A New Beginning - Our 1992 Russian Federation

C) United Labor Party/Agrarian Party

Ngl the commie party would be pretty interesting to work with but for this term at least we should come together with the party that hews closest to our own goals and views for a future Russia
 
Should the new government coalition (whoever it is) pursue liquid democracy at local levels in Russia?
A) Yes
B) No


links:
 
Ok, we can safely assume that New People is going to win, results of snap elections should be:
New People/Yabloko - 41.5%
Right Cause - 22%
United Labor Party/Agrarian Party - 20%
Communist Party - 7.2%
LDPR - 5.5%

Please choose a coalition partner for New People (over 50% of vote are needed for majority government):
A) Right Cause
B) Communist Party + LDPR
C) United Labor Party/Agrarian Party
A
Should the new government coalition (whoever it is) pursue liquid democracy at local levels in Russia?
A) Yes
B) No


links:
B
 
Should the new government coalition (whoever it is) pursue liquid democracy at local levels in Russia?
A) Yes
B) No


links:
No; democratic government in Russia is still too young and on relatively-shaking legs after nearly a century (more, if you include the Russian Empire) of Soviet rule. For now, let's stick to representative democracy and get some experience and precedent among the general populace before we start experimenting with more outlandish political theories.
 
A) Yes

We’re trying to build our own brand of democratic and prosperous governance here. Why not start now instead of later when things will have ossified/solidified? There is certainly no end of history, and no need to stay meshed to a particular form of governing; democratic or otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Should the new government coalition (whoever it is) pursue liquid democracy at local levels in Russia?
A) Yes
B) No


links:
A
 
Should the new government coalition (whoever it is) pursue liquid democracy at local levels in Russia?

B) No

I believe that Russia is to big for this, also this would impede policy decision making process as now we would basically need to have what are basically an elections for every single policy.

Not to vote fraud etc. which would theoretically need to be investigated couple of times. There's also a problem of expert versus majority, no matter how people look at it some economic, security and intelligence questions cannot be put to direct vote.

Honestly i see it as terrible experiment for a country in development to take. Our current form of democracy is well enough.
 
Last edited:
Yea Russia is among last places to test this theory. It already tested entire brand of revolutionary economics and everyone knows how that turned out. No need to throw away perfectly functional system of democracy in favor of theory that at the end of the day will result in more damage to nations development.

This system could have worked in Greek Polis because they were literal city states with a limitation on who gets to vote making voting base even smaller. Here we are speaking about over hundred milions people in the biggest country of the world trying to make a decision on basically everything.

This will basically result in every single political decision and regulation needing weeks to complete it while also make outreach of Central and regional governments far murkier as some population centers for example have completely different priorities than rest of the nation which could lead to the rise of national tensions.

This will also give rise to populist politics made not on the facts but on a popular theory without basis in practice just like this theory.
 
Last edited:
Should the new government coalition (whoever it is) pursue liquid democracy at local levels in Russia?
A) Yes
B) No


links:
B. Russia is not yet ready and prepared for this type of democracy, maybe in a decade or two?
 
B. Russia is not yet ready and prepared for this type of democracy, maybe in a decade or two?

Not even decade, or two. You would really need highly educated population with completely digitalized country to make this form of governance practical. Even with our digital technology we are far away from it.

100 years, or more.
 
I mean, it's not like WWIII is right around the corner, so a little delay isn't really that problematic. It's not as if for a fool's cause, such a deal with Libya would vastly improve our power projection into the Med, as well as our influence in the Middle East.
I agree, plus their money will help us fund more. We might also sell them some S-300s and various other bits like BR-T55, 9P148 Konkurs, 9K33M3 "Osa-AKM", Kub-M4 and others. That will give any opponents a nasty time. The AA and SPAAG will give any Western attackers a rough time, the tanks and the IFV will give any local rebels an issue.
 
Top