The-thing-next-door wrote:
Well then you should just vote for the communist party, unlike any western country Russia is actually democratic, if you lose the vote then it is the will of the people and you have no grounds to argue.
Hardly. They've already been denying communist candidates registration in Saratov, in the Komi republic, in other places
We have a communist in power in Khakassia, who makes little secret of his disagreement with the centre albeit doesn't push the envelope. He's genuinely very popular, hosts regular internet Q&A sessions for the younger audience, is in his early 30s himself, and has done a lot to battle corruption and sort out people's problems in the region.
Well I suppose Putin & co. decided they didn't want more such people so here we are. No candidate that doesn't have the ruling circle's approval is going to have an easy time running for elections, if at all.
But regarding your suggestion of importing europeans, this is suicidal, unless perhaps Russia were to wipe out every last vestige of nato's existence and wait for a few generations. Of all the countries in europe only Russia and possibly a few Russian allies have not fallen to liberal degeneracy.
Why on earth would it be suicidal? I'm not suggesting to import the libtards, but those who run from them. And there are a lot of such people. In the past people fled Europe to America, but these days the degeneracy and instability in America is even worse. In South Africa there's a war against whites. South America is OK but is a bit underdeveloped. Australia and New Zealand are just more globalist colonies. Eastern Europe is full of people already.
When Catherine the Great opened the door for Europeans to colonize the Volga, it was mostly Germans who took her up on the offer. And they were fleeing religious wars in Germany.
In the same manner, there are many Europeans in Germany, France, Ireland I'm sure who would want to flee the new SJW-LGBT-Ecowarrior state religion and its inquisition.
There are many people in Southern Europe who are apolitical and don't care one way or the other, but would be happy to integrate into a new society which can promise them employment and a stable lifestyle; without having to rely on EU-funded public sector jobs, the tourist sector and work migration to more industrialized countries.
If you mean that these people or their descendants would side with NATO interventionists - what on earth what would their motive be for doing so?
It's a common observation that immigrants and those seeking to build a new life for themselves are often more loyal to their new homeland than those who've grown up there, not less.
Those interested in perserving traditional lifestyles and values, and getting involved in agriculture - can settle villages and rural locations. This is Russia's selling point - it's vast amount of sparsely populated land. We've had a program of inviting Russian Germans back to Russia for the last several years; particularly to the Crimea and certain regions of Siberia, with the prospect of having German-language courses in local schools and being able to settle in compact areas of habitation where the Germans can preserve their culture and language.
It hasn't been a run-off success but there has been progress, and we can certainly expand the program for other European peoples too with the same conditions.
In general we need people for the economy. We have a capitalist regime that depends on an ever growing labour army but even under socialism our birthrates were already dropping and ultimately we would come to the same conclusion. Russia is underpopulated, this under-population incurs huge infrastructural and state costs due to the need of providing social services and economic prospects to all the population spread out over such a large territory and so on.
Importing Europeans not suffering from liberal brainwashing would mean people that have values in common with the majority of Russia's population and that won't alienate or feel alienated from the native population.
But I'm not adverse to Muslim immigration from Central Asia & Azerbaijan; these are also people we have a lot of history with and get along with; every ex-Soviet nationality is okay really. Add Cubans, Vietnamese, also easy-going people from traditionally friendly countries.
Another avenue is what Russia is pursuing now - enticing foreign students to stay. At the moment we have about 275k foreign students in Russian universities; mostly from ex-Soviet countries but with an increasing Asian, African and Middle Eastern contingent. Of those a certain amount graduate each year, and we'll be lucky if we get 5000-10000 of them electing to stay and work in Russia per year. The Russian government is working on expanding the number of foreign students. If we can get the numbers up to say 600,000 foreign students and 25000-30000 graduating and staying in Russia per year; then that's already a growing pool of extra specialists with Russian diplomas that can contribute to the economy. And it doesn't matter in this case where they're from as such people are smart enough to integrate well and learn the language quickly.
About restoring the Soviet Union, but with a less fanatical devotion to communism, this would be a viable option (as long as they still let me buy a mansion). The one obvious thing they would need to avoid is marxism, all the internationalist trite and antitheist bull would need to be purged (the former was ofcourse purged in any communist country to ever exist).
The Bolsheviks went a bit overboard with the anti-religious crusade but then traditional religion was used far more severely in those times to keep people obedient and with their faces in the mud.
There is no necessity for repressing religion in this day and age albeit certainly the borgouise structures associated with it are dangerous; the Islamic lobby, the Christian Orthodox clergy-oligarchs and so on. Our clery is corrupt to the bone and have siphoned off tons of money, owing to their connections with the system of power.
I would certainly detach the Russian Orthodox Church from the state and encourage people's elections for a new Patriarch, rather than rely on the existing rigid hierarchy of money and power. To a lesser extent the same problem is present with the Muslim, Buddhist and Jewish clergy - they're all corrupt and grow fat off their connections with the state.
As for the 'internationalist trite' well it worked well enough for Lenin. The British strikes and the French sailor mutinies in the Black Sea were key reasons for the withdrawals of interventions from these two states during the Civil War. Even American soldiers in Arkhangelsk refused the orders of their superiors after being agitated by Bolshevik propaganda.
Revolutions took place and set-up allied socialist governments in Bavaria and Hungary. There were uprisings by Finnish and Latvian socialists which led to civil wars there.
Had the Polish-Soviet war played out differently we could have ended up with a considerably expanded league of socialist governments in Europe on the back of the same internationalism
Internationalism is really a prerequisite of socialism, you can't have one without another. A socialist economy is beholden to support other worker's movements and create more socialist countries, in order to grow its own economy and trade.
But certainly the time is not the same now I advocate a pragmatic approach as China's, rather than world revolution. The priority should be to build up Russia and turn it into a model for others to follow. And I don't call for the abolishment of private enterprise, simply to out-compete the main part of them through the foundation of state-funded co-operatives in agriculture and light industry for a start, coupled with a planned-economy approach to heavy industry and infrastructural development though state corporations (this modern Russia is already doing).
You can only push for simultaneous revolution to other countries undergoing the same historical processes as your own. In our case it would be Turkey, and I'm eager to see the progress of the Turkish Communist Party there in coming years.
It was the Soviet Union's devotion to communist texts that was its downfall and it will be the west's devotion to capitalist texts that will spell thier doom.
The globalists (the borgouise internationale) are gaining ground and will soon settle the issue with Trump and the dissenters in their own ranks, the nationalists in Europe and so on. They will all be fired from their jobs, publicly humiliated, beaten, jailed, killed, whatever.
Trump himself and his family, associates will all be put on a show-trial and found guilty of corruption and so on. Which they are genuinely guilty of no doubt. They all are.
Much as Hitler settled the matter of Yugoslavia and Greece, before marching on Moscow.
Maybe I'm being pessimistic but it's better to be prepared than to fall into hubris and smugness as our Grand Master Putin has done. Now Putin is even losing Belarus. Belarus in 2020 is Poland in 1980. A rebellious population holding strikes and mass protests held down by a security apparatus and military loyal to Moscow.
I'm afraid that local limited successes in all these Syria's and Libya's on the periphery don't amount to much, in the face of such a strategic collapse. Next up is Kazakhstan. They're going to have a nationalist anti-Russian revolution.
As for the Soviet Union's downfall. The Soviet Union's downfall was not caused by communists, but by capitalists.
Those who provoked all the interethnic provocations and conflicts, agitated with cheap propaganda about becoming a 2nd France, invited Western advisors to privatize industries while hoisting themselves up as the new owners.
And many of these people were in the Communist Party but that didn't make them communists.
And finally ended the whole thing by dismantling the USSR in service of their own political game, and then shelling the by then fully-democratic and elected Supreme Soviet in 1993, scribbling up a new constitution and disbanding the rest of the soviets in Russia the same year.
And this was in fact made possible because by the 80s the USSR had seriously deviated from Marxist-Leninism. It would be an exaggeration to say that it was for example, a totalitarian bureaucracy with a planned economy paying only lip-service to socialism, but there is something in favour of such a point of view.
There were also those in the late 80s Soviet Union who were genuinely interested in moving the country back towards socialism; many people in Gorbachev's circle. But events pulled the rug out from beneath their feet
We would also ofcourse not want Russia to become some multicultural left communist hell hole, if you want that, move to germany.
Germany is neo-liberal capitalist not communist. And it certainly doesn't have any sort of socialist or marxist values or anything of the sort.
It has capitalist values; those values which can pretty much be anything, that the ruling class decides serves them in keeping themselves at the top and the people at the bottom divided between themselves by race/religion/sexual orientation/whatever.
As far as Belarussians being non Russian this as as pointless as claiming people in Vladivostok are Chinese or that poles arent backstabbing scum. They were fully integrated in both the Russian empire and Soviet Union, only in the accursed 90's were they separated.
They had their own republic, their own national language schools and classes at least in the rural districts, their own film studio, their own ethnic identity, their own industrial brands such as BelAZ and MAZ, etc...
They are still integrated with Russia and Russians; one does not abrogate the other.
Again I'm not against a Union State. But they have to come to that conclusion themselves. Thanks for Lukashenko's retardation, they'll go through a painful road of pro-Western bullshit and deindustrialization first. And thanks to Putin and his 'loyalty to friends', it may never happen at all, they may be provoked into becoming the next Ukraine.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Isos
