Last week, after Putin put forward constitutional reforms that would “empower the legislative branch” and his entire government resigned, the Western press (and the West-backed “opposition” in Russia) went on at length about how Putin was preparing to “extend his power”, to move to an office “without term limits”, or something along those lines.
After years complaining about the amount of power the President of Russia has, the MSM decided that limiting those powers was ALSO bad (or perhaps, never even actually read the speech itself at all).
This isn’t deliberate deception on their part, they are just trained animals after all. Criticising Putin is a Pavlovian response to the man saying, or doing absolutely anything.
There’s no point in gain-saying it, or analysing it. It is dogs howling at the moon. Instinctive, base and – to a rational mind – entirely meaningless.
Forget what our press says. It is white noise. They have no insight and no interest in acquiring any.
However, even the alternative media are confused on this one. MoA is a good analyst, but he’s not sure what’s at play here.
….so what IS going on in Russia? Why the constitutional reforms?
Let’s take a look at the headline proposals:
- Limit the Presidency to a two-term maximum
- Empower the Duma to appoint the Prime Minister and cabinet, in place of the President
- Anyone running for President has to have lived in Russia for 25 years
- Dual-nationals are forbidden from holding public offices
Are these really steps designed centralize the power of the state in an individual? Do they logically support the argument “Putin wants to be in power for life”?
Given that list, I would say “no”. I would say, quite the opposite.
The first two points limit the powers of the Presidency, whilst empowering the legislative branch. Why would Putin limit the powers of the President if he intends a third term?
Western “analysts” argue Putin plans to stay on as Prime Minister, but these rule changes don’t empower the PM, they only empower the Duma to choose the PM.
If he were going to change the constitution to keep himself in power, why not just scrap term limits? Or increase the Presidental term length?
The third proposed change is interesting – “prevent dual nationals from holding public offices” – is this a way of limiting possible Western interference in Russian politics?
In the days of the Roman Empire, upon conquering a province the Romans would take children of members of the ruling class to back to Rome, to be fostered in Roman families and raised as Romans. Then, when they reached adulthood, the new Romanised Celts or Assyrians or Goths would be sent back to the land of their birth and rule as the province in Rome’s name, serving Rome’s interests.
The modern Rome, the United States, does exactly the same thing.
Juan Guaido is Venezuela’s “acting President”. He was educated at Georgetown University in Washington DC. Alexey Navalny is the “leader of the Russian opposition”, he was a “world fellow” at Yale.
The US/NATO/EU bloc is eagerly awaiting the chance to replace Putin with a pro-Western neo-liberal. One who will increase national debt, implement austerity, privatise industry, gut the public sector, and open up Russia to the IMF…just like has been done all over the Western world.
So: We have rules limiting the power of the office of President, and a rule clearly aimed at making it impossible for a US-backed puppet to be inserted into said office.
Here’s where we get into some hardcore speculation:
I think, having done the hard work to fix many of Russia’s societal and security-related problems, Putin is seeking to make systemic changes that prevent this work being undone.
I think Putin wants to go – or is at least considering it – and is trying to put rules in place to protect Russia from his possible successors.
To demonstrate my point, we should take a look at the other parts of Putin’s speech – the parts no one in the Western press is interested in discussing.
In many ways, it was a speech you could have heard coming out of Jeremy Corbyn’s mouth. Laying out a vision of Russia with improved healthcare, free (hot) school meals for all children, internet access for all Russian citizens. (You can read the whole thing here.)
If a British politician made this speech, it would be considered “radical”. If an American had done so, they would be called a crazy socialist. But there’s more to this than just socialist economic policies.
Here is Putin on pensions:
We have a law on this, but we should formalise this requirement in the Constitution along with the principles of decent pensions, which implies a regular adjustment of pensions according to inflation.
On minimum wage:
Therefore, I believe that the Constitution should include a provision that the minimum wage in Russia must not be below the subsistence minimum of the economically active people.
On local government:
the powers and practical opportunities of the local governments, a body of authority that is closest to the people, can and should be expanded and strengthened.
On the Judiciary:
The country’s fundamental law should enshrine and protect the independence of judges, and their subordination only to the Constitution and federal law
On Russian sovereignty:
requirements of international law and treaties as well as decisions of international bodies can be valid on the Russian territory only to the point that they do not restrict the rights and freedoms of our people and citizens and do not contradict our Constitution.
On Constitutional law:
extending the powers of the Constitutional Court to evaluate not only laws, but also other regulatory legal acts adopted by various authorities at the federal and regional levels for compliance with the Constitution.
Is there a pattern here?
- Enshrining economic reforms in the constitution
- Decentralizing the power for the federal government
- Legally protecting the independence of the courts
- Protecting Russian law from international bodies
- Reviewing future laws to make sure they don’t breach the constitution
These could be interpreted as legal backstops. Safeguards on the progress Russia has made under Putin.
We’ve been over the numbers a lot. There’s no need to repeat them. Suffice to say, under Putin Russian life expectancy, income, employment rate and birth rate are up. Violent crime, poverty, alcoholism and debt are down.
Under Yeltsin, Russia was a borderline failed state. Putin pulled them back from that brink.
Yeltsin’s 1993 Constitutional Referendum drastically enhanced the powers of the President, he doesn’t wield quite as supreme executive power as the office of POTUS, but it’s comparable:
The referendum…approved the new constitution, which significantly expanded the powers of the president, giving Yeltsin the right to appoint the members of the government, to dismiss the Prime Minister and, in some cases, to dissolve the Duma.
It could be argued Putin has used that power as it was intended – for the benefit of the Russian people. Perhaps he feels he cannot rely on anyone who comes after him to be as diligent.
By disempowering the role of President before he leaves office, he ensures that anyone who follows – be they a US-educated plant, a corrupt billionaire, or a hardline hawkish nationalist – can’t undo all the good his administration has accomplished.
Whether or not Putin wants to be in “power for life” is an answer known only to the man himself, but there’s nothing to suggest it in this speech, and none of the reforms put forward would appear to help in that regard at all. It looks more like a man securing his legacy.
Perhaps the question becomes not “does Putin want another term?”, but rather…does Putin even intend to serve all of this one?
For direct-transfer bank details click here.
We’ve now had two comments almost reprimanding us for this article and saying basically ‘it’s none of our business what internal decisions Russia makes.’
This strikes us as a very unusual BTL response. If we were running rampant speculation on Putin’s domestic life it might be appropriate, but as a reaction to an analysis of a public address, it’s hard to understand. After all, this site has readers from all over the world – including Russia – and routinely runs pieces on the internal politics of many sovereign nations. It’s what we do!
Since we have reason to respect the views of both long term OffG commenters/authors, we are genuinely interested in understanding what about this situation prompts the feeling we need to avoid talking about it?
It’s a very good and balanced article by Kit.
I don’t know why anyone would say we shouldn’t be examining Russia’s internal affairs, other than them thinking that any examination risks criticism, and there’s already enough of that already in the MSM. I think they are misguided though, this site should be able to discuss any political situation anywhere in the world without holding back.
As is often the case with Catte’s remarks, I appreciate her main point but do not quite understand her take-off point. Perhaps I misunderstand her targets, as I’m looking at the comments above which seem to have come after Catte’s post?
One of the targets was this comment I made earlier, in relation to a question Kit Knightly made at the end of his article in which he wondered whether Putin’s proposed reforms might be an indication that Putin might not serve out his current six-year term:
At the time I made the comment, I did not think that speculating about what goes on in the Russian President’s head seemed appropriate in the context of the rest of the article. It is possibly reading too much into what Putin intends to do, just going by the proposals he put forward in his speech, and such a supposition might be based on what politicians in KK’s country have done in the past.
In our own countries, we are not necessarily privy to know what goes on in the back offices of individual politicians and senior public servants, what policy ideas they bash out, how they come up with these ideas and on what basis, much less know the whirring that goes on in their minds – and some Western countries may be making certain policies and programs less accessible to the public through legislation or exemptions in other legislation – so how we can speculate about the motives of a politician who has been much maligned and misrepresented in the Western press, and whose actions are constantly being damned, along with those of his government, seems strange.
I get your point, but I don’t see why Catte considers your comment as a reprimand. Maybe it’s my advanced age, but your remarks seem even-handed enough to me. I do think that speculation about the inner workings is somewhat interesting, if, as you imply, essentially unknowable.
I think that there’s another interesting germ in your final paragraph concerning the process by which these political ideas evolve. I’m fairly sure that there is no such thing as Putin the Dictator. There is, I think, a wide array of advisors, officials, and staffers that are researching, considering, debating, and wordsmithing his pronouncements. He is a very able spokesman and, I think, a charismatic personality. Maybe he is also one of the foremost political philosophers and leaders of the 21st century. I don’t know, of course, but I think that he is probably at least capable.
I would agree with you completely if the article was proposing theories about Putin’s personal philosophies, ambitions, belief systems that a) were irrelevant to public interest or b) were devoid of data and based solely on supposition.
But this article is looking at the text of a public speech about public policy and suggesting what the underlying objectives appear to be based on the content. Isn’t this entirely legitimate and indeed ordinary?
Well, frankly, if we applied this criteria across the board something like 60-70% of all political analysis everywhere would be out of bounds!
I do think we need to guard against protective reflexive thinking with regard to Russia. Just because they are subjected to the most grotesque and racist propaganda by our media does not mean we should self censor, consider Russia beyond reproach or avoid analysis of their policies or their politicians.
I’m pretty sure you would agree with me on this. But do you think this type of thinking might still be slightly informing your reaction?
I think Putin wants to spend more time with his family.
Catte did you need to invent a shiny new green ‘PIN’ to keep your comment at the top?
I have not felt the need to join this discussion and thought Jen hadn’t done anything grossly Putin bot like – which Jen has made clear.
But then my hairs stood up with:
“we need to guard against protective reflexive thinking with regard to Russia.”
Will there be any explanation forthcoming?
Entitled much? Like the people running this journal owe you a personal explanation of every word you don’t like! 😆
Never seen you before.
Your first comment in this thread is to me?
I think the people writting this journal are more than capable of dealing with my inanities without your pointless input – did you have something useful to say on the subject at hand or just play ad-hominem?
Before 2020, I would have been one of the first people to say that Putin’s great weakness (among others) was not having a succession plan in place after early 2024 when he has to leave the Presidency. He should have done this earlier, and, as demonstrated by Medvedev’s resignation as Prime Minister, forcing the resignations of the rest of his government including Lavrov’s resignation as Foreign Minister, his timing to announce the proposed constitutional reforms may have been bad.
But now that Putin has proposed a succession plan, which necessitates changes in the Russian Constitution, to then presume that this says something about his immediate personal plans and then to suggest that he may retire before 2024 seems to be irrelevant to the rest of KK’s article.
When I referred to Russian politics as “an open book”, I had in mind the kind of backroom dealing among parliamentarians, party administrators and senior public servants, canvassing and lobbying by interest groups and individuals (both internal and external) that goes on in most governments. I did not think I had to explain this before but I see I do now.
@Jen – I see you are replying to me but can’t find anything here that is a response to what I said!
I’m not questioning your analysis of Russian politics, which I very often agree with, I’m questioning – not challenging, so no need for any sense of hostility – the root of the idea this article is inappropriate. I am genuinely interested in understanding as I previously said. But the rising notes of tension are palpable so let’s chalk it up to human confusion 🤷🏻♀️
Yes, let’s leave it at that. 🙂
As the decisions are now public and effectively made fait accompli by governmental resignation en masse, and so may henceforth impact on the entire world in both foreseeable and unforseen ways, why fret about reprimanders?
You DELETED my comment?
Ok you didn’t it seems to have migrated.
that’s gotta be embarrassing 😳
What you again? What is embarrassing?
I had posted a comment after someone else – Catte i think – as below, which then had disappeared from that position.
I thought it had been deleted until I scrolled down and found it.
It turns out that Cattes comment has been PINNED at the top forcing all newer comments below.
This is the first time I have seen this device on the comments and so I have inquired about its usage.
What is embarrassing about that?
We occasionally pin significant or interesting comments. Catte’s was pinned to enable the commenters being addressed to easily see it.
Thanks for replying- as i said it’s the first time I have seen it, which led me to think that my comment on Georgestown deepstate university and its alumni had disappeared from where it originally appeared, after Cattes comment, which led to my reaction that I just as quickly corrected on finding that comment.
So what about the being too nice to Russia angle? Sounds a bit like fleet sailing orders.
I do hope Off-G can give us an article on the bs Deployment 2020 that will see 20k US troops landing in Europe in a exercise aimed at defending it from Soviet invasion!
I think we should know how much it is going to cost us – the UK – to defend the EU we are abandoning – from a mythical dragon!
The CBC reporter in Moscow “accurately” reported that the Prime Minister was seen walking with Mr.Putin, the former looking glum and disappointed for basically being demoted (fired) and that the entire government resigned (due to that ).
That was his take after the announcement.
I would say that he needs to drink the organic vodka more.
Oh btw “He was educated at Georgetown University in Washington DC.”
It is where LauraKoftheCIA learned her ‘trade’.
Georgetown University is a private research university in the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington, D.C. Founded by Bishop John Carroll in 1789 as Georgetown College, the university has grown to comprise ten undergraduate and graduate schools, among which are the School of Foreign Service, School of Business, Medical School, Law School, and a campus in Qatar. Located on a hill above the Potomac River, the school’s main campus is identifiable by its flagship Healy Hall, a National Historic Landmark.
Roman Catholic (Jesuit)
$1.82 billion (2019)
Both into One (motto from latin)
The university offers degree programs in forty-eight disciplines, enrolling an average of 7,500 undergraduate and 10,000 post-graduatestudents from more than 135 countries.
Georgetown’s notable alumni include U.S. Presidents, billionaires, U.S. Supreme Court Justices, as well as international royalty and heads of state. The school produces more U.S. diplomats than any other university.Georgetown is also a top feeder school for careers in finance and investment banking on Wall Street.
Many former politicians choose to teach at Georgetown, including the former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick, U.S. Agency for International Developmentadministrator Andrew Natsios, National Security Advisor Anthony Lake, and CIA director George Tenet. Internationally, the school attracts numerous former ambassadors and heads of state, such as Prime Minister of Spain José María Aznar, Saudi Ambassador Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud, and President of Colombia Álvaro Uribe.
Former President of the United States Bill Clinton is a 1968 graduate of the School of Foreign Service
Born in 1976 Kuenssberg studied history at the University of Edinburgh, followed by a journalism course at Georgetown University in Washington D.C., where she worked on an NBC News political programme.
Laura arrived in Britain after the completion of her education in the US. Initially, she enrolled in a local radio and cable television in Glasgow. She joined BBC North East and Cumbria in March 2000. Moreover, Laura became a chief political correspondent for BBC News. During her time, there, she worked on numerous projects including ‘BBC One bulletins’, ‘Daily Politics’ and ‘BBC News’.
Laura took the new role of business editor in September 2011 for ‘ITV News’. Her role for ‘News at Ten’ was as co-newscaster. She announced on 12 November 2013, that she will be leaving ‘ITV News’. Laura returned to BBC News as chief correspondent for ‘News Night’ on in February 2014.
The rest as they say is history or HersTory ..
It seems to me that the internal affairs of the Russian Federation, although they may have some impact on external geopolitical issues, are a matter for them. At the present time the relevant question regarding the RF is as follows: Question 1. Is Russia a revionist state intent on an expansionist foreign policy? Answer NO. But it is not going to tolerate NATO expansion into its own strategic zones, namely, Ukraine, Georgia and the North Caucusas. Question 2. Is the Anglo-Zionist empire in open of pursuit of a world empire intent on destroying any sovereign state – including first and foremost Russia – which stands in its way? Answer YES. This really is so blatant that anyone who is ethnically challenged should seek psychiatric help. In Polls conducted around the world the US is always cited as the most dangerous enemy of world peace, including in the US itself. Thus a small influential (unfortunately deranged) cabal based in the west has insinuated its way into the institutions of power and poses a real and present danger to world peace.
This being the case it is imperative to push all and any ‘normal’ western governments and shape public opinion and discourse (except the nut-jobs like Poland and the Baltics) into diplomacy. Wind down NATO just as the Warsaw Pact was wound down. that will do for starters. Of course the PTB in all the western institutions – the media (whores) the deep state, the Atlantic Council, the Council on Foreign Relations, Chatham House the Arms merchants, the security services GCHQ, the CIA, Mossad and the rest will oppose this with all the power at their command. This is the present primary site of struggle, mainly propagandistic, cultural and economic, but with overtones of kinetic warfare.
Similar diplomatic initiatives must be directed at China. Yes, I know all about China’s social credit policy, I don’t particularly like the idea of 24 hour system of surveillance, and I wouldn’t want to live there, but is already a virtual fait accompli in the west. Again it bears repeating that sovereign states should be left to their own devices. After all ‘States have neither permanent friends of allies, only permanent interests. (Lord Palmerston, 19 century British Statesman). No more ‘humanitarian interventions’ thank you very much. How about Mind our own Business non-interventions.
I make no apologies for being a foreign policy realist – if that hasn’t become apparent by this stage!
The countries have experienced Viking invasions from the North, Nazi invasions from the West, Austro-Hungarian invasions from the south, Russian / Soviet invasion from the East. They’ve also been removed from the map entirely at times.
Now that these countries finally find themselves freed themselves from the tentacles of decades of repressive and corrupt Soviet communism, they are attempting to secure their sovereignty by taking out an insurance policy with the US and UK.
Rightly or wrongly, they look very nervously to the East, but also as well as to the West as Germany and Brussels get stronger. They may well be taking out a policy with the devil, but once thing can be assured by this strategy, they will never be invaded by Russia or Germany again.
Casually dismissing whole countries and their valid concerns as being “nut-jobs” displays one or more of: ignorance, arrogance, lack of empathy…
…or harking back to the “glory days” of the Soviet empire.
You’ ve got a soft spot for Baltic and Polish fascists, I see.
You may be right that (in the case of the Baltic states) having Presidents and other senior ministers and public servants from their diaspora populations in North America who have served time with the US State Department or some other US government agency (like the Environmental Protection Agency) is an ideal insurance policy against being invaded by Russia and Germany.
Whether such a history is an ideal insurance policy against being invaded by the country who schooled such leaders and administrators might be another issue.
And they are also often the descendants of WW2 fascists, Jew-killers who startled even the Nazis with their cruelty and sundry other detritus.
Usual anti EU bollocks from Frank.
Ignore the history of the Polish imperialism.
Ignore the fact that through the Soviet control post war – which provided a land shield for the USSR and almostcertainly stopped the gung ho NATO generals and Banker owned Winstons from attempting to bomb Russia back to a dark age and turning Europe and USA into radioactive cinders and thus destroying all life on Earth – through these decades these peoples under the USSR did retain their culture, language and religions unlike the devestation imposed by Americanisation across the planet.
It hasn’t taken long for them to return to their ancient Imperial notions about Russians.
10 days to the longed for Brexit which will be forever OWNED by you and your cohorts – it will not be forgotten.
Oh yes, I forgot, the Baltic states and other central European nations, in taking out insurance policies against German and Russian invasion by hiring US State Department ex-employees as their leaders and senior public servants, may have neglected to take out insurance policies against one another, and Poland in particular, as well.
Nick Cohen,“Intermarium in the 21st Century. A new path for Europe?”
Cohen’s article begins thus:
From then on, you have to subscribe to New Eastern Europe but I think you get the message.
Cohen, the propaganda hero of the Iraqi aggression and genocide-a veritable Zionist Streicher.
I would suggest that Putin is protecting Russia as a sovereign nation state and what his role in that going forward might be is somewhat secondary.
He knows he cannot go on forever and he knows that the West will have been planning meticulously for the day he goes, priming a sell-out traitor to be installed to bleed the Russian people dry again.
As a result, he will have been deciding what can be done to buffer Russia against such threats.
As far as dual nationals is concerned, he will have noted what dual national US-Irsraelis have done to turn the US into a farcical puppet of extreme Zionists. He has no time for that in Russia and so he will not let such Judases run Russia.
I am not sure I agree with saying that no-one who has spent any time living overseas should be excluded from power. Scientists in particular have a habit of educating themselves in several places before settling down: a few years away is not a guarantee of CIA recruitment. But no doubt the President has his reasons……..this may be more symbolic, targeted at very specific people in this moment of history. It is after all a change which could be rescinded in the future…….
Personally, I think this is a sign of Putin saying to Russia: ‘we are big boys and girls now, so it is time to go out into the big bad world without merely following Daddy’s orders’. ‘
Very strong leadership’ is actually a sign of nation state infantilism, after all. The stronger the leadership required, the less grown up the nation being thus led. The British are after all incredibly infantile in many ways, so their ‘desire for strong leaders’ is no surprise. I have never gotten over the absolute shock that merely asking a question was perceived as ‘disloyal’, ‘unsound’ or the like. Apparently you develop world class businesses being thought-free automatons obeying some mythical master. Does not say much for the so called leader, does it?
Much of the East has turned away from the US and is now looking more to Russia for leadership. Not autocratic leadership, but diplomatic influence. That is probably the sign Putin was seeking to sense that his job, as Russia’s ‘strong man’, was coming to a close.
He did not invade Syria, he was invited by President Assad to provide assistance. He has not invaded either Pakistan or Afghanistan, but both are seeking closer relations. He has not threatened China with sanctions, rather he has expanded enormously the oil/gas trade between the two nations and is encouraging Russian-Sino collaboration in agriculture development in Russia’s Far East.
He has defended Russia with an iron first when it’s territorial borders are threatened, but has been acting like a statesman abroad.
NO wonder he is more influential than yap dogs like Andrew Roberts, whose salivating blood lust for foreign wars did not extend to actually fighting in any himself, nor has he sent his six children on any Holy Crusades to ‘civilise the savages’ he so strenuously believes still exist.
Putin is a proper politician, like him or hate him.
He does his job properly and instead of demonising him, UK yapdogs should spend greater time trying to ensure that the UK had similarly professional leadership.
Putin is probably the only true statesman left in this dismal world of wannabes, con artists and corrupt criminals.
Andrew Roberts? Do you mean the Andrew Roberts who wrote a “definitive” history of WW2 and the internals of Hitler’s psyche without being able to read a relevant word of German?
In my opinion, Putin has had plenty of time to find fitting successors among younger politicians/administrators, etc., and has likely made his choice and has been grooming him or her for the job.
Just my opinion.
Implementing a system that is secure against any such future manipulation is his & Russia’s main aim.
There is no point leaving a system that would be open to such grooming in a fiture generation.
The EurAsian Republic requires that Kings can never be installed.
Formally, the powers of the Constitutional Court are being expanded and it will be granted the right to check draft legislation for its accordance with the constitution.
But, at the same time, the independence of higher courts is being destroyed. The president will be given the right to propose that the Federation Council fire the judges of the Constitutional Court and Supreme Court. Currently, the Federation Council can only do this if advised to do so by the courts themselves. This erodes the independence of the courts, rather than “protect” it.
There is NO ‘ independence’ of the courts, anywhere-certainly not in the UK or USA. Keep up the lies-it suits you.
I would disagree with that. The courts here in Canada, the U.S., and much of the West can not simply have their judges fired by the President/Prime Minister telling an unelected body like the Federation Council to do so. Nothing like that exists in the West. Further, while there may be some issues, the courts have proven themselves to be quite independent from the person leading the country. They are much more independent than Russia’s courts now, or in the future.
Why do you feel that you must end all your replies to me with petty insults? In almost all my comments in the last two article discussions I participated in, you responded with dozens of petty insults, with not a single comment removed by the moderators here, or any reprimand.
Out of all the commentators here, you are, by far, the one with the most ad hominem towards those who disagree with you.
As to why the moderators here haven’t said anything, I can only assume it is favouritism based upon agreement with your comments.
Throughout the West judges are selected by the ruling regimes, for ideological reliability. In the USA the process is open and unadorned, whereas elsewhere it is achieved more subtly, a process much facilitated by the fact that the upper echelons of the ‘legal’ system are populated by the upper class, who attend the right schools, work at the right chambers and are selected by more of the same. They interpret the class-based ‘ law’ according to their own ideological prejudices and inclinations, being able to find some nuance of the law that escapes their colleagues in lower courts, or even those on their own benches. The process is NOT ‘ objective’, but intensely subjective and driven by ideology, and to pretend otherwise is bunkum.
Of course it is legacy.
Not a personal one – that is for history to bestow – but for the successful ascent of the new EurAsian empire that WILL save humanity and life on the planet.
It is dovetailing with the Chinese AND the EU.
A fiture world government model is nascent.
Trolls got no response to simple verity so just scream a passing ‘arrgh’
Lol. Your Days Are DONE.
I Agree with the author’s reading.
I for one am happy that even this old USSR KGB officer switches from internationalism to nationalism; much more natural and healthier.
It may help if you acquainted yourself with at least two denotations of the word “internationalism”.
The changes that I read about made the Russian federation presidency similar to the US’s (federal) presidency. We’ve seen a number of cases after color revolutions and the like where people who are groomed by the “West” end up in powerful positions in a government which can’t be good for a country.
The US constitution requires candidates for President to be ‘natural born citizens’, at least 35 years of age and a resident for at least 14 years. It would be smart for Russia to adopt similar requirements. Other changes proposed by Putin also seem to draw on US practice for some of his suggestions for limiting the power of the President (quite flattering for an American, BTW — I know our system has holes in it and there is no shortage of really clever legal minds trying to find yet more of them (power’s like that) but considering when and how it was thought up its actually rather clever).
How many ‘dual’ or more nationals are there in the US Executive?
The pathetic US constitution enshrined slavery while at the same time claiming equality of ‘all men’.
Worship of MagnaCarta is just as odious.
The US Constitution is 200+ years old. Magna Carta is 600 years old or so. You have to look at things in their historical context and also allow for hundreds of years of smart-ass types picking holes in it (“Men”? “See, it doesn’t refer to ‘women’ . We’ll also call these darker skinned types not men as well”.) The fact that the execution is imperfect doesn’t negate the fundamenral ideas behind it. I’d expect any modern state’s Constitution to have fixed many of these issues (but probably generated a few more of their own in the process….that’s life unfortuantely).
As for ‘dual citizens’ and the US government my understanding — as a dual citizen myself — is that you can lose your citizenship if you join a foreign military or foreign government. This is spelled out in black and white but I’ve noticed that none of this seems to apply to the State of Israel. I’ve not seen anything specific on the duties of dual citizens in the US government but the implication is that the process of becoming an American citizen binds you to this country so anyone in government who is an agent for a foreign government is automatically breaking their oath of citizenship (not to mention the law). As ever, though, I’d guess this selectively enforced, mostly being honored in the breach and only selectively enforced if its someone we don’t like.
“…my understanding…not seen anything specific…I’d guess..”
That’s the problem of communication that we have here my friend.
I attempt to keep to facts in my comments and ask specific questions of ‘opinion’, factual answers to which are not forthcoming only further couched opinion!
Treaties no matter how old are what made the robber barons into the imperial overlords.
Start I suppose with the Pope dividing the world into two between Portugal and Spain. Consider along the way the treaty of Westphalia. Take in the creation of a corporation as a proto state with the Dutch and English East India Companies…Bank of England also. That will bring you to the old aristocratics who wanted to ‘own’ the American colonies rather than let the Hanovarians inherit it – the reason for the ‘revolution’ nothing at all to do with the immigrants and slave workers there ‘building a nation’. That is all before what happened as the Anglo Imperialists moves over the last 150 years to re-establish itself globally by chewing up all the European empires and their colonies into a single world empire 400 years in the making – except for these peoples who have resisted it – mainly because they are even more ancient. The plot to take over Russia, China, Japan,India etc are as old.
Knowledge is not about width now but the depth of its origins and knowing WHO then, and their inheritors NOW and WHAT they are upto.
There are fortunately in the current interweb plenty of pots of such knowledge, there is no need to suppose anything – dig! the facts are there. Goodluck.
I don’t disagree with any of your points but I do think that we’re stuck either interpreting history as “idealism that got hijacked” or “cynical attempt to set up a bait and switch to favor entrenched interests”. To complicate things further by suggesting both positions could be valid at the same time depending on the actors.
I am a bit long in the tooth to subscribe whole heartedly to the American foundation myth. This period of history is just too well documented. (So Thanksgiving as a holiday, while a welcome couple of days off, is a bit embarassing. We openly teach our schoolchildern lies.) The Revolution has a lot in common with today’s America — it largely about wanting to pay taxes but also a major subtext is a British monopoly trading organization, having ‘captured’ the British government, bent that government to its desire to suppress those colonials and maintain its monopoly resulting in a stalemate until there was a change in British government to one that had a more mercantilist outlook. However, despite the cynical reality I refuse to believe that nobody espoused the liberty and freedom concept — it was the Age of Enligtenment, after all. So, if we deny that possibility and just assume that everything is the creation of self-serving cynics then there’s no way forward. This is unacceptable — we have to keep pushing forward even if our efforts are mostly futile.
Just remember the addages that hold true:
1. History is written by the winners – they rewrite previous versions too.
2. Follow the MONEY.
It becomes starkley evident that almost all history taught during at least the last hundred years in the Anglo-Imperial corporate world has been MADE UP – to produce a deluded peoples with a superiority complex that is actually designed to control them and use them as the stormtroopers to incorporate the rest of humanity through war into one giant ‘borg’ like entity – the slave MASTERS
The ancient Aristos and Bankers are and have always been the REAL enemy – the Slave OWNERS.
There was no permanent income tax until the first world war.
The central banks are mostly private.
The ones which aren’t are attacked with war.
The right to ‘bear arms’ is a political cause to amalgamate people – exactly as Communism, Fascism, Imperialistic jingoism and religionism has been – for the benefit of the SAME ancient rulers.
There would have been NO American Revolution without these Ancient Aristos say so and finance.
(1) What he proposed isn’t the final word, the proposals will be debated, (2) the danger of Navalny’s getting in even with a strong push by the Americans, or their NGO poodles, is minimal, the greater risk is the communist and their fellow travellers gaining power, (3) the last twenty years have shown Putin may not be the ideal leader, but he’s as close to an ideal as the Russians may ever hope to get, his remaining in a position of some power after his Presidency term expires should be a positive for Russia.
Putin infuriates the Western Governing Elites (GEs) because he totally contradicts their progressive, PC, woke agenda and, to make matters worse, his stance resonates with the Western unwashed. That’s unforgivable for the GEs, but one hopes he’ll continue doing so. Just as our Parliament functions best if the opposition has some muscle, so the world also needs a strong opposition to keep the GEs of the nation of the “exceptional people” in check.
For those who live in an alternate reality, this is what’s been happening in France today…
As usual I could go on and on with this.
It just baffles me that people in the US and UK don’t seem to understand that they are next.
By the way, I should say again that most of these police are brought in from other parts of the EU.
For the most part they are not French police.l
Anyone who buys into the EU crap is either an idiot or a troll.
Here’s an idea: why not found a European Army? 😀 😀 😀
Off G, you probably get the ump with me putting in too many links here; but what I’m putting in is links to what’s going on in France right now.
This is history in the fast lane.
Whether you want to be a part of it is up to you.
That is rather off-topic.
Appreciate the links Rob. Am very aware of what has been happening in France, tho obviously, that awareness does Not come from any MSM outlet.
They are far to busy reporting the ‘protests’ in Hong Kong and Iran.
I’m also very aware of what is in store for people in the UK, US, and here in Australia as well. You would have to be completely brainwashed and blind not to understand where all this is heading.
I said in a post yesterday (Capitalism book review by Tony Sutton) that it’s important we link up with like minded people who oppose the Neoliberal orthodoxy, who oppose the actual system, and the bought and paid politicians who dance to their masters tune.
Solidarity, united, – not divisiveness and disunity. I won’t even start on fecken identity politics and the charlatans who push that crap as a means to further divide us. I recently joined the Socialist Equality Party (WSWS) coz nothing will happen if we don’t join with others, as the Gilets Jaunes have ably demonstrated.
There is no hope of a humane, better World if we don’t try…
The most important provision is the ban on dual or triple nationals, usually the same Levantine wide boys, being parachuted in by the State Department to bleed the country white and serve Zionist and globalist interests, as has happened in Ukraine and the Baltics and so many other places.
He has been in power for 20 years, and has probably wanted to step down for some time.
But one externally imposed crisis has followed another, Georgia, Libya, Ukraine, Syria, Iran, Skripal, and others.
There were open US threats to assassinate him over 10 years ago unless he agreed to step down.
And there have been five attempts on his life.
According to the Economist and other MSM, he has stolen $40 billion or $200 billion, or whatever figure they favour.
Because a mate of Khordokovsky says so, and he has a nice gold watch and some nice Italian suits.
And if that isn’t concrete proof that he’s stolen $200,000 million, then I don’t know what is.
Why would Putin desire one billion, or even one million? The parasitic scum who rule the West, whose greed is, indeed, insatiable, are just projecting their sick psychology onto Putin.
He was being ironic.
I was referring to the cited ‘ reports’ by the Economist and the other Western MSM presstitute liars.
The answer to KK’s second question, that is, whether Putin intends to serve out his current term, is that any constitutional reforms such as what he proposed in his speech to the Federal Assembly need time to be discussed, analysed, put to referendum, approved and included in the Constitution. Also a succession plan needs to be in place by 2024 when Putin leaves the Presidency. By then we’ll know if Mishustin or anyone else (Rogozhin? Glazyev?) might replace him as President.
It’s not for us to speculate what Putin might or might not do. Why should Russian politics be an open book for foreigners to pore over?
What an odd reprimand! Surely it’s perfectly permissible to speculate about or discuss anything? Isn’t that what free speech is and why most people are here?
I see what you mean but my comment is not intended as a reprimand. Given that the West views Putin as an absolute dictator, its interest in what he says or does can border on the sinister, mainly because governments, intel agencies, think-tanks, so-called “Kremlinologists” and other experts are always trying to second-guess what he is thinking with a view to cutting him off in his actions or painting him as more malevolent than he is to justify taking certain actions against him and his government that would be regarded as criminal if they’d been committed against other political leaders and their governments.
Bear in mind the way Iraq was apparently encouraged to act as a mediator between Iran and Saudi Arabia which paved the way for the Iranian general Qassem Soleymani and his entourage to travel to Baghdad as part of a diplomatic peace mission and thus become easy targets for murder by US drones. The whole arrangement smacked of being a Mafia-style set-up.
What is more relevant is why Dmitri Medvedev should have resigned as Prime Minister, causing the automatic resignations of senior Cabinet Ministers such Sergei Lavrov (Foreign Minister) and Sergei Shoigu (Defense Minister) as per Chapter 6, Article 117 in the Russian Constitution. When the PM resigns, the entire Cabinet resigns along with the PM. At present the government is in caretaker mode until such time as Mikhail Mishustin is approved as Prime Minister. If this approval takes place before the referendum on the proposals does, then Medvedev’s judgement must be called into question as he could have resigned after the public referendum (the results of which may or may not favour the proposed reforms).
Of course Medvedev’s actions were coordinated – it is to implement the system asap.
well lets not “speculate” ok, especially when its incorrect to begin with…..
I hear tell that Emperor Trump is also grooming his potential successor/s
It’s a neck and neck race between Kim Kardashian, who Trump is giving personal ‘hands on’ assistance, and Montgomery Burns, who is one of Trump’s role models.
The economic/social model in the neo-liberal West is one of outright parasitism driving ever increasing inequality and elite wealth, which is the expression in real life of the psychopathic elites’ INTENSE hatred of others. For Russia to follow China in creating a society of utilitarian concern for ALL the population, of poverty reduction and of social solidarity between all levels of the population, increases the risk of what Chomsky called ‘the good example’, like Cuba has been for sixty years as the rest of the Latin American continent, under US terror, descended into a charnel-house and mass immiseration. So ‘Russia delenda est’, and Putin is Hannibal, and, thankfully, the rotten cadaver called the ‘Home of Free’, in a fit of malignant self-delusion, ain’t gonna produce no Scipios any time soon. They’ve been reduced to creating Pompeo Adiposus Minors.
Are these what?
“Are these really steps designed centralize the power of the state in an individual? Do they logically support the argument “Putin wants to be in power for life”?”
Does that answer the question?
Thank you for this article.
I have of course read all the comments in MSM and the guff put out by the BBC. This for the first time is an attempt to put meat on the bone.
I must admit I can find no fault with anything that Putin does even some of the strange events in his early years in power when he was fighting an internal war.
Watching a documentary about poverty and homelessness in America by Deutsche Welle, it is criminal what is going on in that country especially when it seems fit to up the military budget to $750 billion. Surely at some point civil war will come to that country to correct the gross imbalance.
Reading about the strange actions of the liquid magma going on deep underground, you almost wish that nature might intervene and deflect America away from its constant onslaught of war and interference in other countries politics.
Boris Yeltsin, (western installed) Russian President from 1991 to 1999, during which the former Soviet Union was totally plundered…
‘He might be a son-of-a-bitch, but he’s OUR son-of-a-bitch’. Surely a ‘Yeltsin’ must replace or join ‘Quisling’ in the popular lexicon as a title for a traitor, in future.
I’m not so sure. For a long time I thought that Mr.Gorbachev was more the western asset however in recent interviews he seems to be in favour of Mr.Putins’ “style” and achievements, although he seems to like living abroad a bit too much. Perhaps its his way of asking if he can come home to die. Anyway.
I feel Mr. Yeltsin was brought in to facilitate the rape and pillage of the country’s resources by dual passport wielding oligarchs (in waiting). Unfortunately for them, Mr.Yeltsin was not as drunk as they were and outfoxed them in the end with the appointment of a true patriot – Mr. Putin.
I think Mr.Yeltsin did not appreciate being hoaxed up for bribery by New York bankers who suddenly found themselves being bbq’d to death in Monaco…..
If Vladimir Vladimirovich really cared about Russia and its people, he would rejoin and help to rebuild the Communist Party: all else is cant. I have vast respect for the man and think he has played a blinder against the USA and its puppets but I have more respect for Josef Vissarionovich, who stayed a Marxist-Leninist to the end.
The Soviet communist system created a class of priviledged party members versus the others. It created abuses, corruption, eventually poverty. In some ways its no different to the totalitarian fascism we are now increasingly experiencing in “the West”. Both extremes are undesirable.
Crap. In the Soviet work was guaranteed, education, healthcare, housing, transport were free or very cheap. Cultural levels were high and widespread. The nomenklatura were somewhat corrupt in places, but NOTHING like what came after Yeltsin and what is considered normal, even desirable, in the West.
After the collapse of East Germany, people there were “shocked” by the luxury in the elite government enclave of Wandlitz. But this was very modest indeed by western standards of corruption. Prefab houses, a well stocked shop, chemist, cinema, and a boating lake. Hardly Epstein-, Clinton-, or Blair-like opulence.
Rumours in the region centre around a forthcoming announcement of reunification between the Russian Federation and Belarus, wherein the new country would have a new constitution and a new President with no time served, thus the clock is reset.
Just rumours. For now.
A consummation devoutly to be wished.
Add NovoRussia and you are getting somewhere
Cue NATO outrage and sanctions.