"Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts, but that it is magnetic to the corruptible." "Charismatic leaders tend to build up followings, power structures, and those power structures tend to be taken over by people who are corruptible." - Frank Herbert (Author of Dune, 1965)
That’s a true statement, and Herbert was a very intelligent writer. But also, having power over prolonged periods of time often corrupts those who wield it, even if they were not inclined to be corrupt to begin with.
@@mk14m0 I'm inclined to agree. Because to wield power 'positively' is to engage with it primarily as a responsibility/burden, rather than an asset/weapon. And so, to wield power 'positively' is to wield it at a disadvantage to one's self. As Frank Herbert also said in his book (Dune): "We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it, and then only under conditions that increase that reluctance." NO HUMAN would be happy to do this for too long a time. And so, to force/allow someone wield power for a long time is to push them closer and closer toward either tyranny or resentment (which itself leads to tyranny), regardless of their original nature or intent. Simply put ladies and gentlemen (anyone that reads this, I mean😅): take responsibility for your self, family and existence, because no one else can do it for you, not for long - lest you regret it.
@@mk14m0 I'm inclined to agree. Because to wield power 'positively' is to wield it at a disadvantage to one's self i.e to engage with it as a responsibility/burden, rather than an asset/weapon. Herbert said as well in his book that: "We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it, and then only under conditions that increase that reluctance." NO HUMAN would voluntarily do this (engage in something to their disadvantage) for too long. And so to force/allow a person wield power for a long time is to push them closer and closer toward either tyranny or resentment (which itself leads to tyranny), regardless of their original nature or intent. In other words ladies and gentlemen (whoever's reading this, I mean😅): Take responsibility for your self, family, and existence. Because no one is going to do it for you, not for long, lest you regret it dearly.
@@mk14m0 I'm inclined to agree. Because to wield power 'positively' is to wield it at a disadvantage to one's self i.e to engage with it as a responsibility/burden, rather than an asset/weapon. Herbert said as well in his book that: "We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it, and then only under conditions that increase that reluctance." NO HUMAN would voluntarily do this (engage in something to their disadvantage) for too long. And so to force/allow a person wield power for a long time is to push them closer and closer toward either tyranny or resentment (which itself leads to tyranny), regardless of their original nature or intent. In other words ladies and gentlemen (whoever's reading this, I mean😅): Take responsibility for your self, family, and existence. Because no one is going to do it for you, not for long, lest you regret it dearly.
@@mk14m0 I'm inclined to agree. Because to wield power 'positively' is to wield it at a disadvantage to one's self i.e to engage with it as a responsibility/burden, rather than an asset/weapon. Herbert said as well in his book that: "We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it, and then only under conditions that increase that reluctance." NO HUMAN would voluntarily do this (engage in something to their disadvantage) for too long. And so to force/allow a person wield power for a long time is to push them closer and closer toward either tyranny or resentment (which itself leads to tyranny), regardless of their original nature or intent. In other words ladies and gentlemen (whoever's reading this, I mean): Take responsibility for your self, family, and existence. Because no one is going to do it for you, not for long, lest you regret it dearly.
I think this is too simplistic a summary. I think a big part of the failure of the Russian project in the 1990s was the the economic catastrophe in the transition away from communism and the failure to build a healthy capitalism. The privations that Russians suffered in the 1990s discredited Western-style democracy in their eyes.
It should also be noted that, in Russia, many don't like the idea of Democracy. They associate the term with the parts of the 90s where criminal gangs seemed to hold more power than the government and when they were least sure they would have food and not be killed. There is a preference for a strong executive, even a tyrant, based on their view of history. And when you consider their experience it's not unjustified. But as you point out it's still not the best.
@@AndryFateev I saw a couple interviews with people who have lived in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union. Not everyone thinks how I described, but enough for it to make a difference in who gets elected. As the years go on that percentage tends to decline as more young people who didn't experience the 90s become voters and old people who did die, but it's going to be a while before that view isn't significant.
Yeah, okay, they don't want democracy. That's fine. We don't care, that's their choice. But why attacking other countries and dragging them to this shithole when they DO NOT want that? Moldova, Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, also how russia violently suppressed protests in BELARUS, Kazakhstan and other countries, as well as organized and funded some pro russian coups. Why do others need to suffer, just because russia doesn't know what democracy and freedom is?
A lot of russians view the USSR period as a part of Russian empire history even though it was communist and atheist, it was nationalist and authoritarian.
It was absolutely an extension of the Russian Empire. The explanation that Russians shouldn't be punished for Stalin's crimes against humanity because they suffered as well doesn't fly anymore. Most of them want those days back.
@@henriikkak2091 That reminds me: I once saw someone joke online that Russians hate all Georgians, except for the one that killed millions of them (Stalin).
It was a communist russian empire. And thats not the point anyways. The point is that the soviet union was as strong, if not stronger than the russian empire. The russians dont care if their leader is a monarch or an autocrat, a nationslist or a communist, they just want him to be strong. And considering the fact that russia always collapsed under weak leadership that demand is very understandable.
Humanity has always been enamored with strong autocrat types. Everyone tends to assume a dictator will lean toward their own side of any issue, so they tend to see it as a win.
And that's not necessarily a bad thing, it's no more problematic than rigged democracy we experience. We hate Russia because they remain autonomous rather than under WEF/UN control
Actually, I would say that Vladimir Putin is taking Russia back considerably further than the USSR, back indeed to the Old Russian Empire of the Tsars. If anything, Putin has more in common with Tsar Alexander III than he does with Joseph Stalin.
Facts! 💯Just goes to show that American conservatives can and will be just as biased and deceptive as American liberals as and when it suits them. And democracy, quite frankly, is overrated. In order for democracy to flourish the way it was originally designed, there needs to be complete transparency and integrity between the authority figures and the people. Votes and elections don't mean anything if there is manipulation, conspiracy and deception. Like what we see in the USA, especially since 2020, when Trump should have been the rightful winner of the presidential election. Even though the USA is meant to be a constitutional republic, the elements of democracy that it does have aren't always carried out with integrity.
Although I'd consider that an interesting factoid (and probably true), it is utterly unimportant. From the common citizen's perspective they just see secret police, labor camps, and death to those that resist government power. The common citizen doesn't care and frequently doesn't know the difference between Fascism, Communism, Despotism, and all the other -isms. They just know that speaking up and trying to change things ends up with punishment or death. Democracy as a system requires buy-in from the majority of the citizens. What Russia needs is a leader who we would call in the West a 'statesman'. Someone who can help educate the populace on the historical benefits of liberty and show them the way and who has the discipline and foresight to internally change Russia into a citizen supported institution as the people grow in support. There are models for how to do this in history. The issue, as it has ever been, is that you can't discriminate between a statesman and another petty dictator until it is too late to do anything about it. It is why most revolutions are just violent changes of power. It makes me even more amazed at how well the US revolution went.
Not really. Sulla was an exception to a Republic that had stood for quite a while. He definitely set the pattern that Julius Caesar and Octavian followed. On that you have it 100% right. But Rome had tradition that had to be broken. You can't say the same about Russia/USSR. There has never been a tradition of Freedom/Liberty/Rule of Law in that country. Yeltsin and Putin have merely done what all leaders in that part of the world do.. keep their power consolidated and rule with an iron fist. It is telling that the citizens don't think there needs to be a civil war to stop it. Democracies and rule of law and freedom grow out of the citizenry's desire for it. The absence of support for liberty is what allows the autocrats to take and keep power. I think the USA is facing a similar test sometime in our near future. I think a majority of US citizens still see the point of liberty and want it.. but many in the younger generation are VERY enamored with Marxism and autocracy. The times, they are a changin.
@@rbarnes4076I am tired of all the democracy and freedom nonsense that doesn’t even exist America needs a strongman reformer like Caesar elections are useless.
You still dont. Go read or watch more. This video brushes over a lot of variables, like that Yeltsin was corrupt as, made really crap choices and that the West helped push Russia into these conditions.
@@Akitorbenov Did Putin make you say that? Has he threatened to send your unborn son to fight in Ukraine 18 years from now? Blink once for yes, twice for no...
@@wazzup233 Not afraid. Contemptuous. Felons earn contempt. And prison. Sentencing in the first of Trump's 4 criminal cases is November 26. Stay tuned.
Yeltsin was a mastermind. Everyone thinks Gorbachev ended the USSR but it was really Yeltsin who stole it out from under him and turned it into what we know today.
Yeltsin was the closest thing to a good leader Russia has ever had. He wasn't great in anything except comparison to the others. Even Katherine and Peter "the great(s)" were mediocre at best.
@@navyreviewer Yeltin allowed the west to ransack the country, Putin stopped the looting which is why these people are so sore today. He stopped "Ukranianization".
@@navyreviewerif your definition of great is in relation to human rights and liberties, we’re agreed, although Alexander II would’ve been a great leader if he had been allowed to stay around longer. That being said, the modernization and expansion of Russia under the czars in question I think earns them their titles indisputably.
@@navyrevieweru should’ve lived under Yeltsin to see for urself. He was a literal puppet for the current president of USA and managed to fish the oligarchs into the ruling classs of Russia
@@matthewheald8964 That is generally were I was going. Of course if your definition is modernization and expansion then Stalin was great. "Joseph the Great"? Mmmmm. Mmmmm. I dont like that. I dont like that one bit.
I’m from Russia. Not a big fan of our government and Putin yet most of us are doing fine. I work, I travel, I love, I live my live… Democracy, not democracy… what else do I need for happy life?
You need democracy for 1 major task - to manage your taxes. You are paying ~40% of your income to the state budget. In democracy you have parliament deputies (elected on free elections) who fight each other (sometimes literally) to decide how to spend your money. In Russia - it is up to Putin. If he decide to burn it in something stupid (like war in Ukraine and unwinnable confrontation with the West) - he can do it. And you can't to anything.
@@ranelgallardo7031And then acquitted in the courts when it goes to trial. See, I don't agree with Trudeau but there still is a legal process he can't ignore. People don't just disappear and then die in prison of some unknown ailment. His overreach in the trucker convoys is now being exposed. In Putin's Russia, that never happens. People who piss him off end up dead or in prison and often both
And if we aren't careful... we're headed this way ourselves. "This nation will remain the land of the free only so long as it is the home of the brave." -- Elmer Davis
Monarchies are succesful, nonetheless. Believe me or not but in early 2000s American "think tanks" produced shittone of papers about how China inevitably will become democratic 😂😂 Because economy and quality of life in China improved a lot and Western lunatics think that this is automatically bring love to democracy (as more succesful citizens now want to participate in ruling of state by liberal elections bla bla basically saying that Western path are one and only and Godsend and anything else lead to "tyranny" and desolation) and without democracy next steps of economic developement are impossible. Here we are 20 years later, China is economic god, not only outproducing but even outdeveloping Apple, Tesla and other major Western corporations (not NASA and SpaceX yet because its hard to close headstart that Russia and USA have in space industry comparing to most countries but they closing the gap), Communist Party not gone and Chinese look at concept of Western liberal democracy like at shit. Alliance of Iran (theocracy), Saudi Arabia (monarchy), China (socialist.. pretty adapted into capitalist wirld order but still), Russia (big bad Putin and not a real democracy, capitalism, whatever western media say) being succesful in economic war against West is pretty damaging to image of undefeatable and inescapable liberal democracy lol
@@imperial_Dragnix Other emirates have fossil fuels, but not Dubai. And the locals are very proud Arabs & Muslims, though they are very tolerant towards outsiders.
It’s interesting to me that some cultures seem to appreciate strong overhead authority. I value my freedom, but I don’t think everyone does in the same way.
I think there are some benefits to an economically benevolent dictator especially in developing countries like Russia was after the collapse of the Soviet union.
@@Delpix722 Nope you are wrong USA is not democracy it's a oligarchy Only Trump is real leader of us , he is little dictatorial monarchy type But he will care for u as he is not funded by too many defence corporates Sadly I have to accept india used to be a secular democracy once Now it's a hindu theocracy
Topic suggestions: Student loans, perverse incentives, failed compromises between parties, unfunded mandates, citizens united cases, and whether or not companies should have the same rights as citizens.
@@conceptualclarity Let's not. I don't want more government power over companies. I want less company power over governments. Restricting the "rights" of companies to weigh in on political issues and lobbying, when they have NO God given rights in the first place, is different from saying I want government control of companies. I'm sick and tired of the interpretation of companies as humans so that they can spend money on politicians "as an expression of their first amendment rights". It's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
@@conceptualclaritybecause more power of companies over the government is such a good thing 😅 Russia learned that lesson in 90s hard way, for the West apparently lesson still not hard enough, thats why it still not learned it.
Short answer: Boris Yeltsin. Under him Russian economy collapsed, culminating in the 1998 default and its consequences, he allowed state enterprises to be privatized at a fraction of their real value (many of them closed down as it was more profitable for the new owners to asset strip them than to maintain operations), and he shot the parliament with tanks in 1993 when it disagreed with him, destroying any chance Russia had at a real democracy. But as he was America's bitсh, he has a positive reputation in the West.
The Russian people still remembered the Soviet Union. Many of them agreed with Putin that it was wrong that the Soviet Union fell apart. Many of them remember fondly of the government taking care of everything for you even if they were not good at it. They remember being proud that the Soviet Union was the most powerful country in the world even if it was propaganda.
Like a lot of Americans do now. People like to think that things are being "managed", even if the management is terrible. There is a deep-seated fear of anything that appears to not be under conscious human control -- people assume that anything not run by a human is invariably on a rapid slide toward chaos.
@@LordZub4291Actually, Putin began his career in the KGB, and the Czech revolution in 1968 was a turning point for him, because he saw the Czech revolution for democracy as a bad thing. He later famously called the collapse of the Soviet Union the worst disaster of the 20th century. He may be making use of some of the old pre-Soviet cultural trappings, such as Orthodox religious rituals, but he acts much like a Soviet ruler.
Russian history can be encapsulated by a phrase (coined by the naval historian and TH-camr “Drachinifel”) which goes: “And then it got worse.” Russia’s entire history is an unending tragedy.
@@navyreviewerThis is really encapsulate lies and errors that led West into perpetual fighting with Russia that now seems to turning not in its favor. His name not Ivan the Terrible. He is Ivan Groznyi which means "Moody" or "Mighty" (like a storm cloud, because word literally means "Thunderstorm-like", groza = thunderstorm). He was very succesful and respected ruler, modernized law system, reduced rights of the aristocrats to make them less corrupt, won several wars. Most of executions was in the last years of his rulership, after loss of loved wife and, as suspected by modern analyze of the body, failed attempt to poison him with quicksilver, most likely from offended aristocrats. Even then, he executed 4000 total. This is more than by his closest predescessors and successors. This is also several times less than British and French kings of that time, but they not called "Terrible" somehow. This is also 10 times less than French killed in one Walpurgis Night for religious reasons (their fellow Christians btw). That how it went then, with Westerners always judging Russia (and rest of the world but Russia especially) by much harsher measure than themselves, lying, mistranslating things (but as stupid examples as "the Terrible" i never seen), always in double standarts-thinking, arrogant and agressive. Thats why most powerful non-West countries united in, basically, anti-West alliance, with very high popular support of that alliance from the common people. Because world are tired of you.
I was expecting something more along the lines of "The people failed to protect the limitations on government, allowing too much power to be concentrated in the hands of a few corrupt individuals."
You will never hear this from someone who criticises only a certain regime because the West is heading the same way Russia, China and North Korea did and that is handling the government too much power.
Not Christianity. National values held with religious ferver; Similar to Hitler's fascists. Not exactly the golden rule, or love your neighbour like yourself.
It seems it doesn’t matter to the Western point of View. If Russia is strong and sovereign - oh no - it must be un democratic and tyrannical and imperialistic and collocialist and, and , and….
There are several key concepts that are required to establish a free and prosperous society. Words on a paper don't do it. 1. Moral society 2. Educated society (not schooled but truly educated) 3. The concept of individual rights versus group rights or government rights. 4. The concept of individual choice and responsibility. Russia has not had any of these ever. Without all of these any society is relegating to having a dictatorial leadership. This is also why we failed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
You left out this one which is the only guarantee of the first four. 5. An armed population who the government fears more than the population fears the government.
@Coloneldad5, You haven't a clue what you're talking about and you couldn't be more incorrect. Russia has greater morality than the United States today. Russians tend to be more truly educated than Americans today. It most areas, Russians have more individual rights than Americans today. In 2024, Russians tend to take individual responsibility more seriously than Americans, and individual choice is cherished in Russia. The Soviet Union is not returning to Russia.
6. Get Americans/west from OTHER countries 7. Learn Americans/west to look in YOUR backyard 8. Explain Americans that invading OTHER coutries is not democracy and your country is not some kind of pure angel who has RIGHTS and OBLIGATION to "teach" others how to live
@@boethius9173 Sorry but that is not true. Russian society is vastly corrupt. They don't have the true sense of individual rights versus governmental rights. Russians are also not "educated" but rather schooled. The key difference here is that a true education teaches you to think for yourself and not parrot what the government or those in control spew. It is easy to identify a society that has all four of these concepts in that they are free and not prone to abusing the rights and freedoms of others. Yes, we have almost completely lost this in the US and that is why we are in a speedy decline.
Thank You for Your programs ,If only people would listen and realize they have a personal responsibility to monitor their governments activities and vote thoughtfully and regularly!!!!
Even when they will be working at three jobs for minimum salary with highest crime rating and streets drown in mud and garbage they still will be singing praises to some hallucinated freedoms that are equal or even less than in most countries actually Tucker already received answer that he should not envy clean and pretty streets of Russian cities because "this is because of tyranny" and shitty cities in USA is "price of freedom" idk but city services in Russia consists not from inmates but from decent paid workers so no idea how "tyranny" cleans the streets
The main problem with Russia is Russian society. Russians are one of the most fierce, big-hearted, and generous peoples in the world, but at the same time, authoritarian rule has transformed Russian society immensely. From the Romanovs to the USSR and now the Putin era, Russia has always been ruled by authoritarian oligarchs. Unlike Western Europe, which went through a wave of democratization and liberalization since the French Revolution, Russia never experienced all of it. Now, most Russians view Putin as the correct leader because they fear that without a central power to rule the country, something worse may come.
At the start of the Romanov dynasty, 90% of the population was serfs, essentially slaves. A pattern of Russian behavior was set: servility to those above, tyranny to those below.
I am an American and I would have believed this video years ago, but after living and working in Moscow, I can assure anyone reading this comment that this video is misguided at best and nefarious at worst.
It would be interesting to hear that conversation, if it should ever happen. I think present day Russia is an enigma to 99% of Americans. I don't understand why Russia's internal status continues to remain so cloaked in mystery. I have no idea what to believe about Russian government nowadays. But, I do know that the Russian people are good people.
@@SMac-bq8skas a Russian, government is horrible. Not just Putin( he ain’t the worst) but the whole system. Oligarchy, corruption and inequality, those three words describe Russian government. The country’s great though, Moscow in particular, as the comment above mentioned
@@ПосланникТьмы-ь6т: Thank you for the info! Sounds as if the Russian and American governments have much in common, unfortunately. Stay strong, my friend!
You forget to tell about the very important part: how the capitalism that the west showed to Russia was of such low quality that Russians gladly looked to Putin to revert to older ways.
Yeltsin's big mistakes were not letting the Muslim territories of Dagestan and Chechnya secede, choosing Putin as his successor, and agreeing to step down as leader.
Yeltsin made right decision thanks to it Russia did not split any further and was able to keep the rebellious republics under control preventing further separatism in the country.
Because other than the brief Yeltsin period, for their entire history, Russians have known nothing but authoritarianism, and culturally its people are unwilling or unable to accept anything else. The same issue existed with Germans in the Weimar Republic. It took a second world war and then an occupation to fix it.
And yet Russia today is much more democratic than the US. Gonzalo Lira (killed), Oles Buzina (killed), Julian Assange (repressed), Daria Dugina (killed), Vladlen Tatarsky (killed), Edward Snowden (received political asylum in Russia), John Mark Dugan (received political asylum in Russia) - all these journalists were killed or repressed by the American regime. R.I.P.
Any type of government is good as long as it cares for it's people China is one party dictatorship India used to be secular democracy , but our countrymen used to so poor . So we kicked those democrazy people and elected a hindu nationalist government❤😂 now atleast no one in india dies from hunger and infrastructure and development is happening
Democracy is a belief system as much as a functional construct. Democracy in America formed because people believed there was a better way forward and they worked together to make it happen. The belief of what could be, in key individuals is the key element. If there are some people in Russia who's belief in a better way than the current, police state disguised as a democracy, we have not seen them. Perhaps the police state is still too strong. Perhaps the corruption of the educational system is too strong for anyone break away from the current oligarch slave system masked as a democracy. To have a functioning democracy you first have to have educated leaders and an educable public. Putin and his supporters have spent many billions to make sure that this independent thinking system never happens.
Well, a little more happened as well. After the wall fell in 1991, we learned that Russia's economy was roughly ten percent that of the USA. Now, no real treaties were made, but the US and Western Europe did imply that they would help Russia economically, but that never really happened. There was still a lot of fear and mistrust of Russia, but also a lot of blatant hatred as well. So, in the ten years after the fall of the Berlin wall the west began expanding Nato right up to Russia's border, and then ten years after the wall fell China, Russia's traditional enemy was given most favored nation status by the World Trading Organization (WTO) at the urging of the Clinton Administration. But that's not all, as soon as the WTO granted China MFN status almost like magic the US began shipping its manufacturing economy not to former Communist Russia, but to Communist China. How about that?
Because Russia has never been a Liberal country. As a result the concept of Individual Rights/Liberties never really caught on. When Christians in Russia flee the country for being "Too" Liberal, you know you have a nation that is devoutely conservative. Mind you Liberalism and Conservatism doesn't = Left or Right. Conservatism = to Conserve, ie Conserve the Status Quo. If people are used to living under Authoritiarnism, supporting Authoritarianism is Conservatism. If you're many generations into say a Socialist State, to be a Conservative is to be a Socialist. In fact Socialism has it's origins in Conservatism. Wealthy Nobility came up with the idea of Socialism in the 18th Century as a "Reaction" to the rise of the Merchant Class/Middle Class/Bourgeoisie (Bourgeoisie mind you is French for Middle Class). ie the Private Capitalist, the Business Owners, the Shopkeepers.. not the Nobility and their Plantation style Country villes. The Nobility resented seeing a part of Society raise up to their level of wealth and GOD FORBID actually start surpassing it. ie the First Socialist were CONSERVATIVES wanting to bring society back to Feudalism of course they didn't call it Feudalism. As a result nearly the entire history of Socialism has been about taking power away from Individuals and giving it into the hands of the "State." And who rules the State? The Ruling Class. They may pretend they're leaders of the Party but they in turn become the Ruling Class. It's literally just Feudalism with a different name. Socialism at it's very core is Conservative, and yearning to bring society back to the farms.
I dont think democracy survives in Europe. Too many different ways and people's. Im Irish, i dont like french people or Germans ect ect but they force they're version of democracy on us . Its just for me to me to see the political fracturing. You all in the states have much more in common than we do as Europeans.
By how the USSR actually fall, I would say that is because Russia may repeat Gorbachev's mistake of using Democracy. If Gorbachev didn't implement full Democracy by sudden back in 1991, and instead do it step by step to fix all internal problems in the USSR, the collapse may had been prevented. I would think that this may be what Putin is doing
That makes no sense at all! The USA is huge they've done fine without autocracy! The founders understood that differences would occur between different citizens. It is why the state system we see today was put in place. State governments provide the real backbone of the government people see, not the central government in Washington D.C. The trick is getting politicians in a centralized government to distribute power and decentralize their own. They'll never do that peacefully. Russia never did that, they just wrote a constitution that doesn't fully recognize that governments must be instituted that resist centralization at all costs. The secret of Republics is that they recognize the dangers they face from a portion of their own citizenry.
Everytime an authority has uses force to prove their point (no matter how good or bad) it just makes the next guy plan how to bring back the regime before (Yeltsin) but without failing this time. in this anecdote the soviet union is in full swing but with extra steps.
The weird thing about Russia is that it's not a bad place to live. Quality of life is similar to USA except food and housing is affordable and there is less crime.
@@amatorlux You may laugh, but I lived there for 3 years as an exchange student....Don't let the western propaganda deter you from understanding the rest of the world.
@@JohnSmith-fo5cxlive there with a local salary. And not in Moscow or Saint Petersburg, but in a provincial city like Chelyabinsk or Novosibirsk and you’ll soon get disappointed in this country, just like you did in the us
The US liked Borys Yelzin because he was a very weak leader. He brought Russia to the brink of collapse with a bunch of oligarchs running most of the economy without government control. Vladimir Putin brought the country back. He reigned in the oligarchs, fought corruption and made Russia a powerhouse with a thriving economy . That's why he has vast support among the citizens. And he is not ruling the country alone, he very much has to consider the duma. Also, there are many Americans, Canadians and Germans moving to Russia , and many of them say, they are feeling safer and more free in Russia than in the west. I am still doing some research, but I also consider leaving the EU for Russia, because the EU is becoming more and more undemocratic and is slowly taking our freedoms away, at the same time deliberately destroying the economy and making people poorer, whilst pushing the agenda of the WEF.
Communists and actual fascists in government won't let anyone but authoritarians to win. You just have to hope the authoritarian that does win is benevolent. Then again, people hoping for benevolence is exactly why communists and fascists get into the government in the first place. So perhaps the best you really could hope for is just a strong leader that isn't necessarily benevolent, but cracks down on things that break down the rule of law.
Russia seems to have it in its DNA to be ruled by a strong man. Even in the Soviet days. Even now. These strong men retain power so long as they produce success and they are successful in creating an apparatus that enforces their will. The US is different these days. The strongman is out after a theoretical 10 years by constitutional law. So the apparatus can be molded by them and do their bidding, but has become independent of them, not by law but in practice.
@@derikuk2967 these days, yes. It would be nice to have the American intel and bureaucracy cut down to size and put in its place. We’d have a real republic again. I sometimes wonder if we had a single 6, 8 or 10 year term for president. 6 seems fine. The two 4 year terms seem so short term that much of it’s spent campaigning. Single 8 year senate terms and give back to the states governments to appoint senators. Congressmen should be given a single 4 year. I’m sick of seeing the government pandering feedback loop.
The short answer is because, the Russian people aren't used to democracy. Hitler took power in 1933 so easily because the Weimar government was already failing, and were used to the Kaiser.
Actually Hitler was able to take power so easily because Herbert Hoover's Smoot-Hawley tariff turned an American economic crisis into a global one, and just after he had meddled a normal stock market crash into Great Depression. And then his successor, Franklin Roosevelt, who doubled down on Hoover's bad policies, actually ADMIRED Hitler!
And countries like Germany, Italy and Japan, allied forces had to basically take control for few years after WW2 to ensure they adopted democracy and don’t fall back into dictatorship
I love the content but why do we have to look in your ear while you talk? Is there something in there we need to see? Can you do close ups so we can see it even better? And why is it your right ear? Is there something wrong with your left ear? Are you ashamed of your left ear for some reason? Why is this a thing? Just look into the camera.
Well, tell me the clear definition of democracy and what countries can call themselves 100% democratic. And then tell my how some countries are democratic and some not. I’ve noticed that 99% of the people who call Russia a dictatorship or autocracy have never been there 😂
None of this is wrong....except for the glaring omission that an American reciting facts without cultural context will always make.....power was never taken in Russia. This included Lenin/Stalin.....the Russian people GIVE power to strong leaders freely. It's part of their culture that was made even more salient by the communists executing/exiling anyone who was even remotely a liberal intellectual. Don't ascribe Western values to Eastern people....the people of Russia want this right now. The average Russian is quite happy in their state-funded bliss....
There's a chance you don't speak on behalf of the Russian people as a whole. Further, in terms of "reciting facts without cultural context"? Much can be learned about cultures, and accurately, without firsthand experience. I'm assuming this is to what you referred by "cultural context"? While I certainly give value to personal experiences, an air traffic controller needn't have experience as a pilot, nor a gynecologist have female sex organs, to gain knowledge, skills, or practice as an expert in the trade. I'm under the impression some Russians dissent.
@@junior.von.claire I mean if you think understanding a culture is similar to learning how to guide airplanes into an airport….not sure there’s much to debate here …
all true. and we also need to look at the citizenry. one thing that makes America thrive (despite our faults) is that, not only do we have those rights enumerated in our Constitution into a system of values, but the vast majority of citizens REFLECT said values. THIS is the crux. Russia had gone from a feudal empire directly into soviet-style socialism. the people never experienced a liberal/englightenment change in values the same way n. americans and western europeans did. until the worldview and perspective of the citizenry change, we will continue to see autocrats ruling the russian people.
Yeltsin took over a country without toilet paper, reformed it, and left it with smartphones. Putin came in after the harsh reforms were completed and got lucky with oil and gas prices. And we can all see where Putin's "competency" has brought Russia.
Because only a few family's run Russia and they are making a fortune so having the state the way it is suits those family's nothing else it just down to money
People blame communism for all Russia's problem and yes communism caused a lot problem in Russia, but I don't blame only communism, Russia is run like a fascist country, most countries under communism did not fall for fascism, countries like the Baltic states or Poland, Romania, Czech Republic etc, I think what make Russia an authoritarian country is how the country was run under the Russian Czar that had absolute power, persecuted, send political dissident to Siberia. The communist was worse than the Czar and more authoritarian but the communist inherited this system from the Czar.
@@infiad1275 who said that? You have many TH-cam channels where Americans explain how Marxism took over the USA or the Canada. The situation in Usa is much worse than in Russia.
@@ArgoPower Russia ain’t any better, and unless you have the western salary, you’ll live paycheck to paycheck. High inflation, bad schools, bad roads, traffic, politicization of the society are all major problems here. It’s not some kind of utopia you may think it is
Genetics? I don't think so. Most of the peoples of Eastern Europe share Slavic roots. Yet some governments are MUCH better than others. People's perceptions are based on how they were taught about history and what they expect from others. If this wasn't so Germany would not have been a republic for long post WW2 (since essentially their entire history prior to that was autocratic).
Simple answer. 1: we didn’t help out the Russian anti-communists back in 1918, and 2: we didn’t have Russia go through a decommunization process when it fell in 1991, like we had a denazification process with Germany in 1945.
The Mongols ultimately were the cause of this debacle. If medieval Europe had formed some sort of defense league specializing in taking out horse archers, Russia might be a free country today.
"Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts, but that it is magnetic to the corruptible."
"Charismatic leaders tend to build up followings, power structures, and those power structures tend to be taken over by people who are corruptible."
- Frank Herbert (Author of Dune, 1965)
That’s a true statement, and Herbert was a very intelligent writer.
But also, having power over prolonged periods of time often corrupts those who wield it, even if they were not inclined to be corrupt to begin with.
@@mk14m0 I'm inclined to agree. Because to wield power 'positively' is to engage with it primarily as a responsibility/burden, rather than an asset/weapon. And so, to wield power 'positively' is to wield it at a disadvantage to one's self. As Frank Herbert also said in his book (Dune):
"We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it, and then only under conditions that increase that reluctance."
NO HUMAN would be happy to do this for too long a time. And so, to force/allow someone wield power for a long time is to push them closer and closer toward either tyranny or resentment (which itself leads to tyranny), regardless of their original nature or intent.
Simply put ladies and gentlemen (anyone that reads this, I mean😅): take responsibility for your self, family and existence, because no one else can do it for you, not for long - lest you regret it.
@@mk14m0 I'm inclined to agree. Because to wield power 'positively' is to wield it at a disadvantage to one's self i.e to engage with it as a responsibility/burden, rather than an asset/weapon. Herbert said as well in his book that:
"We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it, and then only under conditions that increase that reluctance."
NO HUMAN would voluntarily do this (engage in something to their disadvantage) for too long. And so to force/allow a person wield power for a long time is to push them closer and closer toward either tyranny or resentment (which itself leads to tyranny), regardless of their original nature or intent.
In other words ladies and gentlemen (whoever's reading this, I mean😅):
Take responsibility for your self, family, and existence. Because no one is going to do it for you, not for long, lest you regret it dearly.
@@mk14m0 I'm inclined to agree. Because to wield power 'positively' is to wield it at a disadvantage to one's self i.e to engage with it as a responsibility/burden, rather than an asset/weapon. Herbert said as well in his book that:
"We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it, and then only under conditions that increase that reluctance."
NO HUMAN would voluntarily do this (engage in something to their disadvantage) for too long. And so to force/allow a person wield power for a long time is to push them closer and closer toward either tyranny or resentment (which itself leads to tyranny), regardless of their original nature or intent.
In other words ladies and gentlemen (whoever's reading this, I mean😅):
Take responsibility for your self, family, and existence. Because no one is going to do it for you, not for long, lest you regret it dearly.
@@mk14m0 I'm inclined to agree. Because to wield power 'positively' is to wield it at a disadvantage to one's self i.e to engage with it as a responsibility/burden, rather than an asset/weapon. Herbert said as well in his book that:
"We should grant power over our affairs only to those who are reluctant to hold it, and then only under conditions that increase that reluctance."
NO HUMAN would voluntarily do this (engage in something to their disadvantage) for too long. And so to force/allow a person wield power for a long time is to push them closer and closer toward either tyranny or resentment (which itself leads to tyranny), regardless of their original nature or intent.
In other words ladies and gentlemen (whoever's reading this, I mean):
Take responsibility for your self, family, and existence. Because no one is going to do it for you, not for long, lest you regret it dearly.
I think this is too simplistic a summary. I think a big part of the failure of the Russian project in the 1990s was the the economic catastrophe in the transition away from communism and the failure to build a healthy capitalism. The privations that Russians suffered in the 1990s discredited Western-style democracy in their eyes.
We are not privy to the machinations of the Alphabet organizations and their entire involvement from the collapse up to today's Ukraine activity.
That’s not the fault of the west, that was the insane levels of corruption and organized crime/oligarchs.
The living definition of "the road to hell is paved with good intentions."
The west did not have good intentions ever.
It should also be noted that, in Russia, many don't like the idea of Democracy. They associate the term with the parts of the 90s where criminal gangs seemed to hold more power than the government and when they were least sure they would have food and not be killed. There is a preference for a strong executive, even a tyrant, based on their view of history. And when you consider their experience it's not unjustified. But as you point out it's still not the best.
yes, this!
“Democracy Breeds Tyranny”~ Plato
ты бл че несешь? tfffff u talking bout)))))
@@AndryFateev I saw a couple interviews with people who have lived in Russia since the fall of the Soviet Union. Not everyone thinks how I described, but enough for it to make a difference in who gets elected. As the years go on that percentage tends to decline as more young people who didn't experience the 90s become voters and old people who did die, but it's going to be a while before that view isn't significant.
Yeah, okay, they don't want democracy. That's fine. We don't care, that's their choice. But why attacking other countries and dragging them to this shithole when they DO NOT want that? Moldova, Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, also how russia violently suppressed protests in BELARUS, Kazakhstan and other countries, as well as organized and funded some pro russian coups. Why do others need to suffer, just because russia doesn't know what democracy and freedom is?
A lot of russians view the USSR period as a part of Russian empire history even though it was communist and atheist, it was nationalist and authoritarian.
It was absolutely an extension of the Russian Empire.
The explanation that Russians shouldn't be punished for Stalin's crimes against humanity because they suffered as well doesn't fly anymore. Most of them want those days back.
@@henriikkak2091 That reminds me: I once saw someone joke online that Russians hate all Georgians, except for the one that killed millions of them (Stalin).
@@capncake8837Stalin didn’t do that
@@henriikkak2091I do t blame them
It was a communist russian empire. And thats not the point anyways. The point is that the soviet union was as strong, if not stronger than the russian empire. The russians dont care if their leader is a monarch or an autocrat, a nationslist or a communist, they just want him to be strong.
And considering the fact that russia always collapsed under weak leadership that demand is very understandable.
Russia has always been enamored with strong autocrat types.
Humanity has always been enamored with strong autocrat types. Everyone tends to assume a dictator will lean toward their own side of any issue, so they tend to see it as a win.
And that's not necessarily a bad thing, it's no more problematic than rigged democracy we experience. We hate Russia because they remain autonomous rather than under WEF/UN control
With the only exception is when Nicholas is sent to his Siberian Castle. Yeah the Duma is in charge at the time before the Lenin Revolution
The geography Moscow is like the main political center. Everything else is like expendable maybe when Moscow falls it will be free.
Same as many other countries
Actually, I would say that Vladimir Putin is taking Russia back considerably further than the USSR, back indeed to the Old Russian Empire of the Tsars. If anything, Putin has more in common with Tsar Alexander III than he does with Joseph Stalin.
Stalin was a ✡️ in hiding
Truth!
Facts! 💯Just goes to show that American conservatives can and will be just as biased and deceptive as American liberals as and when it suits them. And democracy, quite frankly, is overrated. In order for democracy to flourish the way it was originally designed, there needs to be complete transparency and integrity between the authority figures and the people. Votes and elections don't mean anything if there is manipulation, conspiracy and deception. Like what we see in the USA, especially since 2020, when Trump should have been the rightful winner of the presidential election. Even though the USA is meant to be a constitutional republic, the elements of democracy that it does have aren't always carried out with integrity.
Although I'd consider that an interesting factoid (and probably true), it is utterly unimportant.
From the common citizen's perspective they just see secret police, labor camps, and death to those that resist government power.
The common citizen doesn't care and frequently doesn't know the difference between Fascism, Communism, Despotism, and all the other -isms. They just know that speaking up and trying to change things ends up with punishment or death.
Democracy as a system requires buy-in from the majority of the citizens. What Russia needs is a leader who we would call in the West a 'statesman'. Someone who can help educate the populace on the historical benefits of liberty and show them the way and who has the discipline and foresight to internally change Russia into a citizen supported institution as the people grow in support. There are models for how to do this in history. The issue, as it has ever been, is that you can't discriminate between a statesman and another petty dictator until it is too late to do anything about it. It is why most revolutions are just violent changes of power. It makes me even more amazed at how well the US revolution went.
Stalin was just a red tsar.
So, basically like Sulla. Sulla’s action created a precedent that destroyed the Roman Republic.
Not really. Sulla was an exception to a Republic that had stood for quite a while. He definitely set the pattern that Julius Caesar and Octavian followed. On that you have it 100% right. But Rome had tradition that had to be broken. You can't say the same about Russia/USSR. There has never been a tradition of Freedom/Liberty/Rule of Law in that country.
Yeltsin and Putin have merely done what all leaders in that part of the world do.. keep their power consolidated and rule with an iron fist. It is telling that the citizens don't think there needs to be a civil war to stop it. Democracies and rule of law and freedom grow out of the citizenry's desire for it. The absence of support for liberty is what allows the autocrats to take and keep power.
I think the USA is facing a similar test sometime in our near future. I think a majority of US citizens still see the point of liberty and want it.. but many in the younger generation are VERY enamored with Marxism and autocracy. The times, they are a changin.
@@rbarnes4076 the Roman republic was an oligarchy. Not a free society.
@@rbarnes4076I am tired of all the democracy and freedom nonsense that doesn’t even exist America needs a strongman reformer like Caesar elections are useless.
I did not know this. Man we need to learn this stuff.
You still dont. Go read or watch more. This video brushes over a lot of variables, like that Yeltsin was corrupt as, made really crap choices and that the West helped push Russia into these conditions.
Tou did not know this cause is bull5hit, that's why
@@Akitorbenov Did Putin make you say that? Has he threatened to send your unborn son to fight in Ukraine 18 years from now? Blink once for yes, twice for no...
Now, let's figure out how the United States got to this point.
Sadly, that's exactly what I thought during the intro, as well.
And are you afraid to Donald Trump? 🤔
@@wazzup233 Not afraid. Contemptuous. Felons earn contempt. And prison. Sentencing in the first of Trump's 4 criminal cases is November 26. Stay tuned.
@@wazzup233 I am afraid of the Democrats/Deep State tag team.
Yeltsin was a mastermind. Everyone thinks Gorbachev ended the USSR but it was really Yeltsin who stole it out from under him and turned it into what we know today.
Yeltsin was the closest thing to a good leader Russia has ever had. He wasn't great in anything except comparison to the others. Even Katherine and Peter "the great(s)" were mediocre at best.
@@navyreviewer Yeltin allowed the west to ransack the country, Putin stopped the looting which is why these people are so sore today. He stopped "Ukranianization".
@@navyreviewerif your definition of great is in relation to human rights and liberties, we’re agreed, although Alexander II would’ve been a great leader if he had been allowed to stay around longer. That being said, the modernization and expansion of Russia under the czars in question I think earns them their titles indisputably.
@@navyrevieweru should’ve lived under Yeltsin to see for urself. He was a literal puppet for the current president of USA and managed to fish the oligarchs into the ruling classs of Russia
@@matthewheald8964 That is generally were I was going. Of course if your definition is modernization and expansion then Stalin was great. "Joseph the Great"? Mmmmm. Mmmmm. I dont like that. I dont like that one bit.
I’m from Russia.
Not a big fan of our government and Putin yet most of us are doing fine.
I work, I travel, I love, I live my live…
Democracy, not democracy… what else do I need for happy life?
You need democracy for 1 major task - to manage your taxes. You are paying ~40% of your income to the state budget. In democracy you have parliament deputies (elected on free elections) who fight each other (sometimes literally) to decide how to spend your money. In Russia - it is up to Putin. If he decide to burn it in something stupid (like war in Ukraine and unwinnable confrontation with the West) - he can do it. And you can't to anything.
Power concentrated in the hands of the Executive ... exactly what's going on here in Canada.
He won't win the next election. Trudeau hasn't got the ability take down all the safeguards. But God knows he thinks he should
Bingo!!!
So Putin bad but justin good right?
FJT!!!
@@Carlos-sd6cz definitely Justin bad, Putin far worse.
Yeah cause Canadians are going to jail for criticizing Trudeau
@@ranelgallardo7031And then acquitted in the courts when it goes to trial. See, I don't agree with Trudeau but there still is a legal process he can't ignore. People don't just disappear and then die in prison of some unknown ailment. His overreach in the trucker convoys is now being exposed. In Putin's Russia, that never happens. People who piss him off end up dead or in prison and often both
Just make sure not to blow any whistles about Boeing.
Huh?
Thanks Nick for the history refresher.
Nick should make a video with the title:
"Why Democracy Failed in Canada"
It's a powerful warning. It's both the law AND the ethical standards that are needed.
*0:22* Proof (for the millionth time) that without the *Second Amendment* the entire rest of any Constitution may as well be toilet paper.
Over the years this has become super-clear to me also. That right is the most fundamental of all.
@@rbarnes4076 It is still only the SECOND Amendment. The First will always have the position of primacy.
And if we aren't careful... we're headed this way ourselves. "This nation will remain the land of the free only so long as it is the home of the brave." -- Elmer Davis
Make a video on where democracy actually worked as designed
Why are some Arab countries (UAE, Saudia, Qatar) are successful, while others are hellholes?
Monarchies are succesful, nonetheless. Believe me or not but in early 2000s American "think tanks" produced shittone of papers about how China inevitably will become democratic 😂😂
Because economy and quality of life in China improved a lot and Western lunatics think that this is automatically bring love to democracy (as more succesful citizens now want to participate in ruling of state by liberal elections bla bla basically saying that Western path are one and only and Godsend and anything else lead to "tyranny" and desolation) and without democracy next steps of economic developement are impossible. Here we are 20 years later, China is economic god, not only outproducing but even outdeveloping Apple, Tesla and other major Western corporations (not NASA and SpaceX yet because its hard to close headstart that Russia and USA have in space industry comparing to most countries but they closing the gap), Communist Party not gone and Chinese look at concept of Western liberal democracy like at shit.
Alliance of Iran (theocracy), Saudi Arabia (monarchy), China (socialist.. pretty adapted into capitalist wirld order but still), Russia (big bad Putin and not a real democracy, capitalism, whatever western media say) being succesful in economic war against West is pretty damaging to image of undefeatable and inescapable liberal democracy lol
Oil, alliances and geography
@@visorij3374
Dubai has no oil, Iraq has a plenty.
@@טמוציןבורגיגיןdubai also has oil
And they used that oil money to build infrastructure and tourism and they don't have islamic rules much
@@imperial_Dragnix
Other emirates have fossil fuels, but not Dubai. And the locals are very proud Arabs & Muslims, though they are very tolerant towards outsiders.
Not one inch further east the west told Gorbachov, thats why you have Putin
It’s interesting to me that some cultures seem to appreciate strong overhead authority. I value my freedom, but I don’t think everyone does in the same way.
I think there are some benefits to an economically benevolent dictator especially in developing countries like Russia was after the collapse of the Soviet union.
The Real Reason is this :
"Communism is the very definition of failure!"
Liberty Prime, Fallout 3
Russia is just a machine republic like Chicago, New York City, and other cities.
The word lacks meaning when the modern proponents are the west and China makes Iphones.
China is proving that to be a lie 😂😂😂
@@evansmagungu6305 China is Nazi not communist. They believe Han are the master race.
@@evansmagungu6305 Abandoned communism in the 90's to escape the same fate as Russia.
Because theres no such thing as a democracy, a country is either a monarchy or an oligarchy, guess which one the US is
Both
It’s a Republic.
@@Delpix722
Nope you are wrong
USA is not democracy it's a oligarchy
Only Trump is real leader of us , he is little dictatorial monarchy type
But he will care for u as he is not funded by too many defence corporates
Sadly I have to accept india used to be a secular democracy once
Now it's a hindu theocracy
Simplistic thinking.
Topic suggestions: Student loans, perverse incentives, failed compromises between parties, unfunded mandates, citizens united cases, and whether or not companies should have the same rights as citizens.
Let's be clear: the people who say companies should not have the same rights as citizens are people who want more government power over companies.
@@conceptualclarity Let's not. I don't want more government power over companies. I want less company power over governments. Restricting the "rights" of companies to weigh in on political issues and lobbying, when they have NO God given rights in the first place, is different from saying I want government control of companies. I'm sick and tired of the interpretation of companies as humans so that they can spend money on politicians "as an expression of their first amendment rights". It's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
@@conceptualclaritybecause more power of companies over the government is such a good thing 😅
Russia learned that lesson in 90s hard way, for the West apparently lesson still not hard enough, thats why it still not learned it.
@@AtticusKarpenter I don't think companies have power over the government in the United States
@@AtticusKarpenter rather there is a fairly unified progressive elite that is running both the government and the companies
Short answer: Boris Yeltsin. Under him Russian economy collapsed, culminating in the 1998 default and its consequences, he allowed state enterprises to be privatized at a fraction of their real value (many of them closed down as it was more profitable for the new owners to asset strip them than to maintain operations), and he shot the parliament with tanks in 1993 when it disagreed with him, destroying any chance Russia had at a real democracy. But as he was America's bitсh, he has a positive reputation in the West.
One of the best and most informative videos I've ever seen anywhere, let alone just TH-cam.
The Russian people still remembered the Soviet Union. Many of them agreed with Putin that it was wrong that the Soviet Union fell apart. Many of them remember fondly of the government taking care of everything for you even if they were not good at it. They remember being proud that the Soviet Union was the most powerful country in the world even if it was propaganda.
I thought Putin lowkey hated the soviet union. Isn't he more of a monarchy type? I mean he sees himself as a Christian king and prophet over there
Wow you're a liar.
@@LordZub4291 You clearly made that up.
Like a lot of Americans do now. People like to think that things are being "managed", even if the management is terrible. There is a deep-seated fear of anything that appears to not be under conscious human control -- people assume that anything not run by a human is invariably on a rapid slide toward chaos.
@@LordZub4291Actually, Putin began his career in the KGB, and the Czech revolution in 1968 was a turning point for him, because he saw the Czech revolution for democracy as a bad thing. He later famously called the collapse of the Soviet Union the worst disaster of the 20th century. He may be making use of some of the old pre-Soviet cultural trappings, such as Orthodox religious rituals, but he acts much like a Soviet ruler.
Russian history can be encapsulated by a phrase (coined by the naval historian and TH-camr “Drachinifel”) which goes: “And then it got worse.”
Russia’s entire history is an unending tragedy.
"There first king was called Ivan the Terrible... and then it got worse." Old saying about Russia.
Problem is Russia has always been an expansionist country that liked to spread its misery.
@@navyreviewerThis is really encapsulate lies and errors that led West into perpetual fighting with Russia that now seems to turning not in its favor.
His name not Ivan the Terrible. He is Ivan Groznyi which means "Moody" or "Mighty" (like a storm cloud, because word literally means "Thunderstorm-like", groza = thunderstorm). He was very succesful and respected ruler, modernized law system, reduced rights of the aristocrats to make them less corrupt, won several wars. Most of executions was in the last years of his rulership, after loss of loved wife and, as suspected by modern analyze of the body, failed attempt to poison him with quicksilver, most likely from offended aristocrats.
Even then, he executed 4000 total. This is more than by his closest predescessors and successors. This is also several times less than British and French kings of that time, but they not called "Terrible" somehow. This is also 10 times less than French killed in one Walpurgis Night for religious reasons (their fellow Christians btw).
That how it went then, with Westerners always judging Russia (and rest of the world but Russia especially) by much harsher measure than themselves, lying, mistranslating things (but as stupid examples as "the Terrible" i never seen), always in double standarts-thinking, arrogant and agressive.
Thats why most powerful non-West countries united in, basically, anti-West alliance, with very high popular support of that alliance from the common people.
Because world are tired of you.
In the US, our saying (coined from a TV spokeman) is, "But wait... there's MORE!"
Have you ever been there to say that?
I was expecting something more along the lines of "The people failed to protect the limitations on government, allowing too much power to be concentrated in the hands of a few corrupt individuals."
You will never hear this from someone who criticises only a certain regime because the West is heading the same way Russia, China and North Korea did and that is handling the government too much power.
Suggest a topic “Why Britain is a Sham Democracy”.
The same goes for all of the G7 oligarchies.
All good points
You should know the USSR (which was communist) collapsed decades ago and since then Christianity has made a resurgence.
Not Christianity.
National values held with religious ferver;
Similar to Hitler's fascists.
Not exactly the golden rule, or love your neighbour like yourself.
Like I said, Putin has more in common with Tsar Alexander III than with Joseph Stalin.
It seems it doesn’t matter to the Western point of View. If Russia is strong and sovereign - oh no - it must be un democratic and tyrannical and imperialistic and collocialist and, and , and….
Another great video! I'm curious about where the map at 00:02 came from? As I recall USSR stood for "Union of Soviet Socialists Republics."
Looking forward to „why democracy failed in the west“. 👍
Wait, I thought this was about the USA right now…?
There are several key concepts that are required to establish a free and prosperous society. Words on a paper don't do it.
1. Moral society
2. Educated society (not schooled but truly educated)
3. The concept of individual rights versus group rights or government rights.
4. The concept of individual choice and responsibility.
Russia has not had any of these ever. Without all of these any society is relegating to having a dictatorial leadership.
This is also why we failed in Iraq and Afghanistan.
You left out this one which is the only guarantee of the first four.
5. An armed population who the government fears more than the population fears the government.
@Coloneldad5, You haven't a clue what you're talking about and you couldn't be more incorrect. Russia has greater morality than the United States today. Russians tend to be more truly educated than Americans today. It most areas, Russians have more individual rights than Americans today. In 2024, Russians tend to take individual responsibility more seriously than Americans, and individual choice is cherished in Russia. The Soviet Union is not returning to Russia.
6. Get Americans/west from OTHER countries
7. Learn Americans/west to look in YOUR backyard
8. Explain Americans that invading OTHER coutries is not democracy and your country is not some kind of pure angel who has RIGHTS and OBLIGATION to "teach" others how to live
@Coloneldad5, Russia has all four of the things you mentioned. In 2024, they exceed the USA in all four of these areas.
@@boethius9173 Sorry but that is not true. Russian society is vastly corrupt. They don't have the true sense of individual rights versus governmental rights. Russians are also not "educated" but rather schooled. The key difference here is that a true education teaches you to think for yourself and not parrot what the government or those in control spew. It is easy to identify a society that has all four of these concepts in that they are free and not prone to abusing the rights and freedoms of others. Yes, we have almost completely lost this in the US and that is why we are in a speedy decline.
Why do you value democracy above the autocratic identity of a country?
Thank You for Your programs ,If only people would listen and realize they have a personal responsibility to monitor their governments activities and vote thoughtfully and regularly!!!!
Why is there a mountain of Cheese stored in mountains in Missouri?
Economic freedoms Americans enjoy today!! ROFL
Even when they will be working at three jobs for minimum salary with highest crime rating and streets drown in mud and garbage they still will be singing praises to some hallucinated freedoms that are equal or even less than in most countries actually
Tucker already received answer that he should not envy clean and pretty streets of Russian cities because "this is because of tyranny" and shitty cities in USA is "price of freedom"
idk but city services in Russia consists not from inmates but from decent paid workers so no idea how "tyranny" cleans the streets
The main problem with Russia is Russian society. Russians are one of the most fierce, big-hearted, and generous peoples in the world, but at the same time, authoritarian rule has transformed Russian society immensely. From the Romanovs to the USSR and now the Putin era, Russia has always been ruled by authoritarian oligarchs. Unlike Western Europe, which went through a wave of democratization and liberalization since the French Revolution, Russia never experienced all of it. Now, most Russians view Putin as the correct leader because they fear that without a central power to rule the country, something worse may come.
Nobody is perfect, I feel. USA still is very democratic, but it started so many wars in recent decades....
At the start of the Romanov dynasty, 90% of the population was serfs, essentially slaves. A pattern of Russian behavior was set: servility to those above, tyranny to those below.
You should make a video with the title:
"Why Democracy Failed in Canada".
Because it sucks.
That is an intelligent man.
Obviously he is not Ivy league trained.
Lore of Why Democracy Failed In Russia momentum 100
I am an American and I would have believed this video years ago, but after living and working in Moscow, I can assure anyone reading this comment that this video is misguided at best and nefarious at worst.
Can you please explain how so
@@doug282, It would require an entire conversation.
It would be interesting to hear that conversation, if it should ever happen. I think present day Russia is an enigma to 99% of Americans. I don't understand why Russia's internal status continues to remain so cloaked in mystery. I have no idea what to believe about Russian government nowadays. But, I do know that the Russian people are good people.
@@SMac-bq8skas a Russian, government is horrible. Not just Putin( he ain’t the worst) but the whole system. Oligarchy, corruption and inequality, those three words describe Russian government. The country’s great though, Moscow in particular, as the comment above mentioned
@@ПосланникТьмы-ь6т: Thank you for the info! Sounds as if the Russian and American governments have much in common, unfortunately. Stay strong, my friend!
Yes, New USSR for their survival too.
Describing the West in general.
You forget to tell about the very important part: how the capitalism that the west showed to Russia was of such low quality that Russians gladly looked to Putin to revert to older ways.
Yeltsin's big mistakes were not letting the Muslim territories of Dagestan and Chechnya secede, choosing Putin as his successor, and agreeing to step down as leader.
Yeltsin made right decision thanks to it Russia did not split any further and was able to keep the rebellious republics under control preventing further separatism in the country.
@@RussianOccupier190 separatism is good. Decentralization is good. Don't force parties to stay together who don't want to.
@@305Independent separatism is not good nor is decentralization and no party should be allowed to leave.
@@RussianOccupier190 Wow... right out of the Putin Handbook of Responses.
@@RussianOccupier190 sounds like you hate freedom then
Because other than the brief Yeltsin period, for their entire history, Russians have known nothing but authoritarianism, and culturally its people are unwilling or unable to accept anything else. The same issue existed with Germans in the Weimar Republic. It took a second world war and then an occupation to fix it.
I don't know if I fully understand what you're saying, but it seems to be a good observation.
And yet Russia today is much more democratic than the US. Gonzalo Lira (killed), Oles Buzina (killed), Julian Assange (repressed), Daria Dugina (killed), Vladlen Tatarsky (killed), Edward Snowden (received political asylum in Russia), John Mark Dugan (received political asylum in Russia) - all these journalists were killed or repressed by the American regime. R.I.P.
Any type of government is good as long as it cares for it's people
China is one party dictatorship
India used to be secular democracy , but our countrymen used to so poor . So we kicked those democrazy people and elected a hindu nationalist government❤😂 now atleast no one in india dies from hunger and infrastructure and development is happening
Democracy is a belief system as much as a functional construct. Democracy in America formed because people believed there was a better way forward and they worked together to make it happen. The belief of what could be, in key individuals is the key element. If there are some people in Russia who's belief in a better way than the current, police state disguised as a democracy, we have not seen them. Perhaps the police state is still too strong. Perhaps the corruption of the educational system is too strong for anyone break away from the current oligarch slave system masked as a democracy. To have a functioning democracy you first have to have educated leaders and an educable public. Putin and his supporters have spent many billions to make sure that this independent thinking system never happens.
Usa not a republic but a corporation. A corporation with 34 trillion in debt.
35 trillion... and climbing rapidly. It cannot be repaid in anything like constant value.
If it’s a corporation, then why is your opinion not taken off the site then?
He’s good looking!.!.
So, better make sure that the constitution is maintained.
Including the number of terms a president may serve.
Well, a little more happened as well. After the wall fell in 1991, we learned that Russia's economy was roughly ten percent that of the USA. Now, no real treaties were made, but the US and Western Europe did imply that they would help Russia economically, but that never really happened. There was still a lot of fear and mistrust of Russia, but also a lot of blatant hatred as well. So, in the ten years after the fall of the Berlin wall the west began expanding Nato right up to Russia's border, and then ten years after the wall fell China, Russia's traditional enemy was given most favored nation status by the World Trading Organization (WTO) at the urging of the Clinton Administration. But that's not all, as soon as the WTO granted China MFN status almost like magic the US began shipping its manufacturing economy not to former Communist Russia, but to Communist China. How about that?
Are the corruption in evilness you just described United States
Why do you not have 10 million abos?
Because Russia has never been a Liberal country. As a result the concept of Individual Rights/Liberties never really caught on. When Christians in Russia flee the country for being "Too" Liberal, you know you have a nation that is devoutely conservative. Mind you Liberalism and Conservatism doesn't = Left or Right. Conservatism = to Conserve, ie Conserve the Status Quo. If people are used to living under Authoritiarnism, supporting Authoritarianism is Conservatism. If you're many generations into say a Socialist State, to be a Conservative is to be a Socialist. In fact Socialism has it's origins in Conservatism. Wealthy Nobility came up with the idea of Socialism in the 18th Century as a "Reaction" to the rise of the Merchant Class/Middle Class/Bourgeoisie (Bourgeoisie mind you is French for Middle Class). ie the Private Capitalist, the Business Owners, the Shopkeepers.. not the Nobility and their Plantation style Country villes. The Nobility resented seeing a part of Society raise up to their level of wealth and GOD FORBID actually start surpassing it. ie the First Socialist were CONSERVATIVES wanting to bring society back to Feudalism of course they didn't call it Feudalism.
As a result nearly the entire history of Socialism has been about taking power away from Individuals and giving it into the hands of the "State." And who rules the State? The Ruling Class. They may pretend they're leaders of the Party but they in turn become the Ruling Class. It's literally just Feudalism with a different name. Socialism at it's very core is Conservative, and yearning to bring society back to the farms.
This is genuinely interesting...
Because it was so shit, people started respecting Stalin FOR the repressions, not IN SPITE of them.
Here, saved you 4 minutes.
I dont think democracy survives in Europe.
Too many different ways and people's. Im Irish, i dont like french people or Germans ect ect but they force they're version of democracy on us .
Its just for me to me to see the political fracturing.
You all in the states have much more in common than we do as Europeans.
Corporate Welfare should be your next subject.
By how the USSR actually fall, I would say that is because Russia may repeat Gorbachev's mistake of using Democracy. If Gorbachev didn't implement full Democracy by sudden back in 1991, and instead do it step by step to fix all internal problems in the USSR, the collapse may had been prevented. I would think that this may be what Putin is doing
Putin? Lmao
Why the Federal Reserve is bad.
Russo has always been a very autocratic state. It’s so big that they need central planning or they would fall apart as a nation.
That makes no sense at all! The USA is huge they've done fine without autocracy! The founders understood that differences would occur between different citizens. It is why the state system we see today was put in place. State governments provide the real backbone of the government people see, not the central government in Washington D.C.
The trick is getting politicians in a centralized government to distribute power and decentralize their own. They'll never do that peacefully. Russia never did that, they just wrote a constitution that doesn't fully recognize that governments must be instituted that resist centralization at all costs. The secret of Republics is that they recognize the dangers they face from a portion of their own citizenry.
Bs
Nonsense.
Beard Wednesday!
Everytime an authority has uses force to prove their point (no matter how good or bad) it just makes the next guy plan how to bring back the regime before (Yeltsin) but without failing this time. in this anecdote the soviet union is in full swing but with extra steps.
The weird thing about Russia is that it's not a bad place to live. Quality of life is similar to USA except food and housing is affordable and there is less crime.
😅
@@amatorlux You may laugh, but I lived there for 3 years as an exchange student....Don't let the western propaganda deter you from understanding the rest of the world.
@@JohnSmith-fo5cxFood and housing affordable to westerner going there as exchange students but local incomes are a lot lower
@@thomasgrabkowski8283 they are commensurate. Russians aren't struggling as much economically as people in the US are.
@@JohnSmith-fo5cxlive there with a local salary. And not in Moscow or Saint Petersburg, but in a provincial city like Chelyabinsk or Novosibirsk and you’ll soon get disappointed in this country, just like you did in the us
The US liked Borys Yelzin because he was a very weak leader. He brought Russia to the brink of collapse with a bunch of oligarchs running most of the economy without government control.
Vladimir Putin brought the country back. He reigned in the oligarchs, fought corruption and made Russia a powerhouse with a thriving economy . That's why he has vast support among the citizens. And he is not ruling the country alone, he very much has to consider the duma.
Also, there are many Americans, Canadians and Germans moving to Russia , and many of them say, they are feeling safer and more free in Russia than in the west.
I am still doing some research, but I also consider leaving the EU for Russia, because the EU is becoming more and more undemocratic and is slowly taking our freedoms away, at the same time deliberately destroying the economy and making people poorer, whilst pushing the agenda of the WEF.
Communists and actual fascists in government won't let anyone but authoritarians to win. You just have to hope the authoritarian that does win is benevolent. Then again, people hoping for benevolence is exactly why communists and fascists get into the government in the first place. So perhaps the best you really could hope for is just a strong leader that isn't necessarily benevolent, but cracks down on things that break down the rule of law.
Russia seems to have it in its DNA to be ruled by a strong man. Even in the Soviet days. Even now. These strong men retain power so long as they produce success and they are successful in creating an apparatus that enforces their will.
The US is different these days. The strongman is out after a theoretical 10 years by constitutional law. So the apparatus can be molded by them and do their bidding, but has become independent of them, not by law but in practice.
So, it becomes a choice between long term stability and perverse short-termism.
@@derikuk2967 these days, yes. It would be nice to have the American intel and bureaucracy cut down to size and put in its place. We’d have a real republic again. I sometimes wonder if we had a single 6, 8 or 10 year term for president. 6 seems fine. The two 4 year terms seem so short term that much of it’s spent campaigning. Single 8 year senate terms and give back to the states governments to appoint senators. Congressmen should be given a single 4 year. I’m sick of seeing the government pandering feedback loop.
... because culture matters.
This is not new information, so why are you so concerned about russia more than Sudan
The short answer is because, the Russian people aren't used to democracy. Hitler took power in 1933 so easily because the Weimar government was already failing, and were used to the Kaiser.
Actually Hitler was able to take power so easily because Herbert Hoover's Smoot-Hawley tariff turned an American economic crisis into a global one, and just after he had meddled a normal stock market crash into Great Depression. And then his successor, Franklin Roosevelt, who doubled down on Hoover's bad policies, actually ADMIRED Hitler!
And countries like Germany, Italy and Japan, allied forces had to basically take control for few years after WW2 to ensure they adopted democracy and don’t fall back into dictatorship
Soviet Reunion..
I love the content but why do we have to look in your ear while you talk? Is there something in there we need to see? Can you do close ups so we can see it even better? And why is it your right ear? Is there something wrong with your left ear? Are you ashamed of your left ear for some reason? Why is this a thing? Just look into the camera.
You mean the USA dont you ?
Well, tell me the clear definition of democracy and what countries can call themselves 100% democratic.
And then tell my how some countries are democratic and some not.
I’ve noticed that 99% of the people who call Russia a dictatorship or autocracy have never been there 😂
None of this is wrong....except for the glaring omission that an American reciting facts without cultural context will always make.....power was never taken in Russia. This included Lenin/Stalin.....the Russian people GIVE power to strong leaders freely. It's part of their culture that was made even more salient by the communists executing/exiling anyone who was even remotely a liberal intellectual. Don't ascribe Western values to Eastern people....the people of Russia want this right now. The average Russian is quite happy in their state-funded bliss....
There's a chance you don't speak on behalf of the Russian people as a whole. Further, in terms of "reciting facts without cultural context"? Much can be learned about cultures, and accurately, without firsthand experience. I'm assuming this is to what you referred by "cultural context"? While I certainly give value to personal experiences, an air traffic controller needn't have experience as a pilot, nor a gynecologist have female sex organs, to gain knowledge, skills, or practice as an expert in the trade.
I'm under the impression some Russians dissent.
@@junior.von.claire I mean if you think understanding a culture is similar to learning how to guide airplanes into an airport….not sure there’s much to debate here …
@@thrashdad7348 If you’re unfamiliar with the device I employed? Agreed.
all true. and we also need to look at the citizenry. one thing that makes America thrive (despite our faults) is that, not only do we have those rights enumerated in our Constitution into a system of values, but the vast majority of citizens REFLECT said values. THIS is the crux. Russia had gone from a feudal empire directly into soviet-style socialism. the people never experienced a liberal/englightenment change in values the same way n. americans and western europeans did. until the worldview and perspective of the citizenry change, we will continue to see autocrats ruling the russian people.
Very interesting analysis, and possibly very accurate.
Better take care of your own backyard. Freedom of expression and speech in the US ???BS
The Mongols
Putin invades Ukraine, while Putin’s bots invade this comment section.
at least putin cares about his own country 😭
If he "cares" why he start The War?
@@panos617because he cares about his country that’s why.
@@panos617 because NATO
This is propaganda.
I think that you've gone too soft on Yeltsin. I am not sure about his intentions, but Putin is definitely more competent than him.
Yeltsin took over a country without toilet paper, reformed it, and left it with smartphones. Putin came in after the harsh reforms were completed and got lucky with oil and gas prices. And we can all see where Putin's "competency" has brought Russia.
Its none of your business.
Because only a few family's run Russia and they are making a fortune so having the state the way it is suits those family's nothing else it just down to money
Basically like the Empire of old.
Much like the US.
People blame communism for all Russia's problem and yes communism caused a lot problem in Russia, but I don't blame only communism, Russia is run like a fascist country, most countries under communism did not fall for fascism, countries like the Baltic states or Poland, Romania, Czech Republic etc, I think what make Russia an authoritarian country is how the country was run under the Russian Czar that had absolute power, persecuted, send political dissident to Siberia. The communist was worse than the Czar and more authoritarian but the communist inherited this system from the Czar.
This is all right
Great work Nick! Scooby snacks for you.
Praying for Israel and the entire Middle East.
My allegiance is to Liberty, and the Repubic.
Please sir, the Usa is the same shit... Please
How do they not see it?
@@infiad1275 who said that? You have many TH-cam channels where Americans explain how Marxism took over the USA or the Canada. The situation in Usa is much worse than in Russia.
@@ArgoPower Russia ain’t any better, and unless you have the western salary, you’ll live paycheck to paycheck. High inflation, bad schools, bad roads, traffic, politicization of the society are all major problems here. It’s not some kind of utopia you may think it is
@@infiad1275 because it is a western channel.
russia and china bad.
we gud.
@@ПосланникТьмы-ь6т please sir, all what you tells it's better than marxisme or woke and anti guns/white policies
Very deep cultural differences in the degree of collectivism between Russia and rest of Europe which could be due to genetics.
Genetics? I don't think so. Most of the peoples of Eastern Europe share Slavic roots. Yet some governments are MUCH better than others. People's perceptions are based on how they were taught about history and what they expect from others. If this wasn't so Germany would not have been a republic for long post WW2 (since essentially their entire history prior to that was autocratic).
@@rbarnes4076 Slav is not a race. It's a linguistic category. There are genetic differences between Slavic ethnic groups.
Simple answer. 1: we didn’t help out the Russian anti-communists back in 1918, and 2: we didn’t have Russia go through a decommunization process when it fell in 1991, like we had a denazification process with Germany in 1945.
The Mongols ultimately were the cause of this debacle. If medieval Europe had formed some sort of defense league specializing in taking out horse archers, Russia might be a free country today.
What does the mongols have to do with any of this???