One Important Difference between America and Russia

The Russian government is considering raising the retirement age for politicians and officials first. “First” is the key word here. The reform is a touchstone for the ministers, who will test it themselves before it begins to directly affect the lives of citizens.

The raising of the retirement age is a measure from the arsenal of liberal economic politics. The main points of this policy are saving government funds and reducing federal spending. In Russia — a mostly left-wing country — such reforms are not popular.

During his annual Q&A session, Putin said that a competent economic policy comes from the heart as well as the mind, meaning that liberally oriented politics can win public support and trust. Trust could come in handy if the authorities had to implement unpopular measures: the people would understand.

The authorities and Putin personally are enjoying the full support of the population. Moreover, the left-wing opposition in the State Duma is sparse and is not able to block even unpopular legislation if the leading party wants to pass it. Nevertheless, whenever the government does undertake populist measures, it makes liberal moves pass as a display of care for the people. Even in a comfortable political environment and with a high degree of trust from citizens, the government lacks determination. It illustrates how reluctant it is to lose its stratospheric ratings. Also, the government is generally opposed to strengthening the left-wing — as part of the system and beyond.

Barack Obama, who is a liberal politician by American standards, serves as an example for the Russian ruling political elite. In the context of the U.S., it means that Obama advocates for “big government,” in other words for increasing the role of the state in the economic and social spheres. Obama came to the White House with high trust ratings. The central ideas of his campaign, including healthcare reform, were leftist or, as seen in Moscow, populist. However, after six and a half years Obama has lost his rating. He is considered a weak politician in Russia — an idea that gets a lot of coverage on state television and in the pro-government press.

However, the Russian view is clouded. Most of the time the Russian government fails to understand two things about the realities the American president has to consider. First of all, the role of Congress is usually underestimated. For instance, if Russian and American leaders came to a conditional agreement, could there be any delays with the implementation or ratification? There are no such delays in Russia — the State Duma (the lower chamber of the Federal Assembly) agrees to pass any decision of the head of government, hence the misconception about a “weak” president who is unable to push a bill through Congress.

Another misunderstanding has to do with liberalism itself. The Russian government cannot grasp why a politician experiences difficulties implementing his left-wing (read populist) policies. Meanwhile, the concept of “small government” is popular among Americans. Many Americans are used to being independent from the state and do not want to have to pay for others. It explains the reason the Democrats count on votes from immigrants, who have not developed such ideas. Russian authorities miss the fact that the word “socialist” is derogatory and that more than once Obama has had to publicly swear off socialism.

A liberal-minded nation is almost nonsense to the Russian government. The government is used to people who depend on the government and expect its support. Obama is perceived as helpless, although in reality he goes against a strong current. By the way, the rating of the U.S. president rose during the economic recovery, according to CNN. Russian television does not like to mention it.