Vladimir Putin’s government has launched an aggressive campaign to nationalize the assets of Konstantin Strukov, one of Russia’s richest men and the owner of the country’s largest gold mining company. The move marks a sharp escalation in the Kremlin’s efforts to extract wealth from within its own elite as the financial toll of the war in Ukraine deepens.

Strukov, whose fortune is estimated at over $3.5 billion, is the founder of Yuzhuralzoloto—a gold empire built over decades with strong ties to the Kremlin. But on July 5, his private jet was grounded by Russian authorities as it prepared to leave for Turkey. His passport was reportedly seized, and the aircraft barred from departing.

top 99 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 1 point 1 year ago

So when do the oligarchs learn? How much longer do they accept the status quo?

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Let’s make a bingo card out of it. What are our options?

  • source
  • [–] [S] 210 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    Billionaires siding with dictators thinking they'll be protected?

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 121 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    It's funny to me that they think they'll be special, every single time. "They won't throw me out the window for my fortune!"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Usually they are. Dictators typically gain and keep power by appeasing the wealthy and powerful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    I believe Putin is between a rock and a hard place and has to take risks. There could be a coup from this. Perhaps more decentralization of force as rich people look to protect their assets and hire private mercenaries or buy the loyalty of military officers.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 145 points 1 year ago (23 children)

    This is a pretty good example of why I say even millinoaires and billionaires should support a functional democractic society with taxation and regulation and social safety nets. Its the old penny wise and pound foolish. Getting a sliver more and a sliver more and then you lose it all because the rule of law was thrown out long ago. It won't necessarily take that long to. At a certain point it could happen at any time. Maybe it will. Maybe it won't.

  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 67 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This all depends on the people born into wealth being reasonable people.

    Most are unhinged psychopaths or nepo babies with too much ego.

    Which is why wealth needs to be forcefully redistributed, they won't do it voluntarily.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    Wealth is actually being redistributed quite a bit in Russia right now. The oligarchs are paying for the war and "the people" are getting much higher wages either in the military or because of labor shortages.

    It's not great, what with all the death and destruction. But Russians gini coefficient is going down fast.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Rich people live under the fear of losing it all. As sharing is synonymous with losing to them, no one wants it and everyone is caught in this loop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I'm becoming convinced it's an actual mental disease, or at least grossly maladaptive

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    It's a mental disease in the same sense as drapetomania used to be

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drapetomania

    Drapetomania was a proposed mental illness that […] hypothesized as the cause of enslaved Americans fleeing captivity.

    I could make some guesses, but I'm not sure what you meant by this. What did you mean?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Some adaptation pretty human mechanism which looks unnatural because it's not us who experience it although given the same circumstances we would do the same

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Smaller scale millionaires perhaps. Once they go multinational, it becomes very difficult to significantly harm them even if one country decides to dispossess their business. This has already happened to large corporations that exist today through nationalization at various places and points in time. E.g. Shell after Venezuelan oil nationalization.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    A billionaire cannot exist in 2 countries at the same time. It doesn't matter if his company is multinational, he isn't.

    If you jail that billionaire, which is not hard as a state if said billionaire resides in your country, you can "convince" him to give even assets in foreign countries.

    That's why they removed his passport.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Right but how do you make most countries want to arrest them? We currently don't have a setup allowing for this if no international criminal offenses are involved. It only happens if the billionaire resides mostly in an "authoritarian" country where they could get "arbitrarily" arrested. The rest of the world isn't currently setup to do this. I'm not saying it can't be setup or shouldn't be setup like that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The comment you replied to originally was talking about why billionaires should support a democratic society.

    If the society is not democratic, it would be authoritarian. Therefore what I explained could happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    Yes. Of course what you said could happen. My point is that in the current status quo there's still plenty of non-authoritarian countries and billionaires are still operating on easy-to-jump-ship basis when they destroy one democracy or another for increased profit. So I think that's why this cost isn't factored in. Competition for increased profits dominates. If we're left with only a few democracies that tolerate billionaires, then that calculus could change. It's similar to capitalism's treatment of any finite resource - plunder that bitch till there's nothing left, then deal with the consequences. If we don't, the other guy would do it and we'd lose on the profit, and the other guy gains power over us given by the newly acquired capital.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Not if its the home nation. Shell was a us company in venezuela but if the same thing happened in the US the owners would be lucky to get out of the country with what they could carry and if they worked fast enough maybe they could have a small fraction of what they used to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 75 points 1 year ago* (25 children)

    The USA elite should take notice. It'll happen to them too. Trump will ruin them if things get between himself and them.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    It’s all ready happening between him and Musk unless that’s all kayfabe

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    it's so much better when you take from the rich, rather than taking from the poor like we do in the united states.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    They take from the poor in Russia too though. The rich aren’t the ones being fed into the meat grinder in Ukraine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [+] -20 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    the difference is that the united states ONLY takes from the poor, while the russians take from both rich AND poor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    the difference is that the united states ONLY takes from the poor

    Objectively and provably untrue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Call me crazy, but people might take ML users stand against fascism more seriously if they did literally anything with it besides just rooting for a different Imperial kleptocracy built on violence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -24 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    the only thing that's crazy is westerners refusing to learn from the large body of independent evidence that defines marxists/leninists in a similar manner that climate deniers refuse to learn from the large body of climate science evidence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Defending a violent, Imperial, kleptoctacy is not Marxism. Lying about how you are being criticized is not a genius plan to avoid the consequences of what you said. Can you communicate in anything other than buzz words or am I talking to a chat bot?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -14 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That's not what I said.

    I would recommend that you reread the comment before it gets deleted by the liberal mods in this community; but I already know that your ilk doesn't respond well to reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Are, are the liberals in the room there with you? Roll your forehead across the keyboard if so. Seriously though. It's laughable looking at the levels of cognitive dissonance shared between people making arguments like yours and the maga crowd.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    How do you not get exhausted from being so incredibly wrong all the time?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Trust me the US will start taking from wealthy Americans as well soon enough. Once authoritarian groups burn enough Bridges and goodwill. They always have to scapegoat another group.

    It's pretty hilarious how so many people think that the boot isn't the problem. The flavor of it is all that matters.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 62 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    It's funny because $3.5bln is nothing when trying to cover the war effort, but it'll spark a massive distrust in the Kremlin's inner circle, which is basically the only group of people that can realistically threaten Putin's very life.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

    I'm still waiting for these fuckers to finally grow some balls.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Nah. Russia will implode itself on its own even without resistance. As if Russia never learned anything that autocratic control over economy never works, because their political culture is too corrupt to function effectively.

    Francis Fukuyama, as wrong as he was about the end of history, is still correct that dictatorships eventually collapse because they surround themselves with yes men who are too detached from reality. The invasion of Ukraine is the beginning of the end for Putin. It is only a matter of time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    the beginning of the end for Putin. It is only a matter of time.

    With his age, he has all biological means to fuck around and never find out. I believe the legacy talk captures him, but the fact he himself would never meet any pushback makes many of his decisions way easier than if he was 40yo and had another 40+ to his rule. Any other minute of him fucking up foreign countries with a weaponised influence, not to say direct warfare, is a minute too much.

    He could've tried to revive the country, and he got an easy start in the 00s, but he chosed to gamble it instead.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 45 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Soon these oligarchs won't even own a window to jump out of

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Strukov’s company has denied the incident entirely, stating that he was in Moscow on the day in question and calling the reports “disinformation.” But court documents confirm that a judge had already banned him and his family from leaving the country, and government agencies moved quickly to enforce it.

    I will now recommend the Sad Oligarch podcast. Short series on the mysterious deaths of Russian oligarchs in the last few years.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    A friend of a friend is the daughter of a Russian oligarch. It was a messy situation in which she was at risk of being drawn into the politics, even though her dad was an asshole who she would've been glad to see defenestrated. I only know the surface level info, but it sounds like a fucked up situation in many ways

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

    Somebody didn't watch Rules for Rulers, keep your elite happy or they'll come together and turn on you.

    Fingers crossed.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    You remember those old “In Soviet Russia” backwards jokes? It’s like that, but unironically.

    Putin has consolidated power to the point that he doesn’t serve at the behest of Russian billionaires; they only exist due to his whims - and they can cease to exist just as quickly.

    ‘Blowout’ by Rachel Maddow touches on this, it’s an interesting read/listen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    Conversely, if Putin falls out a window, maybe they can keep their business.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    They're scared they'll go down with him. But they'll finally have to accept the fact that they're fucked either way. At this point, getting rid of him is their best chance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    They're scared they'll go down with him. But they'll finally have to accept the fact that they're fucked either way. At this point, getting rid of him is their best chance.

    Yup. They're at the point where the consequences of obedience are as bad as defiance.

    Best have him fall out a window and see if prospects change.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    putin is paranoid enough not to go any windows, he often only ventures from his PALACES under fsb protection to a room where he has 20m table away from his inner circle.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Please. There are hundreds ready to take Putins place. Some politically, but hundreds behind the scenes who also have finger puppets ready for ”power” who can step in for both Medvedev and Putin. The rest of the dog kennel (like Lavrov) will keep barking for their masters sake.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Please. There are hundreds ready to take Putins place. Some politically, but hundreds behind the scenes who also have finger puppets ready for ”power” who can step in for both Medvedev and Putin. The rest of the dog kennel (like Lavrov) will keep barking for their masters sake.

    It sure sounds like you're advocating staying meek and submissive in the face of Tyranny.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I guess you didn’t really read. Just pointing out that you need to do more than kill the puppetmaster to replace all those who he either trained or who learned how to thrive in his absence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I guess you didn’t really read. Just pointing out that you need to do more than kill the puppetmaster to replace all those who he either trained or who learned how to thrive in his absence.

    I guess you didn't really understand my comment.

    You'd have to be a complete knuckehead to think that the point of killing a Tyrant is to have one of their trainees take over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Maybe I should clarify: Oh you spring child who knows nothing of the year, how it turns and how winter turns planted hopes into frozen fears.

    Pre-edit: You’re right. Which is why Putin’s death won’t bring much boon. Staying silent, quiet or passive won’t bring much in opposition to the face of tyranny either. But eliminating the current tyranny will be more difficult than what the people tried to accomplish over a hundred years ago, as the dissemination of power is different nowadays. Before, one used to think that cutting the head of a hydra might be difficult, but possible in the long run. Today, well…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    You’re right. Which is why Putin’s death won’t bring much boon. Staying silent, quiet or passive won’t bring much in opposition to the face of tyranny either. But eliminating the current tyranny will be more difficult than what the people tried to accomplish over a hundred years ago, as the dissemination of power is different nowadays. Before, one used to think that cutting the head of a hydra might be difficult, but possible in the long run. Today, well…

    The more you talk, the more you sound like you're following marching orders:

    Drive home the point that resistance is futile.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›