An article on political opposition to Russian president Putin and
Kasparov's role in it:

http://www.slate.com/id/2145702/?nav=tap3

Taylor Kingston wrote:
An article on political opposition to Russian president Putin and
Kasparov's role in it:

http://www.slate.com/id/2145702/?nav=tap3

I think that Kasparov has an enormous challenge. Simply put: I have the
power and resources to win my struggle - Saint Christopher and Nevis
will have a FIDE Delegate. Gary has an uphill battle. Most Russian
immigration is spurred by the fear of people like Kirsan Ilyumzhinov
stealing their money for simply entering a business as a competitor..
They are resorting to cannibalism.

Just ask GM Max Dlugy how a Russian jail feels? The business
environment is NOT what we in the WEST are used to.

Marcus Roberts

How dare you insult GM Nigel Short? He's the best thing for chess in
the UK. You're a bloody lunatic.

Cheers,
Tony


wrote:

Taylor Kingston wrote:
An article on political opposition to Russian president Putin and
Kasparov's role in it:

http://www.slate.com/id/2145702/?nav=tap3

I think that Kasparov has an enormous challenge. Simply put: I have the
power and resources to win my struggle - Saint Christopher and Nevis
will have a FIDE Delegate. Gary has an uphill battle. Most Russian
immigration is spurred by the fear of people like Kirsan Ilyumzhinov
stealing their money for simply entering a business as a competitor..
They are resorting to cannibalism.

Just ask GM Max Dlugy how a Russian jail feels? The business
environment is NOT what we in the WEST are used to.

Marcus Roberts

Taylor Kingston wrote:
An article on political opposition to Russian president Putin and
Kasparov's role in it:

http://www.slate.com/id/2145702/?nav=tap3

Interesting!

In addition to Kasparov, the author
also has mentioned the colorful
character Eduard Limonov. Limonov
is (was?) a talented poet and writer.
Somehow he got crazy. I wish he would
stick to writing. I have his "Russkoe" --
an extensive collection of his poems
(close to two hundred pages monograph)
and novel "Eto Ya -- Edichka". The
novel is reeking of the non-stop stream
of obscene language. It has its place
as an artistic mean. Otherwise the novel
is so depressing that it would be unreadable.
One needs those obscenities like salt
and pepper to swallow (I mean to read)
all this ****. Arguably, it is still a good
novel. Eddy does have talent.

I am disappointed by the Kasparov's
stated goal and the author's longing.
To meet, to make statements, to
iinform the public... all this is great,
and that's what the opposition should
do systematically. But to unite? That's
a meaningless nonsense. It will not
happen anyway. The major directions
will emerge and will become the major
opposition parties.

Russia is at such an early capitastistic
and democratic stage that the first goal
of the opposition should not be the political
victory in elections but educating the
society about the (internal) politics,
especially the local politics. The old opposition
against communism didn't even dream
about getting the political power for long-long
years. All they tried to do was to educate.
In the last stages it did more. It was
teaching the society what society was
doing any way, namely the local opposition,
going around the system, making the communist
centralized system less important or even
unimportant. Except that the liberal opposition
was talking and acting in the civilized spirit
while the folk opposition often was cinical
and it translated to stealing from the
government, etc. but also ignoring the
communist holidays... Both were opposing
the communist bull****.

Today, it's a different stage. The liberal
opposition should work patiently on the local
democratic activiies and institutions. It's
premature for the liberal opposition in Russia
to simply play the so-called "big politics"
and already concentrate on fighting
for the seats in the parlament. Even if
the opposition won it would still be
meaningless when not based on the real
changes in the society. Winning the elections
should be a logical consequence of
the changes and not an artifact, which
would reduce the new government to
nothing much better than the previous one.

I can't really know what is happening
over there but the article leaves me
with some doubts about the political
thinking of Kasparov (or, to a lesser
degree, of the author of the article).

***

Regards,

Wlod

Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod) wrote:

Taylor Kingston wrote:
An article on political opposition to Russian president Putin and
Kasparov's role in it:

http://www.slate.com/id/2145702/?nav=tap3

Thank you, Taylor, for the link, once again.

[...] the article leaves me
with some doubts about the political
thinking of Kasparov (or, to a lesser
degree, of the author of the article).

Kasparov should study the history
of the fall of communism. There
were of course also the crucial
external factors: the direction of the
new technology, the Reagan's clear
stand, the emergence of the Polish
pope John Paul II, ... Nevertheless,
the opposition had its important role.
Thus Kasparov should study and be
impressed by the Samizdat story,
which started in the USSR and fluorished
in Poland and other European Soviet
satelites. "Samizdat" means "SelfPublisher",
i.e. non-governmental. It had broken the
communist monopoly on information.
On the top of it in Poland many people
actually lived from Samizdat: writers,
publishers, ... This alone made communism
less significant.

Then Kasparov and other present day
opposition activists should study the
Polish KOR+Solidarity. The opposition
worked from the roots up. It has created,
in the final stages of the communism
regime, "a nation within the nation", the life
was going in Poland aside the regime,
around it. The opposition, at its mature stage,
started with the legal assistance for the
workers who got in trouble with the regime.
It encouraged and assisted the workers in
organizing the independent Unions. It had
organized help for the victims of the political
repression. (Thus, for instance, more and
more people were becoming materially
independent of the regime). And that was
the beginning of the end of the communism.

The actual participation in the government
was not an early but the last stage of the
struggle against the totalitarianism. Winning
any seats under a totalitarian regime
(which was somewhat possible at the end
of communism) wouldn't be of much value.

Regards,

Wlod

No, you are NOT the Permanent Delegate of St Kitts and
Nevis to FIDE. FIDE does not RECOGNIZE that country,
and does not recognized MARCUS ROBERTS.

You are ****ing crazy.


wrote in message ups.com...
|
| Simple. I am the Permanent Delegate of St Kitts and Nevis to FIDE.
|
| Marcus Roberts
|