| Author |
Message |
RussianBoy
Frequent Guest
Joined: 01 Dec 2004
Posts: 33
Location: Russia, Moscow
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Roller
Just Starting
Joined: 01 Jun 2005
Posts: 8
Location: South Australia
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 01, 2005 4:44 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Ooo I love a good political debate, especially where it contains America... 
Well first off I don't hate America... I chat to a lot of great american people on the net, but there are many things that annoy me about the country as a whole. The main reason for this annoyance is the fact that most Americans like to tell everyone that they are the BEST, no if's or but's about it. Of course that gets up everyone's nose.
I do not see how America can call itself the pinnacle of justice and freedom (or even a properly civillised coutnry for that matter) when it still has the death penalty. It's old... it was good back in the old days but seriously, people have moved on, become more sophisticated. Your country is more than rich enough to find a better method then killing someone.
I noticed a little bit of talk on the Russian media being so controlled. There is little wonder most Americans think they are doing a great job in Iraq, and the people of Iraq love them - the American government produces it's own news stories and distributes them to the major news networks. Let me repeat that... your government is making false news stories with fake reporters and they are being played on the major news channels as if it were normal news. http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1332765.htm There's the article and no, it's not by a jealous American Basher, it's fromt he New York Times. When I read that I could not beleive it... it's a funny kind of democracy you have there, if your own government can get away with that.
On the subject of Putin, I think he's alright, although I do not live in Russia so I can't give a proper opinion. I don't think that the West "hates his guts"... Well not that I know of. He seems to me to be a very intelligent and hard-working man, and isn't scared of voicing his opinion in front of the cameras. There is a lot of talk about him making Russia a lot more authoritarian with the Yukos case etc, but as I see it he is simply trying to reign in the oligarchs in order to get the economy functioning as it should be... but then again I think that many Russians think differently of him, so who knows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mogsfan
WayToRussified
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 490
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well, what I've read of him, whether it be Russian or Western (including English-speaking) media, he doesn't have much problem with enforcing authoritarian rule whether it's primarily by his own hand or influenced by the powers of the Russian government (Duma etc.).
There have been a few journalists and/or political analysts who have suggested the typical idea that Western political analysts always say: to "choose the 'lesser evil'" Thus, they rationalize their preference for Putin in that manner. I think that just means the collapse of the policial system as people feel indifferent, submissive and defeatist attitude. It also leads to willing jusitifcation of wrongdoings by said government and politicians. But, hey... no one cares. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Only
Frequent Guest
Joined: 05 Mar 2005
Posts: 48
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Putin is alright. I was suspicious of him at first, but thus far I like what he's doing. Astoundingly, ALL of my friends back home are happy about him, now that's something I couldn't see happenning for any power figure back in the nineties. Call him authoritarian all you want, but if it makes people trust powerholders better, I am all for it. Because than people don't trust their government, they stop paying taxes - that's the most telling vote of no confidence there could be - and then they stop paying taxes, like it happened in Russia in the ninties... To illustrate it I could only say that Russia fully economically recovered to its pre-1991 (less than perfect, apparently) state last year. 13 years wasted.
And to those who say that they read in Russian sources that Putin is tightening his grip on the freedom of press...Read this sentence again. And again. Do you see it now?
Someone here said that the only moment than he was proud of Russians was in 1991. I assume he was talking about August, and not introduction of offshore business practises to already ailing Russian economy 
As it happens, I knew most people in the media at that time who refused to close up or play Swan Lake, and printed pro-Eltsin and pro-Gorbachev flyers, went on air live from White House of Russia and assisted CNN crews in Moscow instead. Surprisingly they are, by and large, the very same people who run most prominent media outlets there now. And people who were building barricades around what is now called Independence Square in Moscow are same people who consider Putin to be their president. Not all of them are rich, in fact many are nearly worse off than they were in the eighties; yet they are beginning to believe that it was not for nothing, after all. And they are finally feeling certain that there is no way back to 30s, 70s or 90s.
It might not be democratic enough for some, but it sure as hell works for me. Unlike, say, Bush |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mogsfan
WayToRussified
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 490
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Only wrote: | Putin is alright. I was suspicious of him at first, but thus far I like what he's doing. Astoundingly, ALL of my friends back home are happy about him, now that's something I couldn't see happenning for any power figure back in the nineties. Call him authoritarian all you want, but if it makes people trust powerholders better, I am all for it. Because than people don't trust their government, they stop paying taxes - that's the most telling vote of no confidence there could be - and then they stop paying taxes, like it happened in Russia in the ninties... To illustrate it I could only say that Russia fully economically recovered to its pre-1991 (less than perfect, apparently) state last year. 13 years wasted.
|
No, if they don't pay their taxes, it's called 'tax evasion.' It doesn't matter if they like their President/Prime Minister or not.
Of course, most of your Russian friends like him. They brainwash the populace and don't allow opposing views. All the oligarchs got a free ride and most Russians won't even dispute this. They bought state-owned or bought shares of state-owned companies for much less than they were worth. They built their riches this way but the government allowed it as long as they got their slice of the pie. Now, it seems, the government allows these rich oligarchs financial freedom as long as they don't invest or financially support the opposition. Russia's not known as a corrupt country for nothing.
I know, Bush and his cronies are shite, too, but we're talking about Russia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Of course, most of your Russian friends like him. They brainwash the populace and don't allow opposing views. All the oligarchs got a free ride and most Russians won't even dispute this. They bought state-owned or bought shares of state-owned companies for much less than they were worth. They built their riches this way but the government allowed it as long as they got their slice of the pie. Now, it seems, the government allows these rich oligarchs financial freedom as long as they don't invest or financially support the opposition. Russia's not known as a corrupt country for nothing. |
I wonder which Russia you are talking about since the Russia on the planet Earth I live on, 10 out of the 15 known top oligrachs in the country are living in exile or are in trouble with the government no matter if they were on the side of the opposition or even supportive of Putin. 
Not like the oilgarchs don't deserve to be picked on by the government. They aren't exactly angels either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mogsfan
WayToRussified
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 490
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| e wrote: |
Not like the oilgarchs don't deserve to be picked on by the government. They aren't exactly angels either. |
Quite true. I'm sure the majority deserve it. But, e, who 'created' these oligarchs? I'd say the government had a great influence.
Yes, I know that most of the "old" ones are in exile. They weren't "playing the game" any longer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 11:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
From my understanding and experience of it, the Oligarchs were created when Russia, particulary during prestroika, quickly and irresponsibly deregulated Russia's economy. They took advantages of shortages in Russia during Prestroika and got into the import-export business and grew extremeley rich. Most of these oligarchs, including Khordokoshy, also went into crime. For every oligrach that made it, there were 50 or so that failed. Bankrupt, or assassinated. Or imprisoned by the government.
During the 90s they went into banking and finance as these were the most prominent and profitable businesses in Russia at the time. Then along came the Asian Financial crisis that ruined the Russian economy too and oligarchs became the bad guys.
And those oligrachs aren't old. If you actually get over your biases, you'll realize that they correspond to what I mentioned earlier: most of them were criminals or had criminal connections and most of them tried (read: bought their way in like Chubais) into government. Some were successful in Elstins regime, but then they went too far and crossed him and broke more rules and Eltsin went after them grudingly. Especially when he was under pressure from western institutions like the IMF, World Bank to act and etc.
This is the reason why Putin is going after them and your claims that Putin is in league with them now is farcial. Putin disparingly witnessed all of this when he was a government member and is now only trying to prevent a situation like the 1990s and actually doing the thngs (ie: prosecuting them for crimes commited) that the Elsin regime failed to do.
And I did check what Intoturist said and its true: Menatep and a bunch of oligarchs were on the lists of Western intelligence agencies. So in other words, the Russian government does have a legit reason to go after them and probably one of the reasons why the Yukos case was dropped in the US.
BBC index about it here:
http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?scope=newsifs&tab=news&q=oligarch&go.x=26&go.y=10&go=go
The Economist index about it here:
http://www.economist.com/search/search.cfm?qr=oligarch&area=5&Submit2=Go |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mogsfan
WayToRussified
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 490
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
IYO, what is my bias?
Well, I thought that it was the Russian government de-regulating and not the oligarchs. But, the oligarchs got a "favoured" privatisation deal and were allowed to invest (and acquire) in former state-owned and operated property for much less than it was worth. They were able to secure exclusive rights to them. Average Russians didn't really obtain this opportunity. Thus, the criminal oligarchs were actually 'created' by the government itself. Putin was part of the government although not President. You are right, it is easier to trace oligarch associations to Yeltsin's regime, than Putin's. However, my concern all along was a process of favouritism or toleration of certain oligarchs by Putin's regime. To reiterate for the one hundredth time, it seemed as though Putin only really acted when Khordovsky started to become a serious threat in a political way.
Basically, as far as I'm concerned, it's a matter of timing and ulterior motives. I'm not against it (the charges) in principle (there are a lot of sources to support Khordovsky as a criminal). But, imho, the oligarchs obtained their riches and possessions in a very shady way. The government let this happen and orchestrated the entire thing. Putin didn't seem to really act until guys like Khordovsky started financing the opposition. When oligarchs started going into politics (in an opposing manner), Putin acted.
| e wrote: | From my understanding and experience of it, the Oligarchs were created when Russia, particulary during prestroika, quickly and irresponsibly deregulated Russia's economy. They took advantages of shortages in Russia during Prestroika and got into the import-export business and grew extremeley rich. Most of these oligarchs, including Khordokoshy, also went into crime. For every oligrach that made it, there were 50 or so that failed. Bankrupt, or assassinated. Or imprisoned by the government.
During the 90s they went into banking and finance as these were the most prominent and profitable businesses in Russia at the time. Then along came the Asian Financial crisis that ruined the Russian economy too and oligarchs became the bad guys.
And those oligrachs aren't old. If you actually get over your biases, you'll realize that they correspond to what I mentioned earlier: most of them were criminals or had criminal connections and most of them tried (read: bought their way in like Chubais) into government. Some were successful in Elstins regime, but then they went too far and crossed him and broke more rules and Eltsin went after them grudingly. Especially when he was under pressure from western institutions like the IMF, World Bank to act and etc.
This is the reason why Putin is going after them and your claims that Putin is in league with them now is farcial. Putin disparingly witnessed all of this when he was a government member and is now only trying to prevent a situation like the 1990s and actually doing the thngs (ie: prosecuting them for crimes commited) that the Elsin regime failed to do.
And I did check what Intoturist said and its true: Menatep and a bunch of oligarchs were on the lists of Western intelligence agencies. So in other words, the Russian government does have a legit reason to go after them and probably one of the reasons why the Yukos case was dropped in the US.
BBC index about it here:
http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?scope=newsifs&tab=news&q=oligarch&go.x=26&go.y=10&go=go
The Economist index about it here:
http://www.economist.com/search/search.cfm?qr=oligarch&area=5&Submit2=Go |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mogsfan
WayToRussified
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 490
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I hope you know that Boris Berezovsky was a major partner (and buddy) of Roman Abramovich. Abramovich is the one who apparently financed Putin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I hope you know that Boris Berezovsky was a major partner (and buddy) of Roman Abramovich. Abramovich is the one who apparently financed Putin. |
 LOL Abramovich is living in exile in London. He is wanted in Russia for questioning by Putin!
And again prove it! From something credible too.
| Quote: | | Well, I thought that it was the Russian government de-regulating and not the oligarchs. But, the oligarchs got a "favoured" privatisation deal and were allowed to invest (and acquire) in former state-owned and operated property for much less than it was worth. They were able to secure exclusive rights to them. Average Russians didn't really obtain this opportunity. Thus, the criminal oligarchs were actually 'created' by the government itself. Putin was part of the government although not President. You are right, it is easier to trace oligarch associations to Yeltsin's regime, than Putin's. However, my concern all along was a process of favouritism or toleration of certain oligarchs by Putin's regime. |
Its part of the "read and think" before you type thing that everyone was saying in the predjudice thread earlier. If you actually read what I wrote and the articles I referenced, the oligrachs started out as legit businessmen: a sort of rags to riches story sort of deal when the market was deregulated but then they got corrupt and criminal. It happens everywhere.
| Quote: | The oligarchs started under Gorbachev during his period of market liberalization. Under the market liberalization, many smuggled rare goods into the country, such as PCs, and jeans, for a hefty profit margin, an unforeseen consequence of partial market liberalization with still excessive trade restrictions, and the willingness of some, less savory characters, to smuggle goods into the country and sell them on the black market.
Post-Soviet business oligarchs tended to achieve vast wealth by acquiring state assets very cheaply during the privatization process started by the Yeltsin government. |
From what you can read (if you actually read it): The government didn't do anything and that social-economic conditions such as a shortage of consumer goods that created the oligarchs. As I mentioned earlier, it created market conditions that made them very rich. The post-Societ oligarch took advantage of the free market and the the fact they were already rich and bought into the market. Without any government assistance. Average Russians did participate in this and became oligarchs but many went bankrupt, were killed, and/or assassinated during the late 90s financial crisis.
| Quote: | | To reiterate for the one hundredth time, it seemed as though Putin only really acted when Khordovsky started to become a serious threat in a political way. |
Again, refer to Abramovich who is now on a permanent vacation in London which happened long before Yukos. And see what I posted below.
It seems to me that you, like many a westerner, only started paying attention to this when Putin went after Yukos when one of Putin's campaign promises in 2001 was to crack down on the oligarchs and corruption.
From the Financial Times 12.09.04 (you need a paying account to access this one). I suggest you actually read this stuff this time instead of making your usual impulsive knee-jerk, reactionary, and highly and unecessarily personal flames.
| Quote: | In the Putin era, the remaining oligarchs have come under fire for various alleged and real illegal activities, particularly the underpayment of taxes in the businesses they acquired. Vladimir Gusinsky (MediaMost) and Boris Berezovsky were both effectively exiled, and the most prominent, Mikhail Khodorkovsky (Yukos oil), was arrested in October 2003 and (as of 12/04) is in jail, with his company trying desperately to protect itself from being dismantled.
The first months of Putin's first term were also marked by a settling of scores among elite financial-industrial groups, whose monetary resources and media empires had been critical weapons in the domestic political war that had been waged over the previous year. Leading members of the old Yeltsin group - known informally as "the Family" - were determined to punish the losing camp, headed by Vladimir Gusinsky, which had backed the Primakov/Luzhkov ticket. Within a year of Putin's election, Gusinsky went from being a would-be kingmaker to living in self-imposed exile; his once-influential media conglomerate (Media-MOST) disintegrated in the face of a withering assault by state-owned and state-allied businesses and under the weight of criminal and civil court decisions. |
Once again i'm right, you're wrong.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mogsfan
WayToRussified
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 490
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | You're the one who's wrong. The government played a major role in populating Russia with oligarchs. Once again, they gave favourable deals to these people. You're also hopeless. |
Again Mogsfan READ Can you READ ?:
| Quote: | | The oligarchs started under Gorbachev during his period of market liberalization. Under the market liberalization, many smuggled rare goods into the country, such as PCs, and jeans, for a hefty profit margin, an unforeseen consequence of partial market liberalization with still excessive trade restrictions, and the willingness of some, less savory characters, to smuggle goods into the country and sell them on the black market. Post-Soviet business oligarchs tended to achieve vast wealth by acquiring state assets very cheaply during the privatization process started by the Yeltsin government. According to David Satter, author of Darkness at Dawn, "what drove the process was not the determination to create a system based on universal values but rather the will to introduce a system of private ownership, which, in the absence of law, opened the way for the criminal pursuit of money and power |
So tell me, where does it say in that upper paragraph that the Russian government created oligarchs or gave them favorable conditions? And if so, please prove. You seem to have a problem proving your claims --especially with creible source.
Reading the information provided above, I would say that a complete free market did and Russia's constant problem of a lack of consumer goods and a services economy and not an actual government policy. Perhaps you should be saying that the government did little to stop them or that Eltsins government was too weak and incompetent to stop them until put under heavy pressure by western financial institutions to do so.
| Quote: | | You're also a liar. Unless, you knew he went to the U.K. and nothing else. Highly unlikely. I suspect you knew they were talking and that Putin was just asking for more money |
That made no sense. Can you retype plase.
That Mosnews article actully supports my argument. Putin wants him back in Russia to question his sources of money and to reinvest some it in Russia, but Abe wants to remain in London. You do know he's in London and owns Chelsea right? I bet if Abe continues to remain defiant, he will face trouble too.
And none of those articles give any kinds of support and credence to your claims that Putin is being backed and supported by Oligarachs but are only background profiles on Abramovich. Once again please prove.
From that same article that I reposted:
| Quote: |
Putin did not welcome Berezovsky's views on Chechnya or his political influence. Fearing arrest, Berezovsky moved to London, where he was granted political asylum. Putin's government has successfully pressured Berezovsky to sell many of his business holdings and has attempted to prosecute Berezovsky on fraud and political corruption charges, but it has been unable to extradite him. Berezovsky continues to support liberalization from abroad, but his influence is limited.
|
So that proves that he didn't nor did he could have financially backed Putin as you claim. Can you prove otherwise?
BTW Moscow News is also atually far from credible and has even a degree of noteriety in this forum; it actually printed one of Winstons "editorials" 
Again Mogs you're falling into the problem that Cyndy and Holmes did i.e: a strange addiction to it, making irrational comments and posts, taking things highly personal and loss of self control. I would suggest you relax or smoke some pot in the way you sugested Camrade to do so, and actually read these posts, and come up with better reponses. Or better yet, take time off from this board and relax. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mogsfan
WayToRussified
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 490
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't have time to argue with you right now. Your quote just further supported my point.
| Quote: | | The oligarchs started under Gorbachev during his period of market liberalization. Under the market liberalization, many smuggled rare goods into the country, such as PCs, and jeans, for a hefty profit margin, an unforeseen consequence of partial market liberalization with still excessive trade restrictions, and the willingness of some, less savory characters, to smuggle goods into the country and sell them on the black market. Post-Soviet business oligarchs tended to achieve vast wealth by acquiring state assets very cheaply during the privatization process started by the Yeltsin government. According to David Satter, author of Darkness at Dawn, "what drove the process was not the determination to create a system based on universal values but rather the will to introduce a system of private ownership, which, in the absence of law, opened the way for the criminal pursuit of money and power |
"what drove the process was not the determination to create a system based on universal values but rather the will to introduce a system of private ownership, which, in the absence of law, opened the way for the criminal pursuit of money and power
Yeltsin and many of the oligarchs had "special" relationships. Putin has had "meetings" with Abramovich. Yeltsin was especially connected and relied on the oligarchs for money and power. Putin, I think, is somewhat different as he wishes to have oligarchs 'finance' him, his party and the (state-driven) Russian economy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
e
VIP
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 654
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 9:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Yeltsin and many of the oligarchs had "special" relationships. Putin has had "meetings" with Abramovich. Yeltsin was especially connected and relied on the oligarchs for money and power. Putin, I think, is somewhat different as he wishes to have oligarchs 'finance' him, his party and the (state-driven) Russian economy. |
But yet you can't really seem to prove any of it sooo........
| Quote: | | what drove the process was not the determination to create a system based on universal values but rather the will to introduce a system of private ownership, which, in the absence of law, opened the way for the criminal pursuit of money and power |
You obviously..as usual...misread and misunderstood. It doesn't say anywhere that the government was complict in the creation of oligarchs but lax enforcement of the law and the total free market created a situation where one could become an oligrach and thrive. Where does it say that the government created oligarchs or that they supported them and vice versa? I also mentioned that the IMF and World Bank disapproved of this situation as they forced Eltsin to act against the oligrachs and he did. Putin is rectifying this situation by creating and making the government presence that was conspiciously absent during this period. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
