The State of Democracy in RussiaEssay Preview: The State of Democracy in RussiaReport this essayTHE STATE OF DEMOCRACY IN RUSSIAThe most recent presidential and parliamentary elections in Russia have sparked heated debate concerning the future of Russian democracy. Many social scientists and Russian politicians say that hopes for a true Russian democratic system have been crushed. Few have an optimistic outlook for democratic prosperity in Russia.
These concerns can be substantiated through analysis of many articles on the subject of Russian Democracy. In a recent article entitled, What the Polls Tell Us, Yuri A. Levada (2004) describes Russia as a “Managed Democracy,” in which President Vladimir Putin controls the government and has illegitimately swayed the opinion of the Russian people. Levada (2004) argues that the overwhelming power of the United Party has all but completely destroyed the chances of a true democracy in Russia. Authors Michael McFaul and Nikolai Petrov (2004) explain in their article, What the Elections Tell Us, that although the electoral system in Russia is stable and institutionalized, recent elections have had little meaning and therefore do not demonstrate a legitimate democracy. In yet another article entitled, Force, Money, and Pluralism, written by Stephen Sestanovich (2004), the author does not focus on the failings of the Russian democracy, but rather, he concentrates on how Russian businesses and corporate institutions can affect the ultimate outcome of the post-soviet democratization process.
The aforementioned articles present strong arguments that make it difficult to believe that there is much hope for a sustained democracy in Russia. However, it may be possible, through a system of “free and fair elections,” for power to be obtained by a party that will embrace democracy and work to properly transform the Russian system of government. However, in the short term the outlook for Russias democratic future seems bleak.
Levada (2004), McFaul, Petrov (2004) and Sestanovich (2004) have similar viewpoints on the future of democracy in Russia. Levada (2004) describes the Russian form of government as lacking a pluralistic system, so that various branches of the current government are controlled by whoever sits atop a hierarchical pyramid of bureaucracy. President Vladimir Putin now sits at the top of this pyramid, controlling every facet of the Russian government, thus degrading the democratic system. McFaul and Petrov (2004) explain that although the recent elections in Russia demonstrate a thoroughly institutionalized system, the incumbent President, Vladimir Putin, had an unfair advantage over his opponents. By way of his increased control of the Russian government and media, President Putin and his political party, United Russia, were able to overwhelmingly defeat any opposition. Sestanovich (2004) explains that President Putin created a centralized state bureaucracy in an effort to improve the development and growth of the Russian economy and government. However, it is felt that Putin can no longer afford to rely on this singular power base and must now restore pluralism to the government or face backlash from economic leaders.
Levadas (2004) argument as described above, is similar to many who study Russian Democracy. However, he uses Russian public opinion polls to prove many of his theories, but his analysis of the polls may be skewed and somewhat incorrect. He justifies his belief that Putins control of the government is detrimental by explaining that Russian citizens have been purposefully misinformed by the government. Thus, Lavada (2004) believes that the Russian people support Putin without fully understanding the consequences. However, are the Russian people wrong in supporting Putin? Are they truly misinformed? Putin has brought economic prosperity to Russia and has brought about relative stability there. There may not be enough clear evidence to support the assertion that Russian citizens are clearly misinformed. The same argument applies to McFaul and Petrovs (2004) theory that the elections where grossly skewed in favor of Putin. Was it truly a diabolical plan crafted by Putin to crush his opposition that enabled him to win the last election? Or, do the Russian people believe in Putin because he is simply a strong leader who has improved the Russian government and economy?
Sestanovich (2004) has overlooked some key elements in his somewhat optimistic analysis of Russian Demcocracy. One of his main arguments is that the Russian economy may encounter a major pitfall in the near future, causing business leaders to revolt against Putin and his United Party. This in turn, according to Sestanovich (2004) may allow for a power change and an increase in pluralism. Sestanovich (2004) states that hundreds of companies, “have already begun to mobilize in support of the creation, for the first time, of true capitol markets” (Sestanovich 3, 2004). However, if the Russian economy fails, the Russian people may loose confidence in democracy and turn back to communism for a quick fix. Will Russian enterprises have enough power, success and prosperity to keep a stable democratic government in place?
The Economic and Social Problems of the Russian Democracy
The economic situation in Russia is dire. The Russian state has not yet had a serious financial crisis of any size. To keep economic growth, growth in GDP is the main priority of the Russian government, and Russia continues to do well in the European Union, but there is also a problem in the Russian economy. The Russian Federal Budget’s estimate for its next financial year was not received well by the public in Russia with a substantial portion of its political support from the ruling elite. During the 2014 elections, voters in Russia supported Putin’s re-election. There were reports that the Russian leadership was preparing to send a large military aircraft from Russia to bolster its efforts to take back Russian-dominated cities in Ukraine and to counter any economic and political pressure exerted on Moscow by the anti-Russian, pro-European populist forces. Furthermore, in April of that year, the Russian President Vladimir Putin appointed a special minister for economic and social reforms as a special representative of the ruling class of Russia, and a top figure in the Russian Federal Reserve Bank (RBI). The main reason given by the Russian government and the ruling elite of the Russia-EU countries for supporting Putin’s re-election is that Vladimir Putin had made Russia the world’s most prosperous state and Russia’s leadership had become more popular in the eyes of the U.S. and the international community. It is no wonder that with this new opportunity Putin has said that Moscow will stay to the end of its current development of industrial capabilities to achieve its full potential. The next year will be a crucial year for economic growth, and in so doing it will strengthen the Russian leadership as well as the U.S. and European economies.
While the economic situation may be getting worse in this country, it is no secret that the economy is growing rapidly. As I have argued many times, there has been a great deal of pessimism about the growth prospects of Russian companies in 2012, and a lot of speculation concerning the size of the economy and the possibility of a recession. Some have speculated that Russia should return to stagnation. It is this pessimism that has led to an assessment that the current economic recovery is far from sustainable.
The economic situation in Russia has not been as bad as most predicted, but there are still many issues that threaten the future economic stability of this country. One of the most controversial of them is that there is a deep, persistent inequality in the labor market. The situation of Russian businesses has also been deteriorating. While the economy is growing rapidly, the percentage of employees in firms with at least one worker has declined by 7 percent and unemployment has grown by 24 percent. Meanwhile, there has been a rapid deterioration in the social fabric of Russia, mainly among the lowest income groups. The result of this deterioration is a decline in the proportion of women workers in companies with at least one worker. Since the beginning of the last decade, the number of women working in highly compensated occupations has decreased 5 percent, the percentage of female employees has decreased 5 percent, the percentage of females in jobs related principally to social services, and the percentage of women in the defense
The Economic and Social Problems of the Russian Democracy
The economic situation in Russia is dire. The Russian state has not yet had a serious financial crisis of any size. To keep economic growth, growth in GDP is the main priority of the Russian government, and Russia continues to do well in the European Union, but there is also a problem in the Russian economy. The Russian Federal Budget’s estimate for its next financial year was not received well by the public in Russia with a substantial portion of its political support from the ruling elite. During the 2014 elections, voters in Russia supported Putin’s re-election. There were reports that the Russian leadership was preparing to send a large military aircraft from Russia to bolster its efforts to take back Russian-dominated cities in Ukraine and to counter any economic and political pressure exerted on Moscow by the anti-Russian, pro-European populist forces. Furthermore, in April of that year, the Russian President Vladimir Putin appointed a special minister for economic and social reforms as a special representative of the ruling class of Russia, and a top figure in the Russian Federal Reserve Bank (RBI). The main reason given by the Russian government and the ruling elite of the Russia-EU countries for supporting Putin’s re-election is that Vladimir Putin had made Russia the world’s most prosperous state and Russia’s leadership had become more popular in the eyes of the U.S. and the international community. It is no wonder that with this new opportunity Putin has said that Moscow will stay to the end of its current development of industrial capabilities to achieve its full potential. The next year will be a crucial year for economic growth, and in so doing it will strengthen the Russian leadership as well as the U.S. and European economies.
While the economic situation may be getting worse in this country, it is no secret that the economy is growing rapidly. As I have argued many times, there has been a great deal of pessimism about the growth prospects of Russian companies in 2012, and a lot of speculation concerning the size of the economy and the possibility of a recession. Some have speculated that Russia should return to stagnation. It is this pessimism that has led to an assessment that the current economic recovery is far from sustainable.
The economic situation in Russia has not been as bad as most predicted, but there are still many issues that threaten the future economic stability of this country. One of the most controversial of them is that there is a deep, persistent inequality in the labor market. The situation of Russian businesses has also been deteriorating. While the economy is growing rapidly, the percentage of employees in firms with at least one worker has declined by 7 percent and unemployment has grown by 24 percent. Meanwhile, there has been a rapid deterioration in the social fabric of Russia, mainly among the lowest income groups. The result of this deterioration is a decline in the proportion of women workers in companies with at least one worker. Since the beginning of the last decade, the number of women working in highly compensated occupations has decreased 5 percent, the percentage of female employees has decreased 5 percent, the percentage of females in jobs related principally to social services, and the percentage of women in the defense
In Levadas (2004) analysis of Russian opinion polls, he found that Russians dont consider political pluralism important. He states that, “In the public mind, economic prosperity is a more important criterion for democracy than are multiparty elections and political pluralism” (Levada 2, 2004). Levada (2004) believes that this is a major problem. In a true democracy, pluralism is vital and allows for various branches of government to, “Cooperate while remaining separate from one another” (Levada 5, 2004). This allows for the safeguards of rights and liberties established in a Democratic System. According to Levada (2004), President Putin has created a “Managed Democracy” and is now controlling every facet of the government while masquerading an elaborate show of government reform. Levada (2004) explains that the economic prosperity and governmental reform imposed by Putin have lead Russians to believe that all is well, while in-fact Russian democracy is degrading underneath a shell of deception.
Levadas (2004) opinions may be well grounded, however, it cannot be proven that Putins governmental reforms are merely for show without clearer evidence. Furthermore, Levada (2004) seems to view citizens through the eyes of Plato and does not trust in their opinion. There is a possibility that the large majority of the population, who believe political pluralism is not important, may be right. Russian Democracy has evolved differently than other western democracies have. The current Russian Democratic system may well be what is best for Russia under the conditions