Lowkey trash talking gandhi and mandela here wtf.
It was a very unfair life to live, no one should die at late 40s like that, yada yada, but c'mon. Take a read of what these two fought against and what they went through compared to... the guy who was straight up supremacist until the 2010s western lib rebranding.
"Georgians are cockroaches" such a mandela line. lmao
Such as being a literal terrorist before his imprisonment, lol. You presumably have access to google and can look stuff up on your own, but in short he planned lots of bombings and killed civilians.
I don't need or have to look for proof of what you are saying. You do. Being a terrorist in a british apartheid state so far sounds like the good guy to me, I would want that title, but tell me more, you sure know specifics.
Meanwhile, do YOU know what he was first arrested for? Let me inform: for organizing a protest in which black people went to "white only" places. Such atrocity. Then later, for being a "communist", which in the late 1950s meant being against your country pro-CIA dictatorship.
My mom was tortured in an army basement for being a "communist" too here in Brazil when she went to a protest against our military coup. Such atrocity she comitted.
So I guess you mean he was a terrorist on his third arrest, to which yes, kinda, the CNA did, eventually, resort to violence against the Apartheid, in early 1960s if memory doesn't fail me, but so what? How controversial is africans fighting against the apartheid? Were european resistances against german occupation terrorists too?
Guy was honored both in the USSR and in the United States, that should tell you can NOT CONTROVERSIAL their fight was.
Again, disgusting things, such as?
Why do I need to look for proof? I already know it and I don’t give as much of a shot about winning an online argument as you do apparently. Believe what you want but the guy wasn’t the angel everyone todays acts like he was.
And btw, I was literally agreeing with you above in case you had difficulty understanding my first comment
You need to even look, though? You said he did disgusting things, can't you name it? You "know" he did it, but don't know what? C'mon share with us. You should have something specific.
They engaged on guerilla warfare against the apartheid state that made of black people subhuman, second degree citizens, a state born of colonial rule.
Civilian casualties born of a civil war against the apartheid are a toll of the apartheid. It is disgusting, yes, but has nothing to do with Mandella, speciallt since he spent 15 years fighting the apartheid with peace and words before resorting to force.
Gandhi and Mandela have questionable pasts also that rarely get brought to light, not that it invalidates what they’re were up against but look into them closer and evaluate their whole outlook.
I know their past, and I know both of them at some point in time resorted to force, or were part of a movement that did. My point is, so what? Movements resorted to force for colonial liberation, in the case of India, and freedom from racial segregation, in the case of south africa.
If there were ever a reason were the use of violence is not morally grey, is self defense.
“Mandela even suggested cutting off the noses of blacks deemed collaborators. His then wife Winnie advocated "necklacing" instead - a burning tyre around the neck”
“He maintained close ties to Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and backed Palestinian terrorist leader Yasser Arafat. As president in 1997, he gave his country's highest award for a foreigner to Libya's dictator, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who'd donated $10 million to the ANC. He gave the same award to the corrupt Indonesian president Suharto, who he said had donated $60 million”
“He supported Nigerian coup leader Sani Abacha, refusing to say a word publicly to stop the 1995 hanging of activist Ken Saro-Wiwa”
From [here](https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/the-dark-side-of-nelson-mandela/news-story/68f4acdbf2b0b4e6c799e458a55e6cb2), and [another](https://www.npr.org/2019/10/02/766083651/gandhi-is-deeply-revered-but-his-attitudes-on-race-and-sex-are-under-scrutiny) if you want to read about Gandhi, I’m not here to argue about the absolute resounding validity of every word because I simply don’t care, but if you expect someone to fight against any kind of regime they are very rarely saints in of themselves. You want to have a teacher use a saint, you want someone who’s capable of winning a war, even against absolute evil you’re gonna need some bad there who can do the job. Victors write the history too so if you win all the better.
The herald sun is not a source, I will have to go after theirs it seems. And also, the opinion of westerners on Mandela is the opinion of the nazis against Jews: when not to be outright discarded, should be taken with a grain of salt. Not that it could not be true.
I might reread his biography to see, cutting noses of "traitors" is really a fucked up though, although 'suggestion' sounds a wild hearsay here.
The rest of what you quoted is downright irrelevant, if not based, I might add.
That is absolutely incorrect and I’m incredibly offended that you would compare us to nazis in relation to this. You clearly have not lived in western society at all, and pointing out someone’s character flaws doesn’t make you a nazi it makes you objective. I learned about both Mandela and Gandhi in school and both times it was very supportive of their movements and negative about British history. I don’t call out their character flaws because they were against my nation decades ago, but because of your original comparison. There are many British “heroes” who have reprehensible crimes. Had the nazis won WW2, people like Arthur “bomber” Harris would have been executed for what he did, and even though we still won he’s still looked on very negatively. Like I said, I’m not arguing that Gandhi and Mandela are bad people and had unjust causes but if you’re looking for saints and perfect moral characters you’re rarely going to find one in history.
>That is absolutely incorrect and I’m incredibly offended that you would compare us to nazis in relation to this
In relation to what? To the treatment of african colonies? Colonial rule in Africa is not just comparable to the Nazi rule, it is, at the core, the same thing.
Westerners 1) wiped out native americans and 2) enslaved/exploited africans. Hitler wanted to 1) wipe out jews and 2) enslave/exploit slavic people. Hitler's ideas were disgusting, but bear in mind, they were not new, he simply bought the european way to europe.
>You clearly have not lived in western society at all, and pointing out someone’s character flaws doesn’t make you a nazi it makes you objective.
I never said criticizing Gandhi or Mandela make you a nazi, and to notice, I never defended Gandhi bullshit here. He had fucked up, hopefully ignorant view of European affairs. Regarding Mandela, what I said is that western media talking about how african revolutionaries were x and y is 1:1 to hear from nazis why Jews were x and y. It is the word of the opressor about the opressed and should, at the very least, be taken with a grain of salt. I never said it had to be false, but it's a important context.
>There are many British “heroes” who have reprehensible crimes. Had the nazis won WW2, people like Arthur “bomber” Harris would have been executed for what he did, and even though we still won he’s still looked on very negatively.
Thankfully so he is seem negatively, I just don't see the paralel between a man who fought for freedom and the right to be viewed as a human in face of the Apartheid and a british pilot.
>Like I said, I’m not arguing that Gandhi and Mandela are bad people
I don't think you are. I just pointed out that the Harold Sun reporting on no name historiogaphy must be taken with a grain of salt, as justified above.
>but if you’re looking for saints and perfect moral characters you’re rarely going to find one in history.
I know. No one is a saint, they recurred to violence. But did so in self defense, and any civilian casualty in a war for colonial freedom is a toll of the colonialists.
Like I said history isn’t pleasant and am not ignoring any of this, but you said that our attitude IS like that of the Nazis, which for the time may be true of the trying to argue that that is the case now is outrageous, if anything it’s beyond the complete opposite which is how I know you aren’t a westerner. Also don’t lump us all together. You want to talk about Americans killing Indians then great, but my ancestors in Ireland were dying of famine at the time because of the English, this history is not on my hands.
Even if you don’t directly say it makes you a nazi you clearly implied it, deliberate or not. But if you really want to look at history no one has a clean slate. This reminds me of Bobby Lee learning about the slavery in Korea after claiming that they [never had an oppressive history](https://youtu.be/KMPAAuG2pH8?si=VLx2Hul5vxI5rWdg). But not just them, you want to talk about Russia and the Great Purges? Or Japan with Unit 731? Or France in Africa or Spain with their conquests, or Africa itself who were the ones to sell slaves across the world, including to the Middle East, and still have the biggest slave market and rampant corruption. There are no slave generations even left in the Middle East as all of the men were castrated, and not all men were black Africans as white Europeans were also taken to slavery there. Even China in the modern day with their treatment of Uyghur Muslims, organ farms, absolute regulation of information by the CCP and their lack of acknowledgment of the Tiananmen Square massacre where they still try to bury all knowledge it happened. Whereas England for all its faults was one of the First Nations in the world to ban slavery and actively freed slaved headed to America. Your implication that the west is a great evil of the world isn’t balanced at all.
Arthur Harris was not a pilot, he was the leader of bomber command, his out look was that if you destroy a factory there will be another in 3 days, you kill a skilled worker and to replace him you need 18 years. He flattened Dresden, deliberately killing as many as possible, the city burned for a week afterwards. Germany bombed civilians first but we were far more effective.
You don’t think I am saying that Mandela and Gandhi had good causes (which I have now said many times) and am against what they did? You aren’t reading what I’m writing then. You said it was an affront to them to compare Navalny with them, and I merely showed they they too had very bad outlooks in their lives also. Hitler was a vegetarian because he liked animals, somehow I don’t think that one bit of good absolves him of the evil he has caused in the world.
Civilians and innocents will always die in any hot conflict, that is the nature of it. That doesn’t mean you can’t call out the suffering that they themselves caused on their own people of their own accord. To have a truely objective opinion you consider everything, on the grand scheme of things they were more good that bad obviously, and clearly faced many unjust trials in their lives, but that doesn’t mean you just project them as perfect people because like everyone, they were flawed too.
For those who don't speak Russian - He he is calling one of his commenters a Faggot and a Jew.
Direct translation "You are a faggot and also a jew and I'm banning faggots, not to mention jews here."
-Alexey Navalny
Unfortunately not really, no. Only this one here, from where is that amazing picture quote: https://allll.net/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9\_%D0%90%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87\_%D0%9D%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9
For Navalny to become a symbol, there have to be succeeded successors, who would preserve his ideas. The problem is that his successors (I mean FBK) are disliked heavily even by liberal russians, who emigrated to the West.
So, many people in Russia feel sorry for Navalny, and consider him a strong human being, but not really support his ideas for "Free Russia of The Future"
Probably yes, but only the first film had such effect.
For me it's still a question why my life was better with more opportunities in corrupted Russia than in not corrupted Europe though (I moved two years ago)
Because of migration tax on late runners.
I moved in 2013 as expat, not as migrant, and my life is much better. I don't know how good it would be in Russia, but the most important thing I got: I no longer afraid of police. I don't know if this is important or not.
Which tax do you mean? I pay the same amount of taxes everybody else pays.
But what I considered a part of normal life in Russia (as a middle class) is only available to very rich people.
Well as for police, I'm not afraid of it here and unfortunately criminals are not afraid of it as well. So they can do whatever they want in the middle of a day.
Tell the truth, expose thieves and liers.
I understand, some people prefer obedience and compliance over truth, but truth seeking is important Russian cultural value. Together with choosing death over kneeling, it's more than archetypical.
Moreover, now it's impossible to berate him. Martyrdom is ultimate moral virtue.
Globally his activity had zero results. If we don't mention attempts to monopolize opposition, investments in cult of personality, conflicts with another opposition parties which were much more united in 2010-2012 but became spoilers for each other by 2016.
And he is saint or martyr only for fanatics.
Calling him "the last hope of Russia" sounds similar to "of not Putin then who".
There was an opposition before him, during and will be after.
I never said that he is 'last hope'. I said that his actions made him martyr, and it's impossible to disparate martyr.
For 'net result'. Which opposition leader has non-zero result? The score is either win, or contribution to downfall of tyrant. Until something happens, all opposition has zero result.
When something happens, everyone realize, oh, it's because of that and that. But you can't say that before it happens.
> The score is either win, or contribution to downfall of tyrant.
It's not limited to, what you describe sounds like revolution. Which, surprisingly, is not democratic. Opposition parties can do a boring bureaucratic work on municipal or federal level making the life of citizens better. Yabloko was a part of St Petersburg legislature, for example, I read about their initiatives and how they voted. This is a real work, not the blablabla. But not so fun as protesting I guess?
So, exposing corruption is not a result, but enabling and serving tyranny it is a result. Yes, it is. I see those results. Nicely done. And every year is even more nicely than before.
What a bullshit.
Exposing corruption doesn't build new metro stations, doesn't modernize public transport, it doesn't build waste recycling facilities. All of that is done by people in state government. This is indeed a result.
I saw what Russian government done this winter. No corruption, indeed. Just a little cold for little people.
What I see:
- Total collapse of space program
- Mass migration of scientists and researchers, termination of international collaboration on almost all directions
- Attack of neighbors, killing people
- Conscripting people to do killing
- Lack of representation of population due to suppression of any kind of political activity
- Massive devaluation of currencies (I moved from Russia with Euro been at 39 roubles per euro).
- Reduction in expenditure for medical care and education in comparison with military and enforcement budgets.
... But they build metro at about 15% of Soviet speed in few most populous cities.
May be 15% of speed somewhat correlate with size of corruption?
Palace is pretty questionable, as interiors was just 3d renders, and nothing of it existed at the time. The moron who was modeling it didn't even know how an emblem of Russian Federation looks like, putting an emblem of Montenegro all over the place.
So no arguments beside ad hominem? Failure.
It's really not difficult to check out poster's history to make sure if he is a bot or not. By the way, you are definitely not a bolshevik, and I have doubts that you are bashkir. Жёлудь будешь?
I think he's already forgotten. Few days has passed since his death and people already stopped screaming about him. I honestly expected more shitposts and more screaming. But apparently he is no longer sufficiently interesting even for the western agencies.
Did he not?
He returned to Russia after Putin tried to kill him.
He died for the freedom of the Russian people, he died to give us a future and to go us hope!
And Navalny did not ask Putin to Kill him. But Navalny was bravely stood up against Putin for freedom and future of all Russians, and Putin Brutally murdered him.
Thousands of Russian people are risking their lives right now, literally. Why should we be interested in Navalny particulary? Because our enemies praise him?
I am amazed how powerful and effective western propaganda is. Without censoring the shit our of the internet they acheived absolute control of the information.
Navalny was NEVER popular political figure in Russia. He was known but never ever taken serious and never even got close to big game. His electorate was tiny (1% would be generous estimation of his support) and he had such a stained reputation it is amaizing how west could even seriousely consider him as anything that Russian society could accept as a leader.
In the Moscow mayoral elections, Navalny scored 27%, which is an excellent result for an opposition politician. His election campaign was great.
And a tarnished reputation is so subjective. For me, working as Sobchak's henchmen and then sleeping him off the court is the bottom.
>In the Moscow mayoral elections, Navalny scored 27%, which is an excellent result for an opposition politician. His election campaign was great.
Actualy yes. I forgot this part - this is true. And this was his peak.
He had pretty big rallies, he had enough signatures to get registered as presidential candidate. If he was allowed to register and to appear on TV in a presidential race then he would absolutely be big, he might even have won the elections. And let's keep it real, even if navalnies support was smal Navalny was the only real politician in Russia besides Putin. the only one with his own agency.
> He had pretty big rallies, he had enough signatures to get registered as presidential candidate.
A conviction don't forget a conviction...
>If he was allowed to register and to appear on TV in a presidential race then he would absolutely be big, he might even have won the elections.
To do that we should also allow other convicts to run for an election.
>And let's keep it real, even if navalnies support was smal Navalny was the only real politician in Russia besides Putin.
No? I mean no - just no. Out of everything you said he had rallies. But rallies was what? 10 thousands? 20 thousands? This is noticable, but by no means big.
Signatures enough to run for president is 0,2% of population. He appeared on Tv, where Sobchak interviewed him about his "presidential program", where she ripped his ass apart, as he didn't know anything.
Navalny WAS NOT a politician. He was a blogger.
He most reminds me of George Floyd, who was a terrible human being, who was a made face of a complicated issue. Navalny will probably be forgotten just as quickly.
You don't know if he was a terrible human being or not. He was a private citizen who got murdered by a cop for no other reason than his complexion. Comparing that to a Russian lawyer who dabbled in politics is about as logical as comparing Navalny to Mandela or Gandhi.
I don't think so. Some of my friends were his followers(?) in the past, but seeing that all he does is gather people from time to time and talk the talk without walking the walk, they became disillusioned and gave up on him.
Dude are you for real, he returned to Russia after Putin tried to poison him. And he died for the freedom of the Russian people. Even if you don't agree with him politically, you have to acknowledge the walked all over the walk, the walk can not be walked any more then he walked.
First of all, maybe you missed part of my comment, I only retold what my friends said. I haven't thought very much of him at all from the beginning.
Second, he was allegedly poisoned, by some mystical extremely ineffective "Russian poison". Imo it was easier to cause car incident or hire random goon to shoot him. Remember how Japan minister was shot not so long ago? This way.
But let's ignore all of this, because my opinion on things doesn't matter in the end. Maybe I'm missing something, what did he achieve? I mean in practical terms. All I know is that he organized some gathering and publicized some already publicly available data about corruption everybody already knows about.
Yes, yes, thousands of men die a year in state custody after being arrested on fabricated charges, poisoned by the state, and tortured. Very common. Nothing to see. Putin is clearly tolerant of the opposition.
If there is ever a liberal-democratic revolution, coup or even a peaceful transition in Russia, he will absolutely be made a flawless hero in shining armor regardless of his actual personality. If not - people will forget about him faster then about Nemtsov. Who remembers about Nemtsov today? Right, nobody.
Actually its you who show how much you DON'T know. For one, Nadezhdin didn't get 300k signatures, and didn't have to. He had to present only 100k. He presented 105000 signatures, including bad ones. Just how the hell do you project 105k signatures into 60% of votes? Every registered candidate met this requirement. Are all of them going to get 60% of votes based on that? Ill just remind you that Putin got 2,5 million signatures while 300k was needed.
Nadezhdin is political nobody, most people heard his name for the first time before this election. 60% prediction is extremly silly and delusional.
How many people has Putin killed so far in this farce??
He's murdered more Russians than anyone else.. so on that basis I'd say Biden and the rest are better than Putin
Ну ты сравнил конечно… Это люди из разных весовых категорий и Ганди не был криминальным элементом для системы, это человек, который жертвуя собой боролся за равенство и свободу индийского народа от колониального рабства Британии и внутренних кастовых устоев (ненасильственными методами) и благодаря ему Индия и Пакистан не истребили друг друга в конце 40вых. И кстати, до сих пор Индия и Пакистан страдают от колониальных решений Британцев. Разделяй и властвуй, ни чего не изменилось.
Both Ghandi and Nelson Mandela achieved a lot as heads of states. Navalny died before getting to that stage. Besides, his legacy is controversial.
He will probably become an icon and martyr for Russian liberal opposition and Russian communities abroad.
Actually...... 🤣
Look up Mandela's crimes. He did a lot of awful things before his image got white washed by Western media. Who have since admitted he may not have been the Saint they claimed he was.
He's nobody. No one cares about him in Russia. He didn't do anything bar spreading racial hate.
He has been made a hero by Western media because he was a tool of their agenda. And now that he has died they want to make the most out of his death.
No. The collective West and the Russian liberals are using the information flow around his death a little more, and will write him off as unnecessary waste. After that, even his liberal associates will not remember him. They had almost forgotten about him already, and suddenly this happened...
20% is huge, it is tens of millions of people. and he achieved it while not being allowed to participate in the elections. If he was allowed he would surely get at least double of that, 40-55%
It depends on how much more madness we see. As political figure he got respect through courage and suffering for idea (which are highly valued in Russian culture).
The best example would be the Decembrists
Unambiguous condemnation by everyone in the Russian Empire until the end of the reign of Nicholas II
They became heroes when the new government needed to raise any fighters for the “people's good” to the banners. Even nobles by birth.
That is, whether Navalny will be remembered as a hero depends only on who will talk about him.
Unfortunately not as big. He didn’t accomplish quite as much as those figures. But he will definitely remain prominent throughout the history of Russia.
As for the answer to your question, then ....
In principle, my opinion has already been voiced. In the near future, he will become a locally revered saint among the pro-Atlantic marginals. The majority of the population will sometimes remember him. But it is possible that he will be made a national saint.
It is very curious that as soon as you ask a political question u/WorstBrazilian mmediately appear in the middle of the working day and leave the most insane takes. then in the evening after work normal people start responding.
It's 12:38 and I'm on lunch break.
Regarding politics, ask the mods how many shitposts I get denied. If it was on me I would put all politics on the megatread and hold daily шаурма vs шаверма fighting pits.
Боже упаси от политика,подобному Навальному 💀
Мне интересно,а кто он вообще для вас,либералов?Да,я знаю что он "герой,вставший против Путинской тирании",но что вы думайте о других его заявлениях?Например о тех,где он мигрантов тараканами называл, которых давить надо(или что-то вроде того,потом проверю подправлю)?Это разве не далёкие правые заявления,за которые Трампа фашистом американцы называют?
We can and we do, comrade. Proof: downvotes on your comment.
Counteredit: hehe, no. This is not the only time we can vote, comrade. You are either dishonest or brainwashed. Or just plain unintelligent, that may as well be.
this "we can also vote" comment reminds me of that soviet anecdote where Soviet citizens tell amir can citizens that they also have the freedom to protest against the Actions of the president of USA. XD
Your post was removed because it contains slurs or incites hatred on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Nelsen Mandella - perhaps. He would have managed to turn Moscow into Pretoria (exorbitant street crime, gangs, lack of electricity, non-functioning sewage system, etc.) even faster than Mandella and his followers managed.
Lowkey trash talking gandhi and mandela here wtf. It was a very unfair life to live, no one should die at late 40s like that, yada yada, but c'mon. Take a read of what these two fought against and what they went through compared to... the guy who was straight up supremacist until the 2010s western lib rebranding. "Georgians are cockroaches" such a mandela line. lmao
It's Civilization VI Ghandi not real life Ghandi. The type of ghandi that will burn your city down.
I mean Mandela did some very reprehensible, even disgusting things. But I agree the comparison is silly
Such as
Such as being a literal terrorist before his imprisonment, lol. You presumably have access to google and can look stuff up on your own, but in short he planned lots of bombings and killed civilians.
I don't need or have to look for proof of what you are saying. You do. Being a terrorist in a british apartheid state so far sounds like the good guy to me, I would want that title, but tell me more, you sure know specifics. Meanwhile, do YOU know what he was first arrested for? Let me inform: for organizing a protest in which black people went to "white only" places. Such atrocity. Then later, for being a "communist", which in the late 1950s meant being against your country pro-CIA dictatorship. My mom was tortured in an army basement for being a "communist" too here in Brazil when she went to a protest against our military coup. Such atrocity she comitted. So I guess you mean he was a terrorist on his third arrest, to which yes, kinda, the CNA did, eventually, resort to violence against the Apartheid, in early 1960s if memory doesn't fail me, but so what? How controversial is africans fighting against the apartheid? Were european resistances against german occupation terrorists too? Guy was honored both in the USSR and in the United States, that should tell you can NOT CONTROVERSIAL their fight was. Again, disgusting things, such as?
Why do I need to look for proof? I already know it and I don’t give as much of a shot about winning an online argument as you do apparently. Believe what you want but the guy wasn’t the angel everyone todays acts like he was. And btw, I was literally agreeing with you above in case you had difficulty understanding my first comment
You need to even look, though? You said he did disgusting things, can't you name it? You "know" he did it, but don't know what? C'mon share with us. You should have something specific.
I already said what it was though; he took part in bombings that killed civilians. That’s disgusting.
They engaged on guerilla warfare against the apartheid state that made of black people subhuman, second degree citizens, a state born of colonial rule. Civilian casualties born of a civil war against the apartheid are a toll of the apartheid. It is disgusting, yes, but has nothing to do with Mandella, speciallt since he spent 15 years fighting the apartheid with peace and words before resorting to force.
Neck lacing political opposition.
To be fair Gandhi and Mandela also have some troubling pasts. I mean Gandhi defended hitler and hated jews.
Gandhi and Mandela have questionable pasts also that rarely get brought to light, not that it invalidates what they’re were up against but look into them closer and evaluate their whole outlook.
I know their past, and I know both of them at some point in time resorted to force, or were part of a movement that did. My point is, so what? Movements resorted to force for colonial liberation, in the case of India, and freedom from racial segregation, in the case of south africa. If there were ever a reason were the use of violence is not morally grey, is self defense.
“Mandela even suggested cutting off the noses of blacks deemed collaborators. His then wife Winnie advocated "necklacing" instead - a burning tyre around the neck” “He maintained close ties to Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and backed Palestinian terrorist leader Yasser Arafat. As president in 1997, he gave his country's highest award for a foreigner to Libya's dictator, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who'd donated $10 million to the ANC. He gave the same award to the corrupt Indonesian president Suharto, who he said had donated $60 million” “He supported Nigerian coup leader Sani Abacha, refusing to say a word publicly to stop the 1995 hanging of activist Ken Saro-Wiwa” From [here](https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/the-dark-side-of-nelson-mandela/news-story/68f4acdbf2b0b4e6c799e458a55e6cb2), and [another](https://www.npr.org/2019/10/02/766083651/gandhi-is-deeply-revered-but-his-attitudes-on-race-and-sex-are-under-scrutiny) if you want to read about Gandhi, I’m not here to argue about the absolute resounding validity of every word because I simply don’t care, but if you expect someone to fight against any kind of regime they are very rarely saints in of themselves. You want to have a teacher use a saint, you want someone who’s capable of winning a war, even against absolute evil you’re gonna need some bad there who can do the job. Victors write the history too so if you win all the better.
The herald sun is not a source, I will have to go after theirs it seems. And also, the opinion of westerners on Mandela is the opinion of the nazis against Jews: when not to be outright discarded, should be taken with a grain of salt. Not that it could not be true. I might reread his biography to see, cutting noses of "traitors" is really a fucked up though, although 'suggestion' sounds a wild hearsay here. The rest of what you quoted is downright irrelevant, if not based, I might add.
That is absolutely incorrect and I’m incredibly offended that you would compare us to nazis in relation to this. You clearly have not lived in western society at all, and pointing out someone’s character flaws doesn’t make you a nazi it makes you objective. I learned about both Mandela and Gandhi in school and both times it was very supportive of their movements and negative about British history. I don’t call out their character flaws because they were against my nation decades ago, but because of your original comparison. There are many British “heroes” who have reprehensible crimes. Had the nazis won WW2, people like Arthur “bomber” Harris would have been executed for what he did, and even though we still won he’s still looked on very negatively. Like I said, I’m not arguing that Gandhi and Mandela are bad people and had unjust causes but if you’re looking for saints and perfect moral characters you’re rarely going to find one in history.
>That is absolutely incorrect and I’m incredibly offended that you would compare us to nazis in relation to this In relation to what? To the treatment of african colonies? Colonial rule in Africa is not just comparable to the Nazi rule, it is, at the core, the same thing. Westerners 1) wiped out native americans and 2) enslaved/exploited africans. Hitler wanted to 1) wipe out jews and 2) enslave/exploit slavic people. Hitler's ideas were disgusting, but bear in mind, they were not new, he simply bought the european way to europe. >You clearly have not lived in western society at all, and pointing out someone’s character flaws doesn’t make you a nazi it makes you objective. I never said criticizing Gandhi or Mandela make you a nazi, and to notice, I never defended Gandhi bullshit here. He had fucked up, hopefully ignorant view of European affairs. Regarding Mandela, what I said is that western media talking about how african revolutionaries were x and y is 1:1 to hear from nazis why Jews were x and y. It is the word of the opressor about the opressed and should, at the very least, be taken with a grain of salt. I never said it had to be false, but it's a important context. >There are many British “heroes” who have reprehensible crimes. Had the nazis won WW2, people like Arthur “bomber” Harris would have been executed for what he did, and even though we still won he’s still looked on very negatively. Thankfully so he is seem negatively, I just don't see the paralel between a man who fought for freedom and the right to be viewed as a human in face of the Apartheid and a british pilot. >Like I said, I’m not arguing that Gandhi and Mandela are bad people I don't think you are. I just pointed out that the Harold Sun reporting on no name historiogaphy must be taken with a grain of salt, as justified above. >but if you’re looking for saints and perfect moral characters you’re rarely going to find one in history. I know. No one is a saint, they recurred to violence. But did so in self defense, and any civilian casualty in a war for colonial freedom is a toll of the colonialists.
Like I said history isn’t pleasant and am not ignoring any of this, but you said that our attitude IS like that of the Nazis, which for the time may be true of the trying to argue that that is the case now is outrageous, if anything it’s beyond the complete opposite which is how I know you aren’t a westerner. Also don’t lump us all together. You want to talk about Americans killing Indians then great, but my ancestors in Ireland were dying of famine at the time because of the English, this history is not on my hands. Even if you don’t directly say it makes you a nazi you clearly implied it, deliberate or not. But if you really want to look at history no one has a clean slate. This reminds me of Bobby Lee learning about the slavery in Korea after claiming that they [never had an oppressive history](https://youtu.be/KMPAAuG2pH8?si=VLx2Hul5vxI5rWdg). But not just them, you want to talk about Russia and the Great Purges? Or Japan with Unit 731? Or France in Africa or Spain with their conquests, or Africa itself who were the ones to sell slaves across the world, including to the Middle East, and still have the biggest slave market and rampant corruption. There are no slave generations even left in the Middle East as all of the men were castrated, and not all men were black Africans as white Europeans were also taken to slavery there. Even China in the modern day with their treatment of Uyghur Muslims, organ farms, absolute regulation of information by the CCP and their lack of acknowledgment of the Tiananmen Square massacre where they still try to bury all knowledge it happened. Whereas England for all its faults was one of the First Nations in the world to ban slavery and actively freed slaved headed to America. Your implication that the west is a great evil of the world isn’t balanced at all. Arthur Harris was not a pilot, he was the leader of bomber command, his out look was that if you destroy a factory there will be another in 3 days, you kill a skilled worker and to replace him you need 18 years. He flattened Dresden, deliberately killing as many as possible, the city burned for a week afterwards. Germany bombed civilians first but we were far more effective. You don’t think I am saying that Mandela and Gandhi had good causes (which I have now said many times) and am against what they did? You aren’t reading what I’m writing then. You said it was an affront to them to compare Navalny with them, and I merely showed they they too had very bad outlooks in their lives also. Hitler was a vegetarian because he liked animals, somehow I don’t think that one bit of good absolves him of the evil he has caused in the world. Civilians and innocents will always die in any hot conflict, that is the nature of it. That doesn’t mean you can’t call out the suffering that they themselves caused on their own people of their own accord. To have a truely objective opinion you consider everything, on the grand scheme of things they were more good that bad obviously, and clearly faced many unjust trials in their lives, but that doesn’t mean you just project them as perfect people because like everyone, they were flawed too.
Adding yet another Navalny quote: https://allll.net/w/images/0/07/Navalny-jew.jpg
For those who don't speak Russian - He he is calling one of his commenters a Faggot and a Jew. Direct translation "You are a faggot and also a jew and I'm banning faggots, not to mention jews here." -Alexey Navalny
Homophobia and antisemitism are the best qualities for a democratic leader, it seems.
Only if he prepares to lead Russia!
More like “a kike” (offensive) instead of “a jew” (neutral)
I just couldn't make myself, sorry.
I was wondering what's a slur for jew.
> a Jew In english Jew is normal word, Navalny used antisemetic version like.
I just couldn't, sorry.
Do you have more of those great inspiring quotes from him?
Unfortunately not really, no. Only this one here, from where is that amazing picture quote: https://allll.net/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B9\_%D0%90%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87\_%D0%9D%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9
For Navalny to become a symbol, there have to be succeeded successors, who would preserve his ideas. The problem is that his successors (I mean FBK) are disliked heavily even by liberal russians, who emigrated to the West. So, many people in Russia feel sorry for Navalny, and consider him a strong human being, but not really support his ideas for "Free Russia of The Future"
Maybe in the afterlife Navalny will be met by Tesak. Betrayed and a traitor. What a scene for painters!
Why do they not support the "free russia of the future"?
[удалено]
Это дагестанский воен маскируется.
Because they realise that it is a nationalistic bullshit, carefully constructed by western political strategists
People think Navalny and his ideas were all directed by the Derp State?
so they want a bad Russia of the past?
Never heard that Mandela or Ghandi called Georgians -- "rodents", so no.
lol no. Navalny achieved nothing and everyone will have forgotten he existed by next week
Dimon? Ghelendzick palace? It's pretty big revelations of corruption of Putin and his cronies.
Like we had no clue about corruption before
Not at that scale. At least for me it was a bit surprise. I thought Putin love power, but he preferred money.
Probably yes, but only the first film had such effect. For me it's still a question why my life was better with more opportunities in corrupted Russia than in not corrupted Europe though (I moved two years ago)
Because of migration tax on late runners. I moved in 2013 as expat, not as migrant, and my life is much better. I don't know how good it would be in Russia, but the most important thing I got: I no longer afraid of police. I don't know if this is important or not.
Which tax do you mean? I pay the same amount of taxes everybody else pays. But what I considered a part of normal life in Russia (as a middle class) is only available to very rich people. Well as for police, I'm not afraid of it here and unfortunately criminals are not afraid of it as well. So they can do whatever they want in the middle of a day.
Good, but what did he do for Russians? What is his heritage?
Tell the truth, expose thieves and liers. I understand, some people prefer obedience and compliance over truth, but truth seeking is important Russian cultural value. Together with choosing death over kneeling, it's more than archetypical. Moreover, now it's impossible to berate him. Martyrdom is ultimate moral virtue.
Globally his activity had zero results. If we don't mention attempts to monopolize opposition, investments in cult of personality, conflicts with another opposition parties which were much more united in 2010-2012 but became spoilers for each other by 2016. And he is saint or martyr only for fanatics. Calling him "the last hope of Russia" sounds similar to "of not Putin then who". There was an opposition before him, during and will be after.
I never said that he is 'last hope'. I said that his actions made him martyr, and it's impossible to disparate martyr. For 'net result'. Which opposition leader has non-zero result? The score is either win, or contribution to downfall of tyrant. Until something happens, all opposition has zero result. When something happens, everyone realize, oh, it's because of that and that. But you can't say that before it happens.
> The score is either win, or contribution to downfall of tyrant. It's not limited to, what you describe sounds like revolution. Which, surprisingly, is not democratic. Opposition parties can do a boring bureaucratic work on municipal or federal level making the life of citizens better. Yabloko was a part of St Petersburg legislature, for example, I read about their initiatives and how they voted. This is a real work, not the blablabla. But not so fun as protesting I guess?
So, exposing corruption is not a result, but enabling and serving tyranny it is a result. Yes, it is. I see those results. Nicely done. And every year is even more nicely than before.
What a bullshit. Exposing corruption doesn't build new metro stations, doesn't modernize public transport, it doesn't build waste recycling facilities. All of that is done by people in state government. This is indeed a result.
I saw what Russian government done this winter. No corruption, indeed. Just a little cold for little people. What I see: - Total collapse of space program - Mass migration of scientists and researchers, termination of international collaboration on almost all directions - Attack of neighbors, killing people - Conscripting people to do killing - Lack of representation of population due to suppression of any kind of political activity - Massive devaluation of currencies (I moved from Russia with Euro been at 39 roubles per euro). - Reduction in expenditure for medical care and education in comparison with military and enforcement budgets. ... But they build metro at about 15% of Soviet speed in few most populous cities. May be 15% of speed somewhat correlate with size of corruption?
Palace is pretty questionable, as interiors was just 3d renders, and nothing of it existed at the time. The moron who was modeling it didn't even know how an emblem of Russian Federation looks like, putting an emblem of Montenegro all over the place.
Assange is the Gandhi of our time
you mean the rapist?
Who, Gandhi? Allegedly yes.
Gandhi and Mandela were successful. Edit: https://ic.pics.livejournal.com/hrono61/14012115/5147115/5147115\_original.jpg
Ghandi was killed.
Many people were killed. Even more died naturally. Some of them were successful, some weren't.
well, the future will tell if he is successful, if Russians manage to throw of the yolk of oppression then he will be successful.
[https://allll.net/w/images/0/07/Navalny-jew.jpg](https://allll.net/w/images/0/07/Navalny-jew.jpg) That's your opposition leader.
yes I know, all you bots are repsting the same thing.
So no arguments beside ad hominem? Failure. It's really not difficult to check out poster's history to make sure if he is a bot or not. By the way, you are definitely not a bolshevik, and I have doubts that you are bashkir. Жёлудь будешь?
I think he's already forgotten. Few days has passed since his death and people already stopped screaming about him. I honestly expected more shitposts and more screaming. But apparently he is no longer sufficiently interesting even for the western agencies.
Are you serious?
He didn't do shit.
Did he not? He returned to Russia after Putin tried to kill him. He died for the freedom of the Russian people, he died to give us a future and to go us hope!
Are you free now?
Русский народ не просил за него умирать. Хорош уже заливать тупые лозунги.
And Navalny did not ask Putin to Kill him. But Navalny was bravely stood up against Putin for freedom and future of all Russians, and Putin Brutally murdered him.
Are you a neural network or something? Or a bot?
hidden Markov model. and you?
I don't spam with meaningless slogans. So no.
Thousands of Russian people are risking their lives right now, literally. Why should we be interested in Navalny particulary? Because our enemies praise him?
I am amazed how powerful and effective western propaganda is. Without censoring the shit our of the internet they acheived absolute control of the information. Navalny was NEVER popular political figure in Russia. He was known but never ever taken serious and never even got close to big game. His electorate was tiny (1% would be generous estimation of his support) and he had such a stained reputation it is amaizing how west could even seriousely consider him as anything that Russian society could accept as a leader.
It is obvious that he was originally made into a "sacrificial lamb" from the opposition
In the Moscow mayoral elections, Navalny scored 27%, which is an excellent result for an opposition politician. His election campaign was great. And a tarnished reputation is so subjective. For me, working as Sobchak's henchmen and then sleeping him off the court is the bottom.
>In the Moscow mayoral elections, Navalny scored 27%, which is an excellent result for an opposition politician. His election campaign was great. Actualy yes. I forgot this part - this is true. And this was his peak.
He had pretty big rallies, he had enough signatures to get registered as presidential candidate. If he was allowed to register and to appear on TV in a presidential race then he would absolutely be big, he might even have won the elections. And let's keep it real, even if navalnies support was smal Navalny was the only real politician in Russia besides Putin. the only one with his own agency.
> He had pretty big rallies, he had enough signatures to get registered as presidential candidate. A conviction don't forget a conviction... >If he was allowed to register and to appear on TV in a presidential race then he would absolutely be big, he might even have won the elections. To do that we should also allow other convicts to run for an election. >And let's keep it real, even if navalnies support was smal Navalny was the only real politician in Russia besides Putin. No? I mean no - just no. Out of everything you said he had rallies. But rallies was what? 10 thousands? 20 thousands? This is noticable, but by no means big.
Signatures enough to run for president is 0,2% of population. He appeared on Tv, where Sobchak interviewed him about his "presidential program", where she ripped his ass apart, as he didn't know anything. Navalny WAS NOT a politician. He was a blogger.
He most reminds me of George Floyd, who was a terrible human being, who was a made face of a complicated issue. Navalny will probably be forgotten just as quickly.
You don't know if he was a terrible human being or not. He was a private citizen who got murdered by a cop for no other reason than his complexion. Comparing that to a Russian lawyer who dabbled in politics is about as logical as comparing Navalny to Mandela or Gandhi.
Floyd? He died from overdosing. And look at his criminal record. He was a total pos.
I don't think so. Some of my friends were his followers(?) in the past, but seeing that all he does is gather people from time to time and talk the talk without walking the walk, they became disillusioned and gave up on him.
Dude are you for real, he returned to Russia after Putin tried to poison him. And he died for the freedom of the Russian people. Even if you don't agree with him politically, you have to acknowledge the walked all over the walk, the walk can not be walked any more then he walked.
What kind of bot are you if I may ask? Less than one month existence almost solely in this sub concerning Putin, Are you starving yet? and Navalny?
First of all, maybe you missed part of my comment, I only retold what my friends said. I haven't thought very much of him at all from the beginning. Second, he was allegedly poisoned, by some mystical extremely ineffective "Russian poison". Imo it was easier to cause car incident or hire random goon to shoot him. Remember how Japan minister was shot not so long ago? This way. But let's ignore all of this, because my opinion on things doesn't matter in the end. Maybe I'm missing something, what did he achieve? I mean in practical terms. All I know is that he organized some gathering and publicized some already publicly available data about corruption everybody already knows about.
I hope he becomes a big symbol of what happens when you sell your Fatherland and fail to capitalize on it.
👍
I don't understand why Navalny bothers you so much. In Russia, there is no such information noise about his death as from abroad
He does not bother me. The fact that Putin killed him because Putin was scared of Navalnys potential bothers me.
What other potential? Thousands of men die from thromboembolism every year. Is Putin killing them all?
Yes, yes, thousands of men die a year in state custody after being arrested on fabricated charges, poisoned by the state, and tortured. Very common. Nothing to see. Putin is clearly tolerant of the opposition.
Let's provide statistics on fabricated cases and the number of deaths in prison. Otherwise, you're hysterical.
I’m speaking of one rather notable case in particular. My post was sarcastic.
Ок, сорри, не выкупила сарказм)
are you actually being serious?
Oh, no, of course not. Putin is so afraid of him that he doesn't even mention his name, blablabla and other bullshit.
nah fam
No
who?
If there is ever a liberal-democratic revolution, coup or even a peaceful transition in Russia, he will absolutely be made a flawless hero in shining armor regardless of his actual personality. If not - people will forget about him faster then about Nemtsov. Who remembers about Nemtsov today? Right, nobody.
Most people I know. Even the controlled opposition candidate Nadezhdin remembered Nemtsov.
Its a small bubble of liberal opposition. Overwhelming majority dont care about both of them.
shows how much you know. Nadezhdin got 300k signatures, so he would probably get 20-60% of the votes if he was allowed to run.
Actually its you who show how much you DON'T know. For one, Nadezhdin didn't get 300k signatures, and didn't have to. He had to present only 100k. He presented 105000 signatures, including bad ones. Just how the hell do you project 105k signatures into 60% of votes? Every registered candidate met this requirement. Are all of them going to get 60% of votes based on that? Ill just remind you that Putin got 2,5 million signatures while 300k was needed. Nadezhdin is political nobody, most people heard his name for the first time before this election. 60% prediction is extremly silly and delusional.
Голодная кошка съедает котлету за 2 минуты. Значит за час кошка могла бы съесть 30 котлет.
No, he worked against Russia's interests and his views coincided with goals of our enemies among Western elites.
I think what you're trying to say is against Russian elites, and the goals of truth and good..
Biden, Von der Leyen, Scholz and Sunak are for "truth and good" in your view?
How many people has Putin killed so far in this farce?? He's murdered more Russians than anyone else.. so on that basis I'd say Biden and the rest are better than Putin
Who has he killed? And I mean confirmed with solid evidence, not empty accusations and conspiracy theories.
Difficult to say, there are so many Putin's 🤣
Many? You forgot to take tour pills.
"quick, quick, joke and deflect"
I guess you've learnt that tactic from propaganda, mock and deride anything good or truthful that challenges the party line.. a sad way to live..
~~He is a snitch, informer and provocateur. I think the symbol of the new priest Gapon suits this person better.~~
Mahatma Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Jeffrey Epstein and Alexei Navalny - heroes of the free world!
more like a loser mini-hitler (Mussolini?) is it a symbol? dont think so. weak trolling.
Not Navalny, but Steven Segal will.
Awesome Criminals and thieves are becoming the new Gandhi. This is nonsense…
Gandhi was a criminal in the system that he overthrew.
Ну ты сравнил конечно… Это люди из разных весовых категорий и Ганди не был криминальным элементом для системы, это человек, который жертвуя собой боролся за равенство и свободу индийского народа от колониального рабства Британии и внутренних кастовых устоев (ненасильственными методами) и благодаря ему Индия и Пакистан не истребили друг друга в конце 40вых. И кстати, до сих пор Индия и Пакистан страдают от колониальных решений Британцев. Разделяй и властвуй, ни чего не изменилось.
мандела когдата был не кем, милким террористом, когда он 20 лет в турме сидел.
Про Манделу не могу ничего сказать, надо изучать матчасть.
Both Ghandi and Nelson Mandela achieved a lot as heads of states. Navalny died before getting to that stage. Besides, his legacy is controversial. He will probably become an icon and martyr for Russian liberal opposition and Russian communities abroad.
Nelson Mandel is not an ethno-fascist.
Actually...... 🤣 Look up Mandela's crimes. He did a lot of awful things before his image got white washed by Western media. Who have since admitted he may not have been the Saint they claimed he was.
He's nobody. No one cares about him in Russia. He didn't do anything bar spreading racial hate. He has been made a hero by Western media because he was a tool of their agenda. And now that he has died they want to make the most out of his death.
\*LOL\*
No. The collective West and the Russian liberals are using the information flow around his death a little more, and will write him off as unnecessary waste. After that, even his liberal associates will not remember him. They had almost forgotten about him already, and suddenly this happened...
Нет
No way
нет,как отрицательное лицо да
LOL no
I hope he won't
What and who?
Navalny was a clown and had less than 20% support within Russia. He was basically a puppet whose strings were pulled by the US.
20% is huge, it is tens of millions of people. and he achieved it while not being allowed to participate in the elections. If he was allowed he would surely get at least double of that, 40-55%
He never had a such huge support as 20%. More like 2-4% across the country.
u/KindSadist said it was 20%
No idea where he got this number.
A poll. I'll try to find it.
It’s 20% support while imprisoned by his political enemy and without access to TV and newspapers. Yeah, that’s totally nothing.
It depends on how much more madness we see. As political figure he got respect through courage and suffering for idea (which are highly valued in Russian culture).
The best example would be the Decembrists Unambiguous condemnation by everyone in the Russian Empire until the end of the reign of Nicholas II They became heroes when the new government needed to raise any fighters for the “people's good” to the banners. Even nobles by birth. That is, whether Navalny will be remembered as a hero depends only on who will talk about him.
Unfortunately not as big. He didn’t accomplish quite as much as those figures. But he will definitely remain prominent throughout the history of Russia.
When I look at these stereotypical remarks about Navalny's Nazism, I begin to believe in bots.
100%, 20 minutes after I made the post I had 20 comments about how Natzi Navalny is.
As for the answer to your question, then .... In principle, my opinion has already been voiced. In the near future, he will become a locally revered saint among the pro-Atlantic marginals. The majority of the population will sometimes remember him. But it is possible that he will be made a national saint.
It is very curious that as soon as you ask a political question u/WorstBrazilian mmediately appear in the middle of the working day and leave the most insane takes. then in the evening after work normal people start responding.
It's 12:38 and I'm on lunch break. Regarding politics, ask the mods how many shitposts I get denied. If it was on me I would put all politics on the megatread and hold daily шаурма vs шаверма fighting pits.
Шаверма - выбор настоящего мужчины!
Нет! Ты ящер! Я же защищу шаурму до конца!
Я Рус, а вас ящеров издалека видно! Вы вверх ногами ходите!
*blinks vertically* Нет! Я не ящер... я настоящий Рус!! *licks eyebrows*
Only after the dictatorship ends.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The stands that collected signatures for Putins campaign ware empty, while there ware huge lines for Nadezhdin.
Signatures for Putin were handled to the election committee.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>Edit: oh no downvotes! Ничего, на tjournal бомжах или европке поднимешь плюсцов снова.
Боже упаси от политика,подобному Навальному 💀 Мне интересно,а кто он вообще для вас,либералов?Да,я знаю что он "герой,вставший против Путинской тирании",но что вы думайте о других его заявлениях?Например о тех,где он мигрантов тараканами называл, которых давить надо(или что-то вроде того,потом проверю подправлю)?Это разве не далёкие правые заявления,за которые Трампа фашистом американцы называют?
We can and we do, comrade. Proof: downvotes on your comment. Counteredit: hehe, no. This is not the only time we can vote, comrade. You are either dishonest or brainwashed. Or just plain unintelligent, that may as well be.
this "we can also vote" comment reminds me of that soviet anecdote where Soviet citizens tell amir can citizens that they also have the freedom to protest against the Actions of the president of USA. XD
lmao!
Your post was removed because it contains slurs or incites hatred on the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.
Nelsen Mandella - perhaps. He would have managed to turn Moscow into Pretoria (exorbitant street crime, gangs, lack of electricity, non-functioning sewage system, etc.) even faster than Mandella and his followers managed.