From a Western perspective, Russia has always been an extremely enigmatic figure. News outlets have made it their priority to show the tensions between Russia and western countries such as the United States ever since the Cold War, which was the event that enlightened the public to the great animosity between the opposing perspectives. What’s more, it is not only ideologies that clash, but culture and ways of life that are rooted in the country’s essence. On one hand, the last Romanov Tsar ruled over Russia with a strong hand, unknowingly losing his grip on power. On the other side, the United States was following the patterns of democracy as William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, and Woodrow Wilson all served as Commanders in Chief during Tsar Nicholas II’s reign. Although the history of the turmoil is complex and seemingly never-ending, it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that tensions continue to rise at the rhythm of the sea levels.
More recently, however, the discrepancies between the systems have become flies in milk, so to speak. Vladimir Putin has been the longest-serving leader in the Kremlin after Josef Stalin, and he doesn’t seem willing to step down from that position anytime soon. As of June 2020, Putin proposed a change in the constitution that would allow him to run twice more. Although he has not confirmed his plans for running, according to the official preliminary results, around 78% of the Russian population who voted (which culminated in around 65% of the population as a whole) approve this amendment, essentially creating a loophole in the ideals of democracy that Russia is built on. To the world and popular media, Russia is a democracy. However, small actions and legislations that have been put in place push the boundaries of democracy as Putin comes close to 20 years as the leader of Russia. Democracy is based upon the ideals that the power is in the people. It can be argued that the Russian people voted to extend Putin’s hypothetical rule, but this does not align with democratic values.
There are many countries around the world that have taken advantage of the ambiguity of certain guidelines and slyly control their government systems and policies in a matter that is not immediately apparent to the general public. This can sometimes be beneficial when the government is stable and free of corruption. Venezuela, however, categorizes itself as a democracy. It goes without saying that despite their government's labels, the results of egotistical authoritarian leaders have led the country to suffer one of the biggest humanitarian crises in Latin America. Nevertheless, Nicolas Maduro and the military have seized control and led the country into ruins. From food shortages to lack of basic necessities such as light and gasoline to violations of human rights in terms of political prosecution, it is hard to support their definition of the official governmental structure as a democracy. They have censored their opponents and oppressed people who have tried to make a change like Juan Guaidó who is recognized by the United States and an array of other countries as the official president of Venezuela.
On the other side of the balance, Singapore, a prosperous country which is the leader of innovation both in Asia and on the world stage is also outwardly a democracy-albeit a very stringent one. More specifically, aspects like freedom of speech are very controlled and protests against the government are once in a blue moon based on legislations such as the Public Entertainments Act and the Public Order Act. Furthermore, if citizens are unhappy, the only way they will be able to voice their complaints is to apply for a permit that may or may not allow the gathering to take place in the Speaker’s Corner (the designated area for said type of movements.) In addition, the same political party— the People’s Action Party— has been in power since Lee Kuan Yew founded Singapore in 1965, quite similar to the way Putin and Maduro have stayed in power for extended amounts of time with the difference being that it is a political party, not a person, who controls the country. Notwithstanding, Singapore’s exemplar education, healthcare, and public transportation systems have built the country’s solid foundation and helped it flourish into the successful nation it is today.
The different ways distinct countries have interpreted democracy have given rise to a variety of results depending on the strength of the economy, the levels of corruption, and the overall security of the region. In places like Venezuela where they are plagued by corruption from the people in power, their rendition of democracy has proven to be a fatal disaster. However, countries like Singapore who despite their strong, consistent rule and open-ended execution of said governmental form, have flourished and opened doors of opportunity for millions of people. In the short term, it is important to be aware of these discrepancies and slight shifts in the politics of countries like Russia who play pivotal roles in geopolitical situations that can end up having very personal repercussions. By knowing and understanding this, the public can vote and advocate so similar patterns are not repeated in one’s own government given that success using these methods is quite rare. Education, in the end, is the key to worldliness and open-mindedness which give way to actions that will lead to the greater good.
Written By: Carolina Mejia Rodriguez
Comments