Number of words: 274<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Take Russia for example. For hundreds of years, the Russians were believed to be \u201cdifferent\u201d from their European cousins. When the French political theorist Jean Bodin visited Russia in the 16th<\/sup> century, he observed that the czarist regime\u2019s abosolute power stood in sharp contrast to the more limited rule of European kings of emperors. Unlike the Russians, who were thought to prefer subservience to freedom, the people of Europe would never tolerate such absolutism, Bodin wrote. When the marquis de Custine travelled extensively in Russia in 1839, he wrote that whereas other nations tolerated the oppression of their rulers, the Russians \u201cloved it.\u201d Not surprisingly, when the czar\u2019s absolutism was replaced by Soviet totalitarianism, it only confirmed for many that Russians were not cut out gor democracy. As Richard Pipes, a leading expert on Russia, put it, it\u2019s no coincidence that Marxist ideas developed into a reformist social democracy in many places around the world but evolved into the most extreme forms of repression in Russia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To be sure, there were many substantive reasons to believe that Russia was not cut out for democracy. As schoolers like pipe pointed out, Russia has no tradition of limited government, no institution of private property, and a history that shows little regard for the rule of law. Moreover Russia\u2019s civil society was weak, its middle class nonexistent, and, unlike some European nations, the subjects of the Russian empire did not share a common faith, culture, or language. Simply put, judging by its culture and traditions, there was little reason to believe that democracy could take hold in Russia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n