Tag Archives: politics

Olympics: Putin on the Propaganda

Ever since I first saw Anya and her pup Pooka twirling around the ballroom of the Winter Palace in the animated movie Anastasia, I’ve had a fascination with Mother Russia. The fairytale of a long-lost duchess captivated me, and I’ve since spent a lot of time reading about Russian history. (Yeah, I’m a pretty big nerd, but I’ve learned to be ok with that).

With all eyes now on Sochi (and @SochiProblems), the issues concerning these Olympic games themselves—corruption, animal cruelty, environmental damage, hacking, and bathroom misadventures—have all been well documented. While I’m all for some friendly international schadenfreude, the vast majority of the media coverage has been driving me a little bonkers. While it is easy to file reports and express outrage over the jailing of pretty protesters or the passage of anti-LGBT propaganda laws (though we shouldn’t be ones to talk—similar laws exist in Alabama, Arizona, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah), it is much harder to accurately depict the state of modern Russia—a basic overview of the abuses of power, human rights violations, and economic woes is sorely lacking.

From everything that I have read and studied, the simplest way I can think of to explain the Russia that grew from the fall of the Soviet Union is to call it a “bizzaro world”—a veiled, faux-democratic version of what the U.S. could have become had we lost the Cold War. While each controversy is worthy of its own Tolstoy-length novel, in order to truly understand modern Russia, I believe that it is first essential to understand how and why Vladimir Putin, the former KGB official (and Forbes’ reigning Most Powerful Person) has been in power for the past 14 years. This is what I have come to understand through the looking glass of social media and Lexis Nexis:

Following the resignation of then-president Boris Yeltsin, Putin was named acting president in 1999; he later went on to win an election in his own right in 2000. Since then, as the face and puppet master of modern Russia, Putin has consolidated his power by strong-arming the oligarchy (the roughly 110 Russian citizens who control over one-third of all wealth in Russia) into submission through an exchange of support for political appointments and financial favors, limiting—and eliminating—voices of dissent, and pandering to the leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church.

In 2007, Putin dissolved his own government in order to have a freer hand in controlling upcoming national elections; a year later, in 2008, he unofficially entered into a shared tandemocracy (that’s tandem+democracy) with current Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. This arrangement allows the pair to simply exchange titles when they have reached the end of their term limits (though, of course, they’ve also extended their own term limits from four to six years). Because of this, Putin has the distinction of being both the second and fourth president of what is officially called the Russian Federation.

As terminology goes, Putin’s approach to politics has been described as a sovereign democracy—that is, he insists on the unquestioned acceptance of his actions as reflective of the will of the Russian people. Of course, that’s not exactly the case; Putin basically does whatever he wants. This appearance-above-fact approach extends to every aspect of his persona and governance. To wit: though Putin’s notorious attempts to cultivate a “he-man” image may seem overtly oafish or appear to be vanity training for Festivus’ Feats of Strength, his tactics actually mirror old Soviet propaganda strategies. This thought mentality extends past Putin’s image into official policy and has clearly been on display at Sochi (the Opening Ceremony was curiously quiet on certain aspects of Russian history). It may seem like a joke, but it actually must have taken extraordinary restraint for this man to not ride horseback or fight a tiger during the Opening Ceremony.

Putin’s promotion of traditional, conservative Russian interests (namely, money and power) are best exemplified through his attempts to influence former Soviet satellite states and silence dissenters, both at home and abroad. In this way, he operates as though the might of the USSR is still the status quo and ferociously objects to what he views as Western influence in the region.

Internationally, his recent $15 billion attempt to bribe the Ukraine into rejecting a trade agreement with the European Union has, much to his dismay, only helped to escalate tensions in the reign. However, the attempt itself is not surprising. Much like the 2008 South Ossetia War against Georgia (a NATO nation), the situation in the Ukraine hinges on the potential democratization of what Putin views to be Russian property. These actions, along with his agitated support of fellow human rights violator Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, are a clear assertion of Putin’s vision of Russia as an equally viable alternative to Western European and American leadership, despite the fact that he cannot provide his citizens with clean drinking water.

Within Russia itself, critics of Putin and his regime are often silenced by way of exile to Siberia—literally. Pussy Riot is, perhaps, the most famous example of this methodology; an individual or group voices criticism, is convicted of trumped up charges (hooliganism, etc) during a show trial, and sent to suffer in one of the state’s prison colonies. Throughout and after this process, the target(s) will also be under constant scrutiny and even physical attack from Putin’s armed forces and the state-controlled media.

And speaking of the media: in late 2012, Putin announced the creation of a new news agency, Rossiya Segodnya, tasked with the sole responsibility of broadcasting coverage to promote the Russian image. This is reminiscent of Soviet-era broadcasting and comes on top of the fact that nearly all Russian media is already controlled by the state (the one independent network, TV Rain, has recently been dropped by most carriers following governmental pressure).

This systematic control system that Putin has established underscores not only the climate under which the Olympics are currently being held, but also the living situation of the more than 143 million Russian people. While it is easy to scoff and dismiss the quirks of Sochi, I believe that there is a very real danger in laughing and falling down that rabbit hole. To not acknowledge the inherent problems and continued rise of Putin’s Soviet-style governance is to ignore the denial of voices and basic human rights to an entire populace; to not acknowledge this, but to acknowledge the double toilets, is to fall into Putin’s propaganda. His values aren’t Olympic values and there is nothing sportsmanlike about his conduct.

Photo by Remi Coin

Photo by Remi Coin

Help Me Understand: The Government Shutdown

The government’s shut down (well, sort of). From politicians to pundits, everyone’s squawking, but no one is doing a particularly good job explaining what the heck actually happened. I hear “continuing resolution” and “debt ceiling” being thrown around, and apparently they’re not the same thing? I took American Gov and I paid attention, but this thing is just a mess.

Photo by Elise Walsh

Photo by Elise Walsh

In my attempt to be a decent citizen, I figured educating myself was the least I could do.

The Plan

GOP conservatives never liked Obamacare, so they held a meeting shortly after Obama was elected for a second term to see what they could do about it. Led by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III, he and other high-profile conservative leaders signed a coalition letter declaring their intent to defund Obamacare before it was “too late.”

This plan finally came into effect on Friday, September 20th, when the House, led by Speaker John Boehner, voted for a “continuing resolution” (more on this in a minute) that included a provision to eliminate all financing for the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare’s legal name). A couple days later while the bill moved through the Senate, we got to hear Republican Senator Ted Cruz talk for 21 hours and 19 minutes about how Obamacare “takes our freedom away,” with some side anecdotes about White Castle burgers and Dr. Seuss’ Green Eggs and Ham. Then, a week after the House vote, the Senate having “considered” the bill, threw it back to the House with the defunding provision removed.

They went back and forth a couple more times, the House tacking on a defunding measure, the Senate sending it back without the defunding measure, and then it was October 1st, and the government shut down.

So what’s a continuing resolution and why is it important?

A Continuing Resolution

While it’s the President’s job to submit a budget proposal by the first Monday in February, it’s up to Congress to actually agree upon said budget and then spend the money. Theoretically, each year both houses must pass a dozen appropriations bills by October 1st that the President agrees to sign.

But this is Congress we’re talking about and it’s hard to agree on things, so a continuing resolution basically allows the government to keep funding its departments, agencies, and programs for a limited time in the amount that was already agreed upon from the previous budget. This way, representatives can work out their differences and pass a “real” spending bill. It’s kind of like two-step verification: Congress has to vote on the budget and agree to spend $620 million dollars on the Department of Defense, but then in order for the DoD employee’s (AKA most of the military) to actually get paid, Congress needs to specifically “appropriate” the funds. And just to give you some perspective: Congress hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 2001. We’ve had almost 50 CRs since then.

There are those hoping that the House will pass a “clean” CR—which essentially means a continuing resolution without an added policy change (like the provision defunding Obamacare)—but I’m not gonna hold my breath.

So, then what the heck is the debt ceiling and why does it feel like the same thing? Well, it turns out that it’s just one big coincidence and some really bad luck that our current budget expires on October 1st and we will hit the debt ceiling on October 17th.

The Debt Ceiling

The debt ceiling (or the debt limit) is basically a cap on the amount of money issued by the Treasury. First used in 1917, the idea was that a limit would help keep the President accountable for the money he spent (which in practice may not be true.) Raising the debt ceiling simply allows the government to borrow money from itself to pay for the things it’s already bought.

The key thing to remember is that the government has already spent the money. It’s like having a $200 credit card bill and only $187 in your bank account. The government gets to borrow the extra $13 dollars from itself by “raising” the debt ceiling. If we default (AKA we don’t raise it), it means we’re not paying our bills.

But this should not be confused with the budget deficit: the budget deficit subtracts the cost of running a country from the revenues it brings in each year. In 2013, the government spent $3.803 trillion, but only made $2.902 trillion leaving us a deficit of $901 billion. Our nation’s debt takes into account the previous deficits, which currently amounts to about $16.7 trillion.

To Sum Up

The GOP wanted to take a stand against Obamacare and, according to New York Magazine, they were originally going to do this with the debt ceiling, but switched gears after Ted Cruz’s stunt and went from threatening a default to shutting down the government instead. The government is shut down (which costs money) because the House and the Senate could not pass a continuing resolution and this display of “non-bipartisanship” has, thanks to bad timing, put us on the precipice of defaulting as well.

And that, my friends, is politics.

Extra Credit: While January 1st used to be the beginning of each fiscal year, in 1842 for reasons unknown, they changed it to July 1st, a date that was again moved in 1974 to our current due date of October 1st.