Posted on 07/24/2014 7:41:33 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The history of strongmen leaders helps fuel a passion for capitalism—even if there's a cost.
There he is, the President of Russia, riding bare-back and bare-chested astride a galloping steed; spending $50 billion on a resort town most Russians will never see; seizing Crimea, instigating unrest in Ukraine; maybe even making himself indirectly responsible for the murder of nearly 300 innocents aboard a downed passenger plane: Vladimir Putin, shaking his fist in the face of a West that often seems unable to do more than avert its eyes.
When we in The West do look, it can seem perplexing: How can Russians buy into such blatant bravado? How can a country that is (at least nominally) democratic support such near-authoritarian power? And why does Putin remain so popular?
“Why,” Russians might ask us in return, “do you support a system of government that is so weak?” In 2010, traveling through Russia to research a novel, I was asked this a lot...
(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...
Don’t compare Reagan to Putin, and don’t compare what the most caring generous people on earth saw in Reagan, with what the murderous people of Russian empire see in Putin.
Bad guys admire different qualities and different leadership, with different goals, than the good guys.
“Common” but unproven.
From the Russkie standpoint, where they still pine for Stalin, this has a very different meaning. The criminal gangs don’t rule the streets anymore,
They just run the government, and can afford to pay online trolls like you to pimp for Putin.
“what the most caring generous people on earth saw in Reagan, with what the murderous people of Russian empire see in Putin”
Didn’t know you could fit that many negatives into one sentence.
Obviously, you missed the entire point of what I said.
“They just run the government, and can afford to pay online trolls like you to pimp for Putin.”
Really? More Childish insults from you?
Putin spent a year as head of the FSB.
Your lies that you are only "interested for the truth," fall to pieces the more you post. Keep it up, you neo-soviet scumbag. The Mods need to zot you.
My very own flame troll!!
LOL, yep, common and widely accepted.
We know how Bill Gates got so rich over his 40 years as the whiz kid of computers and Microsoft, but we don’t know how your sweet little KGB man has manged to obtain an equal amount.
LOL A big yacht.
Reagan was a hero to Russians, not Putin and the other Communist Party and KGB thugs who enforced the totalitarian regime.
I have spoken to many Russians and Eastern Europeans who lived under Communism. They did not believe in communism and hated the Communist Party members, the secret police and the whole brutal, corrupt system.
It is true that the Soviet economy has grown under Putin. But economic growth does not make Putin anything like Reagan.
Almost exactly like that.
Until he was handpicked in August by then-President Boris Yeltsin to become prime minister, Putin had never been a public figure. He spent 17 years as a mid-level agent in the Soviet KGB’s foreign intelligence wing, rising only to the rank of lieutenant colonel. Later, as an aide to a prickly, controversial mayor of St. Petersburg, Russia’s second-largest city and Putin’s home town, he made a point of staying in the background.
Yet Putin’s career also suggests that he witnessed firsthand the momentous finale of the Cold War. From the front line in East Germany, Putin saw how the centrally planned economies of the East staggered to disintegration. In St. Petersburg, he had a taste of the ragged path of Russia’s early transition to a free-market, democratic system.
What Putin has taken from these experiences is not entirely clear. He has embraced the conviction that “there is no alternative” to market democracy, and soberly acknowledged Russia’s economic weaknesses. But he also has expressed enthusiasm for reasserting the role of a strong state. He has said the Russian economy has become “criminalized,” but so far only hinted that he would tackle the powerful tycoons who lord over it. Putin has vowed Russia will not revert to totalitarianism, but he has not demonstrated much skill working with Russia’s fledgling, competitive political system.
Putin has never campaigned for office, and he told an interviewer two years ago he found campaigns distasteful. “One has to be insincere and promise something which you cannot fulfill,” he said. “So you either have to be a fool who does not understand what you are promising, or deliberately be lying.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/russiagov/putin.htm
And leave us out of your petty dispute.
I was incorrect when I wrote that Putin was head of the KGB. I should have checked his title before I posted. But even as a mid level KGB officer Putin played a part in supporting the brutal and corrupt communist system.
As a KGB officer Putin would have been an expert in disinformation. The article was in the Washington Post, a newspaper very sympathetic to the Communist Party and the former Soviet Union. I take the article with a grain of salt. It is meant to portray Putin's career in the best possible light.
Late in the article, Svetov, a Russian writer, gave a more accurate assessment of Putin.
Putin has proved to be an intelligent and capable prime minister. The Soviet Union has seen economic growth under his regime.
But my point was that it was stupid to equate Putin to Ronald Reagan. Putin is at his essence a liar and a thug. Reagan was a great President, a great leader and a man who helped to bring to an end the evil empire that Putin worked for.
I agree it was ridiculous to try to equate Putin with Reagan. Obama with Putin - in some ways but Putin is much more intelligent. My dogs are much more intelligent.
Expect an IRS audit soon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.