Vladimir Putin, Better Than Any Psychotherapist

From the prominent Russian band Leningrad; the video has over 750K views, though it was just posted Wednesday. The band members, as I've mentioned before, aren't themselves particularly pro-Ukraine (see here and here)—they are more cynical and realist than ideological, it seems to me (see this song, which I blogged last year). But here, unless I'm completely missing things, the message is entirely obvious mockery of Putin; I thought it was worth passing along as an illustration of how some Russians are managing to criticize the authorities.

Here is my translation, though of course much is doubtless lost in the translation (thanks to my mother Anne for her help); for the Russian lyrics, see here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBudkOlo-yE

The world, so to speak, is burning to the ground
But in Russia life is just getting more and more splendid
All is going according to plan, citizens, comrades
And no one will be forgotten
We will allocate billions for you, all in writing
While the budget will have all expenses entered.[1]
And in all that we were capable of hearing
He was putting a firm end to that question.

[Refrain:]
I listened, without even having time to tidy myself up.
He is better than any psychotherapist.
They tried to spook us from the very beginning
But I listened to Putin and somehow I felt such relief

Ah, but isn't it a coincidence?[2]
Honor God, our country, and our parents!
There still are traitors to the nation
But we've almost finished with them.
It became so calm and peaceful in my soul
My heart felt like gentle ivy entwined it
Too bad he spoke so briefly,[3]
I would have listened much, much longer.

[Refrain]

From the window I look at the slums
In the future, I'll prepare for recording him beforehand
I gave him a standing ovation,
I and the federal assembly
Now, no matter what streams out of the news
I make myself a cup of tea
Sadness and sorrow, out of my heart!
I just put the Putin recording on full volume

[Refrain]

My psychotherapist
My psychotherapist
My psychotherapist
My psychotherapist

[1] I confess that I don't fully grasp what this is supposed to mean in context.

[2] I'm not sure this is correctly translated, but it's my best guess.

[3] Putin's Feb. 21, 2023 speech was actually an hour and 45 minutes long.

Comments

[Frank Drackman]

Putin spoke for an hour and 45 minutes? Could Senescent Joe stay awake that long? But hey, at least he's healthier than at least 3 Senators I could mention. Catchy tune though, sort of a Herb Alpert sound.

Frank

[Orbital Mechanic]

Biden's STOU lasted 71 minutes and included highly factual statements and the complete defeat of the extremist congressional Republicans, showing them to be the liars they are.

Putin emits one hour and 45 minutes of propaganda and nonsense and you are impressed by that.

Biden traveled by train for 10 hours to show support for an important ally in a war zone.

Putin is afraid to be seen in public. And you are impressed by that too, apparently.

This may be a personal tragedy for you but we happen to have the best leader.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

Putin, Trump, Castro, Chávez, Qaddafi...what they all have in common isn't just the length of their speeches.

[Ed Grinberg]

Biden’s STOU lasted 71 minutes and included highly factual statements and the complete defeat of the extremist congressional Republicans, showing them to be the liars they are.

If we could put this to music, and get a hot-looking girl to sing it, we'd have a hit no worse than the one linked above.
It is exactly this kind of "Dear Leader!" sentiment they're mocking.

[Bored Lawyer]

When you say "best," you mean "better," since you are comparing only two leaders.
It's a very low bar for Biden to jump over.

[John F. Carr]

Like the Southern expression "bless your heart". It's not overtly insulting, so you shouldn't overtly take offense.

[grb]

Putin’s ruinous war is easily explained; you just need to review his career:

To secure power, he destroyed Russia’s nascent democracy. To prevent threats, he destroyed the opposition. To eliminate criticism, he destroyed the country’s free media. To forestall any legal challenge, he destroyed the independent judiciary. To enrich himself & his cronies, he hardwired corruption into the very heart of the state.

So, finally and completely secure, he turned to the question of legacy. But what was left? For personal gain, he’d already eliminated any chance Russians could enjoy a normal life in a normal country. Like many a tyrant before, the only option remaining was foreign adventures & tinhorn nationalism.

[bevis the lumberjack]

He’s also been very fortunate in that his most prominent critics keep falling out of windows and accidentally exposing themselves to radiation.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Should we fault someone for being lucky?

[Ed Grinberg]

Aren't we lucky that our security services (for now) limit themselves to spying on opposition leaders and, occasionally, manufacturing spurious investigations / prosecutions?

[damikesc]

There's also significant rumors that he was behind the bombing of an apartment complex that was blamed on Chechens in 1999. That whole thing basically catapulted him into power.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

Very Reichstaggy. But not everything which happens happens due to a conspiracy. Putin may very well have simply been in the right place at the right time.

But he's definitely responsible for what he did later--including the murders of thousands of civilians in Ukraine. That's a sufficient amount of "evil" to condemn him for eternity, even if he had nothing to do with the Chechen apartment bombing.

[Michael P]

Radio Yerevan was asked: Why did Comrade Putin help Russia up off her knees?

Radio Yerevan answered: Because he wanted to have his way with her in a different position.

[mydisplayname]

Americans and Ukrainians and Russians are unsurprisingly similar human beings. When I read "We will allocate billions for you, all in writing \ While the budget will have all expenses entered," I think of the similar American budget which promises non-existent billions in a precisely drafted federal budget -- and share the eye-roll experience with the Russian populace. Similarly, When I read that 28% of Ukrainian farmland is owned by American interests I share the eyebrow-raising experience with the Ukrainian populace.

What I do not yet understand is the logic which led the government of Ukraine to use dubious French/Canadian policies as a model for its language and culture policies: to some, it is preservation of the Ukrainian language & culture but to an equal (or greater) population it is a rejection of Russian language & culture. Who knows -- perhaps elimination of the Ukrainian government mandate might be a step towards peace on both sides of the river.

[gormadoc]

On [1], Russia has traditionally has a well-balanced budget and maintains a "rainy day" fund to keep pensions going in case of problems. They are now using that fund to plug the holes in the budget. It lost $38 million in January, down to about $150 million. Not good prospects.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

Ah, well, it was no loss then.

[apedad]

"However, Russia’s “nascent democracy” that he squelched was the wholesale looting of the place by Western powers during the Yeltsin regime."

Russian oligarchs are pissing their pants laughing at your statement right now.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/04/meet-the-oligarchs-sanctions-russian-billionaires

Many had ties to US investments but no 'wholesale looting by Western powers.'

[grb]

mad_kalak : "Power coalesced into the hands of a few, who facilitated that looting like vulture capitalists in other countries"

OK, show us who from the "Western powers" got rich looting Russia. There are many examples of Russian oligarchs who plundered their own country. Russia produced an astounding number of millionaires and billionaires in an incredibly short period of time.

But where are the westerners in all this? And here's a bonus question for you: All the countries from the old USSR transitioned (in varying degrees) to free market economies. Did the "Western powers" loot those other countries too? If not, why not?

As I noted in another recent thread, a common trait of the hard-Right and the hard-Left is to see every problem worldwide as caused by the secret machinations of the U.S. This seems like a similar phenomena.....

[grb]

mad_kalak : “You’re starting with a false premise…”

No; I’m starting with the likely premise that you’re all talk, and finds it politically convenient to blame the evil West for corruption inside Russia. All I asked was you identify the Western entities that “looted” Russia.

But – hey – it’s looking like you’re abandoned that original claptrap for a fallback position where merely “opening Russia up for capitalism” itself constituted “looting”. Of course you don’t explain how the same process occurred in other ex-communist countries without the same rampant corruption.

Also, the U.S. or other “Western powers” weren’t an occupying force inside Russia. No outside entity forced the former USSR to go capitalist or controlled the way they did so. I note your fallback position shifts the blame to the IMF, only to have your second fallback position admit the Russians disposed of state assets at levels far below IMF recommendations.

It’s not too late for a fourth fallback argument, Mad….

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

"the wholesale looting of the place by Western powers during the Yeltsin regime"

That is your claim (in case you've forgotten!)

Go on. Do your worst.

[grb]

1. You start by claiming : “wholesale looting of the place by Western powers during the Yeltsin regime”

2. You end by claiming the corrupt disposal of Russian state assets is somehow “western looting”, although the disposal was solely managed by Russians and went against all Western procedures and advice.

3. Yet you claim your position didn’t change when obviously it did.

4. And you refuse to discuss why other ex-communist countries made the transition to market economies with a small fraction of the corruption seen in Russia.

5. Plus, there’s a lot of flaming rhetoric above about “punishing Russia” & “Weimar Germany” & “China in the 19th Century” that’s pure gibberish, with no meaning whatsoever.

Dude, my good faith isn’t the issue here; your incoherence is….

[grb]

You claim “Privatization was at the behest of the IMF”

Please explain that.

[Nige]

'mind managed into your consciousness.'

I am fairly certain you didn’t mean this comment as satire, and that this isn’t a troll account. If I’m correct, and you meant this comment as a statement of your beliefs, then I must say that those aren’t your beliefs, but merely what others have mind managed into your consciousness.

[Sarcastr0]

Appeal to 'this was very normal a few years ago.'

Russia falling to Olligarchs was not blamed on America/'The West' outside of Russian/tankie circles that I ever saw!

[bevis the lumberjack]

“Normal perceived reality”.

[Nige]

You believe the only way someone could think that Biden is the best leader is if they've been 'mind managed,' nothwithstanding that the rest of the comment you replied to was entirely factual and a pretty solid basis for an argument that he is, at least, better than Putin.

[Nige]

‘and liberals in general.’

Well there’s a turnaround. Once upon a time to be anti-globalisation was to oppose the plundering and exploitation of undeveloped nations, including the IMF selling off public goods and services to service national debts, which was to be condemned as getting in the way of the glorious march of captialism, after which democracy was sure to inevitably rise, and that was NOT a liberal postion. Neo-liberal, maybe. Nowadays, of course, it means something else entirely.

[Nige]

Globalisation WAS the spread of free trade, supposedly, in stages which included special tax-free economic zones where you could underpay people to work long hours on poor conditions.

[David Nieporent]

obliterated local economies

"Obliterated local economies" is a weird dysphemism for "made everyone better off."

[grb]

mad_kalak : “Privatization was at the behest of the IMF”

That is 100% pure bullshit and you know it. The IMF didn’t force Russia to privatize their state assets. How could they? Russia was a sovereign country whose rulers decide to go the privatization route. Care to explain the mechanism behind your term “behest” or are you afraid of embarrassing yourself further?

You might have tried claiming the IMF had too much influence, but it’s too late for that. You’ve already conceded that the Russians (who decided to privatize their state assets) and the Russians (who managed that privatization) all ignored the proposed valuations and procedures from the IMF.

You’ve dug yourself a deep hole with your flaming, nonfactual rhetoric, mad_kalak. You’re looking up at a tiny glimmer of daylight from that pit.

Just. Stop. Digging.

[David Nieporent]

I gave you specifics, backed up by an encyclopedia source, and your response was to motte and baily me. I give it that you’re sincere, but sincere doesn’t equal factual.

Yes, but your source doesn't support your original claim.

From Yeltsin’s almost decade in power, Russia’s GDP was cut in half,

That is hyperbole. See this graph: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Russia#/media/File:HDP_PPP_per_capita_Russia.jpg

There was a decline, but not a halving.

millions of people lost everything in repeated financial disasters, and life expectancy reverted to third-world levels. All this could have been avoided if privatization went slowly, and/or wasn’t facilitated by the IMF as a requirement for loans.

Maybe it could've, maybe it couldn’t have. Hindsight is easy, but there wasn't really a playbook for turning a command economy into a free market on short notice.

Conquered nations are made to pay, and Russia was indeed conquered.

Russia was not conquered.

History shows repeatedly that when a country experiences an economic collapse, you get a strong-man, if not a dictator. This is what happened in Russia, apparently to your surprise.

Then why didn't it happen — as grb keeps saying, and you keep ignoring — in most of the other eastern bloc countries or former soviet republics?

Also, as the graph I linked to illustrates, the Russian economy had already bottomed out and had already begun rising when Putin became president. And of course Putin didn't come to power as a strongman. He didn't really flex his dictatorial muscles until sometime in his second term, when Russia's GDP had already more than fully recovered.

[Nige]

It says the give and take of democracy goes on.

[Sarcastr0]

What the crap does someone being statistically popular or not have to say about an individual?

You hold plenty of views that are...not statistically broadly supported. Does that make you mind managed?