Why the prevailing doom and gloom view of Russia is wrong

Al Jazeera ^ | Leonid Ragozin

[CondoleezzaProtege]

The prevailing doom and gloom analysis of Russia tends to ignore the enormous progress the country and society have made in the past 30 years. The greatest paradox of Putin’s regime lies in the fact that despite deteriorating politics, the cultural and social tectonics went in the opposite direction from the political regime.

Simply put, Russia has never in the last 100 years been as westernised and modernised as it is now. It is true that without rampant corruption and with more prudent handling of oil and gas revenues, Russians could live infinitely better than they are living now. But the standard of living is comparable to that in poorer European Union countries and is still the best in the lived experience of Russians of all ages.

As great political thinkers, like Francis Fukuyama, stress, political development is never linear or straightforward. While clamping down on the opposition and independent media, Putin’s authoritarianism also created a safer space for millions of people to improve their private lives and pursue happiness. As banal as it sounds, money gives freedom, so many Russian people have felt freer in terms of lifestyle choices, careers and travels than they did during the politically free, but volatile 1990s.

Better life has resulted in a more mature public discourse. Post-traumatic psychosis, which was the singularly most striking feature of the Russian society in the 1990s, gave way to a more reflective attitude to life and more skilful interpersonal communication. Infuriating sternness, outbursts of unwarranted fury and bandit behaviour – those trademark features of the 1990s’ post-Soviet society, reflected in films and music of that time – have faded away.

A fledgling charity and volunteer sector, followed by the rise of protest activity has helped to overcome the extreme atomisation which dogged post-totalitarian society...

[MadMax, the Grinning Reaper]

Pure pro-Putin propaganda. You can say the same things about the economic growth/some income improvements in Red China (but you’d have to ignore the Uighur genocide, cultural genocide in Tibet, threats to start wars with the US and Japan over Taiwan (also threats against the Philippines, Vietnam, possibly Thailand even Malaysia and Australia).

[bagster]

Russia was an ally of America when Trump was President. They were working together to combat the derp state. Both are nationalists and bemoan the dominance of the derps and want nothing to do with it.

There are two Americas. Trump represents one, and Biden represents the other. Putin/Russia is friend to one and enemy to the other. Biden's 'America' is ascendant at the moment, it would appear.

We saw the extent the derps went to to keep Trump and Putin apart as well as their efforts to paint Russia as the true enemy, blaming it for everything from 'dictator' Trump to burnt popcorn.

The true enemy (and derp ally) is China, and they are now America's masters. If this isn't clear by now, then there's something wrong with your brain pan.

[billakay]

It is not actually, the article is pretty much spot on. They make a point that authoritarianism has grown in Russia a bit over the last 20 years, but that quality of life, economic opportunity, and general happiness has grown by leaps and bounds.

I'm saying this as a person who has family who lived in Russia since 1988, and who himself spends a lot of time in Russia and has a home and permanent registration on Russian territory.

[billakay]

Couldn't say it better. Russia is not, and should not be the enemy of the USA. Just because their culture and mindset are a little different, doesn't mean we need to fight them.

The USA's main issue with the Russian Federation is that they refuse to behave as a vassal state. They will act in their own interests exclusively, just as we do. We need to learn to live with that.

[Wuli]

The philosophical, political and moral questions are not whether or not Russians today are “better off” then ever before. The questions revolve around one giant question. Was there no other way than with Putin’s mobocracy - was the progress Russians have seen impossible with greater political freedom and less of an authoritarian government?

The article merely assumes there was no other way. I would like to say it is wrong, yet I understand how culturally the present political circumstance seems to be within centuries old Russian cultural DNA - acceptance of authoritarian rule. To me Russia and China are similar in that appearances indicate great change while the form of political rule in operation is centuries old.