Talk:Vladimir Ulas

right deviationism
What does "right deviationism" mean in the contemporary Russian Communist context? User:Fred Bauder Talk 01:52, 27 December 2011 (MSK)
 * In first thank you for correct my poor English in article. Right deviationism is a politic of "Russian socialism" seperate socialism for russian ethnic nationality. Nikitin, chairman of Control-Revision Committee of CPRF (second header organisation of CPRF after Central Committee of CPRF) say that one million russians die every year and people forget aboriginal cultural traditions. He also say that we must remember tradition "Heathen(Veda) Russia" and "Sacred Russia" ("Ведической и Святой Руси")About Control-Revision Committee of  of CPRF. He say that since Alexander Nevsky epoch(1249—1263) there was govenment , which consisted of best people. Now there is govenment of rich people. ("К сожалению, нынешняя правящая элита России, в том числе многие из депутатского корпуса, нарушили основные принципы цивилизационного проекта Александра Невского и пошли по византийскому пути. Во-первых, преклонились перед Западом. Учение западное приняли - теперь деньги правят Россией. Традиционную для Руси власть лучших заменили на власть богатых.") Nikitin say about Russian socialism and Russian Co-Prosperity Sphere("Русский лад"). --Stalker 12:17, 27 December 2011 (MSK)


 * We are not communicating well, but this:

"the main target of destruction is the spirituality of the people" is clear enough... global capitalism doesn't give a damn about Russian culture, or anything else, for that matter, unless, of course, it affords a way to turn a profit.

Citing Stalin's theories about party centralization and characterizing their opponents as "neoTrokskyites", "неотроцкистам", who don't actually understand Marxist theory but just parrot things they have memorized seems to be rather inflammatory and unlikely to lead to settlement of the dispute.

I don't think much of nationalism, American, British, German, or Russian; just a good way to get into a mess. Cultivating it because it has mass appeal seems likely to eventually backfire. The idea seems to configure the political struggle as a national liberation movement. Russia seems too powerful to authentically take such a posture. It is independent and strong now; the problem is how to take advantage of its strengths and advantageous position for the benefit of the mass of the people. Now I'm talking like Putin... User:Fred Bauder Talk 04:31, 3 January 2012 (MSK)


 * Referring to internet workers as "biobots" would not seem to be an effective organizing tactic. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:09, 3 January 2012 (MSK)


 * Taking the lead from Belarus seems particularly unwise. That model appears to be failing. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:44, 3 January 2012 (MSK)
 * Why belarus govenment is unwise? Economic of Belorussia is growing (5,5% in 2011). There are not better model in neighbour coutries.--Stalker 23:08, 8 January 2012 (MSK)
 * It is not that some progress is not made but that the system is unstable because it lacks broad public support. However, it is not out of the realm of possibility that if handled well public support can develop. That was always the hope with the Soviet Union. User:Fred Bauder Talk 23:55, 8 January 2012 (MSK)
 * Certainly attempting to convert industry to produce for the consumer market is better than throwing it down the oligarch rat hole. User:Fred Bauder Talk 05:37, 10 January 2012 (MSK)
 * Public support of Lukashenko gonenment very high in Belorussia. Attempt of "potato overturn" by USA was failed.--Stalker 15:45, 18 January 2012 (MSK)

I don't see any authentic "Western model" actually being tried in Russia or having been adopted; perhaps some sort of sterile capitalism model. The traditions of the common law as developed in England and in constitutional law in the United States are not, and have never been, adopted by any significant Russian tendency. For example, imagine a jury hearing a criminal case in Russia where a single individual could, if they insisted on it, prevent the other 11 members of the jury from reaching a verdict they have agreed on. And the judge, while clearly not pleased, firmly accepting the fact that there was no verdict agreed to. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:44, 3 January 2012 (MSK)

"Fifth, do not bow to the West. Do not take his faith, his teachings about the art of making money, his insane and boundless desire to consume."

Amen! Now you're preaching to the choir! This is the "sterile capitalism model" that no one in the West would, for a minute, consider our culture. We might admit that people have a right to devote themselves to nonsense, however, if they chose to and it is not harmful to others. Consumerism, however, is not harmless, at least not when practiced by the global masses. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:51, 3 January 2012 (MSK)


 * This seems to be along the same line. User:Fred Bauder Talk 23:07, 3 January 2012 (MSK)