Kamil Galeev has talked a bit about this as well. Putin’s coalition is basically the moderate choice in Russia. Corrupt as hell, but willing to tolerate all kinds of people. Ethnic separatists and various right-wing extremists are the main opposition. (And most people just aren’t into politics)
Unfortunately, he’s decided to take a turn into revanchism, which can’t stand, so we get to pick from the other available people as allies going forwards. More oligarchs in some kind of deal with the West and some more fragmentation, seems like the sanest direction from where I’m sitting.
Lets not forget that Gorbachev, widely perceived in the west as some sort of liberal reformer did not want to end russian occupation of independent countires that were part of the USSR and he supported the annexation of Crimea. Not to mention that the impetus for the end of USSR/Warsaw pact came from countries such as Poland, the Baltic nations and Ukraine, not from russia.
Gorbachev was a socialist, I’ve never heard much evidence otherwise. He basically wanted the USSR to live up to it’s own propaganda, which in the end it never really could have, at least by his era.
Yeltsin and the RSFSR was onboard with the other separatists/nationalists.
Speratists? What? Not wanting to be part of the USSR or even russia (like Chechnya tried to liberate itself from russian degeneracy) is not “seperatism”, it’s wanting to be free and engaging in your own culture.
Separatism is the advocacy of cultural, ethnic, tribal, religious, racial, regional, governmental, or gender separation from the larger group. As with secession, separatism conventionally refers to full political separation.
You’re specifically talking about cultural separatism, which overlaps with ethnic separatism and is the most common kind.
Kamil Galeev has talked a bit about this as well. Putin’s coalition is basically the moderate choice in Russia. Corrupt as hell, but willing to tolerate all kinds of people. Ethnic separatists and various right-wing extremists are the main opposition. (And most people just aren’t into politics)
Unfortunately, he’s decided to take a turn into revanchism, which can’t stand, so we get to pick from the other available people as allies going forwards. More oligarchs in some kind of deal with the West and some more fragmentation, seems like the sanest direction from where I’m sitting.
Gorbachev was a socialist, I’ve never heard much evidence otherwise. He basically wanted the USSR to live up to it’s own propaganda, which in the end it never really could have, at least by his era.
Yeltsin and the RSFSR was onboard with the other separatists/nationalists.
Speratists? What? Not wanting to be part of the USSR or even russia (like Chechnya tried to liberate itself from russian degeneracy) is not “seperatism”, it’s wanting to be free and engaging in your own culture.
That is the definition of separatism.
Wikipedia says:
You’re specifically talking about cultural separatism, which overlaps with ethnic separatism and is the most common kind.
So India was engaging in separatism from the UK in 1947?
No one is buying your attempts at pointless pedantry.
Yes, although it’s usually termed “the British Empire” in this context. Separatism isn’t really a disparaging term.
I would gladly discuss anything else you bring up.
You do you.