Russia may be a leftist society but the government is very much RW authoritarian. And understand, anything that relies on a single strong man is authoritarian. I know you say you don't like labels but they allow us to understand what's going on. From a ideological perspective, anything that is authoritarian is right wing. Conversely, anything that is totalitarian is left wing. Because of your dislike of labels you called something both left and right wing at the same time.

Mussolini, as was Hitler, was an authoritarian strongman and he bolstered his strength through a system of corporatism. Fascists chased down socialists, communists, and leftists and usually killed them, or if they were being kind, ran them out of the country. You want to call that left wing? Sorry but that is straight out of the RW play book of the day.

This from your link: "This is very negative. It's a clear signal that the regime will be authoritarian and autocratic, and control everything. It's all about keeping power. The tsar was constrained by the aristocracy. The party bureaucracy controlled the general secretary. Today the president controls parliament, the senate, regions, the bureaucracy and the security services, as well as oil and gas."

Russia today is a authoritarian regime surrounded by wealthy businessmen or an oligopoly. It all centers around Putin though and the more we stifle the oligopoly with sanctions the more Putin is threatened and why he worked so hard to get Trump in, as he was the only hope of getting Obama's sanctions removed.

These are pretty much the main reasons I can not become a conservative..

I'm absolutely open to conservative views!

Here's one I rather like: fiscal responsibility. Here's the problem, though: can you name the last Republican president to balance a budget? Hint: It wasn't Trump, either Bush, Reagan, Ford, or Nixon. Instead, the GOP has driven up spending, primarily on the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

Here's another one I like: keeping the federal government out of our personal lives. If you're lobbying for the federal government to tell people how to conduct their sexuality, you're in violation of this. The GOP has been bitterly cruel to the LGBT community. Also, the anti-abortion movement is not for personal freedom; it is for imposing your moral judgments on others.

In my estimation, conservatism went off the tracks in the 1980s as Reagan and others embraced the Religious Right. Increasingly, the conservative movement seems to be predicated on two very questionable premises: (1) Straight white Christian men are best suited to decide what's right for everyone in this country, and (2) unfettered capitalism always makes the world better.

But frankly, the biggest problem that I have with “modern” conservatism is its apparent immunity to scientific truths. If you think climate change is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. If you think evolutionary biology is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. And it's one thing to be ignorant, but if your ignorance shapes your policy, then I can't get on board your big dumb train.

These are pretty much the main reasons I can not become a conservative..

I'm absolutely open to conservative views!

Here's one I rather like: fiscal responsibility. Here's the problem, though: can you name the last Republican president to balance a budget? Hint: It wasn't Trump, either Bush, Reagan, Ford, or Nixon. Instead, the GOP has driven up spending, primarily on the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

Here's another one I like: keeping the federal government out of our personal lives. If you're lobbying for the federal government to tell people how to conduct their sexuality, you're in violation of this. The GOP has been bitterly cruel to the LGBT community. Also, the anti-abortion movement is not for personal freedom; it is for imposing your moral judgments on others.

In my estimation, conservatism went off the tracks in the 1980s as Reagan and others embraced the Religious Right. Increasingly, the conservative movement seems to be predicated on two very questionable premises: (1) Straight white Christian men are best suited to decide what's right for everyone in this country, and (2) unfettered capitalism always makes the world better.

But frankly, the biggest problem that I have with “modern” conservatism is its apparent immunity to scientific truths. If you think climate change is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. If you think evolutionary biology is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. And it's one thing to be ignorant, but if your ignorance shapes your policy, then I can't get on board your big dumb train.

These are pretty much the main reasons I can not become a conservative..

I'm absolutely open to conservative views!

Here's one I rather like: fiscal responsibility. Here's the problem, though: can you name the last Republican president to balance a budget? Hint: It wasn't Trump, either Bush, Reagan, Ford, or Nixon. Instead, the GOP has driven up spending, primarily on the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

Here's another one I like: keeping the federal government out of our personal lives. If you're lobbying for the federal government to tell people how to conduct their sexuality, you're in violation of this. The GOP has been bitterly cruel to the LGBT community. Also, the anti-abortion movement is not for personal freedom; it is for imposing your moral judgments on others.

In my estimation, conservatism went off the tracks in the 1980s as Reagan and others embraced the Religious Right. Increasingly, the conservative movement seems to be predicated on two very questionable premises: (1) Straight white Christian men are best suited to decide what's right for everyone in this country, and (2) unfettered capitalism always makes the world better.

But frankly, the biggest problem that I have with “modern” conservatism is its apparent immunity to scientific truths. If you think climate change is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. If you think evolutionary biology is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. And it's one thing to be ignorant, but if your ignorance shapes your policy, then I can't get on board your big dumb train.

These are pretty much the main reasons I can not become a conservative..

I'm absolutely open to conservative views!

Here's one I rather like: fiscal responsibility. Here's the problem, though: can you name the last Republican president to balance a budget? Hint: It wasn't Trump, either Bush, Reagan, Ford, or Nixon. Instead, the GOP has driven up spending, primarily on the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

Here's another one I like: keeping the federal government out of our personal lives. If you're lobbying for the federal government to tell people how to conduct their sexuality, you're in violation of this. The GOP has been bitterly cruel to the LGBT community. Also, the anti-abortion movement is not for personal freedom; it is for imposing your moral judgments on others.

In my estimation, conservatism went off the tracks in the 1980s as Reagan and others embraced the Religious Right. Increasingly, the conservative movement seems to be predicated on two very questionable premises: (1) Straight white Christian men are best suited to decide what's right for everyone in this country, and (2) unfettered capitalism always makes the world better.

But frankly, the biggest problem that I have with “modern” conservatism is its apparent immunity to scientific truths. If you think climate change is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. If you think evolutionary biology is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. And it's one thing to be ignorant, but if your ignorance shapes your policy, then I can't get on board your big dumb train.

I was a liberal for most of my life. I was a local official in the McGovern campaign. I gave up on the Left when two things became overly commonplace in the Leftist vocabulary; everyone they didn't like became Hitleresque and it became common "knowledge" that the "people" were not smart enough to know what is best for themselves.

There is a basic truth I learned about power. To get it, the solicitors will promise everything and to keep it, the holders will do anything. Power doesn't live by the same rules as the "common people".

It really doesn't matter what you label the politicians. They behave exactly the same depending on their control of the processes.

He blame Hillary for the mass protests of 2011. “She said they were dishonest and unfair,” Putin fumed in public remarks, saying that Clinton gave “a signal” to demonstrators working “with the support of the U.S. State Department” to undermine his power. “We need to safeguard ourselves from this interference in our internal affairs,” Putin declared. Former U.S. officials who worked on Russia policy with Clinton say that Putin was personally stung by Clinton’s December 2011 condemnation of Russia’s parliamentary elections, and had his anger communicated directly to President Barack Obama. They say Putin and his advisers are also keenly aware that, even as she executed Obama’s “reset” policy with Russia, Clinton took a harder line toward Moscow than others in the administration. And they say Putin sees Clinton as a forceful proponent of “regime change” policies that the Russian leader considers a grave threat to his own survival.

If that's a love affair with Clinton then it is a very peculiar one.

And Fascists also kill socialists, communists, and liberals too--which is what Hitler did. A good book on political ideology is Political Ideologies: Their Origins and Impact by Leon P. Baradat. I think the early editions better. It's been around since the 70's and you can pick it up really cheap. You should read it, or something on political ideology, so you can understand the 'labels' as they apply to us.

I can't disagree with most of your post but to be fair some liberal thinking is a little too indulgent the other way. Both major parties seem like giant omnibuses that if you board after seeing something you like you suddenly find yourself in the company of malodorous ideas that are also on the bus. Seems like the country functions slightly better under centrist candidates like Bush 41 and Clinton. What is not attractive is a Presidency that ignores and even derides the core voters of the opposite party as if "we are in charge now and you morons can eat it..."
Nixon and Trump come to mind in that category.

These are pretty much the main reasons I can not become a conservative..

I'm absolutely open to conservative views!

Here's one I rather like: fiscal responsibility. Here's the problem, though: can you name the last Republican president to balance a budget? Hint: It wasn't Trump, either Bush, Reagan, Ford, or Nixon. Instead, the GOP has driven up spending, primarily on the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about.

Here's another one I like: keeping the federal government out of our personal lives. If you're lobbying for the federal government to tell people how to conduct their sexuality, you're in violation of this. The GOP has been bitterly cruel to the LGBT community. Also, the anti-abortion movement is not for personal freedom; it is for imposing your moral judgments on others.

In my estimation, conservatism went off the tracks in the 1980s as Reagan and others embraced the Religious Right. Increasingly, the conservative movement seems to be predicated on two very questionable premises: (1) Straight white Christian men are best suited to decide what's right for everyone in this country, and (2) unfettered capitalism always makes the world better.

But frankly, the biggest problem that I have with “modern” conservatism is its apparent immunity to scientific truths. If you think climate change is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. If you think evolutionary biology is up for debate, you're scientifically illiterate. And it's one thing to be ignorant, but if your ignorance shapes your policy, then I can't get on board your big dumb train.