Post by alex221166 on Apr 9, 2004 21:19:29 GMT -5
"As of being lectured on democracy by a Russian, well it’s about same as one would claim that Portuguese would be disqualified to talk about esthetics or modern art because their women are fat, ugly, swarthy and have beards and whiskers. It’s a totally stupid way of making an argument and (yet another!) proof that you are total idiot."
No, not really. You see, Portuguese women are not fat, nor ugly nor do they have beards or whiskers - therefore your premiss is a wrong one. On the other hand, and assuming that you were a Russian (my mistake), receiving lectures about Democracy from a person from a country which has an obvious democratic deficit... well, let's just say that it is amusing to say the least.
"Besides being stupid, you are an incredibly rude. I know that rudeness is not an genetic trait of all Portuguese nonetheless I find you particularly distasteful character."
Well if I cared about your opinion, I woudl reply by saying that I find you charming.
"Russia migration. Although nobility and wealthy property owners left, a large share of the middle class, office corps, and professionals stayed in the country and worked for and with the Communists."
So you agree that the aristocracy left? That's a start. As to the army, you do realise that Stalin wiped out 99% of the officer corp in the 30s, don't you? That means that they died (many of them together with their families) and that also explains the poor performance of the red army both in Finland (1940) and in the eastern front from 1941-43. You speak about the middle class... First of all, you seem to forget that there was a civil war that killed millions. Anyone that was seen as dangerous to the newly formed Communist regime, or possibly a sympathiser of the White Army (or even of the Menshevics, for that matter) was either shot or sent to a Gulag. This happened even to die-hard communists (Berya took care of every single one of the original gang of 1917, and afterwards, Stalin had Berya shot). Hell, this even happened to the new army elite - Field-Marshall Zhukov, was disgraced by Stalin and the only reason why he wasn't shot was because of his wartime reputation.
It is obvious that not everyone fled or was shot, but many were.
"TV ownership. Until very recently in Austria all broadcasting was owned by the central government and the ÖRF was the only broadcaster. This did not make Austria less or more democratic (it was fully democratic). To claim that a particular form of television ownership is synonymous with democracy is just another proof that you are an idiot."
Until relatively recently, we Portuguese only had access to the two channels controlled by the state. I don't find that odd. What I find odd, is when the state actively tries to control private TV stations, radios, newspapers and every other source of independent news. If you don't see the difference, then you are not an idiot: you are a retard.
"Modern democracy, in the liberal sense, is a representative form of the government with a system of checks and balances and a mechanism for protection of minority rights.
In that sense Russia is not a democracy because it lacks proper system of checks and balances and does not fully ensure minority rights."
Bad for Russia, but Portugal has that system of checks.
"From the standpoint of direct expression of popular will through elections, Russia is more democratic than the United States and a number of other states (but less democratic than Switzerland. Process for calling referenda in Russia is more cumbersome than in Switzerland and required number of petitioners is prohibitively large)."
You continue mentioning the US. I do not consider the US as a democratic model (I find the college system obsolete and anti-democratic). Even if the Russian democratic system was in theory more democratic than the one in the US, it fails in practice because (duh!!) the country is plagued by corruption.
"Peter I was the first absolute monarch, who attained absolutist status through a number of minor coups."
Actually you are dead wrong, but nevermind. The first absolute Russian monarch was Ivan IV (known as Ivan "the terrible", 1530-1584). If you doubt, take a good look at on of his biographies. In any case, Peter the Great started ruling in the late XVII century, and if you call the execution of tens of thousands of Strelssy guards "a minor coup", that's your problem.
"Enough said. The rest of bullshit does not merit an answer. Problem with you (besides the fact that you are total moron) is that you lack any knowledge on the subject you are talking about. What you have in your tiny head is propaganda and some weird stereotypes. Forget about Russia. Were we to talk about United States or Finland (of which you most certainly also know nothing) the result would still be the same since you’ve got no knowledge of the subject you trying to judge, and, worse, no common sense either."
Os cães ladram, e a caravana passa (The dogs bark, and the caravan moves on)
I could insult you in many ways, but it would be a complete waste of words. You are undoubtedly one of the most stupid and ignorant persons I have ever had the misfortune of crossing paths with.
No, not really. You see, Portuguese women are not fat, nor ugly nor do they have beards or whiskers - therefore your premiss is a wrong one. On the other hand, and assuming that you were a Russian (my mistake), receiving lectures about Democracy from a person from a country which has an obvious democratic deficit... well, let's just say that it is amusing to say the least.
"Besides being stupid, you are an incredibly rude. I know that rudeness is not an genetic trait of all Portuguese nonetheless I find you particularly distasteful character."
Well if I cared about your opinion, I woudl reply by saying that I find you charming.
"Russia migration. Although nobility and wealthy property owners left, a large share of the middle class, office corps, and professionals stayed in the country and worked for and with the Communists."
So you agree that the aristocracy left? That's a start. As to the army, you do realise that Stalin wiped out 99% of the officer corp in the 30s, don't you? That means that they died (many of them together with their families) and that also explains the poor performance of the red army both in Finland (1940) and in the eastern front from 1941-43. You speak about the middle class... First of all, you seem to forget that there was a civil war that killed millions. Anyone that was seen as dangerous to the newly formed Communist regime, or possibly a sympathiser of the White Army (or even of the Menshevics, for that matter) was either shot or sent to a Gulag. This happened even to die-hard communists (Berya took care of every single one of the original gang of 1917, and afterwards, Stalin had Berya shot). Hell, this even happened to the new army elite - Field-Marshall Zhukov, was disgraced by Stalin and the only reason why he wasn't shot was because of his wartime reputation.
It is obvious that not everyone fled or was shot, but many were.
"TV ownership. Until very recently in Austria all broadcasting was owned by the central government and the ÖRF was the only broadcaster. This did not make Austria less or more democratic (it was fully democratic). To claim that a particular form of television ownership is synonymous with democracy is just another proof that you are an idiot."
Until relatively recently, we Portuguese only had access to the two channels controlled by the state. I don't find that odd. What I find odd, is when the state actively tries to control private TV stations, radios, newspapers and every other source of independent news. If you don't see the difference, then you are not an idiot: you are a retard.
"Modern democracy, in the liberal sense, is a representative form of the government with a system of checks and balances and a mechanism for protection of minority rights.
In that sense Russia is not a democracy because it lacks proper system of checks and balances and does not fully ensure minority rights."
Bad for Russia, but Portugal has that system of checks.
"From the standpoint of direct expression of popular will through elections, Russia is more democratic than the United States and a number of other states (but less democratic than Switzerland. Process for calling referenda in Russia is more cumbersome than in Switzerland and required number of petitioners is prohibitively large)."
You continue mentioning the US. I do not consider the US as a democratic model (I find the college system obsolete and anti-democratic). Even if the Russian democratic system was in theory more democratic than the one in the US, it fails in practice because (duh!!) the country is plagued by corruption.
"Peter I was the first absolute monarch, who attained absolutist status through a number of minor coups."
Actually you are dead wrong, but nevermind. The first absolute Russian monarch was Ivan IV (known as Ivan "the terrible", 1530-1584). If you doubt, take a good look at on of his biographies. In any case, Peter the Great started ruling in the late XVII century, and if you call the execution of tens of thousands of Strelssy guards "a minor coup", that's your problem.
"Enough said. The rest of bullshit does not merit an answer. Problem with you (besides the fact that you are total moron) is that you lack any knowledge on the subject you are talking about. What you have in your tiny head is propaganda and some weird stereotypes. Forget about Russia. Were we to talk about United States or Finland (of which you most certainly also know nothing) the result would still be the same since you’ve got no knowledge of the subject you trying to judge, and, worse, no common sense either."
Os cães ladram, e a caravana passa (The dogs bark, and the caravan moves on)
I could insult you in many ways, but it would be a complete waste of words. You are undoubtedly one of the most stupid and ignorant persons I have ever had the misfortune of crossing paths with.
instead they're located on a rather lame adress. 
)