Some people have criticised that I've compared the US election with that in Turkmenistan: let me explain. The OSCE has 57 participating member-states, among them some vile tyrannies. Turkmenistan is probably the worst, which is why I use it for benchmarking.
If you were to take key indicators of democratic elections - from campaign and media environment to campaign finance to voter enfranchisement to election administration, you will see that the US doesn't do too well in these categories. I'd say it's in the bottom 50 percent.
Of course, there are many others that are much worse. Central Asia, Russia, and Belarus are examples. There are others that are much, much better. Having observed elections in Mongolia, I'd say Mongolia is way better across all indicators. Much of Western Europe is way better.
Put it this way: if the US applied to the Harvard of democracies, where the admission rate is 5%, its application would not be seriously considered.
Okay, it might get in on the athletic scholarship.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Sergey Radchenko

Sergey Radchenko Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DrRadchenko

5 Nov
The @osce_odihr report on the US election is out: osce.org/files/f/docume…. A great read. It's lucky that Trump seems to have been voted out because if he stayed, there'd be every ground to say that his election was not free and fair.
The report highlights Trump's efforts to "harm public trust in democratic institutions" & his widespread use of the administrative resource. And this here: "There was a widespread perception that federal judges often voted on election-related matters along partisan principles."😳
Check out, also, the section on campaign finance (deeply flawed and open to abuse) & voter disenfranchisement. "These restrictions on voting rights ... contravene principles of universal suffrage,...as provided for by OSCE commitments and other international standards."
Read 4 tweets
27 Oct
newyorker.com/news/our-colum…. Ehem. A pretty far-fetched take, even for Masha Gessen.
Check out the juicy evidence, too. "But where there is one conspiracy, another, greater one is always lurking—like the credits and intertitles of this moviefilm, which flash for a moment in Russian Cyrillic (not Kazakh), only to be obscured by English."
Not entirely true by the way since the credits are partially in actual Kazakh. But so what. "Borat" also speaks Hebrew and Polish in the film - is this a pointer to an Israeli-Polish conspiracy to undermine the US?
Read 4 tweets
26 Oct
Reading here Brezhnev's speeches at internal party conferences. On one occasion (in 1973) he went into great detail about how the Soviets were lagging behind the West in high-tech exports, and were just not competitive on the international market.
Here he is complaining how the Netherlands is ahead of the USSR in foreign trade. Image
Later he talks about how the Soviets are falling behind in acquiring foreign licenses (compared to countries like Japan): Image
Read 7 tweets
19 Oct
Some people have criticised my negative assessment of Catherine Belton's engagement with her sources, suggesting that I selectively pointed to one or two dubious sources. I am receptive to this criticism; therefore, I am running another thread (the last one, I promise).
This thread is about Belton's claim that the KGB siphoned off billions of dollars from the Soviet economy in the final days/months of the Soviet regimes. Where do we find this claim? Right here. Image
Here's another bit where she talks about it. Image
Read 17 tweets
19 Oct
Well I don't normally respond to tweets from people I don't know but this thread allows me to highlight some further problematic sourcing in Belton's book. You can see that here Belton argues that certain "progressive members" of the KGB working at IMEMO had pushed for reforms.
You begin to wonder here who Belton is specifically referring to. The Institute of World Economy (IMEMO) was generally known for "liberal" proclivities, and this had little to do with the KGB or the GRU.
The Institute's director Nikolai Inozemtsev was attacked by the Party hardliners for "revisionism," and had to leverage his ties with Brezhnev to protect himself and his institute. You begin to wonder whether Belton had read anything on IMEMO history.
Read 13 tweets
18 Oct
I've noticed there's a lot of public interest in what I make of Catherine Belton's Putin's People. Fine. Let me give another example of problematic sourcing, and I will use this as an opportunity to address broader issues about how we deal with authenticity of sources.
Belton's book begins with a remarkable conversation between "Putin's banker" and exiled oligarch Sergei Pugachev and the well-known Yeltsin associate Valentin Yumashev. The two discuss how Putin came to power and their role in his rise.
Some really revealing stuff in here, see e.g. ImageImage
Read 18 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!