At what point does it dawn on Putin that his unbelievably inept military is getting an ass-whupping for the ages? At what point does he get forcibly removed from office because of the damage he is doing to his country?
I guarantee you he's hesitant to take in the view from any upper-floor window.
At what point does it dawn on Putin that his unbelievably inept military is getting an ass-whupping for the ages? At what point does he get forcibly removed from office because of the damage he is doing to his country?
Synder's contribution here is absolutely marvellous.
Also worthy to note China's complete deafness to Synder's main point.
The concluding remarks (from about 2:00:00 onwards) are fantastic. The Russian delegation basically has no response, mumbling, we'll find a way to get back to you later.
In the grammar of Russian violence, the subject, the perpetrator of violence, can never stand without an object, without a "terpila," tolerator. Whoever wants to talk about peace with Russian violence must not be deaf to it. With tolerators who tell Russia about its "legitimate interests" is only possible to deal , see above. When Putin utters âSurrender, my beauty.." in the video, some life comes into his gaze, his eyes narrow, one corner of his mouth pulls up, Putin seems satisfied by the speech act alone.
Even under the tsar, countries that Russia subdued were said to have been "pacified. In the Soviet Union it was called peace struggle, and we learned in peace lessons how the Western peace movement helped our country to fight for peace all over the world. Today, it is helping Putin.
Every time the word "peace" is mentioned, even if it is only in an Internet comment, it is registered in Russian open-plan offices and it is echoed back, amplified. Every post means one more bullet in someone's flesh, every flyer with Picasso's dove makes more people hide in the basement of their house, because uniforms move into their apartment, come to them in the basement, beat them up, rape them, shoot them until everything "surrenders".
why is it when people want human rights and some to recognize their agency it is always the west's fault?
as if people don't have sense enough to reject brutal populist authoritarian rule?
religious and political theocracy is out...
Heil Neocon Power!
"The billâs authors claimed it was modeled on the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938. The U.S. law, enacted 80 years ago to expose Nazi propaganda, requires people to disclose when they lobby in the U.S. on behalf of foreign governments or political entities."
The move came two days after the Russian state-funded television channel RT registered in the United States under a decades-old law known as the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).
RT officials had complained repeatedly about being forced to comply with the law, and warned of retaliation.
why is it when people want human rights and some to recognize their agency it is always the west's fault?
as if people don't have sense enough to reject brutal populist authoritarian rule?
religious and political theocracy is out...
Narratives attempt to discredit protesters, blame the West for public dissent
Participants protest against a draft law on âforeign agentsâ during a rally outside the parliament building in Tbilisi, Georgia, March 8, 2023. (Source: Reuters/Irakli Gedenidze)
By Eto Buziashvili and Sopo Gelava
Anti-Russian, anti-government protests in Georgia forced the countryâs ruling party, Georgian Dream (GD), to withdraw its bill on âforeign agents,â while GD officials attempted to discredit the protests by spreading anti-Western narratives, echoing Kremlin propaganda, including the threat of another Russian invasion and blaming the West for orchestrating the protests.
Olesya Krivtsova, a first-year university student from the northern Russian city of Arkhangelsk, is facing more than 10 years in a penal colony for publicly opposing the war in Ukraine on social media.
Krivtsova, 19, stand accused of âjustifying terrorismâ and repeatedly âdiscrediting the Russian armed forcesâ for posts she made on her personal page on the Russian social network VKontakte and Instagram.
Russiaâs Wagner mercenary group has launched a youth club aimed at fostering patriotism and preparing young Russians for military service.
The club, called Wagneryonok (âJunior Wagneriteâ), is based at the Wagner Center, the groupâs glass-fronted headquarters and technology center that opened in St. Petersburg in November.
ever notice how all authoritarians eventually skew toward nationalism/facism?
Ever notice how Dilbertarian buffoons can't even spell fascism?
MAGA!
When liberalism is on the march and nationalism is under siege, a nationalist backlash eventually follows. The ensuing competition between these two perspectives is not a fair fight: nationalism wins every time. Not only does liberalism fail to achieve its most ambitious goals, but many of its most important gains are likely to be reversed. Indeed, the great danger is that a resurgent nationalism will not merely restore a workable balance of power between liberalism and nationalism but will instead turn liberal democracies into illiberal democracies or worse.
Nationalism is more powerful than liberalism for three reasons. First, nationalism is more in sync with human nature. Humans are intensely social beings from the beginning, not individuals who start life alone and form social contracts when they are mature. We are all born into social groups that nurture us and protect us. Nations, like other social groups, are primarily survival vehicles that are essential for our well-being. Their common culture allows members to cooperate more easily and effectively, which in turn maximizes their chances of securing the basic necessities of life.
Second, liberalism alone cannot provide the glue that holds disputatious people together in a state, which is a monumental task. The liberal solution for the problem â promoting the norm of tolerance and creating a state that is largely confined to maintaining order and protecting rights â is helpful, but not enough to handle those rancorous differences that invariably arise among individuals and groups in any society. Nationalism is essential for accomplishing that difficult task, because it provides a common culture that helps create bonds between people who often have profound differences over first principles. In brief, liberalism needs nationalism, but nationalism does not need liberalism.
Third, nationalism, unlike liberalism, fulfills important emotional needs. One characteristic of a nation that makes it so special is that it provides its members with an existential narrative. It gives them a strong sense that they are part of an exclusive and exceptional community whose history is filled with important traditions as well as remarkable individuals and events. Furthermore, nationalism promises people that the nation will be there for future generations the way it was there for past generations. In this sense, nationalism is much like religion, which is also adept at weaving the past, present, and future into a seamless web that gives members a sense they are part of a long and rich tradition. This formidable bonding force is absent from liberalism, which has no equivalent
story to tell.
given that there has never been a communist country in the true sense of the word, just autocratic one-party governments masquerading as one, it is just a question of semantics, is it not?
can we just call it (a violence inspired) late stage communism?
ever notice how all authoritarians eventually skew toward nationalism/facism?
far left and far right eventually agree/merge?
hegel/marx inspired nationalism and communism have had plenty of resources, time and most importantly top down strongman control
the disastrous results are really easy to observe
what passes for communism and nationalism today is a reflexive "anti-capitalist" position, blaming everything under the sun on capitalism
not many new ideas, just more of the same silly reheated rhetoric
given that there has never been a communist country in the true sense of the word, just autocratic one-party governments masquerading as one, it is just a question of semantics, is it not?
