Yeltsin firing upon the Duma (1993) was considered a critical error that may have ruined democracy in Russia. Could Russian Democracy have still survived had he not done that? (and a real democracy, not the illusion of choice post-2004)? Would Vladimir Putin have risen to power in that timeline? How would the world change?
The answer I got from Reddit was (credit to abbathehorse)
If Yeltsin had backed down during the constitutional crisis, it's likely that Russia could have become a parliamentary republic rather than the strong president system Russia developed into.
With Yeltsin's power being limited, the pace of the 'shock therapy' being implemented in Russia would have slowed and may even have partially reversed. This would weaken the oligarchs as they began to emerge, and reduce the rise in extreme poverty Russia saw in this period.
As a result, there is less Soviet nostalgia, meaning that the refounded Communist Party is less successful in the 1995 legislative elections, with more moderate parties on the left being the main beneficiaries. A weaker Communist party combined with the reduced powers of the president means leads to the USA being less concerned about the result of the 1996 presidential election, meaning that they do not intervene so Yeltsin is voted out. Without Yeltsin's patronage, Vladimir Putin does not rise to power as he did in real life, although he may still be a major politician within one of Russia's conservative parties or electoral alliances (depending on how the political system in Russia develops).
Anyone else have ideas? I'd like to have more input.
The answer I got from Reddit was (credit to abbathehorse)
If Yeltsin had backed down during the constitutional crisis, it's likely that Russia could have become a parliamentary republic rather than the strong president system Russia developed into.
With Yeltsin's power being limited, the pace of the 'shock therapy' being implemented in Russia would have slowed and may even have partially reversed. This would weaken the oligarchs as they began to emerge, and reduce the rise in extreme poverty Russia saw in this period.
As a result, there is less Soviet nostalgia, meaning that the refounded Communist Party is less successful in the 1995 legislative elections, with more moderate parties on the left being the main beneficiaries. A weaker Communist party combined with the reduced powers of the president means leads to the USA being less concerned about the result of the 1996 presidential election, meaning that they do not intervene so Yeltsin is voted out. Without Yeltsin's patronage, Vladimir Putin does not rise to power as he did in real life, although he may still be a major politician within one of Russia's conservative parties or electoral alliances (depending on how the political system in Russia develops).
Anyone else have ideas? I'd like to have more input.