| what if.... |
[May. 28th, 2009|07:18 am] |
You win 100 million dollars somehow... What do you do?
First you get Taxed 29% from the federal government, then you get taxed 24% from the Quebec government, you made 11000$ yourself(thats just a random number I put in you could put your own income if you want). 100 011 000 - 53% = 47005170.
1st I curse myself for not living in Alberta (they have a flat tax of 10%), then mope about losing 53% of my 100 million.
Eventually realize hey... I have 47 million! Time to get down to business.
I would put 25 million into maintaining wealth,
8 million for family
4 million for taking year off and trying to visit every country in the world.
2 million personaly try to turn around the economy.
1 million charity.
Under maintaining wealth,
I would invest about 10 million acording to financial advice
put the remaining 15 million into a saving account to incur interest, when I return from my globe trotting journey, use most of the money inside to build an apartment building in Ottawa.
Building would have an environmental roof, possibly top floor would be devoted to hydroponics (sod and plants) for small agriculture purposes. Whats grown would be sold in the market. Bottom floor would be made up of small business, as well as the lobby for the apartment building. The lower floors could be used for office space(like 2&3), raising actual living space further from noise of the city. The building would also be built to be as environmentally friendly as possible.
all the floors in between would be apartments, designed for middle income tenants.
I have no idea how much such a building would cost, possibly more than 15 million.
I clearly have to much time on my hands.
Pat |
|
|
| Booyashaka |
[May. 19th, 2009|01:19 am] |
So I've read a three more book, they were all pretty good. I think Child 44 was my favorite. It's a murder mystery based in post war soviet union, whats not to like? Fatherland is a murder mystery based in Nazi Germany after they won the war. It was a fun read, however the ending was pretty weak.Storm of swords is part of an excellent series, and was excellent.
so on wednesday I'm getting surgery on my jaw. heres what the're going to do, cut a chunk out of my lower jaw and push it back. then they're going to cut my upper jaw and push it forward. sounds like a party right?
I will get to spend two nights in hospital, I'm considering brining my laptop if they have wireless internet, otherwise I will just read. I've tried to picture what I'll look like after the surgery and I just cant picture it. I'm hoping it will make me a super babe magnate, this may be overly optimistic.
After the surgery I will have a whole month off work, and no obligations. I'm hopping to get some reading done , and to paint a good chunk of my warhammer stuff, expect photos.
Books to read
Empire to Umpire by Norman Hillmer
The war of the world by Nial ferguson
Who killed the canadian military? by J.l.Granatstein
The Krimean war by Alexis Troubetzkoy
The inquisition by Micheal baigen and Richard leigh
1421:the year china discoverd the world by gavin menzies
1424:the year a magnificent chinese fleet sailed to italy and set of the rainaissance by gavin menzies
what stalin knew: the enigma of barbarosa by david Murphy
Hitler and churchill by Andrew Roberts
The death of yugoslavia by laura sibler and allan little
The last kingdom, by Bernard Cornwell
1917 russia's year pf revolution by roy bainton
The Balkans:Nationalism,war, and the great powers, 1804-1999 by misha glenny
I AM AMERICA (and so can you) by Stephen Colbert
The greatest battle by andrew nagorski
Lennin: a biography, by Robert Service.
and the books I've read since the new year
When the Devil Dances By John Ringo (completed)
Watch on the Rhine by John Ringo (completed)
Child 44 by Tom Smith (completed)
A storm of swords by R. Marten (completed)
Fatherland by Robert Harris (completed)
A hymn before battle by John Ringo (completed)
Gust Front By John Ringo(completed)
The russian revolution: a very short introduction by S.A.Smith (completed)
Brisinger by christopher paolini(completed)
Fighting in spain by George Orwell (completed)
God is not great, by christopher hitchens (completed)
Dracula(graphic novel) (completed)
The prince by niccolo machieveli (completed)
The white tiger by aravind adiga (completed)
The scourge of god by S.M Stirling (completed)
Fathers and Sons, by Ivan turgenev (completed) |
|
|
| well there goese that plan |
[Mar. 25th, 2009|09:57 pm] |
So I've totaly failed my plan to not buy books before I read all the ones on my list, and went and started a new sci-fi series. So from now on this will just be a record of books I intend to read and books I have read this year.
I did however finish Smith's "a very short intro to the russian revolution" it was quite excelent! for such a short book it's very thorough and didint leave much out. Of course this meant it mainly just offered an acount of what happened without much analysis, but he managed to make it not to dry. If you feel the need to read a book on the Russian revolution, but dont want to read a mother of a book, I recomend this one.
I also read Paoloni's "brisingr" this is the 3rd part to a Teen fantasy series. It is very obvious that it's a teen fantasy book, that's ok by me though I quite liked it, you would need to reed the other to books to read this one.
Now the books that broke the resolution. all by John Ringo "hymn before battle" "gust front" and im curently reading the 3rd book of the 9 book series " when the devil dances" this is a cheesy sci-fi series about alliens invading the earth. The humans are allied with these other pacifist aliens who dont have earths intrests in mind. THe series is action packed and light, I quite enjoy it.
Books to read
Child 44 by Tom Smith
Empire to Umpire by Norman Hillmer
The war of the world by Nial ferguson
Who killed the canadian military? by J.l.Granatstein
The Krimean war by Alexis Troubetzkoy
The inquisition by Micheal baigen and Richard leigh
1421:the year china discoverd the world by gavin menzies
1424:the year a magnificent chinese fleet sailed to italy and set of the rainaissance by gavin menzies
what stalin knew: the enigma of barbarosa by david Murphy
Hitler and churchill by Andrew Roberts
The death of yugoslavia by laura sibler and allan little
The last kingdom, by Bernard Cornwell
1917 russia's year pf revolution by roy bainton
The Balkans:Nationalism,war, and the great powers, 1804-1999 by misha glenny
I AM AMERICA (and so can you) by Stephen Colbert
When the Devil Dances By John Ringo
The greatest battle by andrew nagorski
Lennin: a biography, by Robert Service.
A storm of swords by R. Marten
and the books I've read since the new year
A hymn before battle by John Ringo (completed)
Gust Front By John Ringo(completed)
The russian revolution: a very short introduction by S.A.Smith (completed)
Brisinger by christopher paolini(completed)
Fighting in spain by George Orwell (completed)
God is not great, by christopher hitchens (completed)
Dracula(graphic novel) (completed)
The prince by niccolo machieveli (completed)
The white tiger by aravind adiga (completed)
The scourge of god by S.M Stirling (completed)
Fathers and Sons, by Ivan turgenev (completed) |
|
|
| A memo to the Prime minister |
[Mar. 10th, 2009|10:47 am] |
For my Canada-US relations class we had to write a Breifing memo to the prime minister on an important issue on Canada US relations. My topic was theoretical; President Obama asks canada to extend its afghan mission past 2011, the Prime minister has asked you to offer advice on the matter.
Mr.Prime Minister
You have asked me to provide you with a briefing note, in order to better make a decision with regards to President Obama’s request. I have compiled a brief summary of Canada’s mission in Afghanistan as well as my own deliberations and recommended course of action.
( Background ) |
|
|
| More books off the list |
[Feb. 13th, 2009|10:04 am] |
Fathers and Sons, by Ivan turgenev; This book while i liked it was prety slow. Basicly your just following the life of two guys in 19th century russia. Their interactions with their parents, love intrests ect, you read the book for the charecters not the plot wich is strange.
The scourge of god by S.M Stirling; THis is the 4th or 5th book of a series called "the change", ill give you the basic premis of the series, some weird shit hapens in nantucket and then all the technology in the world stops working. like evrything, gasoline doesent combust gunpowerd ceases to blow up, maybe technology is wrong more acurately the laws of physics get changed and as a result almost all technology reverts to medeival level. The first book is prety intense as ou have all these huge cities where all our technology just goese away. The book i just read was OK but i think the series is getting a little stale and he ended it with an obvious cliff hanger ending to make me buy the next book... wich i will.
The white tiger by aravind adiga; this book was simply put awesomely good. Its about a guy from a little vilage in india who becomes a wealthy entrepreneure. You might think "hmm some sappy feel good story", it is definetly not, this guy doese some prety bad stuff to get there. The whole story is told as the main charecter dictates a letter to the premier of china and is a kind of critic of india from an indians perspective. I highly recomend it.
Child 44 by Tom Smith
Empire to Umpire by Norman Hillmer
The war of the world by Nial ferguson
Who killed the canadian military? by J.l.Granatstein
The Krimean war by Alexis Troubetzkoy
The inquisition by Micheal baigen and Richard leigh
1421:the year china discoverd the world by gavin menzies
1424:the year a magnificent chinese fleet sailed to italy and set of the rainaissance by gavin menzies
what stalin knew: the enigma of barbarosa by david Murphy
Hitler and churchill by Andrew Roberts
The death of yugoslavia by laura sibler and allan little
The last kingdom, by Bernard Cornwell
1917 russia's year pf revolution by roy bainton
The Balkans:Nationalism,war, and the great powers, 1804-1999 by misha glenny
I AM AMERICA (and so can you) by Stephen Colbert
Brisinger by christopher paolini
The greatest battle by andrew nagorski
Lennin: a biography, by Robert Service.
The russian revolution: a very short introduction(they arent kiding under 200 pages!) by S.A.Smith
A storm of swords by R. Marten
and the books I've read since the new year
Fighting in spain by George Orwell (completed)
God is not great, by christopher hitchens (completed)
Dracula(graphic novel) (completed)
The prince by niccolo machieveli (completed)
The white tiger by aravind adiga (completed)
The scourge of god by S.M Stirling (completed)
Fathers and Sons, by Ivan turgenev (completed) |
|
|
| Some stuff from canada US relations |
[Feb. 11th, 2009|08:02 am] |
A breife sumay of ww2 acording to me
Hitlah! germs take Austria, Sudetenland, Oh noes! takes other bit of checkoland double Oh noes!,. West is all like WTf?! Brits needs manspower so they start conscription, tell hitlah don’t be touchin Poland! Soyuz and germs say we got no beef. Om nom nom germs take Poland. UK not kool guyz! declares war, wit all their peeps. Everyone chills for a bit…. Oh Noes! Germs is all like “all ur base are belong to us! Lulz” and take west Europe. Winston is like chamberlain you n00b gtfo, Uk keeps fighting. Hitlah invades soyuz, japs bomb pearl harbour, hitlah declares war on USA. Allies invade italy, omgz hax cries hitlah D-Day, hitlah is pwn shortly later, japs are all like wateva you guyz aint so tough, USa enacts god mode nuke japs. ZE end!
something a little more serious
3. scope of canadian war effort , 250 thousand people in air force then (4 times current canadian forces) 1.1 million in army in total (1 In ten Canadians were serving) trained 131 thousand pilots and aircrews. Massive amount of food and industrial product, creats full employment. Public service goese from 46 thousand to 116 thousand, GDP doubles, Income tax goese from 112 millon to 589 million, unions double in membership. Canada grows incredibly. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jan. 16th, 2009|04:00 pm] |
So I've finished a couple more books, "The Prince" and George Orwells "fighting in spain".
I quite liked both of them. The prince was was very intresting, Machiaveli seemingly had a very good understanding of how people react to those in power. Obviously this is why he is so famous.
"Fighting in spain" was a fun book surprisingly light and quite amusing to read, this was writen right after he had gotten back to england and he through the book you see him strugling with his worldview as a result of his time in spain. You can also see how much his experience in spain influenced his later books, especialy animal farm and to a lesser extent 1984.
Heres whats left to go.
Child 44 by Tom Smith
Empire to Umpire by Norman Hillmer
The war of the world by Nial ferguson
Who killed the canadian military? by J.l.Granatstein
The Krimean war by Alexis Troubetzkoy
The inquisition by Micheal baigen and Richard leigh
1421:the year china discoverd the world by gavin menzies
1424:the year a magnificent chinese fleet sailed to italy and set of the rainaissance by gavin menzies
what stalin knew: the enigma of barbarosa by david Murphy
Hitler and churchill by Andrew Roberts
The death of yugoslavia by laura sibler and allan little
The last kingdom, by Bernard Cornwell
Fathers and Sons, by Ivan turgenev
1917 russia's year pf revolution by roy bainton
The Balkans:Nationalism,war, and the great powers, 1804-1999 by misha glenny
The scourge of god by S.M Stirling
I AM AMERICA (and so can you) by Stephen Colbert
Brisinger by christopher paolini
The white tiger by aravind adiga
The greatest battle by andrew nagorski
Lennin: a biography, by Robert Service.
The russian revolution: a very short introduction(they arent kiding under 200 pages!) by S.A.Smith
A storm of swords by R. Marten
and the books I've read since the new year
Fighting in spain by George Orwell (completed)
God is not great, by christopher hitchens (completed)
Dracula(graphic novel) (completed)
The prince by niccolo machieveli (completed) |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Jan. 10th, 2009|11:37 pm] |
So I've already broken my new years resolution and bought a book, George orwell's "fighting in spain" I discovered it in the travel literature section. I will add it to the list of books to read, speaking of which i finished my dracula graphic novel i quite liked it. Kinda spooky in an old fashioned way. I'm also almost done the prince by machiaveli, wich is quite an intresting little book, full of great advice like "a prince must be a lion to scare of the wolves and a fox to outsmart the traps.".I'm thinking ofr my next book I'l read something to do with Russia I'm leaning towards "what stalin knew".
So enough of book crap. I've felt rather disatisfied with my situation lately, and feel I should change something. However I'm at a loss as whatever i think of changing I create a great reason not to change it. Maybe i should just say fuck it and recklessly alter my life. probly a first step would be figure out what iwant to change the most. |
|
|
| beacause i'm a sheep |
[Jan. 4th, 2009|11:08 am] |
1. What did you do in 2008 that you'd never done before?
bought more books then i could read
2. Did you keep your new years' resolutions, and will you make more for next year?
It was probly along the lines of like cure cancer so no. yes new new years resolution read all my books and dont buy more before i finish them.
3. Did anyone close to you give birth?
not unless you count the birth of fiery bromance.
4. Did anyone close to you die?
yes, ill miss you james
5. What countries did you visit?
british columbia
6. What would you like to have in 2009 that you lacked in 2008?
more friends in ottawa
7. What date from 2008 will remain etched upon your memory, and why?
none come to mind
8. What was your biggest achievement of the year?
asked a girl out and wasnt overly concerned about being turned down. ( i was turned down)
9. What was your biggest failure?
didint work hard enough in russian
10. Did you suffer illness or injury?
i was shot, twice
11. What was the best thing you bought?
combat boots,russian gogles and an east german cap
12. Whose behavior merited celebration?
im gona say my old manager sweetest lady ever
13. Whose behavior made you appalled and/or depressed?
stephen harper, russian government
14. Where did most of your money go?
books,warhamer, food (i ate out to much)
15. What did you get really, really, really excited about?
the trio's new years party, going to BC
16. What song will always remind you of 2008?
i dont pay alot of attentions to songs, as such i probly wont associate one with 2008
17. Compared to this time last year, are you:
i. happier or sadder?
Happier, somewhat
ii. thinner or fatter?
i think fatter
iii. richer or poorer?
richer
18. What do you wish you'd done more of?
getting more friends, reading, schoolwork
19. What do you wish you'd done less of?
less mooning after dames but not doing anything
20. How will you be spending Christmas?
stayed home for christmas very fun
22. Did you fall in love in 2008?
No. but i had some crushes though
23. How many one-night stands?
maybe
24. What was your favorite TV program?
Arrested Development. the hour, the national, dirty jobs
25. Do you hate anyone now that you didn't hate this time last year?
james he spurned my bromantic advances
26. What was the best book you read?
this is a tough one.... The entire honor harington serries, The change serries was excelent as well
27. What was your greatest musical discovery?
MSTRKFT
28. What did you want and get?
decent grades in uni
29. What did you want and not get?
GF,trip to russia
30. What was your favorite film of this year?
"He's a silent guardian; a watchful protector. The Dark Knight."
31. What did you do on your birthday, and how old were you?
had a party it was prety fun lots of people showed up. i felt loved
32. What one thing would have made your year immeasurably more satisfying?
moving out, not live over an hour from evrywhere i need to go
33. How would you describe your personal fashion concept in 2008?
same as before.
34. What kept you sane?
books
35. Which celebrity/public figure did you fancy the most?
obama was prety cool
36. What political issue stirred you the most?
the whole hubub in parliment pissed me off, obama's win, gerogia russia war
37. Who did you miss?
all my friends in montreal, james,jeff,cindy, graham, simon and all the others
38. Who was the best new person you met?
hmm I met bc friends last year but just barely so I'll say them
39. Tell us a valuable life lesson you learned in 2008?
dont get into a way street relationship
In 2008 did you:
1. Go to a party? Even threw my own!
2. Try something new? went to Vancouver
3. Have someone change your life? not realy
4. Kiss someone? Couple people.
5. Tell your family and friends you love them? sure
6. Buy something extravagant? combat boots
7. Done something nice for someone? i spit on a hobo doese that count?
8. Do something terribly wrong? i spit on a hobo doese that count?.
9. Move? ugh no
10. Go to a concert? yes... jet planes of abraham
Best of the Year:
1. Party: my birthday party, trio's new years party
2. Show: Venture Bros, arested development
3. CD: shrugs
4. Movie: wall-e, reader was very good to
5. Song: something by MSTRKRFT
6. Experience: drunken make out was fun
7. Concert: jet planes of abraham
8. Book: Dies the burning
9. Month: aughust
10. Day: I dont know!
Worst of the Year:
1. Party: man that new years party was prety weak sauce
2. Show: mythbusters hasnt been as fun
3. CD: songs from work
4. Movie: Mamma Mia,!!!! even hamered it sucked
5. Song: mamma mia crap
6. Experience: mamma mia
7. Concert:mamma mia i know it was movie but it was that bad!
8. Book: havent realy found yet. as a bad book is one i cant stand to finish
9. Month: duno
10. Day: dunno
Hopes for 2009:
1. Predict something that you think will happen in 2009? russia will invade ukrain
2. What do you hope changes about your country? green party gets a majority government
3. What do you hope for yourself? A steady, normal relationship would be appreciated after all this time.
4. What do you hope for your family?that evrything goese super great
5. What do you hope for your best friends? that the bromance never dies
6. What do you hope for the rest of your friends? They realize st.petersburg is not far at all
7. What is your hope for 2009? More st.petersburg and russian goodness
During 2008:
where were you when it began:probly at em's party but im not sure
did you stay up: not sure
what was your new year wish? cant remeber
how many girlfriends/boyrfriends: like a billion
broke up: a billion times : C
have any crushes?: A handful.
care to mention names? NEVER
new friends: a few maybe friends from uni
win anything? many sexual favors from many various ladies
best place you went to: vancouver
worst place you went to: monreal eww gross
happiest moment: leaving montreal, what a releife
how was your birthday: not in montreal and thus awesome |
|
|
| new years resolution |
[Jan. 3rd, 2009|06:13 pm] |
I will finish all the books I've acumalated last year, AND not buy any new ones until these are completed.
Here is a tally of what I have to read in no particular order.
God is not great, by christopher hitchens (completed)
Dracula(graphic novel)
Child 44 by Tom Smith
Empire to Umpire by Norman Hillmer
The war of the world by Nial ferguson
Who killed the canadian military? by J.l.Granatstein
The Krimean war by Alexis Troubetzkoy
The inquisition by Micheal baigen and Richard leigh
1421:the year china discoverd the world by gavin menzies
1424:the year a magnificent chinese fleet sailed to italy and set of the rainaissance by gavin menzies
what stalin knew: the enigma of barbarosa by david Murphy
Hitler and churchill by Andrew Roberts
The death of yugoslavia by laura sibler and allan little
The last kingdom, by Bernard Cornwell
Fathers and Sons, by Ivan turgenev
1917 russia's year pf revolution by roy bainton
The Balkans:Nationalism,war, and the great powers, 1804-1999 by misha glenny
The scourge of god by S.M Stirling
I AM AMERICA (and so can you) by Stephen Colbert
Brisinger by christopher paolini
The white tiger by aravind adiga
The greatest battle by andrew nagorski
Lennin: a biography, by Robert Service.
The russian revolution: a very short introduction(they arent kiding under 200 pages!) by S.A.Smith
The prince by niccolo machieveli
A storm of swords by R. Marten
so 26 books in all.
I'll post a short review after each one and wether or not it gets the pat.c seal of approval.
Since I finished it on the bus today here is a breif review of "God is not great" by christopher hitchens
I quite liked it, its a little like The "god delusion" by richard dawkins, except Hitchens comes off as less foaming at the mouth then dawkings and I think his case is stronger for it. Unlike Dawkins, Hitchens attacks religion more then religious beleife. As is probly evident in the titles; Dawkings "you beleive in god, you are deluded", Hitches "you can beleive in god, but religion is a terrible detriment to humanity" to vastly generalise what they are saying. I'm not sure wich is the more offensive statement, but to me hitchens' by being an attack on religions not the religious seems less offensive. So bassicly what hitchens doese is go through history and finds various horrbile events and lays the blame for them at religions feet, base on the argument that the events wouldnt hapen if not for religion. He also makes the case that all religion is man made (concentrating mostly on islam,judaism and chirstianity but other religions get touched on to) and cites how the talmud,bible and quran came to be, how they were altered ect ect and thus even if divinely inspired arent the originals and thus manmade. He furthers the argument by pointing out descrepnacies within the books, various writing styles atributed to the same author and so on. One thing i found intresting he called the Fascist, Nazi and stalinist regimes pseudo religions, due to their cults of personality and supposed infalibility of the leadership caste. Anyways thats my shody wrap up of the book, It definetly gets the Pat.C seal of approval i recomend reading it. |
|
|
| Knights of 40th milenium |
[Dec. 3rd, 2008|06:08 pm] |
So I've done a bit of work on some of my warhamer stuff. specificly my squad of rough riders, these are guys on horses with explosive lances and laser pistols(so essentialy pure awesome). However the official models for these guys are absolutly hideous, so I figured I'd make some of my own useing a Knight set for warhamer fantasy. Bellow is my work area and under the Lj-cut are the knights.
( My knigts of 40th milenium ) |
|
|
| your going down mother fucker |
[Nov. 26th, 2008|12:16 am] |
|
I'm so sick and tiered of this damn essay, this end tonight!I'm not leaving this school till this essay is done! (not that i could the last bus left 5 minutes ago) this bitch is going down. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 24th, 2008|11:19 pm] |
|
augh just when I hit my essay writing stride its time to go home! I just wrote like a page in ten minutes, mother F I hate travel time. |
|
|
| Old russian joke |
[Nov. 24th, 2008|05:57 pm] |
This is a joke I found in my russian language textbook.
In england what is allowed is allowed, and what is not allowed is not allowed
In germany evrything is allowed except for what is not allowed
In the United states evrything is allowed, and nothing is not allowed
In france evrything is allowed and what is not allowed is also allowed
In the soviet union nothing is allowed, and what is allowed is not allowed.
another soviet joke
Don't say chees or there will be a line up.
(in the soviet union cheese was very rare so any mention of it would cause intrest) |
|
|
| Essay time! tune in on the 24th for another one |
[Nov. 19th, 2008|11:21 pm] |
*disclaimer* this hasnt been edited yet *disclaimer*
Why the Russians shouldn’t like Putin, and why they do
The west’s view of Putin as an autocratic man who will do his best to ensure he remains in power. They point to his control of the Russian television media, the suspiciously high death rate of journalists, his move to become prime minister after his two terms as president were up and his invasion of Georgia as evidence of his less then democratic credentials. Yet despite these worrisome attributes Putin remains very popular among the Russian people. This cannot be simply ascribed to Putin’s control of the media, though it no doubt helps, as other Russian leaders had similar control and yet were not as seemingly popular. Putin’s popularity comes from his ability to present a strong powerful image and for his role in returning stability to Russia after the Yeltsin years. Putin is in actuality a traditional Russian leader, enjoying both their strengths and their weaknesses.
Putin has received much credit for the success of the Russian economy during his presidency. However the source of this success comes not from Putin but the prior presidency of Boris Yeltsin. (aslund) Putin simply has not reversed Yeltsin’s free market reforms and has allowed the market to continue to develop. What Putin does do is minimize the success the Russian economy would be receiving were it not for corruption within the government. State monopolies have expanded during Putin’s presidency, each having a friend of Putin’s at its head (Inozemtsev). While the Russian economy as a whole progresses and advances itself, the large state companies have not implemented necessary reforms and become increasingly inefficient. The government is indifferent to the inefficiency as it allows officials to line their pockets, with ministers controlling large shares of the industries they oversee . (aslund) In fairness to Putin his macro economic policy is sound, Russia enjoys large budget surpluses and has a large federal reserve. However these could disappear if the inefficient state monopolies continue to expand and corruption remains unchecked.
Despite or perhaps in spite of the west’s misgivings about Putin the Russian people have generally approved of him and rated his performance well. The Russian people rated President Putin’s performance very favorably in opinion polls with only 10.9 percent rating his performance poor, with the rest deeming his performance satisfactory or good. (byzov). Interestingly they have rated the performance of the government much more harshly with as much as 34.2 % giving a poor rating and only 6.3 percent giving it a good rating, 48.7% said it’s performance was satisfactory (byzov). The difference is quite substantial which no accident is. While in office Putin has overseen the state takeover of the major media outlets, he has used them to create the image of the good Tsar, all good that comes from the government is attributed to him, and all bad to ministers and bureaucrats (aslund). Putin accomplishes two things by shifting blame onto the bureaucracy. Most obviously it maintains his popularity, more insidiously it creates justification for increased power to be placed into his hands. As well as giving justification for not developing an independent bureaucracy and giving power to other actors in Russian politics, such as the State Duma who’s performance was rated by 52% of Russians as poor. (byzov)
A large part of the west’s misgivings about Russia stem from the fact that the people holding power in government are from the late Soviet Era, and still retain the old ways of seeing the world(Inozemtsev). Not only do Russian officials keep a Soviet world view, they keep the most paranoid of soviet world views, the one which arises from the old Soviet security establishment, 75- 78 % of Russian government employees come from security backgrounds (Inozemtsev). Soviet security men were trained to view the world through the prism of Marxism, meaning that players on the global stage act in their own interests. Global events tend to be viewed from a basic assumption that they are caused by specific interests groups acting in their own interest (Inozemtsev). During the cold war this would obviously mean the west would be acting to protect its capitalist interests, naturally pitting them against communist east. Russian officials continue to view the world in such a manner, though they now assume the west wishes to halt a new competitor. Evidence of this world view can be seen in recent events in Georgia when Russia cited the United States’ foreign policy of “creating dividing lines. This was, in fact, the revival of a policy popular in the past and known as containment” Pres. Medvedev (CBC) as a cause of the conflict. There have also been calls from within Russia to retake some of the territory it lost due to the breakup of the Soviet Union, particularly in eastern Ukraine and northern Kazakhstan. These calls have not gone without official support either in 2001 the Russian Duma passed a constitutional amendment allowing the admittance of foreign states or parts of foreign states into the Federation (rasizade). As a market economy Russia only hurts itself by taking a suspicious and confrontational world view, if Russia did not act so belligerently it would have a much easier time negotiating and be better off for it.
A western Observer may question how it is possible that Russians would allow Putin to concentrate so much power into his hands, or at least how he could do this without some sort of major protest. The answer is simple; the Russians on a whole are not overly concerned with democracy. Many of them have lived most of their lives without democracy and are happy to simply have personal freedom, if not political freedom. When surveyed on what Russian’s thought of a multi party system; 19 percent saw no use for political parties, 16 percent preferred a single party state and 20 percent did not know how they felt either way. 55 percent of Russians either do not support, or do not know either way how they feel about a multi party system.(kertman) With such statistics it is not surprising that Putin could so heavily concentrate political power. The numbers do however leave a sizeable portion of the population which does support a multi party system, 45 percent, why were these people not more vocal? The apparent answer is that while they wish to have multiple parties they do not want them to argue with each other. When asked if “on the whole, competition and rivalry between political parties benefit the country,”(kertman), only 31 percent said yes, while 47 percent thought it would harmful to the country (kurtman). The 45 percent of Russians supporting multiple parties merely think they should exist, but they don’t necessarily want them to form any kind of opposition.(kurtman) It is quite easy to see then why Russians don’t particularly see anything wrong with Putin’s moves to limit political opposition. Putin would in fact be acting in accordance with public opinion, it does bear remembering that the public’s primary source of information is controlled by Putin and the press rarely puts a positive light on the opposition parties, or mentions them at all (aslund). Presuming for a moment that these results reflect the unmanipulated views of the Russian people, they would still be at a disadvantage. A government must be accountable; to be accountable it needs someone to check on it someone who will catch the government when it is wrong, and press it to right its wrongs. There is no better way to ensure then having a separate group which wishes to form the government. Wanting the governments power they will try to find any flaw which might give it to them, if the government wishes to keep power it would have to ensure they make few mistakes. Without the danger of death the government will become complacent and careless as it wouldn’t mater what it did as no one could replace them.
Russian’s could be forgiven for their lack luster support for the existence opposition parties, as they haven’t had any truly effective ones. The largest opposition party the CPRF(Communist Party of the Russian Federation) under Yletsin couldn’t decide wether to vehemently oppose him, or take part in government, it tried to do both and failed at both(March). The CPRF had no clear political strategy and took various contradictory actions, such as entering into power sharing talks with Yeltsin then suddenly walking out. They also called a vote of non-confidence when the political situation was unfavorable for them, resulting in a humiliating loss(march). The various political parties became entangled in power plays and petty parlementary politics, Russians never established the Duma as an effective body of power.(march) While helped by a controlled media the presidency appeared much more effective, this would pave the way for the transfer of power away from the Duma and into the presidential office.
If Putin maintains his hold on political power through use of the government controlled media and political suppression as this essay suggests, how then did he come to power as he did not have those advantages at the time? The answer lies with popular discontent with Boris Yeltsin, who ironically came to power due to popular discontent with Gorbachev. (mishler&willert) Russians have traditionally preferred strong decisive leaders. At a time when Gorbachev was powerless to hold the Soviet Union together they turned to Yeltsin who promised a strong Russian. When as Yeltsin’s second term to an end Russia was not strong, it was the weakest it had been since the first world war. Yeltsin had apparently failed so Russians so when under the leadership of a strong and decisive interim president Putin, the economy improved and living standards went up he was the logical choice (mishler&willert). Unlike Yeltsin, Putin was either able to keep economic growth throughout his presidency or lucky enough that it continued throughout his presidency. Yeltsin and Putin differed sharply in respects to their attitude towards the internal relation between the federal Russian government and the various state governments. Yeltsin governed the states ad-hoc haggling with them to attain a national direction to varying degrees of success, Yeltsin’s Russia was a decentralized federal state. Putin’s Russia is exactly the opposite during his presidency, federalism in Russia has all but disappeared Russia’s states are now firmly in the center’s control(mitin). Putin’s reassertion of central control over the regions reinforced his credentials as a strong leader, While Yeltsin’s gradual loss of control undermined him.
The regional governments had plagued Yeltsin’s presidency often obstructing national proposals or making their support conditional upon demands. Putin did not view this system as viable, and set out to change it with the ultimate goal of reducing the total amount of regions. In order to drastically reduce the power of the regional governors Putin took several incremental steps. his first move was to influence the selection of candidates. Putin would place pro center candidates on the regional ballets and give them federal support, however this sort of intervention had it’s limits as regional incumbents had powerful political machines which could cause headaches if they were overly alienated (mitin). The next step of Putin’s concentration of power in the hands of the center, was remove the untouchability of governors. Term limits were instituted and the center was given the power to fire governors if they broke the law, however the more powerfully in trenched governors were given exemptions to the term limits to ensure their loyalty (mitin). Putin having weakened the governors instituted a series of rapid changes to the Russian federal structure; he drastically cut the regions control of their own funding, established federal administrators to take care of federal institutions across Russia something previously administered by the regions, removed the regional governors from any say in federal maters where they previously had veto powers, in a very short period of time Putin gutted gubernatorial powers. As compensation a consultative body was created with rotating membership of the governors (Mitin). The last act of central consolidation of power over the regions was realized when several governors motioned for the appointment of regional governors, many governors afraid of losing their power supported the motion. By the end of Putin’s presidency he reduced the number of regions by six, eliminating the weakest of them (mitin). While Putin largely eliminated the power struggles between center and regions, he was able to do so because of his strong leadership, the regions still theoretically retain their power in the constitution and if the center were to weaken Putin’s reforms could be rolled back.
There are those who are resisting Putin’s moves illegitimately, they are mostly concentrated in Russia’s southernmost territories the North Caucasus. These regions were the most troublesome for Yeltsin, and wanted independence. when Yeltsin told them no, Chechnya fought for independence , Yeltsin did not win the war and the conflict ended in a humiliating tie. The second Chechnyan war resulted in a Russian victory, thanks in part to Putin (sagramoso). However the violence has not ended, the chechnyans have turned the conflict into a religious cause and violence has spread to neighboring states. To date the new violence has been minor, yet it shows an extreme dissatisfaction. (sagramoso). Putin’s response has been heavy handed more troops and police have been sent to the region, while little has been done to find permanent solutions to the conflict. The north Caucasus states have widely varying ethnic groups, cultures and histories even during Soviet times these groups were given a large degree of autonomy in domestic matters (sagramoso). The recent changes have drastically reduced the strength of the state governments, frustrated north Caucasus peoples and lend more cause to the rebels. The regions militants risk becoming increasingly radicalized, and the various groups are showing a disturbing trend towards Islamism many of the groups call for the creation of a Sharia state. In order to reconcile the region towards the rest of Russia Putin will have to ensure that the economic stagnation there is reversed and the corrupt political elite removed. (sagramosso). While Putin might address the economic situation, he has shown willingness to promote economic growth, it is extremely unlikely he will touch the corrupt but more importantly loyal local officials.
Throughout it’s history Russia has always had a rigid system of government with authority flowing from the top. For over a thousand years Russian rulers did not even pretend to be accountable to the people, saying their power came from god but they pretended to rule in their interest. After the revolution Russian leaders did pretend to be accountable to the people, though not directly through the communist, which pretended to be made up of the people. Now finally Russia’s leaders pretend to be directly accountable to the people. While Yeltsin allowed a multi party democracy, he was not accountable to it (shvestova). Yeltsin appointed positions to his political cronies and made many unequal behind the scenes deals with state governors. Yeltsin also oversaw the privatization of the state, linning the pockets of his friends in the process (shvestova). An inordinate amount of early entrepreneurs came from the communist party, suggesting the distribution of state assets was not honest (bonnell). It was precisely because of the lack of accountability he was able to do this. There was no oversight or participation of opposition parties who found themselves locked out of the process. Yeltsin also concentrated very large amounts of power into his own hands (shvestova). Putin then has simply picked up where Yeltsin left off, although they differ in style. Putin has concentrated on keeping power by subordinating the states to him, rather then Yeltsin’s method of keeping them loyal through bribery. Putin has also rolled back a good deal of Yeltsin’s market reforms reintroducing state ownership of various parts of the economy.
In his years in power Vladimir Putin has reversed much of the works of Boris Yeltsin, whether this has been to Russia’s benefit or detriment is not clear. Boris Yeltsin created a multi party federal democracy, which by Russian standards was very decentralized. That autonomy has now been largely erased, and control returned to moscow’s hands. Boris Yeltsin was a democrat this did not make him a good president. The Russians have not viewed his presidency fondly, and unfortunately have linked Yeltsin’s bungles to his democratic reforms, the most democratic period in Russian history was one of its most humiliating. Putin came to power with aim to end Russia’s humiliations. To a people with as deep a love of nation as the Russians this was a popular goal. As opposition parties dwindled, as media once again spoke for the sate, as Gronzy burned, as reporters disappeared, Russian’s were pleased with their president. Russia was standing up to the west again! Russia was strong again, what of the centralization of power? That’s the way it’s always been, only when it was questioned has Russia stumbled. The reason Russian’s like Putin, is because he is what they know. He is authoritarian and offers a strong leader figure, much like the Czars of old.
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/10/08/russia-georgia.html |
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
| |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
comrad_pat's journal