Alexei Navalny has died

[Something Funny]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Navalny could not be president of Russia, he would get overthrown.

You don't know that.

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

You don't know that.

He was too idealistic to actually govern the oligarchs and insane corruption of Russia.

What was supposed to happen? He walks into office and the entire corrupt system -- the courts, the billionaires, the military, the KGB, the mafia, the police -- just clean themselves up and play nice? No way. They plot to kill him.

Edited February 17 by Leo Gura

[Something Funny]

33 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

He was too idealistic to actually govern the oligarchs and insane corruption of Russia.

What was supposed to happen? He walks into office and the entire corrupt system -- the courts, the billionaires, the military, the KGB, the mafia, the police -- just clean themselves up and play nice? No way. They plot to kill him.

Yeah, but you don't know how well he would have been able to handle that. It's not like you know him very deeply as a person.

Also, in my opinion, the kind of Russia, where Navalnyi could realistically become a president, would be inherently less corrupt already.

[Leo Gura]

9 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

but you don't know how well he would have been able to handle that.

We know very well, since he couldn't even keep himself alive without power. The forces that killed him would be 50x stronger if he actually had power in Russia.

The problem with Navalny is that he would never compromise with the corruption, which is necessary in a system as corrupt as Russia. You can't be squeaky clean inside such a system. Navalny was too clean.

This is the problem with idealism. Your political ideas have to fit with the era and situation on the ground. Not how you hope things should be. Russia is a backwards place that is 50-100 years behind the West in development. Navalny was not sensitive enough to this reality. Putin is sensitive to that, which is why he's still alive and in charge. Putin understands how Russia actually is, not Western liberal fantasies. Western liberal fantasies will get you killed in a place like Russia. And that is not Russia's fault, that is your fault for playing with a hungry bear.

Edited February 17 by Leo Gura

[DefinitelyNotARobot]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

Putin is as real a leader as there is.

This makes me wonder: What are the applications of the conscious leadership you've been talking about? I suppose that what makes Putin a "great" leader isn't the fact that he is a "conscious" leader, but the fact that he understand precisely what level of consciousness he has to appear at in order to serve his agenda and his nation. He understands the collective needs of his people and answers to them on a tangible level, instead of pursuing some "lofty progressive ideals" (that's would be the Russian perspective).

Russians generally tend to value hard work, tangible results, analytical thinking over empathy and being a man of your word. Putin gives this culture what it needs. That makes him a "great" leader, but how could you fit in the idea of "conscious" leader ship in an environment as such? Your ability to be a conscious leader seems to intersect with the collective consciousness of your environment, in that being too highly conscious in a low consciousness environment might get you killed (I mean that's especially true on the absolute level as you couldn't even hold on to your physical level as you approached higher and higher levels, but this also seems to reflect on how the relative world works).

You could distill this question down to: If being a high conscious leader bared risks relative to your environment, would it actually be wiser to let yourself down to a lower state of consciousness, or would a conscious leader not negotiate on their truth? Where is the split-off between "great" and "conscious" leader ship?

[Leo Gura]

@DefinitelyNotARobot Putin isn't doing what I call conscious leadership, he is doing survival. He is a master at playing the Russian survival game.

Russia isn't really developed enough for consciousness leadership to be viable. And the best proof of that is Navalny's murder.

What most Russian's need is help meeting basic survival needs. Not Tier 2 fancy stuff.

Edited February 17 by Leo Gura

[Emissary]

2 hours ago, erik8lrl said:

Interesting. Can anyone from Russia actually verify what this guy is saying? 

I watched most of the video and this is nonsense. The dude says some truthful things in the mix, but frames them to suit his arguments. He also clings to those old TV ads like it's some crime against humanity. Yes Navalny was a nationalist in the early days, then he changed his worldview, that tends to happen as you grow up. There's absolutely no evidence for the CIA connections, that story was started by Russian propaganda many years ago and has spread quite widely, a large portion of the population actually believes that he's a foreign agent, especially older folk. So the video isn't actually saying anything new or revealing some big truth, just good old conspiracy theories to explain away reality in a way that suits their worldview.

[Leo Gura]

Since the Stalin days anyone who looked at you wrong was considered a foreign agent in Russia. Nothing new in this. That paranoia is what resulted in the famous gulags and purges.

Putin considers anyone who opposes his rule a foreign Western agent. Including the entire nation of Ukraine. Of course this is silly, since every nation has legit local opposition. That's otherwise known as democracy. Ta-da! But that does not compute in Putin's head.

Edited February 23 by Leo Gura

[Yimpa]

In the words of Ivan Drago…

 

[erik8lrl]

48 minutes ago, Emissary said:

I watched most of the video and this is nonsense. The dude says some truthful things in the mix, but frames them to suit his arguments. He also clings to those old TV ads like it's some crime against humanity. Yes Navalny was a nationalist in the early days, then he changed his worldview, that tends to happen as you grow up. There's absolutely no evidence for the CIA connections, that story was started by Russian propaganda many years ago and has spread quite widely, a large portion of the population actually believes that he's a foreign agent, especially older folk. So the video isn't actually saying anything new or revealing some big truth, just good old conspiracy theories to explain away reality in a way that suits their worldview.

I see.

Asked ChatGPT to do some research and give me a breakdown. Here is the result: 

The discourse surrounding Alexei Navalny and his political trajectory reveals a complex character whose positions and tactics have evolved significantly over time. Initially, Navalny was identified as a staunch supporter of free market reforms in the 1990s, inspired by then-President Boris Yeltsin's policies. Over time, his firsthand experience in the business world during Russia's tumultuous transition to capitalism and his observation of the systemic corruption led him to focus on anti-corruption efforts, setting a cornerstone for his political activism. Despite his early engagement with nationalist movements and participation in far-right rallies, Navalny's political stance has broadened over the years to encompass a wider anti-Kremlin sentiment, focusing more on corruption and less on nationalist rhetoric. This evolution is detailed in a thorough analysis by The Moscow Times, which highlights Navalny's shift from a "market fundamentalist" to a leader with a more nuanced approach, including advocating for liberal economic policies while maintaining a strong stance against corruption and inequality.

Navalny's commitment to exposing corruption within Russia's elite has garnered him both national and international attention, transforming him from an anti-corruption blogger to a significant political figure challenging President Vladimir Putin's rule. His efforts to mobilize support across Russia's vast geography, despite facing personal risks and legal challenges, underscore his role as a central figure in Russia's opposition movement. However, his past involvement with nationalist groups and statements has also attracted criticism and controversy, leading to debates about his true political ideology and end goals.

Al Jazeera provides additional context, suggesting that while Navalny has moved away from overt nationalism, he continues to advocate for some measures that could be seen as anti-migrant, indicating a complex relationship with his past nationalist tendencies. This nuanced perspective suggests that Navalny's political identity cannot be easily categorized, reflecting a blend of liberal, nationalist, and anti-corruption elements.

Furthermore, the broader implications of Navalny's activism and the West's response to Russia's internal politics are explored by Al Jazeera in another piece. This analysis raises questions about the potential consequences of Putin's fall from power, the fears of Russia's disintegration, and the West's role in shaping perceptions and outcomes in Russian politics. The discussion points to a divided Russian society, with Navalny's efforts seen as part of a larger struggle for political legitimacy and change within Russia, even as the country navigates complex internal and external challenges.

These sources collectively paint a picture of Navalny as a multifaceted political figure whose past actions, current efforts, and potential future impact on Russian politics are subjects of significant debate and interest both within Russia and internationally.

Edited February 17 by erik8lrl

[Applegarden8]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

He was too idealistic to actually govern the oligarchs and insane corruption of Russia.

What was supposed to happen? He walks into office and the entire corrupt system -- the courts, the billionaires, the military, the KGB, the mafia, the police -- just clean themselves up and play nice? No way. They plot to kill him.

This is not that simple. Navalny was also not alone and he had and has people's support. Maybe a civil war would emerge from Putin's lackies and anti-Putin supporters, or a collapse and fragmentation of Russia from the end of Putin's rule alone, i don't think your depiction is very accurate. It is cooking one way or the other as time passes by.

[Yimpa]

15 minutes ago, Applegarden8 said:

Navalny was also not alone and he had and has people's support.

On a contrasting note, Trump had a bunch of supporters during the Jan 6 Capital attack, yet Trump still lost the election.

[DefinitelyNotARobot]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

The paranoia is what resulted in the famous gulags and purges.

My great grandparents (who're still alive) were part of these purges. They're originally from the Ukraine, but were taken away from their homes and translocated over to Kazakhstan. Their families served the Soviet colonialization of Kazakhstan.

They support Putin. You would think that people who were traumatized by the Soviets would be more skeptical of the Russian agenda, but they actually see themselves as Russian, which is mind-boggling to me.

I think a big part of it has to do with Russian propaganda, but I can't solely blame the propaganda on it, because it itself is a byproduct of the Russian culture having a desire to establish itself as a power in the world. This requires blind trust of the people, which they seem to be more than willing to give.

I just wonder what it would take, for Russia to be satisfied with its geopolitical situation. Does Russia merely fight to survive, or does it aim to be THE biggest nation in the world.

Edited February 17 by DefinitelyNotARobot

[Applegarden8]

26 minutes ago, Yimpa said:

On a contrasting note, Trump had a bunch of supporters during the Jan 6 Capital attack, yet Trump still lost the election.

Ok. But so did Biden. What is your point? Russia has different political apparatus which is not a popular vote election based. There are people waiting for a change for at least 20 years and I think a revolution will involve military and a literal civil war + some regions want to disband Russia to this day. It is really fucked and twisted in Russia right now. The average joe's life in there is corruption right now, it's not the same as in America right now.

Edited February 17 by Applegarden8

[Yimpa]

@Applegarden8 The overall theme is that whenever you challenge any system, expect shit to go down one way or another. With great power comes great responsibility. 

[Yimpa]

On 2/16/2024 at 9:01 AM, Leo Gura said:

Maybe the lesson here is: don't be reckless with your life and be careful who you go up against.

And be thankful if you have opportunities to leave unsafe environments. Not everyone has that capability, so they happily suffer silently.

[kray]

Didn’t Navalny support some Neo Nazi groups in Russia at one point? I remember there being another thread from a long time ago in which someone posted a video of navlany hosting a Russian patriots parade, and there being Neo nazis at that event. I mean i know it has nothing to do with OP’s topic, but I do feel that if Navalny were in power, he would have emboldened such groups in Russia. Maybe would have replaced corruption with fascism and racism. 

[Husseinisdoingfine]

 

[Vrubel]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

We know very well, since he couldn't even keep himself alive without power. The forces that killed him would be 50x stronger if he actually had power in Russia.

The problem with Navalny is that he would never compromise with the corruption, which is necessary in a system as corrupt as Russia. You can't be squeaky clean inside such a system. Navalny was too clean.

He had balls of steel. Nothing wrong with his brain either. He was a strong personality that definitely could do some damage to the corruption in the system. I have no doubt about that. I bet Putin knew that too, If he was just some schmuck he would still be alive. 
 

[ZhenZhenZhen]