Roadblocks to Democracy in Russia - Essay Example

Roadblocks to democracy in Russia In this day and age when globalization has transformed economic and political policies and even helped curb many ofsociety’s tribulations, it is understandable to question how a country with such a colorful and diverse history, fails to move forward to democratization. Russia, the largest country in the world is currently ruled by a president exercising federal power and a prime minister that serves at the discretion of the president. Popular impressions against Russia abound thus this paper will attempt to provide its grounds by describing the historical events, systems, and traditions that prevented democracy in the past and led to the rise of the USSR under Lenin and Stalin. Did these obstacles exist in Western Europe? Are effects of Leninism and Stalinism still visible today? The Imperial Russia Prior to the social revolutions that shaped modern Russia; the country was ruled by autocratic czars for more than 300 years (1613-1917) and battled a number of socio-historical events that caused the eventual fall of Imperial Russia. The most notable of czar-led reforms was the Emancipation of Serfs in 1861 when Alexander II abolished the evil of serfdom in order to fuel domestic and military reforms. Of the 60 million legal citizens, 50 million were serfs, making it convenient for Czar Alexander II to blame serfdom for the loss of the Crimean war, food shortages, overpopulation, civil crimes, and industrial retrogression. 1 2 But what sounded to be a solution worsened the burden even more. Landowners gave up lands that yield little to no agricultural value, and serfs and their children toiled for lifelong redemption payments. True enough, the reform was a failure because it was not the solution to the real problem which was the social instability created by huge divide between the royal rich and the poor. The same crisis was faced after the war against Japan in 1904. Russia again was left weak and immobile and people started asking for reforms. The Bloody Sunday massacre caused social and political uprisings all over the country that Czar Nicholas II was forced to pass the October Manifesto granting the people civil liberties and prompting the creation of the Russian Duma to aid the czar as the second governing body. 3 Though the Duma had limited power in its early years, the revolts were somehow pacified for a number of years until Russia again suffered the repercussions of World War I. The Czar took direct command of the armies while his wife Alexandra took a very active role in the government. Consequently, the czar was blamed for every military failure while his wife was blamed for the abject economic conditions. The whole family, together with the nobles, was imprisoned and later executed for their imperial ineptitude by the growing Bolshevik movement led by Vladimir Lenin. Leninism vs. Stalinism Vladimir Lenin took hold of Russia in a time it greatly suffered the atrocities of WWI and the ensuing three-year Civil War after the execution of the monarchs. In 1921, he implemented the New Economic Policy (NEP) which caused the emergence of the new class of entrepreneurs called the Nepmen. NEP was a combination of socialism and capitalism – the state took control of industries like banking and transportation, leased large corporations to private entrepreneurs, and allowed free internal markets for small-scale entrepreneurs.4 Before we can unite, and in order that we may unite, we must first of all draw firm and definite lines of demarcation….Marxism. ... Only such … will be capable of leading the movement on the high road of political struggle. (Lenin, 1900)5 When Joseph Stalin was named the General Secretary of the Soviet Union in 1922, he used his control over the country to modernize economy. He introduced his Five Year Economic Plan in 1928 with ruthless determination – punishing the unproductive and removing any form of opposition in whatever means necessary. Our Party alone knows where to direct the cause; and it is leading it forward successfully. To what does our Party owe its superiority? To the fact that is a Marxian Party, a Leninist Party. (Stalin, 1953) By the end of 1930’s, Soviet Union’s economy enjoyed years of self-sufficiency while capitalist countries suffered the Great Depression. This resurgence of Russia however was short-lived. Soviet leaders battled many socio-economic and political woes that led to its eventual collapsed in 1991. 6 Political Reforms To respond to globalization that paved the progress of the democratic Western Europe, Russia has since undergone major political reforms. But though free elections have been held since 1993, the only relevant element of liberal democracy is the election for Parliament representatives. Mikhail Molchanov argues that Russia suffers from communist legacy and autocratic political culture. This is reasonable because though communism didn’t grip Russia until 1917, the Imperial Russia was everything authoritarian. 7 Today, Russia is ruled by an elected president who holds potent power incomparable to any president in the European Union and the United States. Their president is not just the head of state but also the “guarantor of the constitution” with authority to abolish the Duma and call for a new election if need be. Interestingly, the Russian constitution guarantees far greater rights to its citizens, theoretically that is. 8 Article 29 guarantees “freedom of speech and thought”—…freedom of the media, it forbids censorship, and it guarantees public access to information. Article 44 guarantees “freedom of literary, artistic, scientific, intellectual, and other . . . creative activity.” Article 31 guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and to hold political meetings, rallies, and demonstration. In the latest Pew Global Attitudes survey quoted by The New York Times, the dichotomy between the constitution and reality was exemplified with the survey showing how people find the elections and justice system biased, and how these problems can be best solved with a strong leader – not democracy. Majority of its citizens still cling to its authoritarian roots where people do not participate in state and political affairs. Indeed, one only needs to read the country’s history in order to understand its struggles in adapting democracy.9 The Role of Economic Reforms Vladimir Putin capitalized on the chaos that ensued following Boris Yeltsin’s presidency that started the democratic drive. Unlike then, Russians today find democracy as a breeder for crimes and corruption and the major culprit of the economic decline. Putin established the trust back. Amidst reports of corruption, Putin continues to reap popularity for pushing Russia’s economy forward. In 2011, Russia surpassed Saudi Arabia in oil production and in 2012, its economy performs better than any of the EU countries10. It is however emphasized that though it is tempting to credit the Kremlin for this resurgence and challenge the excessive regard to true democracy, this economic growth is merely symptomatic of EU’s awful performance. Post-communists countries in the EU again suffer from recession affecting trade in the Western Europe. Russia is only spared by its rich natural resources that if managed properly, could have long propelled to stability. While the highly-developed countries in the West believe that Russians need to be intellectually and politically emancipated, Russians see the evil of democracy and try to control it. While the West expanded through commercialization, Russia isolates itself – distrusting the rest of the world in the process. Unlike the other Communist countries in Europe, Russia did not go through a period of values revolution needed to consolidate democracy11. Ryabov emphasized the four main indicators of democratic development which can be used as yardstick in Russia and other post-Soviet states: 1) Political Pluralism which Russia had in the early 1990’s; 2) Democratic elite turnover which has not happened in Russia yet, though Moldova and Ukraine had; 3) Respect for democratic procedures as basis for democratic system; and 4) Not one of post-Soviet states has managed to destroy nomenklatura relations as basis of power relations. System is still relatively feudal with the elites lacking confidence in institutions. Ryabov further claimed that unless all four are achieved will the Soviet legacy be totally destroyed. Leninism and Stalinism Today Of the myriad of government systems in human history, only democracy with its established rules that protect basic human rights is said to propel stable growth. Needles to say, Russia continues to challenge that accepted paradigm. Lenin did in fact advanced women’s rights and education and health care for all. Stalin modernized Russian economy at such a great price. Putin’s redemptive concept of managed democracy is seen as a rollback to Stalin economics where freedom is compromised for greater prosperity.12 The preference for order over freedom in Russia today has reprised popular disillusionment with democratic institutions and values in the decade before the Bolsheviks came to power. In their retreat from democracy under Putin, contemporary Russians have followed their liberal predecessors down a path trodden originally in the country’s first experiment with democracy between 1905 and 1917. (Beer, 2009)13 Russia’s pretense to democracy has always been the inclusion to the European Union and become part of globalization. It is a paradoxical relation – EU demands for democratization before admittance while Russia cannot develop democracy without EU instilling it to them. What is true today is that fact that wherever the Russian government’s trajectories lead in the coming years, it will remain a matter of great interest in the world outside Russia. Bibliography 1. Beer Daniel, “Russia’s Managed Democracy”, History Today, May 2009 http://www.historytoday.com/daniel-beer/russias-managed-democracy (accessed November 8, 2012) 2. Bell James. 2012. Russians have their own Ideas of Democracy. New York Times, 24 September http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/09/24/should-the-us-be-a-political-player-in-russia/russians-have-their-own-ideas-of-democracy (accessed November 7 2012) 3. Boris Yeltsin. 1993. Three Days That Changed the World. London, Chapmans Publishers 4. Brudny, Yitzhak . "The Dynamics of Democratic Russia, 1990-1993." Post-Soviet Affairs 2 (1993): 141-176. 5. Lynch Michael. “The Emancipation of the Russian Serfs”. History Today http://www.historytoday.com/michael-lynch/emancipation-russian-serfs-1861-charter-freedom-or-act-betrayal (accessed November 7, 2012) 6. Michael McFaul and Sergei Markov.1993.The Troubled Birth of Russian Democracy: Parties, Personalities, Programs. Stanford CA, Hoover Institution Press Publication, Vol 415 7. Sakwa.1996. Russian Politics and Society. London, Routledge 8. Urban Michael and Igrunov Vyacheslav. 1997. The Rebirth of Politics in Russia. London, Cambridge University Press Read More