>
Everyone seems to agree Putin isn't really democratically elected (though are vague on the details of how he rigs this, beyond controlling TV channels)People are not vague about this. You just haven't bothered reading the details, it seems.
Putin:
- arrests and kills innocent political opponents
- controls the media
- kills journalists
- kills whistleblowers
- controls the (opaque) ballot-counting process, allowing him to change vote counts without any chance for an audit
- monopolizes poll workers
This has been covered extensively by the Carter Center, every major news publication in the US and Western Europe, and (I'm sure) quite a few blogs and comment sections.
> at the same time, somehow he's a dictator only because ordinary Russians just can't be bothered getting rid of him. This is a contradiction.
Most dictators in history were overthrown by their allies or their citizens. It's not a contradiction.
With today's technology, you still can't quite have 100% control over a populace. If every adult suddenly decided to overthrow you, you'd still lose. This may change with improved autonomous warfare, but for now, it's possible for civilian uprisings to win.
That doesn't make someone not a dictator. You're using an extreme definition of "dictator" if it must be someone who cannot be overthrown.
Just as we had tyrant kings who were sometimes killed by lynch mobs, so too are there dictators who are overthrown by popular uprisings.