Vladimir Putin at the big press conference, asking a question, suggested holding a discussion on the theme about democracy. He said there was a movement “Occupy Wall Street”, rallies, Maidan movements. But the movement disappeared. What do we want? Is it healthy political competitiveness or the authorities’ exaction with God knows who running on the squares? I mean, where is it, real democracy? Where does it end and anarchy begins? Why the authorities, the opposition and the nation have very different meanings in the term ‘democracy’? Indeed, if we look what we are told about American democracy, there are no jokes. I mean, don’t you dare cross the line there. For example, you took two steps and blocked a street somehow. And it doesn’t matter who are you, even a mayor of the city, what happened to the mayor of Washington. Immediately flex-cuff and goodbye. Everybody went around shouting “Occupy Wall Street”. Where did they go? They were dismantled, peacefully. There were even some journalists, it doesn’t matter, all of them were busted. There are 550 visions of democracy. Everybody says “democracy, democracy”. So, what does really mean democracy?
I did listen to it. And thank God I’m not a democrat, honestly. One more time I’m relieved. Because all I see is an attempt to fit the diversity of the politics and the diversity of real life of the states, societies and cultures into a term ‘democracy’. This is a hat with which they cover, try to cover, everything what exists in the modern world for one simple reason because now hardline political ‘fashion’ set on all of it, if you like.
On the market.
The market has no bearing on the democracy.
Vadim, hello! That’s how the revolution is made. This is democracy. Democracy, you know. Somebody hasn’t finish a sentence, but I’ve already started. That fact that I can speak louder is democracy. So, this is not democracy. It’s not democracy, not by the Constitution of Ukraine, not at all. The point is that in fact they try to cover an enormous number of this form’s flaws, I won’t say as they say now “parliamentarism fig leaf”, but they try to cover with the transformation of this democracy formula into quasi-religion. Not without reason everybody is talking about democratic values. In fact, they have already forgotten about them with all these processes. There are no perfect vision of democracy. You can’t say it even about the USA. 550 visions of democracy mean that it isn’t really present. Because you can establish the parliaments in many countries, which mean nothing. You can hold elections, which mean nothing. But formally it would be democracy. There is no democracy in reality. To date, there is big political will on the part of Western countries, which under this name impose their own world view. Yes, after World War II a huge number of countries established pseudo-democratic governance. Why? Because it suited them. At one time, that suited people, now this suits them. 50 or 100 years may pass and, maybe, nobody would remember about your democracy. There will be different forms of government. Nowadays, there is some kind of a world overseer, who really is the most powerful player in the global political scene. And he imposes this ‘hat’ of democratic procedures to everybody, whether these procedures work or not. In doing so he himself assesses if a system is democracy or not. As an example – Iran. In fact, there is internal political battle in Iran. They have the Parliament, opposition, and, by the way, they are combating corruption pretty good. I’ve been there, and I can tell you that they combat corruption better than other so-called democratic countries. But is there anybody in the West who considers Iran democratic? No. In confidence, there is democracy in the DPRK, too. They have the Parliament, could you believe? They have the
Parliament, too, and they have elections, too.
It was “Soviet democracy”, too.
There was democracy in the Soviet Union. That’s the thing. That’s just it, in the end, you say that the Soviet democracy is not a democracy, American one is democracy, Iranian – not democracy, but the European one – democracy, Korean – not democracy, and something is a democracy. And we know nothing about Africa, we don’t even mention Africa. There is almost the half of the world’s population, and we don’t mention it. Whether they have a democracy or not. This is an unknown sphere for us. We explore Russia, Europe, America. And that’s all.
Sometimes democracy is to eat, sometimes – to drink there. Sometimes they chew it, the democracy.
You know, the most part of population, in fact, for them this discussion, which we love to talk about, is alien. We’re not interested in it. The same thing is about vision of democracy in Russia. Not as a social institution, not as a perfect scheme, not as a real control lever, but as a platform, which allows to do this or that. For example, the present authorities are considered as undemocratic. Why? The only reason. They had a fight with the West, yeah. And, in fact, that’s why they are trying to defend the national interests. Because in reality there is more democracy in today’s Russia than in other allied countries of the USA. In reality, more of it. It is the processual democracy, procedural one. More of it in terms of such discussions. There’s more of it. But for the simple reason, that nowadays, at this historic period, the democracy doesn’t correspond to the demands of the West. And nobody knows what will happen to the West in 100 years. But this isn’t considered as democracy. That’s why, unfortunately, yeas, there are theoretical forms of democracy, these are ideal formulas, and, as has been rightly observed, there was no democracy even in Athens, because there were much more slaves, they were deprived of all rights. Yes, it exists, but in fact, years ago it turned into a mechanism of political manipulation. And which is turning into an institution of quasi-religious values. That’s why they try to replace everything with these values. Actually, there is nothing, but the fact whether something corresponds to the democracy or not. And if the matter is about democratic values, then against the humanity. Those, who discredited the democracy, are its main holders. Nowadays, they are the Americans and the Europeans, because it was them, who turned the democracy, by the way really appropriate model in some cases, into political ideology. Democracy became political ideology, which covers some actions at foreign policy level: competition with rivals in economic terms, competition with rivals in military-political terms etc. So, they completely discredited this vision. And that’s why people believe in democracy less and less. And it is less and less operational.
Wait a second. This is what I was talking about. When I say that I’m a monarchy supporter, I say it in all sincerity. By the way, at this point I’m closer to the ancient Greek philosophers. They set monarchy, and then aristocracy, above any forms of democracy. Another matter is about whether it is possible or not, now. This is another question. My point is about this. My point was about this, besides my anti-Americanism etc. My point is that those people, who… I specifically said about it, but you tried to change it somehow. My point is that probably there is the common sense in this theory. Really, we’re talking about it. But into what the holders of this ideology turned it in reality? I’m saying once again. The current leaders of the free world turn it into quasi-religion and ideology, neutering the idea of democracy this way. They neuter it. Because it begins to claim on the areas of life, which it hasn’t right to regulate, and it couldn’t, and won’t ever regulate.
For example, religiosity. Yes, for example, religiosity. It is inherent to humans to have religiosity, in fact, the most people have it.
This is his/her personal choice.
It doesn’t matter. It is inherent to the overwhelming amount of people.
This is choice. Democracy and freedom are different.
Democracy as political structure… hold on… it encroaches even upon these spheres of life. It tries to control everything and, posing as freedom, to control all the life. By the way, being this, democracy turns itself into tyranny, a new form of tyranny. On the base including new technologies. We’re really close to it. And people who consider themselves beacons of democracy, in fact, will lead to the technological tyranny. That’s why they pervert it. You understand? The point is that you really try to understand it and don’t try to side with any political position. This is the problem. Yes, the process of eligibility, it really may be not as bad. Indeed, should people participate in the development of their own life? Yes, they should. But those, who are make a new system of values, almost religious, and new political ideology of democracy, they’re killing democracy. They kill it. By the way, in our country, in fact, most of democrats are supporters not of the process, but of the ideology. This is the problem.
Democracy is always a compromise, between capitalism and democracy, between freedom and security, because sometimes the situation is about to sacrifice freedom for security just to save the country, and sometimes, when there are no problems with security, it’s necessary to increase freedom, because freedom creates opportunities for economic sustainability.
Democracy and capitalism. Did you misspeak or something? I don’t get it. Democracy is a political form, and capitalism is a form of economic structure.
That’s right. Because there are less owners.
What is it about? There is no rhyme or reason in that. They are from different spheres.
I’m saying again. A compromise. Because the majority will always want to dispossess those, who have business, ownership.
So, democracy is it a restriction of capitalism?
That’s right. Yes.
Wow! Stone the crows!
No. At first, there was a constitutional state, then a market state, then a democratic state, then a social state. Many people say that there is ecological state, too.
Not at all.
There were such waves.