No

by Gary C. Gibson

Created on: February 11, 2009   Last Updated: July 04, 2009

A stable democracy is something of an oxymoron. The stable U.S. democracy exists by heavy foreign borrowing-should Russia emulate that?

External political forces especially of globalism present challenges for Russian democratic stability. Capitalism globally is a destabilizing economic fact in several ways; it seeks to reallocate profits, work and investments in areas that will produce the highest rate of return for the concentration of wealth in the rich regardless of nation al boundaries or environmental consequences, and it also has been corrupted by global corporatism that is apolitical power aswell as an inter-corporate share owning class seeking dominance over national governments. Russia has many other external challenges such as global socialism, autocracy, fascism or fascism united as corporatism with business and of course the twin towers of 1.5 billion Muslims and 1.4 billion Chinese with ethnic and atheist or pagan commonalities-neithe r is their growing Christian Church a priesthood of believers but is instead a hierarchical priesthood so easliy manipulated for political purposes by sympathizers to theocracy nor global, anti-Christ economic power.

The United States shares many of the problems of globalism, the Muslim anti-jewish criterionwith it's desire for a 'final solution' in the mid-east and Chinese economic, cultural and millitary power. The Chinese aren't bad people-there are just too many for the United States to treat them as just another business opportunity. In order for American Democracy-or Russian, to survive in a world half Mohammedan and Chinese it will need to promote national securtity and self-development in economic and environmental areas as prioritiy political items. American globalists like Dick Cheney were too willing to sell out the nation for oil profits, and the Chinese economy is the reciprocol of the loss of quality jobs in the United States-with corporations loyal to the China market too far American interests are set aside. Russian in the international realm has been treated with a propaganda approach by the past two adminnistrations that were simultanteously screwling the American public with lessons not learned till the recent financial collapse. U.S. prescriptions for Russian democratic development were hollow to a certain extent for the U.S. economy and its democratic control were paralyzed by the nerve agents of corporatist investment in China, import of Chinese goods, flimsy bank lending practices and corporate owned media prtopaganda saying the American economy was booming-at least they were cooncerned about inflation above all else for good reason-banks make more profit in lending with low inflation.

Russia cannot form a stable democracy if one judges by looking at the large existing democracies of the world; democracy is inherently unstable. Corporatists will call anything a democracy if the masses vote from column A or column B regardless that the people may stay broke for life and experience government oppression, and political power over the economy and government is set by broadcast media owning trans-national corporations concentrating wealth for plutocracies with feet on many continents. Fortunately history has stability implicitly within complex movements of nations and societies based upon incidental factors such as geography, circumstances, personnel and external challenges or the lack thereof. Russia as a nation may develop democratic institutions within as a result of some help from political pressures and catalysis applied from without. The Byzantine Empire may have experienced the iconoclasm movement as a result of external Muslim pressures, and today external democratic pressures in democratic nations surrounding Russia may encourage a Russian democratic populism while the internal dynamics of Russian society in the post cold war decades seems to support a simple powerful central authority over chaos. Russia first of all, for geographic and cultural reasons requires a real central governing power and it does so within a centrifugal force outward naturally tending toward chaos.

The United States has a history of expansion across the continent of North America and occasional foreign wars-even having a colony in the Philippines for twenty years! The Government in Washington D.C. is traditional neo-plutocracy. I cannot imagine there has ever been a poor man elected to the U.S. Senate, and definitely not one that arrived middle class and didn't leave rich.

Today the United States has a flood of illegal alien immigrants that have added more than 20 or 30 million people plus their offspring that become citizens to the population of the United States-that isn't stable. The business people of the United States have become globalists and invest overseas becoming trans-nationalist that descry their own nation's economic interest as protectionist if measures are taken to liberate it from corporatist-globalis t power.

England does have a lengthy history of parliamentary government yet that is fundamentally one-party rule under the authority of the rich. When a general election is held the winning party forms a cabinet and selects a prime minister. There is no separation of the executive and legislative branches of government in England and that means one party rule until the next election.

England also is a government that depends on globalism to input wealth to sustain its standard of living. Unlike Japan, England's industrial era has largely been surpassed by financial services and foreign investments. Both England and the United States have tremendous public debt dumped by bad corporatism and neo-con synthetic infections of domestic economic priorities.

The Obama administration has hired the Rasputin like economist from the Clinton years that made home mortgages liquid assets tradeable as commodities that established the bunk extension of the unnatural post cold war economic surge to be their prime economic planner. That is not a recipe for stability but a search for a method to extend unecological economic instability.

Plainly autocratic forms of government are stable while democracy is unstable. Elite classes enjoying the subjugation of the masses for millenia never want anything to change-they are on a golden pond of power that in some cases can only be overthrown by outside forces of invasion. How long might Pharonic rule have persisted in Egypt without the troublesome presence of invading Hyksos that brought the first invasion and abeyance of the aboriginal power in the inevitable yet slow decline of the stable absolute monarch? If not for the problems created by the west might not the rule of the tsars have continued for another 500 years? What about imperial China? Except for the bloody dynastic change battle, rape and pillaging of the populous by the new administration taking charge and establishing authority China was a stable middle kingdom for several thousand years aggregating neighboring states and ruling powers as it clustered it was slowly toward a new communist autocracy and eventual merging sidle-up with global corporate powers?

Democracies form when the prevailing autocratic power has been eliminated and more or less equal powers join together to govern themselves equally. Democracy tends to have much competition in free enterprises striving to provide better goods and services for others to sell. Democracy tends to minimize organizational powers that repress individual liberty such as may exist at times in socialist and corporatist contexts. Democracy has an unstable equilibrium continually seeking readjustment and renormalize from extremes created by evil hegemony over the government through the influence of special interests.

India is a large democracy yet it is poor compared to England and America. That poverty restricts its ability to let its people be defrauded by clever globalist financiers for a while. Democracy is implicitly unstable and used as a vehicle for the exploitation of whatever human or material resources are available in the modern world. democracy requires a supremacy of individual economic and political interests over organizations and in the Internet and telecommunications era of corporatism that is a significant challenge especially as politicians are bought and paid for by corporations.

The prospects for a stable Russian democracy are not better than those of England and the United States. Democracy was not intended to be a way to fairly reapportion political and economic interests individually when the prevailing social environment is a class stratified mass social zeitgeist. Unfair reallocation's of political and economic resources in a top-down approach to democracy are normal, and in the more desirable bottom up method of delivering democracy through rugged pioneer individualism with plenty for those willing to work for oneself (in a totalized society social position is primary at securing wealth and personal ability irrelevant without a right social role) populist self-determination through democracy is filtered out through controlling powers through the technical problems associated with governance of so many. The stock market and capitalism is corrupted through the similar issue of technical profiting on the real capital of others production capabilities.

Russia has a difficult location to grow a democracy; the world today is beset with trans-national organizations seeking total global market power. The trans-national organization fundamentally subvert the individualist egalitarian that is a necessary component for practical democratic government that ensures that all citizens have a fair opportunity that cannot be denied under any circumstance to construct their own life materially and spiritually at a satisfactory level.

Trans-nationalists may seek to make of post-cold war Russia a technical democracy such as existed in the Ireland after 1800 when the agreement of Union was written. Absentee landlords of vast estates with concentrated wealth made of made of many Irish, landless beggars paying rent. The first anti-vagrancy laws in 19th century Britain were actually anti-Irish begging laws that had existed for 400 years.

When Henry II set to conquer Ireland he set in to play a dispossession of nationality and peace movement that compelled the Irish to move to industrial Britain to work for the lowest wages in order to try to survive. It is not impossible that global corporatism too will seek to impoverish yet own Russia and reallocate its resource values to elite global corporatists just as is developing in the United States today to a limited extent following the fraud based financial-Wall Street economic expansion of concentrating wealth during the 1990's and through the Bush II administration.

Russia will need to form a powerful republic as a transitional step to guard democratic growth. It must have a concept of fairness for all citizens and protect it national security from the worst excesses of foreign invasion and outsourcing of jobs that can be implemented by oligarchy seeking power wielders in corporate organizations. Russia should set limits upon personal income allowed at so meting like 1000% of the average annual wage in order to guard against the corruption of oligarchic concentrated wealth, and set create inheritance taxes that will permit not more than 100 times the annual average income to be passed on.

Globalism has created a small worlds network/advantaged organization phenomenon in communications, business and governance that will lead to the conclusion of global autocracy and the struggle to overthrow it.

Massification of society that eradicates the boundaries of individualism is a desirable trend for sellers of goods globally and for communist designs for an unchanging utopia of plenty for the masses. Unfortunately it is instability in thermodynamic changes of form that is the nature of the world and of the present economic system.

President Obama's primary economic adviser hasn't a concept of what ecological economics is about, or of how to approach and construction for non-expansive in quantity ecological economic policy need for a stable democracy, if it can be made to exist anywhere - it would be a worthwhile experimental object.

Learn more about this author, Gary C. Gibson.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.