Jump to content

Talk:A Just Russia – For Truth

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Just Russia)

Motherland

[edit]

I've changed 'Fatherland' to 'Motherland', which is the correct translation. Fatherland in Russian is 'otechestvo', whereas 'rodina' is motherland. Shotlandiya 15:08, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian name

[edit]

This article should include the Russian name, and the best possible translation of the name, as well... Russian experts needed! —Nightstallion (?) 20:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the name in Russian, as well as the link to the official website. Unfortunately, it seems that things are still in the state of flux—there is no documentation for the new party available on the website yet, only that for "Rodina", which means that the exact punctuation used in the official name of the party may be slightly different. Should be good enough for now, though.
As for the English name, "Just Russia" and "Fair Russia" are technically the most accurate translations. The former, however, is confusing in that it can be interpreted as "just Russia, nothing else", which is incorrect. Other translations can be used as well, as there is neither an "official name in English" nor an established variant consistently used by the English language press. Again, it may be worth waiting a bit more, meanwhile listing all names that's been used in the press so far.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! —Nightstallion (?) 20:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a Russian speaker I would have said "Just Russia" would be more accurate than "Fair Russia" but can see the confusion, but I'm not particularly minded to start an edit war as I think the explanation above does it justice. Shotlandiya 12:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I vote to change the name to "Just Russia". "Fair" and "Just" are not equivalent, and the latter describes the intended meaning much more effectively.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.170.53.239 (talk • contribs) 14:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see, it is called "Just Russia" everywhere in the media. It is a much better, even if slightly confusing name.Cosainsé (talk) 02:06, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gryzlov

[edit]

Gryzlov is the current leader of United Russia, not an ex-leader. Netrat_msk (talk) 16:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Party name translation

[edit]

The party website's 'International' section translates the name as A Just Russia. This translation is also used on Socialist International's website. It might be wise to use that translation of the party in Wikipedia too, if nobody objects. --Autospark (talk) 01:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes official international name to political party is Just Russia http://www.spravedlivo.ru/english/ Gnomsovet (talk) 14:39, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What do reliable secondary sources use? Just Russia is a poor translation, although it should be noted; the natural English reading of it is Only Russia, which is not what is intended. The International Herald Tribune may be the only report on this subject by a native speaker, and their Justice Russia is a reasonable solution.Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not weighing in on the name choice but the intro line format now is atrocious. Pare it down to "Foo Foo Russia (Russian: Foo Foo Росси́я; literally "Foo Foo") was formed on 28 October 2006..." (I.e., one choice of English name, the Russian name, and the literal meaning of the Russian name) and put all of the outrageous, false, or incorrect translations in a footnote or in another "Names" section. — AjaxSmack 00:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is their official English name "Just Russia" or "A Just Russia"? Some of this depends on choosing the best translation of the Russian adjective справедливый, which is translated in my big Russian to English dictionary as "just" (as in justice), and "true", "correct". Plus avoiding confusion with being misunderstood as "only Russia"Anthony Appleyard (talk) 07:22, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can see, it is called "Just Russia" everywhere in the media. It is a much better, even if slightly confusing name.Cosainsé (talk) 02:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

accusation to this parties in nationalism breach Wikipedia:NPOV

[edit]

Accusation to this parties in nationalism breach Wikipedia:NPOV. In program of this parties speaks of inverse http://www.spravedlivo.ru/information/section_11 . Gnomsovet (talk) 19:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to answer you on my Russian talk page. Nationalism is a political ideology that is defined either in the platform a party concerned or by political analysts. There aren't any 'accusations' there. Rodina was definitely nationalist and so is its successor too, though there are very few scholarly sources out there for us to make a definite judgment (both are recent formations). --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 19:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The nationalists came out of "Rodina" and are identified Great Russia and their leads Dmitry Rogozin,afterwards there remained only socialists and patriots.95.52.118.189 (talk) 06:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What kind of ideology is 'left-centrism' (with a link to Centrism. Is this a neologism or raw translation from Russian to English? --Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 01:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1934/02/centrism.htm

http://thetroublewithcentrism.blogspot.com/2008/01/left-centrism-britains-once-big-three.html 95.52.118.189 (talk) 06:53, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The party's nationalist ideology and connexions are often referred to in the media: [1], [2]. It is still very far away from EU style centre-left parties.

The ideology of Just Russia is not "nationalism". The cited source in the article is old (2007) and characterised the Rodina party. The nationalist wing of Rodina had opposed the merger into Just Russia (see Great Russia). None of the (today) five other constituent parties of Just Russia had a nationalist plattform, nor has Just Russia. Does anyone still oppose the deletion of the label "nationalism"?. Lupus648 (talk) 20:10, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I admit that I don't have any English sources specifically for post-2007 developments. However, the links I provided specifically mention that the Just Russia party includes nationalists, anti-semites and xenophobes, among them even signatories of the (infamous?) Letter of 500.

Наибольшее внимание в этом плане привлекли «Справедливая» и «Единая Россия» как партии правящего бюрократического слоя. Первая на протяжении всего года оказывалась втянутой в скандалы, связанные с привлечением в партию ксенофобов разной степени известности. Особенно показателен случай с красноярским антисемитом Олегом Пащенко. Скандал разразился еще весной 2007 года, когда Пащенко стал кандидатом в депутаты Законодательного собрания Краснодарского края (объединенного к тому моменту с несколькими автономными округами в один субъект федерации). В феврале лидер «справедливороссов» Сергей Миронов лично обещал выгнать Пащенко из партии, однако это заявление не помешало Пащенко не только стать депутатом краевого Заксобрания, но и несколько месяцев спустя попасть в список кандидатов в депутаты уже федеральных выборов. Впрочем, и помимо Пащенко, у партии неоднократно возникали различного рода «националистические» неприятности. В частности, осенью произошла довольно странная история, связанная с преследованием члена партии, кандидата в Госдуму мэра Ставрополя Александра Кузьмина. Во время обыска в его рабочем кабинете, проведенного в рамках дела о злоупотреблениях служебными полномочиями, была найдена нацистская символика. О взглядах Кузьмина сложно сказать что-то определенное, хотя, безусловно, он пользовался поддержкой националистов (в частности, на региональных выборах в марте его от имени КРО поддержал Дмитрий Рогозин). Не вызывает сомнения, что преследование Кузьмина спровоцировано жесткой конфронтацией с краевой администрацией и конкуренцией с «Единой Россией». Но трудно представить, что нацистская атрибутика была мэру подброшена, хотя и понять, зачем она хранилась в служебном кабинете, совершенно невозможно. Впрочем, из десятка кандидатов-националистов, включенных в список «Справедливой России», по результатам выборов в Государственную Думу прошел лишь один — подписант «письма пятисот» Анатолий Грешневников.

--Miacek (t) 20:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section

[edit]

Why do we have a criticism section here, but not in the articles of any Western political party? Double standards? Offliner (talk) 23:55, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly agree. You are very welcome to create criticism sections in all other articles about Western political parties. Oh yes, they deserve a lot of criticism. I can support you if you wish.Biophys (talk) 01:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a matter of political culture. Some countries' politicians prefer talking about themselves to criticising their opponent.
Feel free to add relevant, properly sourced criticism to the other Western (and Eastern) political parties' articles. Wikipedia has good precedent supporting such criticism in general. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 15:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on A Just Russia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on A Just Russia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:40, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on A Just Russia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:09, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New party name

[edit]

Do we know for sure that the new party name is A Just Russia - Patriots - For Truth? It's just I have been reading a few sources that say it's just A Just Russia - For Truth. Caretaker John (talk) 13:47, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've just now received the latest newsletter from the Socialist International and they used the full name A Just Russia - Patriots - For The Truth.
The SI have just removed that party from SI membership too https://www.socialistinternational.org/news/press-releases/decision-regarding-membership-of-a-just-russia-patriots-for-the-truth-party-1998/ IamCJRs (talk) 20:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Surkov

[edit]

@My very best wishes: I noticed conflicting information in the establishment section. Earlier it says "Surkov openly initiated the project to create A Just Russia" and then quotes him (although this quote does not seem to refer to this party in particular) while at the end of the section, it states "Vladislav Surkov, the leading force behind United Russia opposed the creation of the new party". Mellk (talk) 20:12, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to check and correct any specific details you think should be corrected. My very best wishes (talk) 20:14, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will look into it when I have more time. Richard Sakwa is also much more well known than Luke March. Mellk (talk) 20:26, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Pro-Kremlin"

[edit]

What does this even mean? consider the follwing quote:

A Just Russia — For Truth[a] (SRZP;[18][19] Russian: Справедливая Россия — За правду; СРЗП, romanized: Spravedlivaya Rossiya — Za pravdu; SRZP),[20][21][22] formerly A Just Russia (SR), is a social-democratic[3][13][23] political party in Russia. The party, part of the "systemic opposition", is considered to be pro-Kremlin.[24][25]

Now, if I change a few words around, it could read like this:

The US Green Party — is a social-democratic[3][13][23] political party in the United States. The party, part of the "systemic opposition" within the two party system, is considered to be pro-Washington.[24][25]

Obviously, it would read and look really silly. So why then does every Russian political party article have this vaguely defined term, "Pro-Kremlin" in the lede of their articles? What does that even mean? Are they pro-Putin? Pro-Russian establishment? Pro-Russian government? Russian patriots?

What does this even mean?


PeaceThruPramana26 (talk) 02:18, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Pro-Kremlin" is a term widely used in RS, it refers to being pro-Putin regime. Systemic opposition is a real term in regards to Russian politics. It is the nature of such authoritarian political system, unlike in United States. With the party displaying Z and V banners around cities in relation to the "special operation" and long declaring their absolute support for Putin, it is quite self-explanatory, no? Of course there was a brief period of opposition before Putin's third presidential term, but things have changed radically since. Mellk (talk) 19:23, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But the sources (or one of them anyway, since the other source doesn't even mention this political party at all) don't say this. They leave it vaguely undefined.

With the party displaying Z and V banners around cities in relation to the "special operation" and long declaring their absolute support for Putin, it is quite self-explanatory, no?

No, I'd disagree with this interpretation. I reiterate my initial statement: Would one consider the Democratic Party to be a 'Pro-Bush' party since the senate delegation went [in favour] of the Iraq War and impugned the character and patriotism of those who questioned their vote? I can't help but feel these purposefully vague, undefined terms (which btw, I can't say that you properly defined it since you used no sources or referred to no Wikipedia policy) are used to create insinuations in articles where they can't do so because the evidence doesn't support it: Can't actually find any evidence to suggest that the party supports Putin? Just slander them as 'pro-Kremlin' in a vaguely undefined way (even the Russian media does this! So it's not merely an 'East vs West' question but a genuine, sincere inquiry that I am trying to find an answer to). PeaceThruPramana26 (talk) 21:25, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is based on WP:V and various RS use "pro-Kremlin", where I do not think there is something similar for Democratic Party. OK, how can it be explained? I think it can be explained by the fact that Mironov is a Kremlin loyalist. Here he describes his relationship and thoughts on Putin [3]. So SR is a pro-Kremlin party, like ER, however it positions itself as alternative to ER. Both however support agenda of Putin. And in 2018 election the party officially endorsed Putin for president. This is the same position as in early days of party, however around 2011-2012 elections there was opposition to authorities during protests, before loyalty to authorities again and removal of members who sympathized with opposition. Mellk (talk) 22:08, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mellk: I agree with PeaceThruPramana26 that labeling SRZP as simultaneously opposed to the Russian government ("part of the 'systemic opposition'") and in support of the Russian government ("pro-Kremlin") is very confusing. Just because reliable sources use both terms doesn't mean we can't have a clearer and more nuanced explanation. How about "Although the party is part of the 'systemic opposition', it has endorsed Putin for president and supports much of Putin's agenda, including the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine." SRZP certainly isn't "pro-Kremlin" when it comes to issues like pension reform, so I think using that term is sloppy and misleading, even if it is used by some reliable sources. Nosferattus (talk) 19:09, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Systemic-opposition can still be token opposition. "Pro-Kremlin" essentially means pro-Putin. Yes they might argue over stuff like pension, but anger at unpopular policies like pension reform is directed at United Russia and the government (not Putin/Kremlin). The government bear the brunt of the blame while Putin is presented as not being responsible for those policies. Anyway, yes it could still be elaborated on. But I would just say something like: "The party is considered to be part of the 'systemic opposition', and has supported the agenda of president Putin, including his foreign policy". Mellk (talk) 23:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that SRZP is pro-Putin. The problem is "pro-Kremlin" doesn't have a clear meaning. As our Kremlin article mentions, the term Krelim is "often also used metonymically to refer to the Russian government", and I think most Americans would understand "pro-Kremlin" to mean "pro-Russian government", not necessarily "pro-Putin". I like your suggested wording and will try to incorporate it into the article, although I might change "and" to "but" due to the apparent contradiction involved (regardless of how normal it is in Russia). Nosferattus (talk) 19:54, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Government of Russia is different to the presidential administration, technically speaking, but sure it might be a bit confusing. The current wording is fine. Thanks. Mellk (talk) 19:56, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Syncretic political position

[edit]

I think this party is syncretic, that is, left economically and right culturally. 2A00:1FA1:F021:8040:8C2E:150A:9383:8DA4 (talk) 14:06, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a reliable source explicitly stating such. Yue🌙 02:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's understandable, since the party is social conservative. 2A00:1FA1:F010:160F:23:1C3F:33A4:FF31 (talk) 04:20, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can a socially conservative syncretic party be in a centrist-centre-left position

[edit]

How can a socially conservative syncretic party be in a centrist-centre-left position 2A00:1FA1:B022:D003:6184:60D5:A377:90EF (talk) 12:26, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:A_Just_Russia_–_For_Truth&oldid=1256506926"