[goatteatromiag]

eddhead, if you'd like to talk about this more, I have no problem with it. The topic happens to interest me, and I'd like to learn more about it if I have the chance.

Threads like this tend to get off topic fairly easily, and Ninja already pointed out we were veering off course. I only brought the issue up because Zippy mentioned it in his last post. But you started the thread, so I guess if you think a discussion of America's military expenditures is relevant to the topic, we can keep discussing it.

Article lobbing aside, I reject any notion that would rationalize the use of media censorship, dictatorial rule, and political intolerance as necessary means to achieve ends that include the establishment of the rule of law and with it the social stability needed to create an environment conducive to self-actualization and individual freedoms.

Like I said, I'm not defending it, nor am I in favor of it. From what I've read, however, there does seem to be justification for it in political development theory. I also think it's fair to say that many democratic societies today are more democratic than they were at the onset. For me, it's a question of balancing two conflicting perspectives: 1) How a country is developing in relation to its current time and global context; 2) How a country is developing in relation to its position on the development timeline.

There is less corruption for sure. But I go back to Ninja's point. People can't object to what they do not know about.

To what extent do you think this phenomenon is occurring? There's certainly a lot of activity in the government that Russians probably have no details about, but then again we face that problem too. What's to be said of the Russians who freely defend Putin's actions in forums such as the NYTimes? Even if they don't know exactly what's going on, they must know there are things about which they know nothing, and they don't seem to mind.