It's probably a good thing that Putin has held onto the leadership. It was probably required to complete the job against the DS. I don't think things are as bad for the people as the media makes it out to be, but I can't really say for sure other than the media has a 99% track record of being wrong/outright lying, so the odds are in favor.
They always cry things like "political prisoners in the gulags" about Russia but look at what they do to people here over petty bs, so I don't take those cries about Russia seriously at all.
A strong and forceful leader is needed when taking out such a powerful and deceitful enemy, as you can't be weakened by your enemy's cries as they stab you in the back.
I understand that line of thinking, and in principle it makes sense. A strong hand to handle an existential threat is sometimes necessary. There's probably plenty of examples of this with leaders during say WW1 and WW2.
With that said, in practice, a strong hand implies a certain level of authoritarianism & big government, which could become problematic. If you had a choice, taking the risk associated with the strong hand could quite possibly be the right choice, but I'm not 100% sold on that. Open to hearing other thoughts on this.
I can't speak for the Russian people obviously, but it could kind of be a similar situation as we would be if we had Trump stay in as Emperor, lol. We would be pretty much be okay with that if it weren't for the constitution and us purposefully staying away from any one person holding onto power for too long. In Russia, things may work differently.
We'll see over time how it goes, and hopefully, before too long we can actually start getting some good honest reporting on it.
You're more right than you think, fren.. Russians had the same situation (staying away from any one person holding more than two terms) but they have changed the constitution about this recently..
Question, what is it like in Russia these days? Specifically, the freedom of their people.
It's still a dictatorship, no?
With that said, Putin's stance against Big Tech is great to see.
It's probably a good thing that Putin has held onto the leadership. It was probably required to complete the job against the DS. I don't think things are as bad for the people as the media makes it out to be, but I can't really say for sure other than the media has a 99% track record of being wrong/outright lying, so the odds are in favor.
They always cry things like "political prisoners in the gulags" about Russia but look at what they do to people here over petty bs, so I don't take those cries about Russia seriously at all.
A strong and forceful leader is needed when taking out such a powerful and deceitful enemy, as you can't be weakened by your enemy's cries as they stab you in the back.
I understand that line of thinking, and in principle it makes sense. A strong hand to handle an existential threat is sometimes necessary. There's probably plenty of examples of this with leaders during say WW1 and WW2.
With that said, in practice, a strong hand implies a certain level of authoritarianism & big government, which could become problematic. If you had a choice, taking the risk associated with the strong hand could quite possibly be the right choice, but I'm not 100% sold on that. Open to hearing other thoughts on this.
I can't speak for the Russian people obviously, but it could kind of be a similar situation as we would be if we had Trump stay in as Emperor, lol. We would be pretty much be okay with that if it weren't for the constitution and us purposefully staying away from any one person holding onto power for too long. In Russia, things may work differently.
We'll see over time how it goes, and hopefully, before too long we can actually start getting some good honest reporting on it.
You're more right than you think, fren.. Russians had the same situation (staying away from any one person holding more than two terms) but they have changed the constitution about this recently..