![Kamil Galeev Profile picture](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="73" height="73"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
No. Describing Russian regime as "kleptocracy" is misrepresentation. It's not technically false, just absurdly reductionist. Let's be honest, if Putinism was *entirely* about stealing it would not be able to wage wars or produce armaments. And it produces hella lots of them
Keep in mind that public rhetorics work according to the rhetorical logic. Public position doesn't have to be factually accurate, it has to be rhetorically advantageous for it to work. They talk about "corruption" so much because it's rhetorically advantageous. That's it
When you don't have a positive agenda/vision of future or it's too hideous, you talk about "corruption". Examples - Lukashenko or Yeltsin. "Anti-corruption fight" is an ideal topic for a power hungry politician. Because talking about corruption = avoiding the actual conversation
"Fight on corruption" is so rhetorically advantageous for three reasons. First, you avoid talking about your positive agenda. Second, because it's an ideal tool to concentrate power, destroying all other interest groups (like Xi Jinping) and grab an absolute power for just one
Third, because normal people on street have no idea about the motivation of those higher up. They're so stressed with the constant need to pay their bill and fight for survival, that they simply can't imagine the motivations of people who just don't have these concerns at all
Almost everyone in this world is living on the edge of poverty. Fear of poverty and struggle for money largely shapes the motivations of almost all humans. Ergo, the motivations of people who just don't have this fear are unimaginable. Like ofc they just want money, what else?
I strongly believe that the higher you go on the socio-economic ladder, the more does the structure of motivations change. Yes, ofc they grab money, lots of it. But it's very, very easy. You probably very much overestimate how much of a concern it is for those higher up
One guy (he'd later become a Russian Deputy PM) responded to a similar remark:
- Yes. Power is substantial (субстанциональна). It's not a means, it's a goal
I 100% believe him. Those who claim that rulers of Russia are there to steal are either ignorant or lying intentionally
- Yes. Power is substantial (субстанциональна). It's not a means, it's a goal
I 100% believe him. Those who claim that rulers of Russia are there to steal are either ignorant or lying intentionally
The entire discourse about "corruption" and attempts to portray absolute rulers as just thieves are so successful, because they're factually wrong. They relate with the common's man neverending concern about money and paying the bills. But the rulers don't have this concern
Let's be honest, if Putin was all about money, this war wouldn't happen. My friend recently admitted he was wrong about Putin:
"I thought Putin regretted that he involved in Ukraine in 2014. Now I understand that his only regret is that he didn't go all the way back in 2014"
"I thought Putin regretted that he involved in Ukraine in 2014. Now I understand that his only regret is that he didn't go all the way back in 2014"
Also. Russian regime can be very functional in those few spheres it priorities. In the piece time it was obvious with railways. In a largely dysfunctional country they worked perfectly. Because it was a priority
In the war time, that is obvious with missiles. They prioritised quantity of them, sacrificing most of the R&D, home production and equipment and components and just fully switching to imports. They also sacrificed variety, keeping just very few models, far less than the Soviets
Putin's war machine is a very reduced version of a Soviet machine. It's far more centralised, more vertical integrated. It has little of the Soviet variety of models and almost zero of the Soviet technological chains. It fully depends on import. Because it prioritised *quantity*
Putinism is *efficient* when it wants and needs to be efficient. In the war context it needs to produce hella lots of shells and missiles here and now (fuck the future, fuck R&D, fuck import substitution). That's reductionist. But it's efficient. And it's not just a "kleptocracy"
Picturing Putinist regime as just a "kleptocracy" and "corruption" as the single most important problem sounds brave. But it's intentional or unintentional misrepresentation of a real situation while systematically avoiding the discussion on how are we gonna get out of it
There are indeed extremely kleptocratic elements among the Russian elites. These are:
1) Siloviki (FSB, MVD, prosecutors, investigators). Much of it just business
2) Many of Putin's friends
The level of corruption of the bulk of bureaucracy is hugely exaggerated in my opinion
1) Siloviki (FSB, MVD, prosecutors, investigators). Much of it just business
2) Many of Putin's friends
The level of corruption of the bulk of bureaucracy is hugely exaggerated in my opinion
Example. A major bank CEO is looking how can he get in contact with some ministry official. He makes decisions of life and death for his business. But he doesn't know how to get closer to him. Then he tells about his problem to one of his secretaries:
"Not a problem at all. Every Friday we drink at the same bar" resounds secretary
Official has a huge power over a bank CEO. But his incomes are more like CEO's secretary than a CEO himself. CEO just doesn't go to such cheap bars as a person who has power over him
Official has a huge power over a bank CEO. But his incomes are more like CEO's secretary than a CEO himself. CEO just doesn't go to such cheap bars as a person who has power over him
There's a massive power Vs money asymmetry in Russia. It may be less visible than let's say in England but still shows that the power is not cashed out nearly as massively as some journalists or politicians would suggest
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
