> The Russians I know all fought to stay in the States.

Russia or Soviet Union? The thing is I also know Jews who fled to the US from Europe (Germany, Poland, France, Austria, ...) in WW2 and came back. The same thing happened in the Soviet Union, the DDR, etc.

Things changed since then. I know Russians visiting every now and then. They know all the things that suck about Russia, like I stated. The worst thing currently appears to be the anti-homosexual laws and gangs and people flee because of that.

Anyway, we seem to know different people then. ;)

Speaking about fleeing: There are even Crimean people fleeing to Russia or US citizens, such as Snowden.

> It may make feel better to pretend that the US is as bad as Russia but you probably know you are lying to yourself.

I usually don't quote myself, but... "I get that certain things are worse and that Russia is poorer and stuff, so that sucks "

But again: What makes you think that getting rid of one single person changes that much? There is a whole regime. Yes, we could use other examples, but I think here on HN most people know the US the best. If Obama would get killed lets say by some leftist socialist terrorist or some Islamist, whatever, do you really think the US would become socialist or Islamic? No? Why do you think that killing Putin would then change things?

If you go back in history only a couple of years and look at the DDR: No political action, no big sanctions, cold or hot war changed something. It was more the ordinary people who changed things making nations tremble. Can go really fast.

And why so defensive? Aren't the statements about all these things being really bad true, war and murder, not caring about people in general and spreading hate, disinformation and fear by one nation is just as bad as by another. I know, hardcore nationalist on both sides may never understand that, but I'd think the average Hacker News reader isn't that blinded by propaganda. Come on, you don't really think killing someone really solves a problem. Just means the next person in a row takes a seat there. Doesn't mean that person is better. Look at North Korea or China. Did things really change to the better with switching leaders? Yeah, things sometimes switch but usually it's kinda switched. One thing will be better, but someone else things come up. Russia reduced weapons, pretty much abolished death penalty and wages less war, using gas sanctions, while reducing civil freedoms. Actually that is also a bit like in the US. Civil freedoms (even though stuff like freedom of expression, privacy, protests, ...) reduced and in most states there is no lethal punishment anymore. China still is really bad to any opposition, has the death penalty (with extremely long queues), lots of censorship, harassment of opposition, but has more economic freedoms, a... well, at least for the population living in cities good welfare systems, while reducing other rights.

The problem is that when we always point at the worst spot we will end up being the worst. Instead comparing with the best should be the goal. Scandinavia was just an example, since they really are on top of things currently, but also New Zealand and others seem to be on top of things.