A New Beginning - Our 1992 Russian Federation
- Thread starter panpiotr
- Start date
-
- Tags
- russia russian federation
I'm abstaining on this vote because of the fact that yes we get more to vote for but it's just the same coin, different sides and the fun option is gone here. The options that other people were hoping for were not here as well.
Gaúcho Maldito
Banned
Read the small letters at the end. The funny option is gonna appear in the next vote.
I already read it last night and no it says depending on this vote here that Ukraine or Novorossyia will join the Union state or not when the second vote happens. And it says join not annex, we don't know if Ukraine will get a special status like Belarus or something else.
Gaúcho Maldito
Banned
Joining or being annexed is mostly a matter of semantics. They are clearly not going to join voluntarily, considering we are gonna have to intervene.
It's implicit that for the option of full annexation to even be in the menu during the next round we need Ukraine to become a puppet now. The specifics of the constitutional status of Ukraine inside the Union State are gonna be a very interesting aspect to debate during the next vote.
But I would argue that we need to give them similar treatment to Belarus. The office of Vice-President of the Union State needs to be rotated between the Presidents of Belarus and Ukraine, while the office of President of the Russian Federation is separated from that of President of the Union State. The Russian Federation is to become a fully subnational entity with all the Armed Forces answering directly to the President of the Union State of Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, which would have it's official residency on the Kremlin.
The most benefited from this arrange would of course be...Belarus, which would be elevated to a position higher than it's importance. But it isn't like we can downgrade Belarus now, and we also can't offer Ukraine less than what we offered Minsk. On the other hand, offering Ukraine much more would jeopardize the internal cohesion of the Union State.
Last edited:
If we are not going to have any second vote for the gradual joining of Ukraine in the Union state,.
Then I urge the members who have votes for H or B to change their vote for I. H and B are never going to get majority votes because they are impractical or almost ASB, but option I is a compromise with more realist members.
So, please change your vote for I, as this may be our last land grab.
Also, @panpiotr, I think now we should also have revoting for the joining of Transnistria, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia in Union State.
Is Romania in NATO? . I forgot. Can someone tell me?
Then I urge the members who have votes for H or B to change their vote for I. H and B are never going to get majority votes because they are impractical or almost ASB, but option I is a compromise with more realist members.
So, please change your vote for I, as this may be our last land grab.
Also, @panpiotr, I think now we should also have revoting for the joining of Transnistria, South Ossetia, and Abkhazia in Union State.
Is Romania in NATO? . I forgot. Can someone tell me?
Oh, ok, this changes the thing,
Also, you mentioned the Ukrainian civil war, which I believe the pro-Russian force will win. So can we force the puppet regime to ban the pro-Western parties? We will turn Ukraine into a beloved autocracy (Singapore in the 80s), where the economy is fast-growing and HDI increases but the political rights of people are limited. Also, if we interfere in their civil war, sure, we will get some military bases or have some of our troops remain in the country to maintain peace (similar to Georgia but with fewer numbers).
Last edited:
I don't think war will be necessary. Money and the promise of a better future is leagues better material. Do a good charm offensive, show people will get jobs and better education and healthcare, buy some key industries, leverage the half of the country that is in pro Russian anyway and win the referendum on a (con)Federation.
No war, no death, no sanctions, no loss of international trade position.
No war, no death, no sanctions, no loss of international trade position.
Finance capitalism versus industrial capitalism (2007)
In the global economic landscape of 2007, two distinct models of capitalism held sway, each shaping the trajectory of their respective countries and regions. On one hand, there was finance capitalism, epitomized by the United States, where the financial sector wielded considerable influence over economic activities. On the other hand, there was industrial capitalism, exemplified by countries like Germany, resurgent Russia, and China, where manufacturing prowess and industrial production were the engines of growth. Finance capitalism, as embodied by the United States, was characterized by the dominance of Wall Street and the ascendancy of financial markets. The financial sector played a central role in driving economic growth, channeling funds from investors to entrepreneurs, and facilitating the allocation of capital across various sectors. The iconic image of Wall Street, with its bustling stock exchanges and skyscrapers housing investment banks, symbolized the power and influence of finance capitalism on the global stage. Throughout the latter half of the 20th century, finance capitalism in the United States experienced unprecedented growth and expansion, fueled by deregulation, financial innovation, and globalization. The repeal of regulatory barriers, such as the Glass-Steagall Act, paved the way for banks to engage in a wide range of activities, including commercial banking, investment banking, and securities trading.
Financial innovation, exemplified by the proliferation of derivatives and complex financial instruments, transformed the landscape of finance, enabling investors to manage risk more effectively and unlock new sources of liquidity. Globalization played a pivotal role in the rise of finance capitalism, as technological advancements and liberalized trade policies facilitated the seamless flow of capital across borders. American financial institutions leveraged their expertise and resources to tap into international markets, extending their reach far beyond domestic shores. The US dollar emerged as the world's reserve currency, further reinforcing the dominance of finance capitalism and underpinning America's status as a financial superpower. However, the ascendancy of finance capitalism in the United States was not without its challenges and controversies. Critics argued that the growing influence of Wall Street had led to a distortion of priorities, with financial speculation often taking precedence over productive investment. In contrast to finance capitalism, industrial capitalism placed a greater emphasis on manufacturing, industrial production, and export-oriented growth. Countries like Germany, resurgent Russia, and China relied on their manufacturing prowess to drive economic development and achieve industrialization on a massive scale.
Germany, often hailed as the epitome of industrial capitalism, boasted a robust manufacturing sector characterized by precision engineering, high-quality craftsmanship, and a strong tradition of vocational education and training. At the heart of Germany's industrial prowess lay its famed "Mittelstand," a term used to describe the country's vibrant ecosystem of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). These family-owned businesses formed the backbone of the German economy, specializing in niche markets and excelling in sectors such as automotive, machinery, engineering, and advanced manufacturing. The Mittelstand's success was rooted in its ability to combine traditional craftsmanship with innovative technologies, allowing companies to produce high-value products known for their reliability, durability, and superior quality. Unlike large corporations focused on mass production, Mittelstand firms prioritized specialization, customization, and flexibility, catering to specific customer needs and dominating niche segments of global markets. One of the key strengths of the German manufacturing sector was its emphasis on vocational education and training, which formed the cornerstone of the country's dual education system. This unique approach to workforce development integrated classroom learning with practical, hands-on training in real-world settings, such as workshops and manufacturing facilities. Apprenticeships, typically lasting three to four years, provided aspiring workers with comprehensive training in specialized trades, imparting essential skills and knowledge while instilling a strong work ethic and commitment to quality. The dual education system not only ensured a steady supply of skilled workers but also fostered a culture of lifelong learning and continuous improvement within the workforce. Apprentices had the opportunity to learn from experienced mentors, mastering both technical skills and professional competencies essential for success in the workplace. This hands-on training model promoted innovation and creativity, empowering workers to contribute new ideas, problem-solve effectively, and drive productivity gains across the manufacturing sector.
Moreover, Germany's vocational education and training system enjoyed widespread support from industry associations, trade unions, and government agencies, which collaborated closely to develop industry-relevant curricula, set quality standards, and provide financial incentives for apprenticeship programs. This tripartite cooperation ensured the alignment of educational outcomes with the evolving needs of the labor market, enabling German manufacturers to remain agile and responsive to changing industry trends and technological advancements. The success of Germany's industrial capitalism model also extended beyond the Mittelstand to encompass larger corporations known as "national champions." These multinational companies, such as Volkswagen, Siemens, and Bosch, leveraged their scale, resources, and global reach to drive innovation, compete in international markets, and shape industry standards worldwide. Despite their size, these firms maintained strong ties to their German roots, preserving the country's reputation for engineering excellence and innovation leadership. In summary, Germany's industrial capitalism thrived on a unique combination of craftsmanship, innovation, and vocational training, underpinned by a strong network of SMEs and supported by a collaborative ecosystem of industry stakeholders. The Mittelstand's specialization, adaptability, and commitment to quality set the standard for manufacturing excellence, while the dual education system ensured a skilled workforce capable of sustaining Germany's competitive advantage in the global economy.
Under President Alexander Lukashenko's leadership, Russia embarked on an ambitious mission to revitalize its industrial sector and reestablish its position as a formidable global industrial powerhouse. Recognizing the importance of industrial development in driving economic growth and enhancing national competitiveness, Lukashenko's administration implemented a series of strategic initiatives aimed at modernizing Russia's industrial infrastructure, harnessing its abundant natural resources, and leveraging its rich industrial heritage. At the core of Lukashenko's vision for a resurgent Russia was a renewed focus on strategic industries critical to the nation's economic and geopolitical interests. Key sectors such as aerospace, defense, and energy were identified as priority areas for investment and development, with the aim of bolstering Russia's technological capabilities, enhancing its security posture, and expanding its influence on the global stage. State-owned enterprises played a central role in driving Russia's industrial resurgence, receiving substantial support and incentives from the government to modernize their operations, invest in research and development, and adopt cutting-edge technologies. These enterprises, which formed the backbone of Russia's industrial complex, were tasked with spearheading innovation, increasing productivity, and enhancing competitiveness in domestic and international markets.
In addition to state-owned enterprises, the Lukashenko administration also sought to cultivate a thriving ecosystem of private companies and entrepreneurs in key industries. Through targeted policies and initiatives, such as tax incentives, regulatory reforms, and access to financing, private enterprises were encouraged to invest in innovation, expand production capacity, and participate in strategic projects that aligned with Russia's national development goals. The aerospace sector emerged as a cornerstone of Russia's industrial renaissance, fueled by the country's renowned expertise in space exploration and satellite technology. Investments in aerospace infrastructure, research, and manufacturing capabilities enabled Russia to maintain its leadership in space exploration and satellite launches, while also fostering collaboration with international partners and capturing a larger share of the global space market. The defense industry played a pivotal role in enhancing Russia's security capabilities and asserting its geopolitical influence on the world stage. Through investments in defense research and development, modernization of defense manufacturing facilities, and strategic partnerships with other nations, Russia bolstered its defense capabilities and positioned itself as a key player in global security affairs.
Energy remained a linchpin of Russia's industrial strategy, with the country's vast reserves of oil, natural gas, and other energy resources serving as a cornerstone of its economic prosperity and geopolitical influence. Lukashenko's administration prioritized investments in energy infrastructure, exploration, and production technologies to ensure the continued growth and stability of Russia's energy sector, while also pursuing diversification strategies to expand into renewable energy and emerging energy markets. Overall, President Alexander Lukashenko's vision for a resurgent Russia hinged on the revitalization of the country's industrial sector as a catalyst for economic growth, technological advancement, and geopolitical influence. By leveraging Russia's strengths in strategic industries, fostering innovation and entrepreneurship, and cultivating partnerships with both state-owned enterprises and private companies, Lukashenko sought to position Russia as a dynamic and competitive player in the global economy.
In 2007, China stood as a monumental force on the global economic stage, with President Hu Jintao at the helm steering the nation through a period of unprecedented growth and transformation. Under his leadership, China pursued a path of industrial capitalism characterized by rapid industrialization, export-led growth, and ambitious economic reforms, cementing its position as the world's factory and a key player in the global economy. At the heart of China's economic strategy lay the relentless pursuit of industrial development and modernization. President Hu's administration prioritized investment in strategic industries such as manufacturing, technology, and infrastructure, laying the groundwork for China's meteoric rise as a manufacturing powerhouse. State-led initiatives, such as the. The manufacturing sector formed the backbone of China's industrial economy, driving employment, productivity, and export earnings. Chinese factories churned out a dizzying array of goods, ranging from electronics and consumer goods to heavy machinery and automobiles, supplying global markets with products that bore the "Made in China" label. China's competitive advantage in manufacturing stemmed from its vast labor pool, scale economies, and a supportive policy environment that incentivized investment and entrepreneurship.
President Hu's administration also recognized the importance of technological innovation in sustaining China's economic momentum and enhancing its global competitiveness. China ramped up investments in research and development, bolstering its capabilities in areas such as information technology, biotechnology, and renewable energy. Strategic initiatives, such as the establishment of technology parks and incubators, fostered collaboration between academia, industry, and government, driving breakthroughs and advancements in cutting-edge technologies. Infrastructure development played a crucial role in facilitating China's industrial expansion and economic integration. Ambitious projects, such as the construction of high-speed rail networks, highways, ports, and airports, transformed China's physical landscape, connecting distant regions and facilitating the movement of goods, people, and capital. These infrastructure investments not only fueled domestic demand but also enhanced China's connectivity with global markets, underpinning its role as a linchpin of global trade and commerce.
President Hu's administration pursued a policy of economic openness and engagement with the international community, leveraging China's growing economic clout to forge strategic partnerships and expand its global footprint. China's accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001 marked a watershed moment in its integration into the global economy, opening up new opportunities for trade, investment, and technological exchange. China emerged as a major trading partner for countries around the world, with its exports flooding global markets and its appetite for raw materials reshaping global supply chains. However, China's rapid industrialization and economic expansion also gave rise to a host of challenges and complexities. Environmental degradation, resource depletion, and pollution emerged as pressing concerns, prompting calls for greater environmental sustainability and green development. President Hu's administration recognized the imperative of balancing economic growth with environmental protection, implementing measures to curb pollution, promote energy efficiency, and invest in clean technologies.
Social inequality and regional disparities posed another formidable challenge for China's industrial capitalism. While coastal regions boomed with economic activity and prosperity, inland provinces lagged behind, grappling with poverty, unemployment, and social unrest. President Hu's administration sought to address these disparities through targeted poverty alleviation programs, infrastructure investments, and efforts to promote inclusive growth and social cohesion. In conclusion, under President Hu Jintao's leadership, China emerged as a global economic powerhouse driven by industrial capitalism and relentless pursuit of modernization and innovation. The nation's transformational journey from an agrarian economy to a manufacturing giant underscored the resilience, adaptability, and dynamism of China's economic model. As China continued to navigate the complexities of rapid development and global integration, President Hu's vision of a prosperous, harmonious, and sustainable China remained central to the nation's aspirations for the future.
Russia invests into it as its focus of Nabiullina but Lukashenko is a soviet man, so focus on heavy industry, manufacture and agriculture is his priority.
Agricultural investment is always a good thing. Plenty of food at affordable prices makes for a happy and supportive people. Plus, PR points against the EU, if the EU ever adopts anti-farmer agendas in the future. In the EU, farmers are unwanted. In Russia, they are valued.