On Russia and Western Bias

[NuvoRossiya]

What I hate the most about online forums is the pro west bias everyone on them seems to exhibit. As a russian it is very hard to not be called a Fascist or nazi for my patriotism while I go on these forums. So what I want to do here is make my case against this pro west bias in hope that not all westerners will want my country to be weak anymore. I will display all my points for this argument here.

point 1, The great effects of Russian Nationalism: In the 90s after the collapse of USSR Russia was very weak, and most people lived in poverty because of the shock therapy. Where did this poverty come from? The West! Boris Yeltsin was a Clinton backed week leader, his shock therapy was adopted from Western economist Milton Friedman. The western liberal democracy that was forced upon us by the neoconservatives was what made Russia week, it was cultural genocide of our nation through the implementation of western "liberal" hypocrisy. Now we have Putin, a great leader who has vastly improved health and the economy. Most Russians live in nice apartments, and are able to afford their needed products. Putin is a Russian leader who has adopted Russian values like the orthodox church, unlike the week western leaders Putin is strong. Many detractors blame putin for allowing monopolies and oligarchs when in reality he has fought them hard. Also hypocritical westerners claim he invaded sovereign nations for his greedy nationalistic fascist purposes, this is not true. If you look into russian history you will learn that russian occupied countries experienced economic growth. Putin is helping the CHechnyans and Ossetians by taking matters into Russian hands, now Ossetians and Chechnyans LIVE ALMOST AS WELL AS RUSSIANS. Saakashvili's georgia was a horrible place to live in reality too, while in Ukraine the people suffer from Yatsenyuk's Nazism economic policy. The solution to all problems in eastern europe in Russia, so do not pretend you have the key and force your austerity and chock therapy onto eastern europe, let us retake the lands we lost and bring them prosperity!

So I know I need this to be a discussion so I will add a question.

Do you think that Russia has a good or bad effect on its neighbours? Do you think that Western bias has led to mass poverty and misery in eastern european nations? And do you think that Russia is the anwser?

My points correspond to these questions.

[Allanea]

The great effects of Russian Nationalism: In the 90s after the collapse of USSR Russia was very weak, and most people lived in poverty because of the shock therapy.

This is a claim that you make, and it is not necessarily true. Russia's economic crisis commenced before shock therapy.

Boris Yeltsin was a Clinton backed week leader, his shock therapy was adopted from Western economist Milton Friedman.

So what you're saying is that Russia attempted to implement... the same economic policies that Westerners use in their own nations? If Westerners were evil and wished Russia harm, wouldn't they have tried to implement there a policy different from what was used domestically?

The western liberal democracy that was forced upon us by the neoconservatives was what made Russia week, it was cultural genocide of our nation through the implementation of western "liberal" hypocrisy

Russia has never experienced liberal democracy. "Liberal" Yeltsin very likely faked his re-election and fired tank cannon at Parliament. Nor is Putin so opposed to oligarchs - he kept people like Chubays and Sobchack in his team and personally is likely to be very rich.

, while in Ukraine the people suffer from Yatsenyuk's Nazism economic policy.

How is Yatsenyuk's economic policy 'Nazi'?

[NuvoRossiya]

The great effects of Russian Nationalism: In the 90s after the collapse of USSR Russia was very weak, and most people lived in poverty because of the shock therapy.

This is a claim that you make, and it is not necessarily true. Russia's economic crisis commenced before shock therapy.

Boris Yeltsin was a Clinton backed week leader, his shock therapy was adopted from Western economist Milton Friedman.

So what you're saying is that Russia attempted to implement... the same economic policies that Westerners use in their own nations? If Westerners were evil and wished Russia harm, wouldn't they have tried to implement there a policy different from what was used domestically?

The western liberal democracy that was forced upon us by the neoconservatives was what made Russia week, it was cultural genocide of our nation through the implementation of western "liberal" hypocrisy

Russia has never experienced liberal democracy. "Liberal" Yeltsin very likely faked his re-election and fired tank cannon at Parliament. Nor is Putin so opposed to oligarchs - he kept people like Chubays and Sobchack in his team and personally is likely to be very rich.

, while in Ukraine the people suffer from Yatsenyuk's Nazism economic policy.

How is Yatsenyuk's economic policy 'Nazi'?

I sigh this is what I expected.

1: Boris Yeltsin was forced on Russia by Clinton we did not choose him and his liberal policies CLINTON CHOOSE THEM. and no SHOCK THERAPY CREATED OUR ECONOMIC DOWNTURN thank goodness though it was not that Yavlinsky who devised them as he would give all power to Ukraine.

2: Russia experienced liberal democracy in the 90s, our traditional heart close values were torn apart using the hypocritical enlightenment doctrine of Descartes and Kant.

3: Yatsenyuk is a Right Sector Nazi, watch ans you will see I am right.

[Avaerilon]

1. This is rather more of a blog-type thing you're posting, don't you think? The way you've worded it makes it come across as such, rather than a basis for discussion.

2. Evidence from reliable sources, please? You've made some very bold statements indeed, and they won't last long without some cold hard facts from reasonably trustworthy sources.

3. Please don't be quite so abrasive about the West- genuine criticisms can be worded much more constructively.

[United facist States of America]

Russia has no right to Eastern Europe since they stole their lands in Eastern Europe from the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. So I say give Poland back Eastern Europe!

(Sarcasm about Poland)

[Allanea]

1: Boris Yeltsin was forced on Russia by Clinton we did not choose him and his liberal policies CLINTON CHOOSE THEM. and no SHOCK THERAPY CREATED OUR ECONOMIC DOWNTURN thank goodness though it was not that Yabloko thug who devised them as he would give all power to Ukraine.

Choose only ome:

Either:

1. Russia had liberal democracy, and therefore Russia elected Boris Yeltsin, and chose him as its leader. A necessary though not sufficient condition for liberal democracy is that the people choose their own leaders.

2. Russia did not choose its own President, and therefore did not have liberal democracy.

Only one of these can be true at the same time.

[Seno Zhou Varada]

let us retake the lands we lost and bring them prosperity!

What if these countries that own that land don't want you to have it?

[NuvoRossiya]

Russia has no right to Eastern Europe since they stole their lands in Eastern Europe from the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. So I say give Poland back Eastern Europe!

Poland and poles hate us Russians for no reasons. It is just that we teach them how to run economy.

[Seno Zhou Varada]

Russia has no right to Eastern Europe since they stole their lands in Eastern Europe from the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. So I say give Poland back Eastern Europe!

Poland and poles hate us Russians for no reasons. It is just that we teach them how to run economy.

I think a reason they hate you is because Russia conquered them.

[Cinnabarra]

I agree that the brutal ending of the USSR was somewhat too abrupt- To be honest I don't know if modern Russia is better or worse than pre-1991 Russia.But blaming the ensuing poverty on the west or Bill Clinton is too far-fetched.The USSR was already crumbling at the end of the 1980s.I say to each his own system, so I'd rather leave Russians themselves to decides wether communism was better or worse than liberal democracy.

For cultural genocide, one can argue that the 1917 Revolution was also a cultural genocide of Tsarist Russia.On that point again I am fairly ignorant on Russian culture.I think that Russian people are the only ones to be able to decide what's best for them.

Putin may have adopted and strenghtened Russian culture, but his policies are a disaster.His aggressive behavior ruined Russia economically and diplomatically.Putin unlawfully annexed Ossetia and Crimea (Breaking a treaty Russia had signed), and under his "presidency" Russia's Human Right record has been very low.He imprisons political opponents and Russia Today, that I have watched for a while, is mere propaganda.

Saying that Russia's invasion of Crimea, Ossetia, or its mingling in Chechnyan affairs, brought them progress or wealth is like justifying colonialism.
Speaking of that, there's a subject that is not very common, which is minorities living in Siberia who are seeing their resources stolen and their environment destroyed by the day.

To answer your questions, no, I don't think Russia is good for its neighbors.Just look at the Baltics who are doing fine economically-speaking.Eastern Europe has been poor even before Western ideologies were introduced.

All in all no, Russia isn't the answer.But in my opinion, Putin is wasting the country right now.

Russia has enough resources and wealth to be a developped country.It can be a global Eurasian power with a coast on the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and the Pacific, add to that the Caspian Sea.If Russia was democratic and economically thriving, it could influence its neighbors in a good way.But right now, no.

[NuvoRossiya]

let us retake the lands we lost and bring them prosperity!

What if these countries that own that land don't want you to have it?

Then they must accept if they want economic gdp growth, we will force them like we force babies to drink milk.

[NuvoRossiya]

Poland and poles hate us Russians for no reasons. It is just that we teach them how to run economy.

I think a reason they hate you is because Russia conquered them.

The poles have hated us from day 1.

[Godular]

This is a claim that you make, and it is not necessarily true. Russia's economic crisis commenced before shock therapy.



So what you're saying is that Russia attempted to implement... the same economic policies that Westerners use in their own nations? If Westerners were evil and wished Russia harm, wouldn't they have tried to implement there a policy different from what was used domestically?



Russia has never experienced liberal democracy. "Liberal" Yeltsin very likely faked his re-election and fired tank cannon at Parliament. Nor is Putin so opposed to oligarchs - he kept people like Chubays and Sobchack in his team and personally is likely to be very rich.



How is Yatsenyuk's economic policy 'Nazi'?

I sigh this is what I expected.

1: Boris Yeltsin was forced on Russia by Clinton we did not choose him and his liberal policies CLINTON CHOOSE THEM. and no SHOCK THERAPY CREATED OUR ECONOMIC DOWNTURN thank goodness though it was not that Yavlinsky who devised them as he would give all power to Ukraine.

Odd claim to make, considering Yeltsin came to power before Clinton did. Amazing how a single google search can destroy your argument in a single blow.

2: Russia experienced liberal democracy in the 90s, our traditional heart close values were torn apart using the hypocritical enlightenment doctrine of Descartes and Kant.

3: Yatsenyuk is a Right Sector Nazi, watch ans you will see I am right.

You're adorable. Wrong but adorable.

[NuvoRossiya]

1: Boris Yeltsin was forced on Russia by Clinton we did not choose him and his liberal policies CLINTON CHOOSE THEM. and no SHOCK THERAPY CREATED OUR ECONOMIC DOWNTURN thank goodness though it was not that Yabloko thug who devised them as he would give all power to Ukraine.

Choose only ome:

Either:

1. Russia had liberal democracy, and therefore Russia elected Boris Yeltsin, and chose him as its leader. A necessary though not sufficient condition for liberal democracy is that the people choose their own leaders.

2. Russia did not choose its own President, and therefore did not have liberal democracy.

Only one of these can be true at the same time.

In liberal democracy only the Liberal can win.

[Seno Zhou Varada]

What if these countries that own that land don't want you to have it?

Then they must accept if they want economic gdp growth, we will force them like we force babies to drink milk.

So war and Imperialism? Cut out your crap.

[Seno Zhou Varada]

I think a reason they hate you is because Russia conquered them.

The poles have hated us from day 1.

Source or bullsh*t.

[Avaerilon]

In liberal democracy only the Liberal can win.

I live in a liberal democracy, and the liberals definitely didn't win our last election... unfortunately

[Ikania]

>Putin
>Improved the economy

Sorry to break it to you, but the ruble's lost all its value, and Russia's economy went into a nosedive recently. Putin's also tightened laws that restrict civil rights and has gradually turned Russia into his own authoritarian state.

[NuvoRossiya]

Then they must accept if they want economic gdp growth, we will force them like we force babies to drink milk.

So war and Imperialism? Cut out your crap.

It is what you in the west call tough love, like what those quasi Nazis in Germany do to Tsipras.

[Highfort]

What if these countries that own that land don't want you to have it?

Then they must accept if they want economic gdp growth, we will force them like we force babies to drink milk.

Those countries are not your children and you have neither a duty nor permission to go fucking around with them for your own gain.

There's a reason the west frowns whenever the US goes exploiting other people's politics for money and I think Russia should get the same reaction when it tries that.

[Page]

Once on a flight I sat next to a Russian kid. We were both teenagers but he was a few years younger than me. He asked me if I was an American and somehow we got into politics, and he asked me what I thought of Bush. "I think Bush was a horrible President, I didn't like him at all" I said. The Russian kid says "George Bush was a stupid goat." Cute, and not something I'd disagree with. But then as things go on he rambles about how great Putin has made Russia and that he was part of some kind of Putin-youth thing (I don't know what it was). Then he was ranting about Germans and how evil they are, and I said "Well the Nazis were evil but Germans today realize that and Germans today are good people" and he's like "No, they shouldn't be forgiven for Hitler." And then he goes on about how Russia crushed Hitler without anyone's help, how they "won" against the Finns in the Winter War and showing me his knowledge of history.

It was right around then I realized some Russians are really fervently nationalistic and do not listen to other views. And of course there are Americans like that too but some Russians really do take it to a whole new level.

[Allanea]

Poland has a higher GDP per capita than Russia, as well as a lower inflation rate and poverty rate. proof.

Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia all have higher GDPs per capita than Russia.

[Valkalan]

Russia is an authoritarian nation run by the FSB, and is in effect nothing but a modernization of Soviet Russia. The most successful firms and businessmen succeed only with the blessing of the state, an in effect the Russian economy remains centrally planned. 70% of all key government positions are staffed by former KGB and FSB personnel with the rest of Russian society including even the Russian Orthodox Church and organized crime being thoroughly penetrated by the FSB. Vocal dissenters often meet with death under questionable circumstances. Russian foreign policy is nothing less than a plot to reestablish control of the old Soviet sphere of influence now envisioned as the "Eurasian Union", with all of the repression and economic mediocrity of the Soviet Union.

I see no bias. Russia's ill reputation is deserved.

[Wolfmanne]

What if these countries that own that land don't want you to have it?

Then they must accept if they want economic gdp growth, we will force them like we force babies to drink milk.

What if they believe that the best way for economic growth is to join the EU and they decide to do that?

[Allanea]

Choose only ome:

Either:

1. Russia had liberal democracy, and therefore Russia elected Boris Yeltsin, and chose him as its leader. A necessary though not sufficient condition for liberal democracy is that the people choose their own leaders.

2. Russia did not choose its own President, and therefore did not have liberal democracy.

Only one of these can be true at the same time.

In liberal democracy only the Liberal can win.

Please look up the definition of 'liberal democracy'.