Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by EGreg 1290 days ago
I think the only Russian leader who ever left and lived abroad was Gorbachev.

Even Navalny came back to face the music, and he wasnt even president (yet?)

I do not believe they are self serving at the expense of their country and will live in a bunker while their countrymen are bombed. They all thought and think they were doing the right thing for their country. Even Yeltsin, when he did in 1993 what essentially the Peruvian guy is doing now — trying to dissolve parliament in a constitutional crisis, in order to perpetuate the “shock therapy” of privatizing everything to oligarchs while people started to starve.

I an sure even Stalin thought he was modernizing the country, just as Mao later did, while people were starving.

The problem isn’t that they are self serving kleptocrats. Stalin owned one suit I think, and personally was poor.

Just because they love their country and think they’re helping it, doesn’t make it true that they’re helping people though. I am sure George W Bush loved USA and wanted the best for it when he invaded Iraq. As libertarians we question the basic “patriotic common wisdom” of how things are set up in the first place.

2 comments

Hordes of them around the revolution. After there was never a serious change of power.
Well yes, after the Russian revolution the losers fled for their lives. As did Trotsky when Stalin was seeking to kill him. I think he dressed as a woman to escape lol

I am talking about subsequent leaders who actually ruled Russia. Yeltsin helped usher in the Chicago Boys reforms in Russia and he literally fired on Congress. The Peruvian guy does less than that but he is denounced - yet Yeltsin was supported by USA. There is a cover of Time Magazine w him holding an American flag saying “Yanks to the Rescue” where we claimed to have interfered in the Russian elections to have him re-elected despite a 6% (!!) approval rating. We did it so the communist party candidate wouldn’t get into power (Zyuganov).

They even made a movie about it https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Z7pAcGQSQ

So when it comes to Russia, interfering in their elections is something we are proud of doing and even probably overstate it for propaganda purposes. That is another reason why even on a logic/hypocrisy level, very little said by large states (especially empires) means anything to intelligent people. It’s all sound bites designed to get public support for the latest policy of the latest administration, who themselves make it up as they go. Instead of working hard to hear legitimate concerns of others and prevent wars, they escalate wars. This is true across the board in Russia, China, USA etc. They supposedly “work for us” but they do such a terrible job and then we have to pay with our taxes and our boys (and kill other people by the tens of thousands) for THEIR mistakes while they never even come close to paying the price an average young male member of the public has to pay.

In the Russian revolution, 20 million people died, many killing their own relatives. But not Stalin, Lenin, or any of the Bolshevik leaders. Must be nice to be the political class. And people buy this bullshit. Read “war is a racket” by Smeey Butler

Yes, it is clear you are talking about USSR and post-USSR RF. Again I don't know what's the point of picking a period with no real change of power, not even close to what seems possible in Iran.

Russian leaders were as quick to leave as any when shit hit the fan is my point.

> Even Navalny came back to face the music, and he wasnt even president (yet?)

The dude has a a net positivity of -30% rating ... and is a designated terrorist.

> According to polls conducted by the Levada Center in September 2020, 20% of Russians approve Navalny's activities, 50% disapprove, and 18% had never heard of him. Out of those who were able to recognize Navalny, 10% said that they have "respect" for him, 8% have sympathy and 15% "could not say anything bad" about him. 31% are "neutral" towards him, 14% "could not say anything good" about him and 10% dislike him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Navalny

You could argue Russia is corrupt, but it equally seems likely the west is propping this guy up because he's an "asset". Navalny isn't anywhere close to electable. He's convicted of multiple crimes, in solitary for trying to start / organize a prisoners union (something the west also pushes back against) and isn't generally liked in Russia. Especially, when comparing to someone like Putin who has a +50% approval rating

https://www.statista.com/statistics/896181/putin-approval-ra...

You could have said the same about Mandela and the ANC. Or Lenin and the Communists. Or Robespierre and the Jacobians.

Happy to say that Mandela and Navalny seemed less likely to create violent revolutions and big terrors, than those other two guys.