Talk:Vladimir Putin

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Icon politics.svg

This Politics related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


this guy is awesome![edit]

i love Russian..... so serious...... with a deadly gaze without emotion.

.......... i wish my GF was a sexy Russian dominatrix but she just a normal girl...... WHY!? ............WHY!?Waronstupidity (talk) 20:16, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Conservapedia's article on him is one of the few articles by them that's better than Wikipedia's. RationalWiki also has the right idea in shorter sentences, but the main Wikipedia is burdened by being a high value target for Putin's spin doctors. Look at [1] 's uncanny praise of him. I think it might have gotten a lil better lately, but still no mention of the very apparent poll rigging (some formal looking website as well as the Cobarat's Report (Misspelled ...or was it the Daily Show)) claimed there was one region where more ppl voted than the total number of legible voters, with only one voting against Putin.
Wikipedia does not focus on defending Russia's image in general, [2] actually talks of a history of Psychiatry being used as an excuse for political suppression, and if you read to the end of that article, you'll find Putin's government using the method to defend him. But only 100 people a day read the article talking of political suppression, while 5000 a day read the article on Putin which contains no mention of political suppression other than that unfairness has been suggested. (talk) 08:26, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

russian dominatrix[edit]

I disagree about Ukraine in this article. My opinion is RW must be free from lie.— Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs


Didn't the guy that got polonium have a history of service at the KGB? I thought he was a defected spy. -- (talk) 18:00, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

As a russian....[edit]

I think this article requires work. Putin is a subject worthy of having an article full of fun on this wiki. I shall be working on this in the near future. Lichy (talk) 14:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Removal of Link[edit]

ZooGuard took my last link away saying "Pravda is shit". I know very well that Pravda is shit! I wanted the article in there because it was hilarious! If he, and others think it was not relevant to Putin then maybe it can stay out, but it was relevant to claims of psychotronic weapons. Incidentally laser weapons and rail guns are just high technology. The things mentioned by Putin's defence minister are science fiction - to my knowledge - and probably based on pseudo-science.


TheoryOfPractice, Would you mind telling me and everyone else why you took the brilliant picture of Putin away?! It was the best thing on the page.Zara Thustra (talk) 20:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Putin - BADASS[edit]

Putin is a BADASS... not a "very mean man". He just acts mean to keep his badassness up.— Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

You know, you could have done with only one section title.--ZooGuard (talk) 19:11, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
"One year later..." Osaka Sun (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Putin reverted[edit]

My edit was reverted for 'changing the tone' of the article (I guess, to 'accurate'), and even the links I used to back up evidence of Litvinenko's MI6 funds was deleted; the commentator above remains unanswered regarding Litvinenko; I've been here a day and can already see the agenda the 'Rational' Wiki attends to push.

Dalandzadzi (talk) 20:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I agree, this article is stupid. It's a couple of kids who don't know anything fooling around. SuperInfinity (talk) 12:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Litvinenko is not the only person who spoke out against Putin to be killed. Several actual journalists have been killed by Russian security forces on Putin's command, or by upper levels of those associated with Putin.ROPChain (talk) 09:42, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
No they haven't you idiot. You are a very simple-minded person. SuperInfinity (talk) 15:13, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
What about Anna Politkovskaya? --Drowninginlimbo (talk) 15:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Is Putin a dictator?[edit]

I'd say yes, but apparently this is not a universal view. Worzelpete (talk) 03:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

No, it's not universal. There's certainly pro-forma elections and republican government bureaucracy at the very least. What definitions of dictator do you think apply? Which do you think don't? ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 22:50, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Well, because of how political definitions work, the definition of the word dictator is key here. Putin was elected in a Republican presidential system. Whether this election was legitimate or not is basically irrelevant. It's not like in other African countries, where the dictator has held the office since forever and literally kills his opponents that will just to make the election go in his favor. Although it's true Vladimir Putin has had a couple of people killed and plenty of people imprisoned, this hardly makes him a dictator. Typically dictators have an unwaveringly loyal population behind them willing to do whatever they want without question. This is hardly the case with Putin, as there are plenty of vocal opposition figures that are able to basically say whatever they want as long as it's not slander or treason. Also, Putin faces plenty of opposition from Parliament, who can stop some of the things he wants to do. While it's true that they follow him in most respects, there have been some issues in the past that they've disagreed with him on. I'd hardly put him in the same category as Pinochet, Ben Ali, or Saddam Hussein. Applesauce (talk) 23:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Hitler won a relatively free election in 1933 and was appointed according to the rules of the constitution. And Ben Ali also had regular elections. Your definition is flawed. Worzelpete (talk) 23:57, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Sure, I can understand why you think their definition is flawed. But I'll repeat my solicitation above: Which definitions do you think apply? I'm not at all in disagreement with you that Putin is something of an odd case. But the position you need to articulate is more than "He's not not a dictator" but also "He's this kind of dictator in particular" ikanreed You probably didn't deserve that 15:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Ukraine & Ukrainian nationalism[edit]

US sanctions on Putin now are standing in the way of a Nato-Russian response to Daesh and work to Daesh's advantage and survival. Sanction's were placed over the issue of Ukrainian nationalism. Ukrainian nationalists trace their struggle back to Czarist and the multicultural Soviet era when Ukrainian language was targeted and attempts to stamp it out. In both Czarist and Soviet times a Ukrainian shopkeeper, for instance, could not post a sign in the Ukrainian language, whereas Muslim shopkeepers and Arabic script went untouched.

The issues are similar today. Ukraine is facing a declining birthrate and a growing Muslim population. However Putin is not known for granting special privileges and exemption to Muslims, as the Czars and Soviets did. The common belief is the Czars and Soviets were fearful of Muslims, and at a loss as to how to try to be equal in the administration of law in dealing with Muslim subjects. Putin by contrast, doesn't appear fearful of Muslims and is tolerant of the Ukrainian language. nobs 13:39, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Strawman ?[edit]

"Putin is popular with certain elements of the left,[54] particularly people who who opposes atlanticismWikipedia's W.svg, globalization, or US foreign policy. This "anti-imperialism" line was a staple of Soviet apologetics. The apparatchiks justified practically any move with "defense against Western Imperialism". And while the Soviets are dead and buried now, with their rhetoric, you can play the Russian public, the left and right wings like claviatures.[55][56] Putin, a literal Judo master, invokes this "political judo" stuff all the time. " Indeed not everone opposing atlatic foreign policy or globalization and seeing in some cases Russian policies as better or more consistent, doesn't necessarily mean supporting Putin in all cases, especially his internal politics, from authoritarianism, to banning "gay propaganda" to please orthodox fundies, but it's true that it's not an uncommon pattern. About the Ukrainian crisis, it should be mentioned that a "coup" or golpe occurred there and a democratically elected prime minister, Yanucovich has been debased, with the neo nazi governement of Petro Poroshenko taking power. At that point the Russian comumnity of Donbass and Crimea was at risk of a renewed persecution. We may contest the legitimacy of annexing Crimea (after a consultation) and invading Donbass, but those communities were in danger and Nato with the EU supported a neonazi golpe, failing to protect people who felt russian but which was protected from discrimination with past governments of Kiev. -- (talk) 18:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Baba Vanga "prediction"[edit]

Concerning this edit by User:Bryan See, there is little evidence for the supposed prediction of Putin by Baba Vanga in 1979. On her Wikipedia pageWikipedia, Pravda Report is the only source for this claim. It was only added to Wikipedia recently, in 2016, by an account that might also be Bryan See (the edit summary mentioned "BatteryIncluded", similar to User:Bryan See/BatteryIncluded).

I could not find mention of this prediction anywhere before a Pravda Report article in 2006. This "prediction" appears to have been invented by the press. CowHouse (talk) 00:15, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

I know it's invented by right-wing press, and may have been originated from Russian social media and conspiracy theorist sites. Russia has been manipulating me since 2012, with Putin himself. -- Bryan See (talk) 03:07, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
The wording of your edit said she "obscurely predicted him back in 1979". This was, at best, misleading. Nothing in your edit suggests it was invented by the press or that there is no evidence she ever made the prediction in 1979. Also, to be clear, this is all irrelevant to the Vladimir Putin page anyway. So please don't re-add it.
"I know it's invented by right-wing press." It seems to have originated in Russia, not necessarily right-wing press (Pravda Report is left-wing).
"Russia has been manipulating me since 2012, with Putin himself." I'm not trying to be rude but you sound a bit paranoid. CowHouse (talk) 05:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
I know. Putin is very popular with certain elements of the far-left, including you on this wiki. That's why I spent most of my time holding back Putin's influence. -- Bryan See (talk) 08:31, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
I could not find mention of this prediction anywhere before a Pravda Report article in 2006. This "prediction" appears to have been invented by the press. CowHouse (talk) 00:15, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
I guess it must be copied from message boards or Russian social media or conspiracy theories. The 2012 Washington Post said that. Regardless, Vanga must be referring "Vladimir" to this leader.
She said in 1979: "Everything will melt away like ice yet the glory of Vladimir , the glory of Russia are the only things that will remain. Russia will not only survive, it will dominate the world." I guess Baba Vanga predicting authoritarianism taking over the world, but she didn't.
I guess she made these predictions in Bulgarian. -- Bryan See (talk) 07:52, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

I've found the one besides Pravda. It's "(1) "The Prophecies of Vanga", aut: Jeni Kostadinova, "Trud"". It said in Bulgarian:

Предсказания за Русия

„Няма такава сила, която би могла да сломи Русия. Русия ще се развива, ще расте, ще крепне. Всичко ще се разтопи като лед, само едно ще остане незасегнато – славата на Владимир (княз Владимир, покръстил Русия), славата на Русия. Твърде много жертви са принесени. Никой не може вече да спре Русия. Всичко ще помете по пътя си и не само ще се съхрани, но и ще стане господар на света.“ (1)

„Русия е прамайка на славянските държави. Тези, които се отделиха от нея, ще се завърнат с ново лице. Русия няма да се отклони от пътя на реформите, които накрая ще направят страната силна и могъща“ (1)

„И сега Русия е велика и винаги ще бъде велика… Републиките ще се върнат към Русия.“ (1)

„Сега Русия се нарича Съюз. Но ще се върне старата Русия и ще се казва като при свети Сергий. Нейното духовно превъзходство ще признаят всички, включително и Америка. Това ще стане след 60 години (казано през 1979 г.) Преди това ще се сближат три страни – Китай, Индия и Русия ще се съберат в една точка. България ще е при тях само ако бъде заедно с Русия и като част от Русия. Без Русия за България няма бъдеще.“ (1)

Руското религиозно превъзходство е предсказано и от американския пророк Едгар Кейси: „…От Русия идва надеждата на света…“ (1)

-- Bryan See (talk) 09:00, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

The "prediction" does not belong on the Putin page; it's too vague for one thing. Bongolian (talk) 03:58, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Some conspiracy[edit]

There is a very popular theory within russian conspiracy groups. It says that Puting is long dead for now, and all we see are his doubles. They use his young days photos and compare the form of his ears and other facial features to proof there point. There point is that there had been no "original" Putin on any visual media since 1998 (or 2009). I know there is such theories around almost any old political leader (ex., british queen), with Trump may be the single exception :). Is it worth to mentioning in the article?

There is also the theory that Putin, himself, arranged for the bombings he blamed on Chechnya, so that he could get the popular support that put him into power. --Bertrc (talk) 21:26, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

"War on science and tech" section[edit]

A significant portion of this section was plagiarised (seemingly copied and pasted) from the cited articles. The parts that weren't copied and pasted were not supported by the sourced articles. For instance, the article referenced for the claim that Putin "sabotaged space missions like Fobos-Grunt" does not mention Putin at all. CowHouse (talk) 03:34, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Come on[edit]

Go easy on Putin. It’s not like he’s Kissinger. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

No. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 01:29, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
Putin's fee-fees are easily hurted. Bongolian (talk) 01:31, 17 June 2021 (UTC)