Yeltsin--Father of Democracy?

The Nation ^ | Apr 27, 2007 | Katrina vanden Heuvel

[RedStateRocker]

Perhaps part of the dichotomy is that for a LONG while the KGB was the only place for an intelligent and ambitious young person to go? Much like the Church in the middle ages- as nearly the only repository of power it attracted both idealistic and corrupt, ‘good’ and ‘bad. but on the whole the brighter and more competent who might or might not be idealistic.
Just a thought.

[Diocletian]

That’s actually a very good point. Think about it: The Communist system was in place since 1917 and was the only game in town. That’s three, almost four generations, where only system existed, where all dissent was eliminated, where history was politicized, etc.

[Cacique]

bump

[Alberta's Child]

I would ask the moderators here to please look into restoring A. Pole's posting privileges. I hardly ever agree with him on anything, but he's always been a reasonable poster and engaged in some very thought-provoking conversation here.

If there's something else going on that I'm not aware of, then I'll gladly stand corrected on this one.

[philly-d-kidder]

I remember the Polls during his time 95% of the Russians hated the USA because Bill Clinton Propped him up far too long! I guess they were drinking Buddies...

Then we Bomb CHinese embassie with Tennets faulty Inteligence again.. and 90% of Chinese hate the USA and Clinton Albright Richardson as a result!

I guess Bush’s approvals don’t look as Bad....haha

[xJones]

I don’t think we’re going to get an answer, it’s a done deal.

[doc30]

Well, there goes the Immigration ping list, too. I just don’t understand the heavy hand on FR lately. It seems any deviations from a certain perspective are now unforgivable. What kind of discussion will there be if everyone has the same opinions?

[Cacique]

To do that someone would have to admit they made a mistake. That is totally contrary to human nature. Ain’t gonna happen, that is why society is divided into two camps each thinking it is in the right stubbornly holding to ideas even if patently wrong. Human nature is thus. FR has become a place to be cautious lest capricious moderators who disagree with you on some minor point ban you for life.

[montyspython]

I remember the signs in the crowd that were shown on TV during the bombing, "Don't worry Russia, we'll protect you"

If Russia wants to be relevant, then she needs to quit playing quid pro quo with this nonsense and start making a real stand.

[TexasRepublic]

I will join the others questioning why A. Pole had to be banned. He posted a controversial article (lies?) by someone with a stronly leftist slant. Occasionally I want to hear what the bad guys are saying. Okay, let there be debate. Let the Freepers tear the article to pieces. A. Pole did not call names, insult anyone, call for violence, etc.

[kosta50]

If Russia wants to be relevant, then she needs to quit playing quid pro quo with this nonsense and start making a real stand

Russia is looking after its interests. A lot, even all of the anti-NATO rhetoric in Russia was for domestic consumption. Americans have an emotional attachments for the British more than any othern European nation, but US and UK have only mutual interests. The same can be said of Russia and Serbia.

[saradippity]

First let me add my disappointment to the swelling ranks of Freepers unhappy with the suspension of A.Pole. He was one of my favorites and he seldom failed to provide good information on topics,he provoked thinking,always a benefit. I hope he will be off suspension soon.

Vn_survivor, you don't like the source of the article,not the writer or her periodical,and I can understand that. However,I have very similar info about Yeltsen taken from testimony given before the Committee on Banking and Financial Services of the U.S.House of Representatives on September 21,1999. The presenter is Anne Williamson,she spent ten or so years dividing her time between Moscow and New York and wrote for the Wall Street Journal among other publications. She is not in the slightest degree,left leaning.

You can Google her name right now and info about her is right at the top.

I happened on info about her prior to the election in 2000 as I looked for evidence of corruption in the Clinton/Gore Administration. From her testimony:

The first mistake was the West's perception of the elected Russian president,Boris Yeltsin;where American triumphalists saw a great democrat determined to destroy the Communist system for freedom's sake,Soviet history will record a usurper. A usurper's first task is to transform a thin layer of the self-interested rabble into a constituency. And she goes on to relate how he accomplished that.

She then goes on to say:

The second mistake lay in a profound misunderstanding of Russian culture and in the Harvard Institute of International Development advisor's disregard for the very basis for their own country's success;property rights.

It was a very grave error.

Her testimony is compelling,it is packed with great information giving names and places and missteps. I hope you will read it as it has a considerable impact on what is happening in Russia now. As others on this thread have said Putin did not have it easy and while he must be watched carefully,he came into office in a country that was buried in complex problems and corrupt men in positions of power.Boris Yeltsin,was not a good man.

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

“Vn_survivor, you don’t like the source of the article,not the writer or her periodical,and I can understand that.”

Good.

About the banning.....you’re an inch or so from accusing me of having something to do with it. Wrong. Period. Ask the Mod.

[saradippity]

Fact is,I am a lazy Freeper and chose to write one response rather than two.

Originally it was intended to go to you since A.Pole was not suspended when I read your statements about the article. I knew I had a similar assessment about Yeltsin from a conservative source (Williamson) and searched around for it. When I found it I ran through the thread because if someone else had sent it I wouldn't. That is when I learned that A.Pole had been suspended.

I never even thought about who asked for it because it seemed so completely divorced from anything written on this thread. For all I knew it was the result of something he said on another thread. Nonetheless,I wanted to express my sincere disappointment with the suspension,so I did by pinging the admin moderator.

Then I went on to the real purpose of my comment which was to give you the information from a source I believed you would find credible. Sorry my slothfulness caused you to think I was somehow implicating you with an action I thought kind of unreasonable,didn't mean to.

Reread everything and am convinced the banning must be something from another thread,there is nothing wrong with anything on this one IMO. Do you know what happened?

Also read up on what Williamson said about the whole thing and let me know if you don't think her assessment is pretty good given the documentation she presents. On the other hand, if you are Bill Clinton or Larry Summers you may have other thoughts.

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

Do you know what happened?

No. And I already said as much.

Further, I am astonished with your concern (twice now) to educate me with van den huvels/etc POV re Soviets/Russia - since I said not a single word about it on this thread. My comments and discoverthenetwork posts were exclusively re van den huvels gauche America-hating agenda.

BTW, I don’t take research or reading assignments such as yours.

Let it be, now.