So... More of the same

[fridi]

The Eurasian hamster gnome has won again in Russia - quelle surprise! We saw another fat batch of evidence that the Kremlin controls all political processes in Russia - and we weren't shocked. Nothing was left to chance. Especially during the whole circus they call presidential elections. So it's not too easy to surmise what exactly those purported 76% Putin votes really mean.

It's beyond any doubt that many Russians did genuinely vote for him out of sincere love. It's also doubtless that Putin is immensely popular at home. That's mostly due to the fact that he's been busy for years (in collusion -HA!- with the state controlled media), clearing the playground of any potential real rivals. He never allowed a single other politician to establish a profile of their own and garner enough popularity. That's the case not just with the current face of real opposition (or whatever has survived of it), Alexey Navalny. All other moderate opposition leaders have also been kept under a thick lid, even people close to Vlad, like puppet prime-minister Medvedev. Repression from the whole state apparatus are a given, as is the total control on the state media (which of course dominate the public landscape). They always show Putin as a leader without alternative. Repression plus media control: the perfect formula for cementing his power for life. Or for whatever period he fucking pleases.

Any results from such pseudo elections would be pointless and meaningless as long as there's no real political competition in Russia. Because political competition is only an imitation. All other candidates that made it to the ballot had exactly zero chance of success. They were given a figurehead role right from the get-go, and everybody knew that. Realizing this flaw of theirs, the Kremlin smartheads didn't just adopt the task of organizing Dear Leader's formal re-re-re-election; their purpose was to mimic high support for him through vast turnout rates, achieving a landslide and thus convincing the world of the legitimacy of Dear Leader's power (as if anyone doubted that; the rule of power as opposed to the power of rule has defined that society for centuries, as another contributor so eloquently explained here recently).

Only the stupidest of the most stupid would buy into that sort of stunt, though. The Kremlin strategists know that full well. It was them who invented the countless tricks, manipulations and falsifications leading to the desired result, after all.

So where will Dear Leader lead his country from here on? The West is mostly concerned with his aggressive behavior on the international scene. Skripal's poisoning was only the most recent of a stream of cases attesting to an increasingly confrontational stance on Putin's part.

There's more. With his expansionist, assertive and aggressive foreign policy, Putin wants to draw attention away from his domestic failures. Because the last 6 years were something like a "wasted age" for Russia. GDP was growing very slowly, contrary to all his generous promises from 6 years ago. In the meantime, other world players weren't sleeping, they increased their economic lead, confirming Russia's role as an energy and raw material appendix to the developed world. China, most of all; but also the US, Japan, the EU.

The Russian folk, of course, is feeling this discrepancy through their wallets. Real income has plummeted, and attempts have been made to compensate for that through relentless anti-Western rhetoric, coupled with praise of an imaginary military might. As if people eat missiles or something. Evidently, the Kremlin propaganda machine has successfully managed to cloud the vision of its own people on questions of domestic importance, like economic stagnation and social inequality. The siege mentality has taken hold in Russian society again, carefully tailored by the state, the media, and a numerous army of online trolls and hybrid disinformators. Not to forget the domestic pop and art world, which has served as a horde of servile lackeys to Dear Leader, rather than dong their job of holding him accountable and asking the hard questions.

In short, Putin will keep the course for the time being. He'll keep pushing for the development of various programs producing things that go kaboom. He warned the world about it just prior to the election, after all. The time for hopes and illusions of a brighter future for Russia has long gone. It's reality check time now. Enter Cold War v.2.0.

Comments

[johnny9fingers]

Even Uncle Vlad isn't immortal. I'd give him 10 years more before he has to let loose the reins of power however...

I think he had better start preparing the succession. 10 years should be enough time to enable him to train someone up in the role.

[fridi]

Like I said earlier, this is likely his last term. He'll be preparing his successor in the next 6 years.

[abomvubuso]

Don't write him off just yet. Same goes for Berlusconi, by the way.

[johnny9fingers]

Living proof that overindulgence in Viagra prolongs political life even beyond court orders and convictions for wrongdoing.

[johnny9fingers]

I can see that being a sensible opinion, but I reckon Vlad will cling on for a bit longer, maybe even as long as the medics can keep him going. Retirement is rarely an option in Russia when it comes to the top job, though one or two have managed it. If he can do that he will have won bonus points in the game, surely?

[fridi]

Putin's predecessor did retire, although it was his age, health condition, and the fact that the powers-that-be were pushing hard for his removal, that may've played a key role.

[abomvubuso]

His approval ratings were close to zero at the time he was made to resign. He was an embarrassment.

[oportet]

Stepping down/not running because of old age would be a possibility, if he aged.

He looks exactly the same today as he did when W looked into his soul or whatever the hell he did like 20 years ago.

Looking at the before and after pictures from our last 3 (measly two-term) Presidents, it's obvious Vlady has access to some dark magic that lets him steal their youth.

[kiaa]

Obviously, he drinks the blood of devoted pop-star maidens who are in their period.

[asthfghl]

Yep. The rule of power as opposed to the power of rules. We know the drill all too well.

[mikeyxw]

"I understand, no I really do, that some people are too unhappy that Russia has become assertive enough to behave like a superpower again"

Naw, people are unhappy that Russia has become the invade your neighbors and use chemical weapons in the capitals of other countries type of superpower. If they were becoming a developed, powerful country through growth that builds influence, sometimes at the long term expense of the influenced, you know, like China, nobody would mind as much. I suspect this would have also be better for Russians.

[abomvubuso]

Acting like a bully doesn't help make friends, either.

[abomvubuso]

And threatening everyone doesn't help sustain one's interests in the long run, because those you threaten come back at you with a vengeance sooner or later.

"Selling stories", as cynical as it may be, might be a more sustainable approach to pursuing one's geopolitical interests. Hint: blatant propaganda doesn't work in the long run, either.

[fridi]

You're talking about "values", of course. Well, Putin has been crafting a "values" narrative of his own now. Protector of traditional values, etc. And some are buying it, including ones at the other side of the new Iron Curtain. You might refer to them as useful idiots if you like, but they're there.

[mikeyxw]

No, China isn't an example of how one should act. China is an example of a country that is becoming an assertive, global superpower but isn't targeted by broad ranging sanctions because of it's actions or have it's diplomats expelled by the dozen. It can be done. Despite what you were asserting, people aren't being mean to Russia because they're becoming powerful. People are being mean because the way it's behaving has consequences.

[luzribeiro]

"Become"? They haven't stopped in the first place.

And neither have you guys, while we're at it. You've just sold a better story about yourselves. So get off that high horse, will you.

[mikeyxw]

I was talking about Russia and China, not the US. Not sure what high horse this puts me on.

[luzribeiro]

The one you're sitting on while judging the bad kids on the block.

[mikeyxw]

Oh, of course. My bad. I should of course never say that using nerve gas or invading one's neighbor is a bad thing.

Actually, not even that. I retract my point that Russia is being treated the way it is because of it's actions. It's completely, as was implied above, because they're being assertive and regaining their global stature. Yep, you got me.

[luzribeiro]

Better admitting an error late than never. ;-)

[fridi]

"the invade your neighbors ... type of superpower"

Well, it's way sexier to invade countries at the other end of the world, you know. And safer for the invader, of course. Wink-nudge-wink.

[mikeyxw]

Not sure I'd call it sexier, but yes. Attacking what was once a regional power across the globe, getting about three dozen countries to contribute troops, including some usually level headed folks like the Danes, Dutch, and Norwegians, having once globally respected folks tell stuff to the UN that turns out to be fiction, and making a huge fuck-up of the affair that defines a generation, yeah, that's in a completely different league of global dick-waving. Both invasions were huge mistakes in my opinion, but Russia's looks like something from early last century while the US's was a completely new and novel way to screw the pooch.

[fridi]

Well at least they're invading places predominantly populated by Russians. What's your excuse?

[mikeyxw]

Fist, you really think it's excusable to invade a place that's populated by your ethnic group?

Second, did anything in my post indicate I thought it was excusable?

[fridi]

"Naw, people are unhappy that Russia has become the invade your neighbors and use chemical weapons in the capitals of other countries type of superpower"

Those are your very first words. The US has long been the invade-foreign-country type of superpower, but I'm not seeing you explaining why people should be unhappy. You can't put Russia's actions out of the more global context of every damn superpower doing whatever it fucking pleases. Whence the selective outrage? Why the double standard?

[mikeyxw]

Huh? People say bad things about the US because the US has done bad things. I never tried to assert that people only criticize it, for example, the war in Iraq because the US is being assertive and not rolling over.

Oh, and my first post didn't include the US. It was about China, who haven't, in the past couple of decades, invade foreign countries. I don't really see the double standard regarding Russia and China, which is the comparison I made.

[fridi]

'K.