lot of his own money into the development projects there. But Russia do not have a lot of rich billionaires of Jewish origin willing to invest their money in such projects. Most of the "wannabe Governers" wanted the opposite: to become the Governer to get more money for themselves. <BR/><BR/>So shut up with this Governer non elected issue. It is not a criteria. Democracy may work with local governers appointed not elected. Let Russia do first things first.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25230932.post-18192206950812025312007-06-02T09:34:00.000-04:002007-06-02T09:34:00.000-04:00Yes Penny but I see you didn't answer my question....Yes Penny but I see you didn't answer my question. What proof do you have that India and South Africa are: "moving from appointing regional authorities from above to their election"?<BR/><BR/>So I know a hell of a lot more than you do, sweetheart!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25230932.post-30201835581025296642007-06-01T15:21:00.000-04:002007-06-01T15:21:00.000-04:00You really shouldn't comment about a country you k...<I>You really shouldn't comment about a country you know nothing about.</I><BR/><BR/>Which means your mouth would be permanently nailed shut.Pennyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08179466916477423331noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25230932.post-11192275505299343052007-06-01T11:14:00.000-04:002007-06-01T11:14:00.000-04:00Where on earth do you get the idea that India and ...Where on earth do you get the idea that India and South Africa are: "moving from appointing regional authorities from above to their election".<BR/><BR/>You really shouldn't comment about a country you know nothing about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25230932.post-31538718658908496622007-06-01T09:44:00.000-04:002007-06-01T09:44:00.000-04:00To the Zhirinovsky's Moron:Yes, they are. At least...To the Zhirinovsky's Moron:<BR/><BR/>Yes, they are. At least they are moving from the authoritative rulings to the democracy, they're abandoning their former colonial status and moving from appointing regional authorities from above to their election - quite opposite way in comparison with Russia's.Chuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17981834873730700306noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25230932.post-7545524399002565742007-06-01T04:24:00.000-04:002007-06-01T04:24:00.000-04:00"the president's well-timed proposal to abolish gu..."the president's well-timed proposal to abolish gubernatorial elections and centralize power by appointing the regions's representatives himself"<BR/><BR/>You mean the same system that exists in India and South Africa?<BR/><BR/>I wonder, are India and South Africa democracies?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com