Russian Manifesto, long and probably useless

[Fyodor]

> > corporations bring the country into the situation when the rulling top
> > of the country is having/sharing a huge amount (can't bring any number) of
> > all the profits, while the rest of population (especially pensioners in
> > russia (people of age of 50 and above, who are brought up in
> > post-socialist environment and are totally incapable to adopt to new
> > environment)) are thrown and maintained in poverty.
> 
> I understand that, but I thought having *incompetent* corrupt people is
> better than having *competent* ones! Who said "let's be happy that we don't

The difference is: those people are incompetent in performing the roles
which they were elected for (i.g. being governors of country's wealth,
building laws and rules in the country to assist economy development and
such), but those people are very *competent* in ripping the other people
off. That is the primary reason why they went for the game to be elected
in government and that's the primary reason why they got power to do so.


> have all the government that we're paying for" (or something like that)? The
> flaw here is the idea that the government COULD be a good thing, provided
> that the governors are competent. I disagree with that.

Indeed. "Don't give power to those who desire it. Those who do, desire
it for their own profits".

> > not all are vodka drinking idiots. but your statement makes sense. :-)
> 
> I'm not saying that all russians are such. (Not that I love them, being from
> an ex-satellite...) Only that a significant number are (just like a

What is ex-satellite? ;-)

> significant number of Americans are "couch potatoes"), and having to share
> my earnings with them is a big disincentive.
> 

I doubt that a significant number is either. There could be certain
percentage that is higher than in other countries, which might be the
reason of such image of a nation to exist.

> 
> Yep. As Ian Clarke (the initiator of Freenet) said, Americans look at the
> big mansion on the hill and say "one day I'll have one of those", while
> Irish (or Romanians, or Russians...) say "one day we'll burn that
> sonofabitch".

:-) 

> 
> That's what I was objecting to :) The solution is obvious: capitalism. The
> real one, not the fascist version.

Well, hard to say which 'real version' of capitalism is good. I would
strongly vote against american model for sure, which turns people and
people's relationships into mostly money-based relations. IMHO
relationships in eastern europe and asia are more human and less money
dependent than in US pretty much because of such reason.

> > Union? Which Union? I doubt russia is welcomed to European Union (update
> > me if I am wrong) and there's no former Soviet Union either. More over
> > the Union of Idependent Countries, seems to be getting gone piece by
> > piece, at least now you need to proper visa if you want to visit Russia
> > from one of the 'former' republics.
> 
> Really? I didn't know that. Anyway, being old people and so on, I am sure
> they are nostalgic about the One Big Union.

It was a good thing (tm). That's what european union is coming too.
Easier econimics relationship between parts of the union. Easier
traveling. Centralised model of control of such union is a bit flawed
though, but definetely is better than heaps of small countries with its
own barriers.

> Well, at least there's two of us <g>

:-p

-- 
http://www.notlsd.net
PGP fingerprint = 56DD 1511 DDDA 56D7 99C7  B288 5CE5 A713 0969 A4D1