|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Mar 16, 2018 9:10:28 GMT
The sad thing is that Kievan Rus, and later Novgorod, had a sophisticated form of government that was proto-democratic in many ways. Unfortunately the Mongol invasion, and then the rise of Muscovite despotism, put paid to that, and the effects are still to be seen today.
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 16, 2018 9:44:23 GMT
The sad thing is that Kievan Rus, and later Novgorod, had a sophisticated form of government that was proto-democratic in many ways. Unfortunately the Mongol invasion, and then the rise of Muscovite despotism, put paid to that, and the effects are still to be seen today. Yes, the Mongol belief in all up elections by FPTP scuppered the Novgorod preference for PR elections by thirds.  |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Mar 16, 2018 9:48:59 GMT
The sad thing is that Kievan Rus, and later Novgorod, had a sophisticated form of government that was proto-democratic in many ways. Unfortunately the Mongol invasion, and then the rise of Muscovite despotism, put paid to that, and the effects are still to be seen today. Yes, the Mongol belief in all up elections by FPTP scuppered the Novgorod preference for PR elections by thirds. Of course, the Mongols famously ended the invasion in order to go back to Mongolia and elect a new Great Khan. The first and last successful example of going back to one's constituency and preparing for government. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 16, 2018 9:52:21 GMT
At least no-one can accuse the BBC of being behind the story here. They're being spied on even before the debate in the house of commons..... |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Mar 16, 2018 9:54:05 GMT
Yes, the Mongol belief in all up elections by FPTP scuppered the Novgorod preference for PR elections by thirds. Of course, the Mongols famously ended the invasion in order to go back to Mongolia and elect a new Great Khan. The first and last successful example of going back to one's constituency and preparing for government. reminds me of the Britons in Asterix, who stopped fighting the Romans so that they could make a cup of tea. |
|
Dan
Animal Welfare Party
Believes we need more localism in our politics
Posts: 813
|
Post by Dan on Mar 16, 2018 11:48:12 GMT
I suppose for completeness sake, we should list the 'candidates':
Sergey Baburin (Russian All-People's Union)
Pavel Grudinin (Communist Party)
Vladimir Zhirinovsky (Liberal Democratic Party)
Vladimir Putin (Independent)
Ksenia Sobchak (Civic Initiative)
Maxim Suraykin (Communists of Russia)
Boris Titov (Party of Growth)
Grigory Yavlinsky (Yabloko)
2012 results:
Vladimir Putin (United Russia) - 63.6%
Gennady Zyuganov (Communist Party) - 17.2%
Mikhail Prokhorov (Independent) - 8.0%
Vladimir Zhirinovsky (Liberal Democratic Party) - 6.2%
Sergey Mironov (A Just Russia) - 3.9%
Finally, if we want to track the winning share of the vote over the years, it's been:
1991 - Boris Yeltsin (Independent) - 58.6%
1996 - Boris Yeltsin (Independent) - 35.8%
2000 - Vladimir Putin (Independent) - 53.4%
2004 - Vladimir Putin (Independent) - 71.9&
2008 - Dmitry Medvedev (United Russia) - 71.2%
2012- Vladimir Putin (United Russia) - 63.6%
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 16, 2018 12:27:27 GMT
The decline of Novgorod is best illustrated by the fact that it is now twinned with Watford
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 12:34:34 GMT
The decline of Novgorod is best illustrated by the fact that it is now twinned with Watford How Novgorod the Great is fallen! Dear God, why? |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 16, 2018 12:35:58 GMT
The decline of Novgorod is best illustrated by the fact that it is now twinned with Watford How Novgorod the Great is fallen! Dear God, why? It dates back to the 1980s when both Russia and Watford were run by Communists |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 12:38:24 GMT
How Novgorod the Great is fallen! Dear God, why? It dates back to the 1980s when both Russia and Watford were run by Communists Even so... I checked that it was the famous Novgorod - there are others - and indeed it is. They must have had no pride. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Mar 16, 2018 12:41:36 GMT
It dates back to the 1980s when both Russia and Watford were run by Communists Even so... I checked that it was the famous Novgorod - there are others - and indeed it is. They must have had no pride. I'm reminded of the late Linda Smith: "Erith isn't twinned with anywhere but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 13:41:05 GMT
Yes, the Mongol belief in all up elections by FPTP scuppered the Novgorod preference for PR elections by thirds. Of course, the Mongols famously ended the invasion in order to go back to Mongolia and elect a new Great Khan. The first and last successful example of going back to one's constituency and preparing for government. The Mongols also favoured total extermination of any city they captured, if you don't think very long about it certainly solved any arguments about democracy... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 13:43:05 GMT
Of course, the Mongols famously ended the invasion in order to go back to Mongolia and elect a new Great Khan. The first and last successful example of going back to one's constituency and preparing for government. reminds me of the Britons in Asterix, who stopped fighting the Romans so that they could make a cup of tea. Not quite the Mongols were genocidal maniacs, Asterisk just cracked a few Roman heads together now and again... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 13:44:33 GMT
How Novgorod the Great is fallen! Dear God, why? It dates back to the 1980s when both Russia and Watford were run by Communists Watford run by Communists? I think you mean LibDems... |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Mar 16, 2018 13:51:41 GMT
Of course, the Mongols famously ended the invasion in order to go back to Mongolia and elect a new Great Khan. The first and last successful example of going back to one's constituency and preparing for government. The Mongols also favoured total extermination of any city they captured, if you don't think very long about it certainly solved any arguments about democracy... You did tend to have to go to all-outs at that point. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,774 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Mar 16, 2018 14:09:16 GMT
Sergey Baburin (Russian All-People's Union) Pavel Grudinin (Communist Party) Vladimir Zhirinovsky (Liberal Democratic Party) Vladimir Putin (Independent) Ksenia Sobchak (Civic Initiative) Maxim Suraykin (Communists of Russia) Boris Titov (Party of Growth) Grigory Yavlinsky (Yabloko) ... 1991 - Boris Yeltsin (Independent) - 58.6% 1996 - Boris Yeltsin (Independent) - 35.8% 2000 - Vladimir Putin (Independent) - 53.4% 2004 - Vladimir Putin (Independent) - 71.9& 2008 - Dmitry Medvedev (United Russia) - 71.2% 2012- Vladimir Putin (United Russia) - 63.6% Two thoughts stumbling over each other to get to the front first: Boris Yelstin *won* with *35%*  Russia has two Communist parties? Or possibly more than two? Splitters! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 14:16:57 GMT
The Mongols also favoured total extermination of any city they captured, if you don't think very long about it certainly solved any arguments about democracy... You did tend to have to go to all-outs at that point. I take it you are referring to their innards spilling "all-out" after the thrust of a Mongol sword in their bellies...😆😁 |
|
Dan
Animal Welfare Party
Believes we need more localism in our politics
Posts: 813
|
Post by Dan on Mar 16, 2018 15:50:37 GMT
Boris Yelstin *won* with *35%* Russia has two Communist parties? Or possibly more than two? Splitters! The 2000 election was the only one that's ever gone to a second round runoff (I'd quoted the first round result). In the second round, Yeltsin beat Gennady Zyuganov from the Communist Party 54/41 (with 5% 'none of the above'). The Communist Party is the continuity/successor to the USSR's communist party. The 'Communists of Russia' were established in 2012 for people who thought the Community Party had drifted too far from its Marxist core. |
|
johng
Labour
Posts: 4,850
|
Post by johng on Mar 16, 2018 16:08:53 GMT
Sergey Baburin (Russian All-People's Union) Pavel Grudinin (Communist Party) Vladimir Zhirinovsky (Liberal Democratic Party) Vladimir Putin (Independent) Ksenia Sobchak (Civic Initiative) Maxim Suraykin (Communists of Russia) Boris Titov (Party of Growth) Grigory Yavlinsky (Yabloko) ... 1991 - Boris Yeltsin (Independent) - 58.6% 1996 - Boris Yeltsin (Independent) - 35.8% 2000 - Vladimir Putin (Independent) - 53.4% 2004 - Vladimir Putin (Independent) - 71.9& 2008 - Dmitry Medvedev (United Russia) - 71.2% 2012- Vladimir Putin (United Russia) - 63.6% Two thoughts stumbling over each other to get to the front first: Boris Yelstin *won* with *35%* Russia has two Communist parties? Or possibly more than two? Splitters! Yes, and he only got that with vote rigging and significant amounts of oligarch cash. The Communists of Russia are indeed a splinter from the CPRF. The split was caused by disagreements with long-serving Communist Party general secretary Gennady Zyuganov. The Communists of Russia generally have a much stronger nationalist line than the main communist party - though they didn't get close to the threshold at the last Duma elections. Also, it might sound strange to say, but the only real (limited) opposition in the state Duma is provided by the communist party so there could have been some Putin influence in the split. This election is going to be all about turnout. In 2016 around 35% of voters turned out in the major cities where fraud is less likely to happen. With a low-impact campaign, will the presidential election turnout go so low? |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Mar 16, 2018 16:28:54 GMT
Vladimir Zhirinovsky (Liberal Democratic Party) "Liberal" "Democratic" I'll accept that it probably is a party, though. |
|
