That statement doesn't seem to make sense without context. Please elaborate.
There is a push of Central Asian people toward a form of de-colonial thinking and praxis, but in my humble opinion, it's another colonization with a different color - from the west.
What is true is that democracy mostly exists in the west currently. But it's not colonisation if a country becomes a democracy. That could happen without "the west".
Ps. A sign of not a democracy is leaders in control for > 20 years.
Russia is a terrible partner. Russia sympathizer in Ukraine brought destruction on that country from Russia. It's really tragic that Russia is obliterating people that considered themselves Russians living in Ukraine.
There is zero comparison between modern western projects and Russia imperialism that did not change in the last 300 years.
No state is perfect, and one can always find this or that to pick at, but most of democratic ones have not unleashed armies of state-employed goons on their own people to keep them from speaking up.
You should work on your boot-licking addiction (and I am telling you that as a Soviet-born russian-speaking citizen of one of the former republics).
You could've studied and worked in Belgium/Netherlands/Finland and many other countries much richer than Poland even with the Iron Curtain in place.
Millions of people did just that.
- You werent able to cross to the west unless on official Government delegation.
- You werent able to cross the border _at all_ unless Government decided to let you. It was a political decision by a party committee.
- Vacations abroad were only possible as an official reward from the Government, and never outside ~Comecon.
- You couldnt even keep a passport in your own house. It was given to you before departure, and you had 7 days to return it after crossing back.
You know who did work and study in the west? People who ran away https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/300_Miles_to_Heaven https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Ferry
My uncle actually planned stowing away on a ferry to Norway in 1981, but got caught in the port and landed in penal company.
Large parts of Eastern Europe had a choice after the collapse of the Soviet Union and chose the way of the west/Europe, with all its challenges and shortcomings, because almost any system is better than living under the thumb of autocratic leadership.
I hope one day, not that many years from now, I can once again visit a prospering Ukraine, which will be a member of the EU. If that is what the Ukranian people want, that is.
Yeah but wait: Russia today is very capitalist and market based. Yet very autocratic. The two can well go together. And that is the case of Kazakhstan as well.
> Large parts of Eastern Europe had a choice after the collapse of the Soviet Union and chose the way of the west/Europe, with all its challenges and shortcomings, because almost any system is better than living under the thumb of autocratic leadership.
No, they had no choice, because there was no alternative, not even in Russia. And today we are dealing with this lack of alternative. I think you are prone to believe that Putin is the Soviet Union 2.0: that's far from reality. Putin is the product of this lack of alternatives of the 90s.