This one comes from Nina Khrushcheva:
Indeed, Russia’s liberal promises have been shattered time after time. Nikita Khrushchev’s de-Stalinization reforms ended with Leonid Brezhnev’s stagnation; Boris Yeltsin’s democratization resulted in Putin’s authoritarianism. In the sadly immortal words of Victor Chernomyrdin, Russia’s prime minister during the Yeltsin era, “We wanted for the better, but it turned out to be like always.”
But, as predictable as Russia’s undemocratic system of governance usually is, the country does defy expectations once in a while. Khrushchev denounced his mentor, Stalin. Mikhail Gorbachev was originally installed in power to press on with Yuri Andropov’s KGB-inspired vision of communism, but instead diverted the Soviet Union’s course into glasnost and perestroika , and accidentally into freedom.What if Putin is wrong in his choice of successor, and Medvedev refuses to be his clone, but instead follows in the footsteps of Khrushchev, Gorbachev, and Yeltsin? What if the supposed puppet starts to pull the strings?
Subscribe by Email
3 Comments
Nina Khrushcheva was recently on Russia Today.I wonder if she expressed such views?If so, then such an instance would be another example of that news station doing politically diverse journalism.If not, then fault NK for going against her stated views at other outlets.
It’s kind of sad how certain readers of the blogosphere are so lazy and shiftless that they refuse to do any work on their own, making no attempt to add value to the blogs they comment on. It’s as if they think their own words themselves have some kind of value, even though they have nothing whatsoever (much less a blog) to back them up).For instance, if one wanted to discuss Nina’s appearance on Russia Today, one could actually watch the broadcast and even give the link to it:http://russiatoday.ru/guests/video/944Then, one wouldn’t have to speculate about the content of the broadcast, one could actually inform other readers and add value.Of course, if one did that, then one would see Nina not being allowed to make a single cutting remark about “President” Putin (while chortling merrily at the stilted accent of her interlocutor). She’s never asked what she thinks about Vladimir Putin and his term in office, much less (although it’s part of the program “Russia’s Choice” in connection with the elections) is she asked whether she thinks his candidate would be a good choice to succeed him (indeed, no mention is made of Mr. Medvedev at all).Rather that criticize Putin on Kosovo, for instance, Nina says that “like most Russians” she has “mixed feelings” about the issue, and she merely says she’s “not that sure” having close relations with Iran is a good idea.The idea, of course, that Nina is to be faulted for not speaking more harshly about Putin on Russia’s state-owned propaganda network is, quite simply, insane. Had she done so, then her interview would never have been broadcast, as any attempt to find such an interview in RT’s archives would instantly show.The fault, instead, lies with the pathetic neo-Soviet nature of the RT propaganda itself, and there’s nothing whatsoever wrong with Nina attempt to infiltrate that propaganda to the extent possible, so as to inject at least a little bit of quasi-reality into the charade.
My point has been further substantiated. I recall past instances where others have walked off the set or refused participation on the basis that the involved media outlet was muting their position.As an aside, someone (anonymous at that) who punked out of a major media panel discussion is in no legitimate position to second guess my credibility.As noted elsewhere, RTTV has exhibited some pretty hard hitting journalism. Its coverage of the last Duma vote saw plenty of frank criticism from Kasparov, Limonov Yavlinsky and Zyuganov.