The oligarch's money -- to the people!
Posted on 02/08/2015 4:43:30 PM PST by annalex
If you want to be on this right wing, monarchy, paleolibertarianism and nationalism ping list, but are not, please let me know. If you are on it and want to be off, also let me know. This ping list is not used for Catholic-Protestant debates.
I think the proper term here is nomenklatura.
The nomenklatura (Russian: номенклату́ра, Russian pronunciation: [nəmʲɪnklɐˈturə], Latin: nomenclatura) were a category of people within the Soviet Union and other Eastern Bloc countries who held various key administrative positions in all spheres of those countries' activity: government, industry, agriculture, education, etc., whose positions were granted only with approval by the communist party of each country or region.
Virtually all were members of the Communist Party.[1] Critics of Stalin, such as Milovan Đilas, critically defined them as a new class.[2] Trotskyism uses the term caste rather than class, because it sees the Soviet Union as a degenerated workers' state, not a new class society. Later developments of Trotsky's theories, notably Tony Cliff's theory of State Capitalism, did refer to the nomenklatura as a new class.
Sounds just like DC, when Administrations come and go.
fascinating take on Russia and OUR politicians.
Please add me to your ping list
Update: billionaires.
And what does the KGB want? And what will it stop at in its quest for it?
And what was the KGB's main tool in commerce?
It is absolutely naive and infantile to attribute the games being played in the oil markets to the Saudis.
Solzhinitsyn is one of the most brilliant men who ever lived. Shame Putin hasn’t learned from him.
Thank you, you are correct. Still with either spelling the term probably needs some explaining.
Done, thank you.
It is clear now that he was prophetic. The dirty hybrid has arrived, and 170 years is a long time.
Well, they learned. They learned that it is easier to maintain a docile and cowardly opposition than to put everyone to the GULAG. But they learned it, to a significant extent, from us.
Great post. Thank you. It is sad that such a revelation is not big news all over the world. But such is the power of disinformation.
From what little I could find out before his death, Solzhenitsyn thought Putin was doing a good job. Of course he was a very old man at the time and what he thought was not exactly well known. So who knows? Certainly Putin would want his support. What i wonder about is the timing of his death on August 3, 2008 and the invasion of Georgia on August 7. Could Putin have waited for his death in order not to be criticized by such a great man?
Prior to a certain point everyone thought that Putin was OK. He was seen as a sound alternative to the Communists and someone who could clean up the mafia. It is about 2008, and perhaps we can point to the war on Georgia as a turning point, that it became clear that this guy was working on a USSR 2.0 project.
John Randolph of Roanoke used to warn about King Numbers.
A tyranny of 51% of people or 51% of ones representatives, or a large noble clan, or a society of limited numbers or a single royal family or a single despot are all still tyranny.
Only a limited Republic of laws with checks and balances can give Ordered Liberty.
Monarchy is not tyranny simply because the monarch truly and legally owns the national infrastructure: roads, mint, posts, the military and therefore violates no one’s rights.
Of course that is true. I was speaking of Democracy and how it can be a tyranny despite issues of numbers and majority.
An absolute monarchy possessing the nation and the sovereignty truly cannot violate rights of vessels that have no rights is hardly a recommendation for that form of government. Instead, it is merely a description.
However, a monarchy where property rights exist, where takings are restricted from the monarch as in the “King IN Parliament” in the British system of old can well be free of tyranny.
Functionaries in communism change their descriptions to democrats and never change positions is what is pointed out by the article and the reason is that democracy is no lodestone — it holds no healing posers or magic.
That is no monarchy then, but a slaveholder estate. In monarchies throughout history everyone had property rights, not just the king.
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.