Probably some ISIS or Taliban character. If you sin with these guys, off goes your head.
The whole anti-gay thing in Russia is probably a crock. With a winked-at underworld like Russia has, can anyone truly believe there aren’t homosexual bathhouses and child exploitation going on there?
Autocrats aren’t. There is no such thing as a true Autocracy or Monarchy. Nominally, potentially. But reality, impossible.The Socialist governments, even under the likes of Stalin and Mao were not autocracies, but rather absolute oligarchies (Politburo, Central Committee, etc.).
The closest historical autocrats were absolute monarchs before the end of XVIII century/Revolutions of 1789-1848. It would be a great historical injustice to judge these rulers in the same manner as the totalitarians of the XX century.
As for installation of any autocrat, I cannot answer correctly, since I am but a mere student of history. I specialise in the past, not the future.
as opposed to the violent transitions of Oligarchies, Democracies, and Anarchies 
Well said. A Republican form of Democracy that protects the rights of the minority is the way to go. Its something that has to be jealuosly guarded and works best with an educated electorate. Its hard to create, easy to lose and dissolve into a lower form of governance such as autocracy. Germany w/ Hitler is a good example. Russia had its chance after the collapse of the USSR and blew it. Iraq as well.Autocrats aren’t. There is no such thing as a true Autocracy or Monarchy. Nominally, potentially. But reality, impossible.
A King/Queen has the appearance of being at the top, but how many Monarchs were overthrown or fought against by their own country? Who could forget the Magna Carta> The French Revolution? Or farther back, all the Roman Emporers who were overthrown?
A king must have support of his Vassals. And his vassals must have support of their vassals - until you reached the basic serf/peasant/citizen/etc.
Therefore, there is only Oligarchy. On the other side, Democracy isn’t stable, and the will of the people quickly bends to attacking vulnerable minorities. Eventually, Democracy leads themselves into the ground, leading to voting in an absolute ruler (anyone remember Caesar, Hitler, etc?). Therefore, Democracy just leads to Oligarchy.
Furthermore, Anarchy also isn’t. Anarchy lasts long enough for people to rally behind an absolute ruler, who will then control an Oligarchy. Therefore, almost every type of government transitions to Oligarchy, which periodically dissolves into Anarchy.
And the one thing they all have in common: Violence. They are all very violent in nature. Look at any of the past Autocrats/Monarchs/Totalitarian/Transition Governments of the past century, or even the present.
The only government to appear to be above this violence, when closely guarded, is a Republic form of government. But that isn’t without it’s failures. But the election of Thomas Jefferson marks the first involuntary change of power - of an entire country - without violence. Yet, for someone reason, what that represents is evil
Russia and Europe still doesn’t understand peaceful transitions of power. It’s a very American thing - and it’s starting to disappear if you look at many reactions of the American Left. Perhaps if the Russians could understand peace, then there wouldn’t need to be a missile shield? Or a NATO? Maybe Russia could even join NATO - instead of trying to attack and threaten countries thinking about joining NATO?
Actually, I heard this statement for the first time from a Catholic priest. All it means is that we have no right to sin in the eyes of God. We do sin, but in doing so violate our Lord’s established order.
I would not trust dissident sources, or most dissidents for that matter. Generally, dissidents stir unrest simply to gain power for themselves.
Mothers of dead soldiers are out to gain power for themselves, what the . . . . . . . .?
I was referring to dissidents in general. The principle still works even if I limit my assessment to the aforementioned organisation. Of course the mothers have no ambitions. You have to look beyond the details and particulars.Mothers of dead soldiers are out to gain power for themselves, what the . . . . . . . .?
p.s. Putin obviously is not out to get power or rather retain his stranglehold on Russia.
I don’t think so. Even Adam and Eve had free will. I don’t think that God was wrong in His Divine Creation Plan.
Unfortunately, it looks like Americans such as Victoria Nuland do not agree with this.
Jefferson Davis hated it too - cramped his style.
I don’t think you understand sarcasm very well, i.e., I was being sarcastic when I said that.
In other words, you’ve completely ignored the point of my article, i.e., there are Russian troops in the Eastern Ukraine.
Yes damn those dissidents who were against Mao, STalin, Hitler, Mussolini, The GALL of them to try to take away the power of these fine upstanding autocrats.
I don’t believe that one should use the Holy Divine Name in sarcasm. It is contrary to the first Commandment.
Gays in Russia are what was the “Jews” in Germany for a time.
I wasn’t trying to use his name in sarcasm, i.e., I respect the free will He has given me, and was trying to relay that in my statement.