I have thought much on the question of why, often after revolutions, a new power becomes even worse than previous one. For example, in Russia after 1917 old authoritarian power was replaced by totalitarian one. Here is the answer: each authoritarian power suppresses the opposition, which pose a threat ideologically, more intensively, than rabid/extreme opposition, despite the second one often poses even bigger threat to the representatives of current power. The first opposition is a seculiar democratic opposition, while the second opposition is something with communist/fascist/fundamental etc ideology.

This is very clearly seen on the examples of such countries like Syria or Russia. When protest against Assad started in Syria, firstly this was seculiar pro-democratic opposition. But Assad fully destroyed this opposition, giving more chances to islamic fundamentalist forces (al-Sharaa) - and suddenly in 2024 they came to power. I think, it can be correct to say that al-Sharaa was to some extent a spoiler of Assad.

Similar things are happening in Russia: Putin unofficially declares that if he loses the power - instead of him cruel imperialists will take it. For supporting this statement, Putin always supported anti-democratic imperialists in power like Ramzan Kadyrov or Evgeniy Prigozhin.

I think, Alexey Navalny was also one more of Putins's spoilers to some extent: as far as I know, firstly he collaborated with the presidency administration in Kremlin, but then he went out of control and Putin decided to finish him. Below I want to show you a picture from one Russuan website, relating Navalny; even those who don't know Russian, probably will understand the meaning of this picture:

1 hour ago, Linkey said:

I have thought much on the question of why, often after revolutions, a new power becomes even worse than previous one. For example, in Russia after 1917 old authoritarian power was replaced by totalitarian one. Here is the answer: each authoritarian power suppresses the opposition, which pose a threat ideologically, more intensively, than rabid/extreme opposition, despite the second one often poses even bigger threat to the representatives of current power. The first opposition is a seculiar democratic opposition, while the second opposition is something with communist/fascist/fundamental etc ideology.

This is very clearly seen on the examples of such countries like Syria or Russia. When protest against Assad started in Syria, firstly this was seculiar pro-democratic opposition. But Assad fully destroyed this opposition, giving more chances to islamic fundamentalist forces (al-Sharaa) - and suddenly in 2024 they came to power. I think, it can be correct to say that al-Sharaa was to some extent a spoiler of Assad.

Similar things are happening in Russia: Putin unofficially declares that if he loses the power - instead of him cruel imperialists will take it. For supporting this statement, Putin always supported anti-democratic imperialists in power like Ramzan Kadyrov or Evgeniy Prigozhin.

I think, Alexey Navalny was also one more of Putins's spoilers to some extent: as far as I know, firstly he collaborated with the presidency administration in Kremlin, but then he went out of control and Putin decided to finish him. Below I want to show you a picture from one Russuan website, relating Navalny; even those who don't know Russian, probably will understand the meaning of this picture:

This thread seems to be a piece of Russian propaganda intended to tarnish the reputation of Navalny. Who do you guys bother? The man is dead.

Power tends to corrupt. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

— Lord Acton