Forum

Wicc, I am amazed — I always considered you a sensible person... I highly doubt your brain has been brainwashed by the "zombie box" [TV]; apparently, this is just trolling. Well then, let's go in order.

No. Destroying a bad barn does not mean building a new good one. Someone builds, someone doesn't, but in any case, after demolishing the old one, you have to freeze for a while.

Overthrowing a dictator does not mean destroying a barn at all — it means changing its owner.

The Bolsheviks, after 1917, did eventually build something; it took about 10 years to climb out of the hole, with the growth of well-being only starting somewhere towards the end of the 20s.

As far as we know, 1917 was not a peaceful popular protest, but an armed revolution and a real civil war. The goal of the Maidan is not that.

Putin & Co. also built something, and it also took about 10 years; steady growth began in the early 00s.

What steady growth are you talking about? More cars and higher salaries? That is not Putin's achievement; it is the achievement of oil prices. During the entire period of Putin's rule, oil prices increased by 10(!) times. With the money from its sale, Russia could have been turned into Kuwait. What did Putin do? He ruined the economy, almost completely hooking Russia on the oil needle. Exorbitant utility prices, an African level of corruption, Basmanny justice courts, repression, police brutality, and crushed small businesses. Do you turn a blind eye to all of this, focusing your attention on slightly increased salaries? I have to disappoint you — oil prices are falling now, Putin himself is talking about a crisis, so soon there won't be normal salaries either. Are you satisfied with such stability? Any competent economist, like Guriev, can explain everything said above to you.

...the result of a firm hand at the helm — a person who understands where he is leading the ship and makes others work.

Putin and Yanukovych don't give a damn where this ship is going. They use power exclusively for personal enrichment and to maintain that same power. Hence the mass protests.

That is your personal theory.

No, it is not my personal theory; it is the opinion of many political scientists, and in my view, quite obvious.

But sociology says otherwise — in any society at any time, there are always about ~5% chronic oppositionists who criticize any government, no matter what it is, ~5-10% absolutely loyal to any government, and the remaining main mass, essentially apolitical, but motivated by their stomach and wallet, therefore depending on circumstances they lean one way or the other.

Do you often hear about one and a half million protesters taking to the capital's square? We are not talking about some average country and the distribution of political sentiments in it. We are talking about a specific country — Ukraine, a country occupied by Putin. Protests are happening not only in Kyiv, but also in many other cities. This is a nationwide strike. Do you also consider the Battle of Kulikovo to be destroying a barn? Should all of Russia have continued to lick the Mongol-Tatars' ass and not make a move?