Why Western Food is BANNED in Russia

[The Lawspeaker]

In practice, Communism largely substituted stratification by money (in a Western capitalist sense) with stratification by pure power and position. In a way our dear friends in Saudi Arabia and to some extent the other Gulf countries are not so dissimilar - politically totalitarian, yet with laws that may appear strict and puritanical on the outside, but if you're part of the elite you can (literally) get away with murder (and much more besides).

(Say what you like about the CCP, but at least it is open about the fact it no longer intends to run a socialist-egalitarian society).

Absolutely. At the risk of sounding harsh: I don't see the difference between capitalism, socialism or feudalism. The men with the funny hats call themselves differently under the three systems but they're still the same men with the funny hats. If you have a system where some people can get away with murder because of their position, then you have no equal society whatever "democracy" you claim to have built into the system is moot by default.

[Tooting Carmen]

Absolutely. At the risk of sounding harsh: I don't see the difference between capitalism, socialism or feudalism. The men with the funny hats call themselves differently under the three systems but they're still the same men with the funny hats. If you have a system where some people can get away with murder because of their position, then you have no equal society whatever "democracy" you claim build into the system is moot by default.

Another thing I would like to add: with all due respect to our German members, I would argue that totalitarianism (whether Nazi or Communist) was in some ways actually more 'successful' in Germany than in Russia. This is because German culture is naturally more law-abiding and respectful to authority, meaning that what the government said would be mostly obeyed and thus some semblance of order could be maintained. (Lest we forget, the GDR was by some distance the most affluent and productive Eastern bloc country). In contrast, Russian culture seems to be more anarchic and disdainful towards the law, thus however strict and rigid a government may appear to be and want to be, in practice it can be often circumvented through bribery and winks.

[The Lawspeaker]

Another thing I would like to add: with all due respect to our German members, I would argue that totalitarianism (whether Nazi or Communist) was in some ways actually more 'successful' in Germany than in Russia. This is because German culture is naturally more law-abiding and respectful to authority, meaning that what the government said would be mostly obeyed and thus some semblance of order could be maintained. (Lest we forget, the GDR was by some distance the most affluent and productive Eastern bloc country). In contrast, Russian culture seems to be more anarchic and disdainful towards the law, thus however strict and rigid a government may appear to be and want to be, in practice it can be often circumvented through bribery and winks.

I agree. This is why the German central government should be kept as weak as possible (the Swiss system rather than what they have now). As for the Dutch ? I don't think we're followers. We're too anarchic as well. They'd probably be laughed out of the Binnenhof.. if not shot out by the army.

[Tooting Carmen]

As for the Dutch ? I don't think we're followers. We're too anarchic as well. They'd probably be laughed out of the Binnenhof.. if not shot out by the army.

Same for Britain. The culture is just too individualistic for totalitarianism to really take off here.

[The Lawspeaker]

Same for Britain. The culture is just too individualistic for totalitarianism to really take off here.

I am afraid you're wrong about Britain. Britain has been quite totalitarian for much of its existence. Be it in terms of religion, class or now well you see what is going on with ideology and in terms of political and personal rights.

[Rumata]

In practice, Communism largely substituted stratification by money (in a Western capitalist sense) with stratification by pure power and position.

There never been full equality and maybe will never be. Let's compare.
Soviet system came after Tsarism with its extreme inequality. Yet, in Soviet Union there was much less stratification than even in modern Britain or Russia.

[Rumata]

The following story is lies mixed (less important) truth which can be more harmful than sheer lies.

This reminds me of what the journalist Peter Hitchens wrote about his experience of living in the USSR: juxtaposed with the political totalitarianism and strictness, in many ways it was actually quite chaotic, corrupt and dangerous.

Not just the food but also televisions were shoddy and prone to explode, people couldn't go out on their own balconies as chances are they'd collapse

Exagerration

the traffic was a nightmare

Sheer lie. As a child I used to ride a bycycle on the roads of same streets where now even adults mostly dare to ride only on trottoirs.

people had no concept of queuing for buses or trains...

Truth. But queuing for other things was widespread.

The biggest irony of all is that, in a country where the official ideology is strict egalitarianism, it was actually far more stratified than any Western country

The crucial lie. It was much less stratified. At the very least compared to Britain.

with special lanes for government cars everywhere

A lie.

special schools (albeit not fee-paying as such) for the children of government representatives

A lie. Most of Soviet schools were standard. Some had an indepth teaching of either math, foreign languages or other subjects. A few were for children with distadvantages. Those were about all Soviet scholls. If there were any other, they were extremly few. While both modern Britain and Russia are full with elite and not-so-elite schools.

In addition, he tells of a story of getting away with a parking offence merely by saying he was a journalist (and a foreign one to boot) in a way that would not be possible in Britain.

Might be truth.

[Tooting Carmen]

I am afraid you're wrong about Britain. Britain has been quite totalitarian for much of its existence. Be it in terms of religion, class or now well you see what is going on with ideology and in terms of political and personal rights.

Britain is paradoxical in that respect. In theory, ever since Magba Carta, it has often been on the vanguard of political liberty. The problem is that for far too long it was designated only for specific lucky groups.

[KirillMazur]

Not just the food but also televisions were shoddy and prone to explode, people couldn't go out on their own balconies as chances are they'd collapse, the traffic was a nightmare

This journalist is clearly a professional liar.
I watched Soviet television receiver for several years, and even successfully connected a game console to it - I am still alive, my brother and I constantly went out to drink tea on the balcony in a Soviet-built house - we stayed alive. By the way, on the balcony there were a lot of all kinds of things - from bicycles to auto parts, the balcony is still alive (and for all neighbors and friends too).
The rules of the road were respected as they are now, but the danger, nerves and traffic jams were much less, since the level of motorization of the population was orders of magnitude smaller. Cities looked better — there were more green spaces, not autobahns.
But most importantly, there were no fences, turnstiles, guards, CCTV cameras, police or other attributes of “democracy” anywhere. You, as a child, could easily climb roofs and walk around construction sites, ride trains for fun. Without any money. There was danger in all this, but when such a child grew up, he was better prepared for adulthood.
Enough to post nonsense about a country in which neither you nor your parents lived.

[PAGANE]

Democracy originated in Ancient Greece at a time when slavery was the norm, when there were free people (Demos) and slaves. Democracy literally means - The right of free people / demos / to own slaves. Nowadays, the difference is not big. The so-called "Democratic Societies", nowadays, understand the Western societies that claim to be democratic, in fact, put everyone else other than themselves in the position of slaves by dictating their rules, their understandings and their laws.