[lbo-talk] eXile

Chris Doss lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com
Fri Feb 26 04:39:25 PST 2010


No you're right. But it wasn't (isn't) couched in left vs. right terms. It was more about rule of law and accountability and economic growth (which was very high in the Putin years).

Obviously things work differently than in the West because "left" has associations with to the Soviet period and all of its characteristics.

I should also clarify my previous statement that "lev" means "opposition to the reforms of the Gorbachev and Yeltsin period." Practically everybody is opposed to those reforms. The real difference is whether you believe that the reforms were bad in principle (i.e. you believe that the Soviet system was not really in need of reform) or believe that the reforms were poorly carried out for whatever reason.

----- Original Message ---- From: Sean Andrews <cultstud76 at gmail.com>

I'm way out of my depth here and the political semantics are dicey even in the West I live in where there is also almost no left, but wasn't a good part of Putin (and then Medvedev's) support due to their claim to be more interested in returning Russians to the secure days of the USSR, i.e. with more social safety net?  Or was it just the shirtless fishing Clint Eastwood impersonation, i.e. more forceful state externally?  I suppose it could also be both (that's what Karl Polanyi would have predicted after the 90s), but my understanding was that the former held some sway which would seem to be more of a social democratic push, but maybe that is way too generous--and in any case, as the US is evidence, social democracy is only "left" when the middle is populated by people to the right of Reagan.

s ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list