I thought that you would tell me that. I see no reason to explain to you what I mean by the term.
You see no reason? Then I see no reason to take you seriously. You use a word that has no established meaning -- even less established meaning than democracy, because it's usually used as a word to slander someone or something -- and you expect that I'm supposed to read your mind to discover what exactly makes a country "neo-fascist."
I doubt that Internet can be a valid source.
This is a ridiculous canard. It's foolish to talk of "the internet" as a single, undifferentiated source. Yes, there's a lot of shoddy information and data on the internet, but if you were to take a break from whatever rubbish you read, you'll find that there are scores upon scores of reputable, reasonable sources for just about every variety of human knowledge.
The link you posted is pretty interesting. You can find many similar articles about other (democratic) countries.
I don't disagree. No country, no society is perfect, because humanity is imperfect. But at the same time, to tell me that all of Russia's neighbors are terrible places while ignoring Russia's many failings is, at the very least, intellectually dishonest.
I wonder what countries you are talking about. Finland? But Finland was the part of the Russian Empire, not of the USSR. Estonia and Latvia? Hm... Yeah, the standard of living in these countries is a bit better (thanks to the EU).
No, I'm not talking about Finland. I'm talking about the Baltic countries, which you so crudely dismissed as "neo-fascist." Estonia and its neighbors began a period of accelerated growth years before they joined the EU. Did they benefit from the prospect of becoming members of the EU? Indubitably. But to attribute it solely to the EU is a mistake. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have been quick to embrace freedom in all its forms -- economic as well as political -- and they have benefited greatly. Every international survey that measures the advance of freedom has rated them highly, even while noting the concerns about the treatment of ethnic minorities. While one survey may be "biased," when every survey reaches the same conclusions it becomes considerably more difficult to dismiss the results.
In any case, quality of life isn't simply a matter of economic figures. It is more holistic than that, and therefore difficult to put into numbers.
Do not forget that it is Russia that is liable for the Soviet external debts. And it successfully pays them off. As far as I know, the external debt of the USA is much heavier than that of Russia.
Ok, I won't forget that. But this statistic is meaningless. So what? Yes, Russia's external debts are lower than America's. Could it be because Russia is a major exporter of energy and, with energy prices being higher, Russia's external balance is in good shape? Am I supposed to be impressed by your picking an arbitrary economic figure and comparing Russia and America? America's external debt, while worrying, is hardly unsustainable, in part because the US has certain privileges as a result of seigniorage. Why not talk about Russian inflation? Or Russian unemployment?
But, in general, you are not very knowledgeable on these matters either. Recently, the mortality rate decreases, the birth rate increases. There is surplus of births over deaths.
If you're going to be exceedingly arrogant, at least have the facts on your side. Of course Russia has more death than births. That's why the Russian government is concerned about its demographic crisis. (Maybe you filter out the bad news that emanates from Moscow and hear only "good" news?) In any case, here are the numbers provided by Population Reference Bureau, a reputable organization that tracks demographic statistics for all the world's countries.
Russia (
http://www.prb.org/TemplateTop.cfm?...profile/countryprofiledisplay.cfm&Country=470)
Population Mid-2005 143,025,000
Births per 1,000 Population 11
Deaths per 1,000 Population 16
Rate of Natural Increase (Percent) -0.6
Projected Population, 2025 130,175,000
Projected Population, 2050 110,459,000
Projected Pop. Change 2005-2050 (%) -23
Infant Deaths per 1,000 Live Births 12.4
Lifetime Births per Woman (TFR) 1.4
Population Age <15 (%) 16
Population Age 65+ (%) 13
Life Expectancy at Birth, Total 66
Life Expectancy at Birth, Male 59
Life Expectancy at Birth, Female 72
Urban Population (%) 73
HIV/AIDS Among Adult Population, Ages 15-49, 2001 (%) 0.7
In terms of population growth, life expectancy, and infant mortality, that is a demographic crisis in the making.
And **** all those who do not agree with me.
This seems to be your preferred manner of argumentation. I'm waiting for you to support your arguments with something other than bluster.