Russia today

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sun May 06, 2018 5:59 pm

VICE PRESIDENT FOR CAPITULATION – PUTIN DECIDES WHAT JOB TO GIVE KUDRIN

Image

By John Helmer, Moscow

President Vladimir Putin is considering whether to appoint a vice president for negotiating an end to sanctions with the US and the European Union (EU), and an about-turn in Russia’s foreign and defence policy.

In the scheme proposed by former finance minister Alexei Kudrin (lead image, centre), the job would hold more power than the prime minister, allowing Dmitry Medvedev to remain in his place, but subordinate him to the new man. Kudrin’s idea is that he would become this de facto vice president; the dominant policymaker of the government after Putin; and his likely successor.

Vice president is the term being used among Kremlin officials and advisors. Not since the constitutional crisis of 1993, when Vice President Alexander Rutskoi led the Russian parliament in rebellion against President Boris Yelstin, has the position of vice president existed in Russia, with the power to succeed or replace the incumbent president. It is an arrangement for which Kudrin claims to have the backing of the US and the EU. Kudrin would also draw on the support of the Russian oligarchs, inside and outside the country.

The Kudrin scheme is being opposed as capitulation by the leadership of Russia’s defence, military and security forces. The Defence Minister, Sergei Shoigu, the chief of the General Staff, General Valery Gerasimov, the deputy prime minister in charge of the military-industrial complex, Dmitry Rogozin, and other senior officials have been trying to persuade Putin to appoint a new prime minister to fight the military, economic and information war which they believe the US intends to wage against Russia until the Kremlin accepts the West’s terms. For the story of their Stavka, read this.

These officials are fiercely opposed to Kudrin, and to his attempt to make an alliance with Medvedev to claim the legal succession to Putin, should Putin agree to relinquish the powers and policies against which the NATO powers have planned regime change.

Igor Sechin, the chief executive of Rosneft and a presidential succession contender himself, is not in the running for the so-called vice presidency. Sources close to him say he is opposed to the ambitions of Kudrin and Medvedev but he is biding his time. As deputy chief of the Kremlin staff when Putin was president between 2000 and 2008, Sechin was the de facto vice president for domestic policy, and dwarfed Medvedev.

The Russian Constitution of December 1992 provided for a vice president as the second ranking official of the state. He was to be elected with the president on the same ticket, American style. The Constitution’s Article 121-7 said: “The vice-president of the Russian Federation carries out his separate powers at the request of the President of the Russian Federation. The vice-president of the Russian Federation replaces the President of the Russian Federation in case of his absence.”

There has been only one – Alexander Rutskoi (right), a major-general in the Soviet Air Force and decorated combat veteran of the Afghan War. After he led the rebellion against Boris Yeltsin in 1993, he was suspended by Yeltsin in a decree the Constitutional Court ruled to be illegal. With a vote of parliament Rutskoi became acting president on September 22, 1993. Two weeks later he was defeated in the Yeltsin-ordered attack on the Imageparliament building, and imprisoned. Yeltsin then arranged for a new constitution which was ratified by a fraudulent referendum in December 1993. In the new Yeltsin charter the vice president’s post was erased. In its place, a subordinate prime minister, named by the president but not voted by a general election, was substituted.

Kudrin’s ambition to take power is so well-known, in September 2011 it brought him into open conflict with Medvedev, then president and hoping for a second term. Kudrin declared his power grab in Washington. When he returned to Moscow, Medvedev gave him a tongue-lashing on television and sacked him. Putin, then the prime minister and intent on recovering the presidency for himself in 2012, defended Kudrin by saying “our very personal and my good friend” had suffered an “emotional breakdown”.

Three months later, at Putin’s national call-in television show, he was restored. “Aleksei Leonidovich Kudrin has not left my team. We are old comrades, he’s my friend. He did a lot for the country. I’m proud that this man worked in my government. Such people are needed and will be needed in current and future governments.” The US state broadcaster RFE/RL headlined the rehabilitation: “Putin And Kudrin: Russia’s Real Tandem”.

Image
Source: https://www.rferl.org/a/putin_kudrin_ru ... 24519.html

Kudrin, a St. Petersburg economist with Putin in the mayoral administration of Anatoly Sobchak in the mid-1990s, has been Putin’s Svengali for austerity budgeting, privatization of state assets, and oligarch control of the economy for twenty years. His record for enriching himself has been attested by sources inside Alrosa, the state diamond miner, whose board Kudrin controlled when he was finance minister. Start reading the backfile here.

Last week Kudrin advertised his readiness for promotion to Putin’s official deputy, briefing the press on his proposals for “a fair parity — after six years of growth in unproductive spending, move to a six-year increase in productive spending.” Kudrin meant six years since his dismissal from office. He also means to implement sharp cuts in defence spending, and a policy of withdrawal from the Ukraine and Syrian fronts on the terms demanded by Washington. He favours a massive sell-off of state assets to the oligarchs, whose capital export Kudrin has long protected, and whose bailout by the state banks Kudrin directed in 2008 with his longtime ally, German Gref (lead image, 2nd from left), chief executive of Sberbank. When Kudrin uses the word reform, he means a privatization of the state’s assets to the oligarchs, and nationalization of the oligarchs’ losses and liabilities.

Last week too, Kudrin advertised that he and Medvedev had met for a discussion, which the prime minister’s spokesman characterised as focusing on “his proposals on improving the system of public administration.” In fact, they discussed how to form a united front in the bidding for Putin’s decision.

To show Putin he has the support of the anti-Russian alliance in the West, Kudrin arranged for the Financial Times to report yesterday that his promotion is a near certainty.

Image
Source: https://www.ft.com/content/c1721646-4d5 ... 951a2d8493

The newspaper calls the proposed job “a heavyweight post in charge of economic strategy and outreach to Europe and the US, said people briefed on the plans….His title could be something like: the president’s representative for international economic co-operation.”

A Kudrin spokesman is also quoted by the newspaper as revealing his boss’s calculation that with Putin’s mandate he will “reform” Russia’s foreign policy. “If Kudrin joined the administration or government, it would indicate that they have agreed on a certain agenda of change, including in foreign policy, because without change in foreign policy, reforms are simply impossible in Russia… Kudrin is the only one in the top echelons with whom they will talk in the west and towards whom there is a certain trust.”

The Financial Times calls the struggle to promote Kudrin with presidential authority to dismantle Russia’s defence capabilities and reverse its foreign strategy, “an effort to repair relations with the west as sanctions and growing international conflict obstruct attempts to reinvigorate Russia’s stagnant economy.”

The London newspaper has been notoriously mistaken in the past, reporting its wishful thinking as if it had already been decided in Moscow. Once, the newspaper’s Moscow correspondent – married to a lawyer in a firm working with Yegor Gaidar on state asset sales to foreign investors — announced that Gaidar had been elected prime minister. In fact, he had been defeated in the parliamentary vote, and Victor Chernomyrdin voted in his place. That was in December 1992.

Sources familiar with Kudrin’s campaign against the General Staff say the tension has been running higher than they can remember since then. They claim Putin has decided not to dismiss Medvedev, but has yet to decide between Kudrin’s scheme for the future and the policies urged by the Stavka.

NOTE: Key to lead image, from left to right, Mikhail Fridman, German Gref, Alexei Kudrin. Missing from the illustration, but included in Kudrin's plan, is Dmitry Peskov, who has been hoping to move from Kremlin spokesman to replace Sergei Lavrov as Foreign Minister. Also in the capitulation faction, Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov announced to the press last week that he doesn't want to be reappointed to his current job. "I want to work where the President will say. I am glad of any work that the President will give".The original of the lead image was a poster by Kukriniksy, the collective of three famous Soviet cartoonists, Mikhail Kupriyanov, Porfiri Krylov and Nikolai Sokolov. Their cartoon, published in Moscow in October 1938, showed the British betraying the Czechs by handing over the Sudetenland to Adolph Hitler, as Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain had agreed with Hitler in Munich on September 30, 1938.

http://johnhelmer.net/vice-president-fo ... ve-kudrin/

Trying not to knee-jerk hate on Putin cause of Donbass but this sounds pretty legit.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Thu Jul 19, 2018 4:36 pm

Mass actions held in Moscow, St. Petersburg against raising retirement age

Moscow: The people against the 'pension reform'
More than 1,500 people took part in an authorized rally on July 18 against raising the retirement age in Sokolniki Park in Moscow.


Image

The paddock in Sokolniki Park was the only place where the city authorities would allow people to hold a rally against raising the retirement age. Actually, the paddock is proudly called "Hyde Park,” that is, no agreement with the city should be required to rally there. [Translator’s note: It’s supposed to be a “designated protest area”] Yet -- it was necessary to coordinate with the authorities, go through a metal detector and be observed by the riot police squad, which timed the event literally with a stopwatch. This is the "freedom of assembly" we have today.


Image

Representatives of a number of trade unions and left-wing organizations, including the United Communist Party (OKP), ROT FRONT, the Left Front, the RRP made speeches at the rally. There were no flags of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF), though someone spoke on behalf of this party, too. Strangely enough, the event was visited even by those who are traditionally called the "right,” including the scandalously famous Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin.

Image


Here’s how Anatoly Baranov, Secretary of the Central Committee of the United Communist Party, characterizes the planned "reform":

- Firstly, my generation has strictly fulfilled its part of the "social contract" -- in 1977, when I made out my work book, my duties and the obligations of the state were spelled out in the Labor Code. And I fulfilled my part of the contract for 40 years -- you can look at my work book – I worked, received gratitude and awards, there were no penalties. But when it was time for this state to fulfill its obligations, it somehow decided that it was me who was to blame -- our generation did not work well, could not provide itself with a pension ...


Image

But let's be honest -- the pension, even before its planned cancellation, was insultingly small. It’s impossible to live on it, and all the "young" pensioners are forced to somehow earn additional income. But the tiny pension, in fact, is a small acknowledgement of the fact that at 60 years old you cannot earn as much as at 30. And this compensation you’ve decided not to give me anymore.

But this means that you will definitely lose the ability to live. And that 4.6 million human lives that will be cut off before the start of the new retirement age is a lie. More will die! Because it was based on the calculation of the receipt of a pension, and now it will not be! So, someone will not have enough for medicines, someone will not get vitamins, and not enough calories ... But mortality after a short time will begin to grow.


Image

This is called genocide. Genocide of older people.

This, by the way, concerns everyone. Or almost everyone. The object of genocide is all of us.

And now the government turns to us, to the object of genocide, with the question -- where will it get the money for us to retire?

Is it our responsibility to answer this question for the government? Were we asked when it formed the economic policy according to which our country is the first in the world in the growth in the number of billionaires -- and the last in Europe in life expectancy?

Pensioners should ask the government where our pension savings are!


Image

If we believe official economic statistics, then our country is first in the world for economic growth. So where is the money? If the economic management is inefficient, then it should not even be about the resignation of the government -- that was necessary before.

It should be about bankruptcy of the state! Yes, if the state is not able to fulfill its obligations to citizens of retirement age -- declare yourselves bankrupt! And we ourselves will take what we need from the liquidated property. Give us the factories and oil industries that were squeezed dry by the oligarchs, Gazprom and Rosneft. Give them back to us! And we ourselves will figure out what to do with them, instead of the useless current leaders.

That's how to put the question!


Image

It is clear that our "masters of life” will not want to bankrupt themselves, but it is necessary to put the question! And to file in the courts, by the way. Instead of joking at the rallies that Medvedev and Siluanov will watch the video from the rally in the bushes behind the toilet in Sokolniki Park? But a lawsuit will have to be read.

And the second question is the price. Economist Andrei Bunich, who did not get to speak at the rally, estimated that it was about saving $2 billion for the treasury. That is, an amount that any one of the oligarchs could pull from his pocket, not to speak of all the hundreds who own all of Russia today. And then, according to Bunich, in a few years the losses from this reform will exceed today's savings.


Image

But here is the essence of the matter -- the losses will be later, and the losses will be for the treasury. But $2 billion can be "saved" for their own pockets now. That's the whole background of this “pension reform" story! This was already the case in 2005, when the expected gain from cancellation of benefits resulted in losses for the budget several times greater. But for those who profited from this, the interests of the state mattered very little ... But the Investigative Committee should have been concerned.

Naturally, all the participants did not hear the rally. They had a good time, got on with each other well with slogans and utopian plans. We parted.

Image

By the way, on September 9 in Moscow and the Moscow region there are elections of heads of regions. Do you think at least one of the candidates was at the rally?

They were not ...

Image


Almost immediately after the start of the action, police announced that the gathering of citizens, which the officer for some reason called a rally (although there were no slogans and posters heard or seen, and moreover there was no amplified sound equipment), was unauthorized and therefore illegal. Protesters tried not to succumb to provocations and continued to show their cards. Then the citizens organized themselves on a walking tour of the Nevsky Prospekt, holding red cards in their hands, but they were immediately blocked by a cordon of riot police. People retreated deep into Malaya Sadovaya, lowered their cards and went back through the cordon to Nevsky Prospekt.


Image

The walk turned into a procession with the red cards raised at the Gostiny Dvor. Someone loudly said: "We are against pension reform." Then, at the Griboyedov Canal, OMON [riot police] blocked the way, everyone stopped. Several OMON troops rushed into the crowd, targeting activists of left and trade union organizations. During the arrests, the crowd chanted loudly: "Shame! Shame!" Then they continued the journey to Isakievskaya Square. Only about 200 people reached the square. No one shouted slogans on the square, but the police still demanded they disperse. Several more people were detained. The protesters showed a red card to the Legislative Assembly of St. Petersburg for unworthy behavior and the action ended there. In total, according to our data, about fifty people were in the hands of law enforcement officers.

Image


The event was held in the framework of the all-Russian campaign “People Against the Pension Reform.” An undeniable advantage of the action is that many young and middle-aged people came to it, a fair number of whom participated in such an action for the first time. Provocateurs were practically unnoticeable. People came out and looked each other in the eye, and they saw that they were not alone, and that many equally adequate, interesting and strong-willed people took action against the anti-people reform plan, just like themselves. This provides an incentive to continue the fight with confidence and greater energy against raising the retirement age.

Image


Source

Translated by Greg Butterfield

https://redstaroverdonbass.blogspot.com ... ow-st.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Fri Jul 27, 2018 3:43 pm

CEC refused the KPRF in holding a referendum on pension reform

colonelcassad
July 27, 17:58


The CEC denied the CPRF a referendum on the pension reform. It was a bit predictable.

The Central Election Commission did not approve the idea of ​​the Communist Party of the Russian Federation to hold a referendum on raising the retirement age. This is stated in the resolution to the meeting, which was reviewed by RBC on Friday, July 27.

On July 23, the commission's secretary, Maya Grishina, reported that the CEC received an appropriate request from the Communists. MPs from the Communist Party earlier appealed to the Moscow City Duma. They suggested asking the Russians the following question, which should be put forward at the referendum: "Do you agree that in the Russian Federation the age giving the right to an insurance pension for old age should not increase?" After the announcement was announced, the CEC began a discussion that lasted more than one and a half hours. The members of the Central Election Commission expressed their support for and against the position stated in the document. Thus, CEC member Boris Ebzeev said that he sees in the formulation of the CPRF issue "legal uncertainty, which can not be won simply by ardor or conviction." In the opinion of Yevgeny Kolyushin, who represents the Communist Party in the CEC,
After the end of the discussion, Pamfilova suggested that the CPRF again convene an initiative group to hold a referendum and added that the CEC is ready to help them with consultations. "Nowhere you are late, with formulations we will help," she said.

CEC Chairman Ella Pamfilova called the question of the referendum on the retirement age legitimate. "Our citizens have the right to express their opinion about what the pension system should be," she said. "It's all about the quality of the question." Grishina, the commission's secretary, added that "the issue was not an easy one" and, if necessary, the commission will consult with social security authorities. But in the opinion of the Central Election Commission, the question for the referendum was not formulated correctly. The phrase "the age giving the right to designate an old-age insurance pension" does not sufficiently specify its content for referendum participants, the resolution says.
"This applies both to the absence of indication of a certain age, and to the lack of definition of the type of pension indicated in the question," the authors of the document believe. Such a wording could mislead the participants of the plebiscite, the document says.
The question that is submitted to the referendum may be recognized as not in accordance with the requirement of the law "On referendum", if it allows uncertainty of the legal consequences of the decision taken at the referendum.
The decision on the correctness of the formulation of the issue remains at the discretion of the Central Election Commission, follows from the law on the referendum.
If the CEC finds that the issue does not comply with the requirements of the federal constitutional law, it motivates it in its opinion, which is approved and immediately brought to the attention of all election commissions, is specified in the document.

https://www.rbc.ru/politics/27/07/2018/ ... 50044fc493 - zinc

It remains unclear whether after a correct reformulation of the question, it is possible to re-submit a request for a referendum, although in this case there seems to be a reason for refusal there are.
In Yaroslavl, a fairly large meeting of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation was held against the pension reform, where representatives of other parties, both parliamentary and not represented in the Duma, spoke.



The main rallies will be held tomorrow.
On the main photo, a rally on July 26 in Voronezh.

Regarding the questions of "political repression" in the EP against Zheleznyak and Poklonskaya, it seems that these are political investments of these people in the long term, since the topic of "not voting" for this reform will be relevant in several forthcoming elections.

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/4346953.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sun Jul 29, 2018 1:55 pm

Russian upper house of parliament passes VAT hike to 20%
Business & Economy July 28, 11:44 UTC+3
Russia’s Federation Council also approved adjusted rates of social payments

Image

© Valery Sharifulin/TASS
MOSCOW, July 28. /TASS/. Russia’s Federation Council (upper house) approved the law on the VAT (value-added tax) rate increase from 18% to 20% and adjusted rates of social payments, at a plenary session on Saturday.

VAT reliefs, such as reduced tax rates for food, children's goods, medical goods, as well as zero rates for domestic interregional air transport, will be retained.

The bill also envisions the reduction of the aggregate tariff of insurance premiums to state off-budget funds from 34 to 30%, and sets the tariff of insurance contributions to the Pension Fund at the rate of 22%.

http://tass.com/economy/1015196

Putin's popularity is based upon his slowing the free fall into capitalist relations which was imposing severe hardship upon the working class. Looks like that's over with, I should hope the Communists take advantage of this reversal.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Sat Aug 18, 2018 1:16 pm

A Russian Perspective On Foreign Affairs: An Interview with Konstantin Zatulin
Is Vladimir Putin truly on a mission to resurrect the Russian empire or the Soviet Union?

by Dimitri Alexander Simes

President Vladimir Putin’s 2005 statement that the collapse of the Soviet Union “was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century” led to accusations that the Russian leader harbored imperial aspirations. Russia’s actions since then, including the seizure of Crimea in 2014 and fomenting of warfare in eastern Ukraine, have only heightened scrutiny of its aspirations abroad.

Is Putin truly on a mission to resurrect the Russian empire or Soviet Union? To obtain a better understanding of Russia’s foreign-policy goals, the National Interest spoke with Konstantin Zatulin, first deputy chairman of the Duma’s committee for relations with the CIS and Russians nationals abroad, for nearly an hour on July 23 in his Moscow office at the Institute for the Countries of CIS, which Zatulin directs in addition to his role in the Russian parliament. Zatulin is a leading figure in Putin’s United Russia party and is regarded as one of the government’s foremost experts on the Russian “near abroad.” He presented an assessment of Russian foreign policy that is quite different from the one that is often held by the West and by many of Russia’s neighbors.

From the outset, Zatulin dismissed the notion that Putin holds ambitions of major territorial conquest. The Russian president, he said, “is a person living in real time and who understands well that whatever our personal feelings, opinions, and assessments might be, restoring the Russian empire or the Soviet Union is impossible because they are in the past.” While Russia may have serious issues with some of its neighbors like the Baltic states, a move to invade them “is completely beyond the realm of common sense.” Zatulin argued that a policy of territorial conquest is totally unnecessary. He contended that Russia is a “self-sufficient nation” which has all the necessary assets “to be confident in her ability to build her own future” and not feel “critically dependent on relations with other governments.”


At the same time, Russia has no interest in being just another country. Zatulin explained that Russia aspires to have greater sway over global affairs. “If by the restoration of the Russian empire, one means restoring the big role that the Russian empire or the Soviet Union played in international life, then we would of course be happy to have such a role today,” he stated. The Russian lawmaker asserted that such a desire is in no way unusual or nefarious, claiming “if we are being honest, all the other key players in the international process are striving for the same thing.” Thus, he views accusations that Russia behaves like a rogue state as unfounded.

Zatulin charged that the leadership in many former Soviet republics exaggerated the threat posed by Russia for political reasons. Political elites in those countries, he insists, use Russia as a bogeyman to distract disgruntled citizens from internal problems. Moreover, Zatulin said that Russia’s neighbors want to draw the West into a conflict with Moscow. “Of course local politicians want to make their problems NATO’s problems. They really want someone to fight with Russia on their behalf,” he contended.


Western policymakers and experts almost uniformly view the annexation of Crimea as a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty. However, Zatulin maintained that Russia’s recognition of Crimea as part of Ukraine was never unconditional. Referencing the 1997 Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between the two countries, he argued that Russia’s pledge to not challenge the status of Crimea was contingent on good relations with Kiev. “We accepted these borders under the condition that we have friendship, cooperation, and partnership with Ukraine. But as soon as Ukraine signed this treaty, it immediately started asking to join NATO,” he said. According to him, even during the Yeltsin administration, Russian leadership was so displeased with Ukraine’s behavior that it threatened to declare the deal void.

The Russian lawmaker also accused the Ukrainian government of pursuing a long-standing policy of discrimination against ethnic Russians and Russian speakers in the country. Zatulin blamed the decline of the Russian population’s size in Ukraine on a “process of assimilation” aimed at creating a hostile environment in which “Russians do not feel comfortable to be considered as Russians, so they pretend to be Ukrainians instead.” The resulting tension backlash from Russians in Ukraine ultimately “detonated the events in Crimea in 2014.” In this way, Zatulin contends the Ukrainian government brought about the loss of Crimea and the current civil war in the Donbass on itself. This is more than a general observation. Instead Zatulin’s statements indicate the Moscow is likely to insist on significant concessions for the Russian speaking population in Donetsk and Luhansk before agreeing to return those regions to Ukraine.

Unease about NATO enlargement remains at the forefront of Russian foreign policy decision-making. Citing NATO’s 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, Zatulin challenged the claim that the alliance is merely a defensive coalition. From Russia’s perspective, NATO is without a question an organization with offensive military capability and intent. Subsequently, Moscow “cannot be happy about seeing a military-political bloc that has a much mightier military potential than the Russian federation alone move ever closer to our borders.”

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/ru ... ulin-27302

This is the official position. In the back room the tone & content will be different. For example, Moscow has again recently tried to compromise Syrian sovereignty(and again been rebuffed by Syria). My admiration for Syria increases daily, tremendously grateful for the help but not about to be dictated to by stronger ally, you don't see that much.

That he did not even mention the Nazis in Ukraine is another concession to US sensibilities.

The duplicitous compradors ruling Russia today should all be shot. C'mon guys, you got history.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Aug 20, 2018 7:52 pm

Workers across Russia protest plan to raise retirement age


By Greg Butterfield, Workers World

This summer, across the vast breadth of the world’s largest country by area, from huge cities to small towns, workers young and old have taken to the streets to protest a plan by the capitalist government of the Russian Federation to raise the retirement age.

The government’s plan would, step by step, raise the retirement age for women from 55 to 63 by the year 2034, and for men from 60 to 65 by 2028.

The plan was unveiled by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev in June, on the eve of the Russian-hosted World Cup soccer championships. Activists and ordinary workers alike were outraged that officials tried to sneak the unpopular measure under the radar while people were distracted by the games.

President Vladimir Putin, who vowed publicly in 2005 never to raise the retirement age, has remained silent.

Workers in the U.S. will immediately recognize that Russian workers have a much lower retirement age than they do. That was a key accomplishment of the working class during the early years of the socialist Soviet Union. The current retirement age was established all the way back in 1928.

It’s one of the last pillars of worker protection remaining from the socialist era. Russian workers, who have suffered greatly since the capitalist counter-revolution of the early 1990s, including a catastrophic decline in life expectancy, are determined not to lose this historic conquest.

“If the retirement age is increased, every citizen of Russia will be robbed of more than a million rubles ($16,000), and it is unacceptable,” declared Left Front leader and former political prisoners Sergei Udaltsov at a 10,000 strong protest in Moscow. (Associated Press, July 28)

Image
Communist youth in Moscow protest plan to hike retirement age, July 18.
Photos: United Communist Party

Mass mobilization

Security measures for the World Cup gave authorities an excuse to ban protests in many major cities in June and July. So regional centers and smaller cities took the lead in organizing demonstrations. In many cases, these have grown into weekly or even daily actions drawing hundreds or thousands of workers.

“In Saratov, rallies now take place almost every day,” reported the left news site Free Press. “Even the terrible heat doesn’t stop people. From 300 to 1,000 attend. They hold rallies, gather signatures on petitions, which they then send to the Kremlin. …

“In Kemerovo, the capital of the Kuzbass mining region, the mayor’s office agreed to a protest near the racetrack, which is on the outskirts of the city and difficult to reach by public transportation. Nevertheless, about 1,500 people came to the rally, including from remote areas. …

“In far-off Nefteyugansk, more than 100 protesters gathered in the square near the government center. Residents of neighboring Pyt-Yakh also joined the participants. The demand of all is the same: “No to the ‘anti-people reform.’” (SVpressa.ru, July 20)

In most cities, protesters have also raised their voices against a planned 2-percent rise in the Value Added Tax on consumer goods (similar to sales tax in the U.S.), utility rate hikes and surging prices for gasoline and heating fuel.

On July 18, a protest permit was finally granted for Moscow, although in a “designated free speech area” in a park far from public view. Thousands turned out.

The same day, hundreds flooded the famous Nevsky Prospekt in St. Petersburg (formerly Leningrad). City officials refused organizers a permit. So the people, banned from using signs or chanting slogans, held aloft red “stop cards” used to penalize soccer players. In this way they dramatically showed their opposition to the planned hike in retirement age and the use of the World Cup as an excuse to silence their protest. At least 14 people were arrested. (RotFront.su, July 19)

Image
Dramatic 'red card' protest in St. Petersburg, July 18.

Despite the protests and polls showing 90-percent public opposition, on July 19 Russia’s lower house of parliament, the State Duma, approved the plan to raise the retirement age on the first reading by a vote of 328-104. (SVpressa, July 20) It must pass a second reading, planned for late September, before moving to the upper house.

Finally, on July 28, a day of coordinated mass protests was held in the capital and over 150 other cities across the vast Russian Federation, including at least 10,000 in Moscow. The day of action was principally organized by the reformist-led Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF), which has a wide base, but included revolutionary left parties, labor unions and many others.

The protests forced a concession from the government when on August 8 the Central Election Commission authorized three groups of petitioners to begin organizing for a nationwide referendum on the retirement age. However, activists cautioned that the way it was being carried out was meant to divert the protest movement.

The CEC authorized three different groups – the KPRF, the capitalist Fair Russia party, and a group of NGOs – to organize around proposed referenda with very similar wording, setting them in competition against each other. Only one of the referenda can be approved, and each requires overcoming enormous organizational hurdles. (Tass, Aug. 8)

Despite these challenges, the struggle against raising the retirement age is shaping up to be the largest protest movement of the working class in Russia since the 1990s. And it comes at a critical moment – not only for the immediate demands of the workers – but because of the growing threat posed by U.S. sanctions and NATO war moves against Russia.

As the war danger escalates, it will be essential for the Russian workers to raise their voices independently and demand more effective, internationalist measures of fighting U.S. imperialism than the current oligarchic rulers can manage.

Behind the pension crisis

According to Labor Minister Maxim Topilin, the government plan would slash the number of people eligible to receive pensions by almost 11 percent – 4.6 million people -- by 2024. Officials claim this is not a death sentence for older workers already tottering on the edge of destitution, but rather an opportunity for new, higher paying jobs through professional retraining.

This refrain will sound familiar to many workers in the U.S. In fact, Medvedev, Topilin and other proponents of the plan are explicitly looking to the U.S., with its cuts in social programs and increased pressure on workers to delay retirement, despite the steep decline in long term, good paying jobs.

Russian workers aren’t fooled. Among the most popular signs at recent protests are “Pension in the grave” and “Be a patriot – kick the bucket before you get a pension.”

According to Oleg Babich of the Russian Confederation of Labor, by 2024 the economy would need to generate between 7 and 7.5 million jobs to accommodate both delayed retirements and young people entering the job market. “We have figures from the same Ministry of Labor that 300,000 jobs will be created next year,” said Babich. (SVpressa, July 19)

Others point out that the destruction of the institutions that supported workers in socialist times means the “reform” would have a massive impact on the whole working class, not just those approaching retirement age. The loss of affordable housing and quality, accessible health care means working families will face the same crisis that those in the U.S. with senior parents and grandparents do.

Also, with the sharp decline in childcare options for workers, grandparents are increasingly called upon to watch young children while parents work on attend school.

Image
'Stop robbing the people!' Sayanogorsk, July 28.

Academics and activists agree that the reason the Putin-Medvedev regime is pushing the unpopular attack now is an impending deadline in 2022, when retiring workers would first begin drawing on a new Western-style, investment-based pension system introduced after the destruction of socialism.

These instruments have been ruthlessly looted for short term gains by the oligarchs, and if people continue to retire at the current rate, by 2024 the government will be unable to hide the shortfall or its causes. “It was not abstract funds that were plundered,” noted Dr. Nikita Krichevsky, chief researcher at the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences. “They plundered part of people’s salary that was deferred for many years for use in old age.” (SVpressa, July 19)

“Let’s be honest – the pension, even before its planned cancellation, was insultingly small,” says Anatoly Baranov, a secretary of the United Communist Party (OKP). “It’s impossible to live on it, and the ‘young’ pensioners are forced to somehow earn additional income. But this tiny pension is, in fact, a small acknowledgement that at 60 years old you can’t earn as much as at 30. …

“If the state in unable to fulfill its obligations to citizens of retirement age – then declare yourselves bankrupt! And we ourselves will take what we need from the stolen property. Give us back the factories and oil industries that were squeezed dry by the oligarchs.” (UCP.su, July 19)

Or as a woman protesting in Tver put it: “In China, thieving officials are taken in the streets and shot, and their property confiscated. We want that too.” (New York Times, Aug. 8)

https://redstaroverdonbass.blogspot.com/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Wed Aug 29, 2018 11:12 am

Here Boris presents the Kremlin's excuses for backing the raising of pension eligibility. There is no denying the demographics, which are rooted in the Great Patriotic war and the losses sustained therein. But of course there is no accounting for the damage that the capitalist counter revolution has done to the well-being of the working class, the deindustrialization which destroyed productivity necessary for a socialist society...Oh, wait.....

*************************

The Kremlin supported the pension reform
Main
colonelcassad
August 29, 13:43
On the Kremlin's website, Putin's message was posted with the justification of the need for pension reform. Special surprises did not happen - the Kremlin with reservations supported the pension reform.

On June 16, 2018, the Government submitted a bill to the State Duma on changes in the pension system. On July 19, it was adopted by the country's parliament in the first reading. Its main, main task is to ensure the stability and financial stability of the pension system for many years to come. So, not only the preservation, but also the growth of incomes, pensions of current and future pensioners.

To achieve these goals, the bill, along with other measures, provides for a gradual increase in the retirement age. I understand how important these issues are for millions of people, for each person. Therefore, I appeal to you directly to describe in detail all the aspects of changes proposed by the Government, to indicate my position and to share with you my proposals that I consider to be of principle.

First of all, let me remind you that the discussion about the need to raise the retirement age did not start suddenly, not today. This was discussed both in the Soviet period and in the 1990s. But decisions were not made, for one reason or another were postponed.

At the beginning of the 2000s, both members of the Government of Russia and many representatives of the expert community again began to raise the question of pension reform and raising the retirement age.

Objective prerequisites for this existed. It was obvious that at the turn of the 2020s we will inevitably face serious demographic problems. What are they caused by?

Every 25-27 years into adulthood, when it is possible to create families, to raise and raise children, we have a much smaller number of citizens who could and should have. This is the result of the heaviest demographic losses during the Great Patriotic War. And this is not only direct losses, but millions that were not born in the war years.

The period when the next small generation entered into adulthood came in the middle of the 90s of the last century. But it was at this time that the country was faced with a severe economic, social crisis, with its catastrophic consequences. This led to a second powerful demographic strike. Even fewer children were born than expected. The demographic collapse of the late 1990s was comparable with the 1943 and 1944 military years.

And now it is this very small generation born in the 90's that enters the working age. In connection with this, the burden on the pension system is also increasing, because it is built mainly on a solidary principle. That is, the pension contributions of people working today, go to payments to current retirees, the generation of our parents. And they, in turn, while they were working, sent contributions to pay pensions to the generation of our grandfathers.

The conclusion is clear: the able-bodied population is being reduced - the possibilities for paying and indexing pensions are automatically reduced. So, changes are necessary.

But then, in the 2000s, I was against them. I spoke about this at closed meetings, and publicly. For example, in 2005, on one of the "Straight Lines", he bluntly said that until the end of my presidential term, such changes would not happen.

In 2008, when I left the post of President of Russia, the basic provisions of the pension system were fully preserved. And now I believe that at that time, such a position was economically sound, and from a social point of view it was absolutely justified and just. I am convinced that raising the retirement age in the early and middle of the 2000s was categorically impossible.

I will remind you how the country lived at that time. This is not yet a strengthened economy with very modest indicators of gross domestic product and extremely low wages. This is a high level of unemployment and inflation. Nearly a quarter of the country's citizens were below the poverty line. Life expectancy hardly exceeded 65 years.

If, in those socio-economic conditions, we began to raise the retirement age, and at this cost, as we now plan, to increase pensions, then why would this result? Many families, especially in small towns and rural areas, would lose their main and sometimes the only source of income. With a high level of unemployment and work would not exist, and you could not retire on pension. And all the possible increase in pensions would simply be "eaten" by high inflation, and in the end the number of poor would become even greater.

It was necessary first to overcome the consequences of the shocks of the 90s, to ensure economic growth and solve the most acute social problems.

What has changed over the years? We did not waste time in vain. We, we all - citizens, power, country - have worked.

As soon as we managed to generate the necessary financial resources, we sent them to social development, to save our people. Started the implementation of long-term demographic measures, including the maternity capital program. And this gave good results, partially compensating for the demographic failures of the past decades. We have overcome serious difficulties in the economy and since 2016 have once again reached a stable economic growth. Now the unemployment rate in Russia is the lowest since 1991.

Of course, we still have a lot to do. Including in the field of health, in other areas that determine the quality and life expectancy of a person. But the indisputable fact is that due to the complex of measures taken by the state and, most importantly, the more responsible attitude of people towards their health, today the growth rates of life expectancy in Russia are among the highest in the world. Over the past 15 years, life expectancy has increased by almost 8 years - 7.8 years.

I know that we are not very used to trusting statistics. We draw conclusions, as a rule, from what we ourselves see in real life, around ourselves. Someone really lives a long life, and someone from our relatives, friends, unfortunately, leaves very early. But here we are talking about an objective assessment of the growth rates of life expectancy in Russia, confirmed by experts of the United Nations.

We set a goal to reach the end of the next decade for a life expectancy of more than 80 years. And we will do everything to ensure that people in our country live long, healthy.

Dear friends!

All that I just said is an objective but still rather dry analysis of the situation, which is certainly important. But it is equally important to feel and consider that the proposed changes are based on vital interests, plans of hundreds of thousands, millions of people. Someone is already thinking of going on a well-deserved rest, devoting more time to the family, children, grandchildren. Someone plans to continue to work and expects to retire as an additional help. And he has the right, of course. And suddenly such prospects are being alienated.

Naturally, all this is perceived by many people painfully. I understand this well and share this concern. But let's see what options we have.

Accept the low incomes of pensioners and wait for the pension system to crack and finally fall apart? To shift unpopular, but necessary decisions to the shoulders of the next generation or, realizing that it is waiting for the country in 15-20 years, given the real situation, to act?

I repeat, changes in the pension system, especially those related to raising the age of retirement, worry, disturb people. And it is natural that all political forces, first of all, of course, opposition, will use this situation for self-promotion and strengthening their positions. This is the inevitable cost of the political process in any democratic society. Nevertheless, I asked the Government to study and use seriously all the constructive proposals sounded, including from the opposition, in the most serious way.

As for the current, functioning government, the easiest, simplest thing for it today is not to change anything at all. Now, despite the known difficulties, the Russian economy feels confident. The budget has the resources to replenish the Pension Fund. We will at least the next 7-10 years be able to continue to index pensions on time.

But in fact we know that gradually there will come a time when for the indexation of pensions the state will not have enough money. And then the regular payment of pensions can become a problem, as it already was in the 90's.

Look, back in 2005 the ratio of working citizens, for which contributions to the Pension Fund are regularly paid, and citizens receiving an old-age insurance pension, we had almost 1.7: 1. And in 2019, it will be already 1.2: 1. That is practically 1: 1. And if we do not take any measures, then we will not be able to save the income of the pension system. So, the incomes of today's and future pensioners. On the contrary, they will inevitably depreciate, decrease relative to the level of salaries.

And where to reduce them? Pensions and so today are rather modest, incommensurable to the contribution that the older generations made to the development of the country. We are in great debt to them.

The proposed changes in the pension system will make it possible not only to maintain the income level of pensioners, but the main thing is to ensure their steady, outstripping growth.

Already in 2019, the indexation of old-age pensions will be about 7 percent, which is twice the predicted inflation at the end of 2018. In general, in the next six years we will be able to annually increase the old-age pension for non-working pensioners by an average of 1 thousand rubles. As a result, it will make it possible to reach the average level of pensions for unemployed pensioners in 2024 in 2024 per month - now, I recall, this is 14,144 rubles. Later, already beyond the horizon of 2024, changes in the pension system will allow to form a solid basis for a stable annual increase in insurance pensions above inflation.

I draw your attention to the mechanism of annual increase in pensions should be laid in the bill on changes in the pension system. This should be done already for his second reading in the State Duma.

Dear friends!

Naturally, the question arises: did the government consider any other options, other reserves to ensure the sustainability of the pension system without raising the retirement age? Of course yes. Of course, considered.

On my instructions, the Government up to the present time carried out this work. All possible alternative scenarios were carefully studied and calculated. It turned out that, in fact, they do not solve anything radically. At best, just patching holes. Or worse, they have devastating consequences for the country's economy as a whole.

Well, look, seems to be an effective, seemingly fair measure - the introduction of a progressive scale of income tax. According to the estimates of the Ministry of Finance, the application of an increased tax rate, for example, 20 percent to high incomes, can give, and it is not certain, about 75-120 billion rubles a year. These funds at best will last for six days. Because the daily, I want to emphasize this, the daily need for paying pensions in Russia is 20 billion rubles.

Another option is to sell part of the state property, for example, as some suggest, all the buildings of the Pension Fund, including its regional offices. Of course, I agree, they are too swing with their apartments. People are annoyed. And I also support this. It is estimated that the total value of these facilities is 120 billion rubles. But even if we sell them all, and send the money for retirement, we can pay them also for about six days. This is also not an option.

Or it is proposed to impose additional taxes on oil and gas companies, fuel and energy complex. I can tell you: all that we can collect in this way is enough to pay a maximum of a couple of months. Moreover, we will pay pensions, the whole pension system of the country to a very vulnerable position, depending on the price drop in the world hydrocarbon markets.

Perhaps, more actively use the funds of reserve funds, which are replenished by income from oil and gas? Yes, you can for a while and this. And if tomorrow, as I have already said, the prices for these goods will fall, which is quite possible and has already happened more than once, what then? Reserves will be exhausted instantly, for several months. People's lives, their pensions, incomes for years ahead can not and should not depend on the price of oil, which changes every day.

Perhaps we should continue to increase the funding of the Pension Fund? At the expense of the federal budget to cover its deficit? Already said that for this while there are resources. They really are. But look, what kind of picture does the whole thing develop here.

In the current year for these purposes we allocate from the budget 3.3 trillion rubles, of which 1.8 trillion rubles directly to ensure the payment of insurance pensions. Assuming that we want to achieve our goal, to reach the average pension of 20 thousand rubles, without changing anything, the deficit of the Pension Fund would increase by one and a half times, to 5 trillion rubles. For comparison, this is more than all the costs of national defense and national security.

Having chosen such a decision, sooner or later we will destroy our finances, we will have to get into debt or print unsecured money with all the ensuing consequences: hyperinflation and increasing poverty. Without resources, we can not ensure reliable security of the country. We will not be able to solve the most urgent problems: to develop education and health care, to support families with children, to build roads and infrastructure, and to improve the quality of life of people. We will be doomed to an economic, technological backwardness from other states.

Therefore, our inaction now or the adoption of temporary "cosmetic" measures would be irresponsible and dishonest in relation to both the country and our children.

I repeat, over the years I have been very cautious, and sometimes even with disbelief, treated any proposals for changing the pension system. At times very sharply reacted to these ideas. However, the current trends in the field of demographic development and the labor market, an objective analysis of the situation, show that one can not drag on. But our decisions must be fair, balanced, necessarily taking into account the interests of people.

In this regard, I propose a number of measures that will make it possible to mitigate the decisions as much as possible.

First. The draft law proposes to increase the retirement age for women by 8 years - up to 63 years, whereas for men it increases by five years. So it will not go, of course. It is not right. And in our country the attitude to women is special, careful. We understand that they not only work at their main place of work, they usually have the whole house, caring for the family, raising children, and worrying about grandchildren. The retirement age for women should not increase more than for men. Therefore, I consider it necessary to reduce the proposed increase in the retirement age for women from 8 to 5 years proposed by the bill.

Next: we must provide for the right to early retirement for large mothers. That is, if a woman has three children, she will be able to retire three years ahead of schedule. If four children - four years earlier. And for women who have five or more children, everything should remain as now, they will be able to retire at 50 years old.

Second: as already mentioned, the retirement age is supposed to be increased gradually. So that people can adapt to the new life situation, build their plans. But I understand very well what will be most difficult for those who are the first to face an increase in the retirement age. Very soon. And we must take this into account.

In this regard, I propose for citizens, who were to retire under the old legislation in the next two years, to establish a special privilege - the right to issue a pension six months before the new retirement age. For example, a person who, according to a new retirement age, will have to retire in January 2020, will be able to do so in July 2019. That is, I repeat, 6 months earlier.

Third: what cares and even, would say, scares people of pre-retirement age? They are afraid to face the risk of losing their jobs. With what can remain without a pension, and without a salary. After fifty work is really hard to find.

In this regard, we must provide additional guarantees that will protect the interests of older citizens in the labor market. Therefore, for the transition period, I propose to consider the pre-retirement age five years before the onset of the retirement period. I repeat, a whole package of measures is needed here. So, I consider it necessary to establish for the employers administrative and even criminal responsibility for the dismissal of workers of pre-retirement age, as well as for refusing to employ citizens because of their age. Corresponding changes in legislation should be made simultaneously with the adoption of the bill on raising the retirement age.

Naturally, it would be wrong and unfair to be guided here only by administrative measures. Therefore, I instruct the Government to offer real incentives for business, so that employers are interested in accepting and retaining pre-retirement citizens at work.

What would I like to add here? Older people, as a rule, have a good professional experience. These are, as a rule, reliable, disciplined employees. They are able to bring great benefits to their enterprises and companies. At the same time, it is important that they, as well as younger workers, if they wish, can undergo the necessary retraining, acquire new skills, improve their qualifications.

In this regard, I instruct the Government to approve a special program for advanced citizens for citizens of pre-retirement age. It should earn as early as possible and be financed from the federal budget.

And if a person of pre-retirement age decided to resign himself, voluntarily and until he found a new job, then in this case we also need to strengthen his social guarantees. In this regard, it is proposed to increase the maximum unemployment benefit for citizens of pre-retirement age more than twice - from 4,900 rubles, as now, to 11,280 rubles from January 1, 2019 - and set the period of such payment in one year.

And, finally, it is also necessary to fix the duty of the employer to provide employees of pre-retirement age each year with two days of free medical examinations, while retaining their salaries.

Fourth: when making changes, you can not act on the template. What is called, just chohom. We must take into account the special conditions of life and work of people.

We have already provided for the preservation of benefits for miners, workers in hot shops, chemical industries, Chernobyl victims, and a number of other categories.

I think that it is necessary to maintain the current conditions for the appointment of pensions for indigenous small-numbered peoples of the North.

We must support the residents of the village. It has already been repeatedly discussed and even decided on the need for a 25 percent premium to a fixed payment of an insurance pension for unemployed pensioners living in the countryside, who have at least 30 years of experience in agriculture. But the entry of this decision into force was postponed. I propose to begin these payments as early as January 1, 2019.

Fifth: I think that those who started to work early, should be able to retire not only in terms of age, but also taking into account the earned experience.

Now the bill states that the length of service that gives the right to early retirement is 40 years for women and 45 years for men. I propose to reduce the length of service for three years, giving the right to early retirement: for women under 37, and for men up to 42.

Sixth: I consider it principally important to maintain all the federal privileges in effect for December 31, 2018 for the transition period, until the reforms in the pension system are completed. I mean the benefits of taxes on real estate and land.

Yes, these privileges were traditionally granted only with retirement. But in this case, when changes are needed in the pension system, and people are counting on these benefits, we must make an exception for them, grant benefits not in connection with retirement, but at reaching the corresponding age. That is, as before, benefits can be used by women at the age of 55 and men from 60 years. Thus, even before retirement, they will no longer pay tax for their house, apartment, or garden plot.

I know that representatives of the party "United Russia" in the regional legislative assemblies and the leaders of the subjects of the Federation have taken the initiative to preserve all the existing regional benefits. These are very important things for people. Such as free travel on public transport, utilities benefits, major repairs and gasification, benefits for the purchase of medicines and a number of others. I certainly support this approach. And I expect that all the necessary decisions will be taken in the regions even before the new law on pensions comes into force.

Dear friends!

As you know, many experts now believe that we have been too slow to solve the issues that are being discussed today. I do not think so. We just were not ready for this. But it is really impossible to postpone further. It would be irresponsible and could lead to serious consequences in the economy and social sphere, most negatively affect the fate of millions of people, because, now it is already clear, the state will eventually have to do it sooner or later. But the later, the more severe these decisions will be. Without any transition period, without preserving a number of benefits and those mitigating mechanisms that we can use today.

In the long term, if we are now hesitant, this could jeopardize the stability of society, and hence the security of the country.

We must develop. They must overcome poverty, provide a decent life for the people of the older generation, both today's and future retirees.

The proposals, which were discussed today, will be formalized as amendments and brought into the State Duma as soon as possible.

Dear friends!

I have very objectively, in detail and absolutely sincerely reported to you about the current state and proposals for the sustainable development of the pension system in our country. I would like to emphasize once again that we have to take a difficult, difficult but necessary decision.

I ask you to treat this with understanding.

Ps. In general, I was not surprised at all, since the power we own is big capital, then it generally prefers to solve problems with a lack of money, at the expense of others, vstavaya on the rack only when fat cats offer to share.
It is even interesting - will there now be a referendum?

https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/4418400.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:10 pm

Shevchenko: "All power in Russia and Putin are subordinate to the US"

Image
Photo taken http://www.grushevskogo5.com

Journalist and public figure Maxim Shevchenko spoke about the Russian government.

"All power in Russia and Putin are subject to the United States," he does not doubt.

The journalist is sure that it began and continues after the collapse of the USSR in exchange for personal welfare and power.

The journalist notes that no one can oppose either Putin or the government inside the country.

No one can decide to take an independent step in politics without agreement. Otherwise, as "Grudinin," the whole presidential army will fall upon him.

There are no trade unions, no independent media. They can do everything: blame for embezzlement, riots, everything, anything, and no one will say anything.

Our power is part of the international system. According to the journalist, its representatives behave like "junior partners".

They dream of such a status. After all, now they have a completely different - a semi-criminal team.

A status can be obtained either in Washington, or in London. Naturally, while observing certain rules of the game.

Now in the country the following situation: all supposedly is solved for the people, and this very people lives as it can under total control.

"Under the hood," as the journalist says. It is this system that gives the senior partners, that is, the USA, controllability of Russia.

And the certainty that no one will ask superfluous and inappropriate questions, rebel. Today we observe this. No one dares to say a word specifically against United Russia, let alone actions other than the Communist Party.

(Despite numerous rallies against the pension reform on September 9, many dissatisfied, TV somehow did not particularly willingly, let's say there, covered them.While watching television, there could be an impression that everything is perfect in Russia)

However, we do not hear these words of protest, and do not even always know about them - they do not talk about this and do not show on TV.

Everywhere there is propaganda, there is a discussion of those issues that do not concern each of us, but cause emotions. The same Syria and Ukraine, the World Cup on football. To switch attention.

Indeed: there is such a feeling that the entire country does not work for its own well-being, but for the prosperity of other states.

Our money helps you to improve the lives of Americans and Europeans - anyone, but not their own people. And no one is trying to change something for the better: everyone behaves as if that's the way it should be.

https://zen.yandex.ru/media/newspolitik ... 00aebb1c5d

Bolding added. What more do ya need?

I don't think it's exactly like that but I do think it's something like that. What else could explain the dishonorable policies implemented in Donbass and suggested in Syria?
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:47 pm

Russia's revolutionary communists work for unity

Vladimir Lakeev: 'There can and should be a merger of the OKP and RKRP into one political party'

On October 20, 2018, the plenum of the Central Committee of the Russian Communist Workers Party (RKRP) was held. The first secretary of the Central Committee of the United Communist Party (OKP), Vladimir Lakeev, and the first secretary of the Moscow OKP, Sergey Seryogin, took part in the plenum.

Image


Speaking to comrades of the RKRP, Lakeev emphasized that this party has always been guided by revolutionary Marxism in theory and consistently embodied it in political practice. In many regions of Russia, a good practice of active collaboration has been established between the organizations of the OKP and the RKRP. At the same time, Lakeev noted, the left forces of Russia can accomplish the tasks facing them only through the organizational unity of the vanguard of the working class.

“Today there are no insurmountable obstacles to the unification of the revolutionary communists of Russia into one political organization. We cannot get away from this, and first of all, we should talk about the merger of the OKP and the RKRP into one political party. It is quite possible to combine our programs and statutory documents.”

As the name of the future party, Vladimir Lakeev proposed “United Communist Workers Party” (OKRP). This preserves the essence of the names of the existing organizations.

Source

Translated by Greg Butterfield

https://redstaroverdonbass.blogspot.com ... -work.html

About time! Sez the guy with no Party at all......
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10591
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Russia today

Post by blindpig » Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:42 am

Image

Preliminary agenda

USRBC Annual Meeting 2017



Registration is open for the USRBC 2018 Annual Meeting "Commercial Priorities in a Time of Complex Bilateral Relations" that will take place in New York on November 15-16. This year's agenda will explore the business community's priorities for investment in Russia in an era of uncertainty and political tensions, the economic agenda for the next six years and how digitalization could become a catalyst for innovative growth, among other topics.

Similar to the 2017 Annual Meeting, the program will start at noon on Thursday, November 15, with an Opening Keynote Luncheon and conclude mid-afternoon on Friday, November 16, after a Closing Luncheon. The Gala Dinner will take place on November 15 at Prince George’s Ballroom (15 East 27th Street, between 5th and Madison Avenues.)

Confirmed Annual Meeting speakers include:

• Anatoly Antonov, RF Ambassador to the United States
• Denis Butsaev, Deputy Chairman, Government of the Moscow Region
• Ian Colebourne, CEO, Deloitte CIS
• Frances Devlin, Director, Global Policy & International Public Affairs, Pfizer Inc.
• Thomas E. Graham, Managing Director, Kissinger Associates
• Drew Guff, Managing Director and Founding Partner, Siguler Guff & Company, LP
• Richard Haass, President, Council on Foreign Relations
• Alexander Ivlev , CIS Managing Partner , EY
• Selina Jackson, Vice President, Global Government Relations & Public Policy, Procter & Gamble
• Vladimir V. Kolychev , Deputy Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation
• Yuri Korsun, Deputy Chairman, Vnesheconombank
• Marc Luet, Division Head in Russia, Poland, Turkey, Israel, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, Citi
• Timothy Murphy, General Counsel and Chief Franchise Officer, Mastercard
• Mark von Pentz, President, Agriculture and Turf Division, Europe, CIS, Asia, Africa and Global Tractor Platform, Deere & Company
• Dmitry Peskov, Special Presidential Representative for Digital and Technological Development
• Natalia Porokhova, Senior Director, Head of Sovereign Rating and Forecasting Group, Analytical Credit Rating Agency
• Alexis Rodzianko, President & CEO, American Chamber of Commerce in Russia
• Matthew Rojansky, Director, Kennan Institute
• Charles Ryan, Chairman, UFG Asset Management
• Matthew Sagers, Executive Director, Oil and Gas, IHS Markit
• Mark Sutton, Chairman & CEO, International Paper; Chairman, U.S.-Russia Business Council
• Elena Teplitskaya, Advisor to the Chairman, Sberbank

VENUES
Annual Meeting - November 15-16
Kimpton Hotel Eventi
851 6th Ave, New York, NY

Gala Dinner - November 15
Prince George Ballroom
15 East 27th St, New York, NY

AGENDA
To view the preliminary Annual Meeting agenda, please click here >>

REGISTRATION
USRBC Members
Annual Meeting and Gala Dinner: US$1,495
Gala Dinner Only: US$500

Non-Members
Annual Meeting and Gala Dinner: US$1,995
Gala Dinner Only: US$800

Registration fees are non-refundable after Wednesday, October 31, 2018 . Registration is transferable with notification.

HOTEL
The USRBC reduced-rate room block at the Kimpton Hotel Eventi for Thursday night, November 15, has been expended to November 6th. To book a room at the Kimpton Hotel Eventi, please contact Stephanie Lopez, Eventi Conference Service Manager, at 646-794-6835.

VISAS
Given the extended wait times to receive visas to travel from Russia to the United States, we encourage USRBC's 2018 Annual Meeting participants who need a visa to begin the application process as soon as possible. For Council members who need visa assistance, please contact Anna Lutkova at the USRBC Moscow Office at anna.lutkova@usrbc.org or +7 (495) 937-8352.

https://www.usrbc.org/viewEvent.html?no ... uage=en_US

Speaks for itself, 'comprador.!
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply