How Russian Government and Other Dictatorships Work, based on Alternative History House of Lords

Many media commentors nowadays make an error of thinking that everything Russia does it but a will of one man, Vladimir Putin. 

Reality is that 'no man rules alone'. Putin too is beholden to his 'keys to power'. It is these keys are more obscure and opaque than they are in Western Democracies. Also, they are far less numerous then in a democracy.

The best comparison a real dynamics of Russian power system is that of the British House of Lords.

Russia is a peer-o-cracy or banon-o-cracy. 

Unlike UK there is no clear, publicly available list of peers, but it does exist informally. They themselves prefer the public to be unaware of their existence. However, they themselves do know who is in and who is not. When talking about them various experts use term 'elites' (elitta).

What is House of Lords

House of Lords is rather different from other upper houses of National Legislatures, such as the US Senate or even appointed Canadian Senate for example.

House of Lords have members who are hereditary peers. Nowadays they share the House with so called life-peers who are appointed for life just like members of Canadian Senate. However back in the days there were no life-peers, and all the peers were hereditary. 

However, what are hereditary peers are? 

Word hereditary here means they all inherited they place in the Lords from their parents, who in turn inherited it from their parents and so on. None of them were ever elected. You can even trace their lineage all the way back to medieval era Barons and other nobility.

From a modern liberal democratic society that raises the question: why they should be entitles to a political power based on their inheritance alone. However back in the medieval times or even generally in pre-French Revolution times, values were different.

In fact, monarchies are another such vestige of the times past, are also hereditary. One becomes a King not because he deserves it or people elected him, but merely because he was born first son of a previous King.

Peers and nobility in general work just like the Royal family itself, just one or several steps below in a feudal hierarchy.

Thus, a House of Lords is an assembly for these noble hereditary peers, that allows them a special increased influence over the government and the state.

Of course, in modern UK House of Lords is nothing more than a near-ceremonial vestige of the times past. Nowadays it hardly concerners itself with anything beyond opposing ban on hunting foxes.

It is directly elected House of Commons that provide for democratic representation and governance. 

However back 300 or so years ago both houses were rather equal in power they wielded. Only in 19th century directly elected House of Commons grew to assume dominant role in politics, while the House of Lords eventually grew increasingly passive at first, irrelevant next, near moribund later and eventually at the turn of 20th century it was even legislated into near obscurity by the Parliament Act of 1911, when they suddenly decided to oppose a government budget.

What if scenario

If you imagine an alternative reality where House of Lords not only stays fully hereditary but also manages to monopolies control over the state and its politics, relegating both King and the Commons to sidelines, you will get something close to how power in Russia works.

In this alternative reality, peers, fearful that something like French Revolution can lead to them loosing not only their power and privileges, but also their lives would play more active role in politics. They will band together just like barons against King John, but instead of agreeing on Magna Carta, will just seize control over state and government. Once Prime Minister and other key positions are in their hands, they will make sure that government answers only to them, creating a government by peers for peers.

To keep common men placated, they will not abolish House of Commons, but rig the elections using rotten boroughs and other tricks to make sure that only loyal to peers MPs are elected.

The actual Dynamics of Government by Peers for Peers

When all the ropes of government will be in their hands, peers would be driven by fear that commons might rise up against this peers' government. Thus, they will do everything they can think of to shore up their power and keep commoners as disempowered as possible.

However, a government by peers will govern only in the interests of the peers, often ignoring the needs of everyone else in the country. That would provoke people to protests and even uprisings against the government.

Such protests would only further exacerbate peers' fears of losing power and they will commit to even more repressive police state measures to keep common people down. Such oppressive measures will produce even more discontent among the population, which will result in even more protests. That will produce even more fears among the peers. A clear pattern here.

You can see these dynamics in play in Iran, Belarus, Russia, North Korea and China.

Eventually this pattern will lead to absurd measures, such as North Korea banning, computers, internet and mobile phones, in fear that people might use these things to coordinate an uprising. 

Putin poisoning his opponents and claiming that there are Nazi in Ukraine is also because of that.

How this relates to war in Ukraine

Occasionally protesters do win and overthrow the government, like it happened in Ukraine and Georgia.

Such events further exacerbate fears of peers in neighboring states and they double down on oppression in their counties.

Ukraine under Kuchma and Yanukovych and Georgia under Shevardnadze were peer-o-cracies. New governments in both countries did try to dismantle peers' system and peers' grip on power. They achieved partial success. 

Former peers in these countries often get investigated for corruption and abuse of power. Sometimes they just lose power, sometimes they even get arrested. 

For example, very influential and powerful Firtash, Ukraine analogue of Duke Buckingham, is now stuck in Austria, and fighting his extradition to the US to stand trial for corruption. Back in Yanukovych times he had control over gas transit and had both money and plenty of power. Now he struggles to stay out of prison as gas exports are controlled by someone else.

Firtash was on good terms with elites in Russia. They are concerned over his fate. They are concerned if they end up join him in this struggle, if someone like Alexey Navalnyi takes power in Russia. Their fellow peers in Belarus are equally concerned that it will happen to them, should Lukashenka lose power to anyone.

Also, House of Lords used to have a, now abolished, privilege that peers can only be tried by fellow peers. I think Firtash, Putin and Lukashenka personally believe in something similar.

For that reason, for example former members of Yanukovych era government enjoy protection and immunity from prosecution in Russia, even if new Ukrainian government initiated criminal cases against them and issues warrants on their arrests.

Current Development of Events

Meanwhile Putin uses war in Ukraine to drive young people out of Russia: either into emigration to the West, or to slaughter in war in Ukraine. 

Sure, that condemns Russia to stagnation and backwardness, as young people are the only one who can master modern technology and prevent country from falling back. However, Putin has other more pressing considerations: young people are much more likely to participate in protests and uprisings against the peer-o-cracy, so Putin wants young people somewhere where they cannot topple him.

That is how state by peers for peers slowly destroys itself from within. They will not stop destroying the future until they are gone for good: either through internal revolution or through the foreign invasion.

Putin's Elites are of course squarely behind him, it is for the Elites sake he is doing it after all. So is Lukashenka and his Elites in Belarus, who barely survived and clung to power after most recent election protests there. However next election in Belarus is coming so they have a lot to worry about. Protests in 2020 were bigger than previous ones in 2010 and 2005. They came much closer to toppling the peer-o-cracy. If next one will be even bigger, Lukashenka and Elites will end up joining Yanukovych and his crew in their exile in Russia.

However, Elites will not just give up as they see it as a survival issue. If protesters topple Putin as well, the only other dictatorial country further east, that can give them shelter are Kazakhstan and North Korea. They sure as hell are not thrilled to be exiled there. Not to mention Kim Jong Un might not be able to refuse the extradition request from Russia's new government.

What will happen in Future?

Peers or Elites in both Russia and Belarus will continue their losing battle to stay in power, until a revolution will finally succeed in ousting them like it did in Georgia and Ukraine.

Can some sort of deal be reached with them? Possibly. After all they are concerned with self-preservation. Given some assurances of safe exile and immunity from prosecution, they might agree to hand over the power to a democratic government.