If consumption standards do not fall dramatically, it means that the main concern about the Special Operation was groundless. It doesn't have serious downsides It consumption standards do fall dramatically, it means the main concern about the Special Operation made sense
When I say "decrease in consumption standards", I don't mean hunger. I mean the loss of the prior abundance of consumer goods. Paradoxically it may sound for a Westerner, the limited choice of yogurts on shelves is far worse blow on Putin's legitimacy than the mass starvation
Two reasons. 1. Limited choice of yogurts hurts Moscow and the attitude of Moscow does matter. Mass starvation would hurt the province no one cares about 2. You starve cuz you don't have money? That's your fault. There are few yogurts in supermarket? That's Putin's fault
Westerners may misunderstand the Putin's social contract. It's not about "increasing the life quality of the general population" (do you think you are in Sweden or what?). It's primarily about abundance of consumer opportunities. That's the major basis of Putin's legitimacy
If some remote province potentially starves or freezes, no one will care. However, if Moscow feels the lack of broadly understood consumption opportunities that's a much greater blow on Putin and delegitimization of his policies than a Westerner could ever imagine. The end