Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mikhail Gorbachev has died

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 971 posts

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#191

Post by MichaelCollins »

kenned3 wrote: post #89
ipnon wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me tell you why I think this is an inappropriate comment: The point of it seems not to be collaboratively extending the line of thought proposed by the original post or the parent comment, but to make the parent commenter feel some kind of personal shame or stupidity. Good commenting is more like a team sport than a martial art.

So like telling "jokes" at Russia's expense by a man of questionable ethics? what is the point of his joke, if not to mock another country? The OP posted a quote, and i posted one too?

> "jokes" at Russia's expense

I'm not seeing it. That joke could just as easily be told for any other national leader and it would still work.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#192

Post by avmich »

anon_123g987 wrote: post #118
avmich wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was the absence of Marshall plan happened because of the West or because of Russia's decision? > Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. Russia today is a faint ghost of the former USSR. The events in Eastern Europe show that to an extent.

> Russia today is a faint ghost of the former USSR. Russia was only a part of the USSR. Their main problem is that they, too, believe that they are the former USSR, and try to restore the former glory. Well, the state of the war in Ukraine (another part of the former USSR) clearly shows how wrong they are.

> Well, the state of the war in Ukraine (another part of the former USSR) clearly shows how wrong they are.

I assume you mean "Russia believe that they are the former USSR".

It's interesting to note that Russia in 1990-s focused on economic modernization - and while it went through highly criminal years, they built a good market economy by 1999 - while Ukraine was mostly (more) doing political reform - and they had established presidential changes. Now more economically robust Russia with autocratic ruling fights with still quite corrupt, but politically much more democratic Ukraine - and shows that, yes, it's better to be a poor democracy, than a rich autocracy, because autocracy will get you in the end... or maybe it's a too hasty conclusion.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#193

Post by theonething »

eps wrote: post #134
lapcat wrote: post #22

The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet…

It's naive to think that a Western-style democracy could've been instilled in Russia just through some extra effort. The fact that it works elsewhere doesn't mean it's a suitable model for other countries. Especially when there's a lot of prior baggage of being ruled by a single person, be it a tzar or a head of Politburo.

> Especially when there's a lot of prior baggage of being ruled by a single person, be it a tzar or a head of Politburo.

This describes Hungary, Czech Republic, Romania and Poland, all former Soviet bloc countries. They've all had varying levels of success transitioning from communism to democracy and from a planned economy to market.

So it can happen. Could it have happened for Russia? Who knows? Based on the above, I lean towards yes.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#194

Post by ZoomerCretin »

KptMarchewa wrote: post #156
Beltalowda wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't impose democracy, but if democracy and associated ideas such as the free market spectacularly fails the people – as it did in the 90s – then that certainly doesn't help. We probably could have done a thing or two to make it fail less . Would that have made a meaningful difference? Hard to say for sure, but it would have been worth to try.

Not "ideas" failed the people, but the implementers - which turned out to be straight up robbers, dividing past empire's industrial base amongst them, like western idol Khodorkovsky or Berezovsky. Where the politicians were less corrupt, the free market worked spectacularly well, like in Poland.

So it wasn't real capitalism?

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#195

Post by ZoomerCretin »

ghostwriter wrote: post #174
hnhg wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You couldn’t impose democracy on many parts of the USA if it were suddenly removed, let’s face it.

that's good, as the US is a constitutional republic

Democratic republic, which is what everyone means when we say democracy.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#196

Post by hotpotamus »

nxm wrote: post #177
hotpotamus wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Federalism is one of the core principles of the Republican party. I don't believe that's a controversial statement of fact, but I also didn't think vaccines or the shape of the Earth were controversial subjects, so I never know these days.

Pushing vaccines and forcing them onto people is (or they lose their jobs). Similarly, Democratic government forced many businesses to permanently close as they were deemed non-essential.

As a child I was compelled to take vaccinations in order to attend school. My buddy in the military tells me he was "voluntold" to give blood for his fellow soldiers, nevermind all the vaccines they were required to take. Back then, vaccine denial was a loony left fringe thing, and now it seems to be a mainstream conservative position. Times change I suppose, but I do remember the old days.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#197

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

nxm wrote: post #181
avmich wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was the absence of Marshall plan happened because of the West or because of Russia's decision? > Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. Russia today is a faint ghost of the former USSR. The events in Eastern Europe show that to an extent.

Who would pay for Marshall Plan?

Somebody pays eventually. We are all paying for it right now, plus interest.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#198

Post by wnevets »

markdown wrote: post #110
wnevets wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. Some how people manage to blame everything on the United States.

The US manages to meddle and create problems all over the world. A small part of the US footprint: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...

> The US manages to meddle and create problems all over the world.

Huh? The OP is accusing the US of NOT meddling. Talk about damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#199

Post by mantas »

romwell wrote: post #87
avmich wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy to argue that it's USSR people, not Western, who benefited most from the end of the Cold War.

Some did, some didn't, the way it happened. The Cold War wasn't a good thing, but it didn't have to end with the dissolution of the USSR, and the dissolution of the USSR didn't have to end with a coup, followed by chaos, which nevertheless kept all the appartchiks in charge. 30 years later, we can see how the people who were in charge of the USSR are the reason if fell apart: because they are still running Russia, an…

Yeah, USSR should have kept all the occupied countries!

/sarcasm

Re: Mikhail Gorbachev has died

#200

Post by abraxas »

lapcat wrote: post #22

The United States didn't do enough to help Russia transition to democracy in the 1990s. There was no "Marshall Plan" after the Cold War like there was after World War II. This was a huge mistake, and we see the consequences now, with Russia having turned back toward totalitarianism and imperialism. Sadly, it seems that Gorbachev's efforts were mostly for naught. But it was courageous at the time to open up the Soviet…

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN