Another garbage article that builds/propagates narratives, has zero nuance (dumbs everything down to the nomenklatura, and doesn't even mention the lineage interruption or FSB vs military vs civil institutions power struggle of 90's), and won't lead to any HN-worthy discussion beyond feeding the confirmation bias of local folks. Modern democracy is not a thing that either exists or doesn't. It's a loose bunch of basic practices and properties most meet to the certain extent: rule of law, checks and balances, representation, transparency, pluralism, market-based economy, and so on. Most of those existed in the post-Soviet Russia for a while to a certain extent. We can argue endlessly about that extent, but they undoubtedly took a while to dismantle, otherwise the war and runaway fascism could have happened in 1993 or in late 90's. In reality, it only happened after the 2020 constitution coup.
In fact, you seem to have to potentially have started one with your criticism.
It is not the quality of the article that creates a good discussion. Discussion involves cycles of correction and progression and expansion by its own nature.
Another garbage comment that builds/propagates narratives, has zero nuance, and won't lead to any HN-worthy discussion beyond feeding the confirmation bias of local folks.
I'm increasingly convinced that the short and sweet answer is: because they've had a tsar and serfs since the fall of the kievan rus and the establishment of the muscovite power, and nothing has meaningfully changed since that time, except that sometimes the tsar is called "general secretary" and sometimes the serfs are called "comrades".
There are many things to dislike about a soviet republic, but lack of democratic representation isn't one of them. I wish we could recall MPs via a vote like they could.
IME though this argument is used to rationalize the behavior of Russian leaders (I’ll call it “tyranny” and “oppression” as a Westerner, acknowledging that we have some of our own trash to clean up).
Interesting, I've heard a similar theory used to describe the Kim regime of North Korea. In that the Kim regime is basically an extension of the Lee dynasty of Joseon and the three generations of Kims are basically kings in all but name.
