The Ukraine Question

[xerx]

For an alternate view, read this: https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/stat...47886908424195

I'm not a historian and can't respond critically to what he's claiming, but I'll grant, for the sake of discussion, that the Soviet Union was highly dependent on Western know-how for bootstrapping its industry (Stalin wasn't shy about outright stealing atomic technology, either). But isn't that generally the case for developing countries? China has been stupendously reliant on Western technology and knowledge-transfer, both openly and surreptitiously (China has been accused of sending spies to infiltrate Western university research departments).

A counter-argument, from the same guy: https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/stat...76859741904898

One random report: https://twitter.com/markito0171/stat...36178394488835

That guy's right about sanctions being ineffective tools of regime change. If the Russian government is indeed overthrown (obviously, anything is possible), that would be bucking the trend.

The sanctions will impede the war effort, by definition. But Russia has been planning this invasion for months, and it has stockpiled necessary provisions, including gold reserves. Its economy, following the seizure of Crimea, has also been hardened by years of sanctions—it is more self-sufficient than it was before 2014. Russia could still achieve enough of its war objectives, whatever those turn out to be.


* The rise in oil prices has certainly helped Russia—alongside Saudi Arabia and Venezuela (which the Biden administration is now cozying up to, following years of sanctions and hostility, in an attempt to find an alternate oil supply). India has quadrupled (!) its imports of Russian oil, which is irresistibly being bought at a lower price [source].


* Europe is still reliant on Russian gas and will be for quite some time. Not all Russian banks have been removed from SWIFT. French and other firms are certainly taking their sweet time in leaving Russia [source, source]. Some French firms are even looking to expand due to lowered competition from UK, Germany.


* Russia has threatened to ignore intellectual property laws, which would be bad news for Western brands, as they could potentially be undercut by cheaper, 'generic' Russian knock-offs (imported even more cheaply because of the lower price of the Ruble). [source]


* Russia still has enormous intellectual capital and a well-educated professional class.


* Russia still has a large and immovable trading partner, in China.


I don't know where this is heading, and I'm not making any predictions about Russia's state over the next few years (collapse / consolidation / revolution / other?). But while Russia is certainly a weak country — too weak to pose a threat to central Europe — it has a stronger hand than is claimed. And Kissinger's opinion, that it can't be treated as some correctable aberration within an American-led hegemony, was worth listening to. It isn't Panama and Putin isn't Noriega. A craftier strategy is probably called for: compromise and negotiation (however asymmetrically, given Russia's obvious weakness).

[Baqer]

Yeah, right. Pretend you care about democracy and represent all Ukrainians while mirroring your opponent's autocratic tactics, ostracizing political opponents which incidentally (or not?) happen to be mostly left wing parties. You wouldn't dare to call out and ban the Azov Battalion or any of the fascist formations, would you? But yeah, fuck all Ukrainians who identify as ethnic Russians, they don't need representation... And where is the evidence of spying performed by these 11 entities? Was each party caught independently? Was it a joint effort?

There has to be something and/or someone else behind this, I just haven't figured it out yet.

https://www.spiegel.de/international...0-c20fd5786288

alright I need an excuse to post this interview and since it addresses the idea of Ukraine and Russia being "brother countries" I feel like it's fair to respond to this.

[Baqer]

* Russia still has enormous intellectual capital and a well-educated professional class.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60697763

No.

Or at the least, not for long.

But while Russia is certainly a weak country — too weak to pose a threat to central Europe — it has a stronger hand than is claimed.

The obvious tendency of basically every person who knows anything about Russia and wants to look reasonable has been overhyping Russia as having a stronger hand than they actually are.

It'll take time for the dust to settle and information to become clearer, but I don't think I'm being unreasonable in saying that Russia is currently being ruled by a paranoid, delusional man demanding military success from virtually untrained incompetent buffoons, and is in the same state as the Russian Empire during the Russo-Japanese war or maybe even the USSR during Afghanistan.

I'd even argue that Ukraine is currently on track for total victory, assuming they play their cards right (which they have so far demonstrated they are capable of doing, unlike Russia), save for the scarily likely possibility that Putin, in his deranged state, orders some suicidal escalation in a last ditch effort to win.

[xerx]

* Zbigniew Brzezinski believed that Ukraine's admission into NATO would be like a dagger aimed at Russia. Even if long-range weaponry, stationed far outside Ukraine, could destroy Russia from afar, Ukraine's NATO admission would still represent a psychological threat. (Just as Chinese ICBMs could destroy American cities from afar, Chinese troops in Mexico would still represent a psychological threat to the Americans, let's be honest).

* He suggested hardening Ukrainian defensive capabilities via purely defensive weapons (e.g. MANPADS) and asymmetric warfare training (especially urban and guerilla combat). This should have been done openly, in full view of Russia, and it should have been done thoroughly and exhaustively, making it clear to Russia what the stakes are. This would make it too costly for Russia to invade, but without posing any direct threat to Russia itself. Ukrainian defense policy doesn't need to be a binary choice between joining NATO vs. being a Russian colony.

* Following the collapse of the USSR, the question of NATO expansion came up. What was actually proposed is still open to debate, but Russian negotiators may have gotten the impression, naive or otherwise, that NATO wouldn't expand into eastern Europe. A written guarantee vis à vis Ukraine's non-admission would reassure Putin.

* Crucially, even if article 5 was called, any other NATO power can veto it (there has to be a consensus), and joining NATO doesn't prima facie guarantee support during an invasion. It isn't obvious that all NATO countries share the same geopolitical interests. France has demonstrated an unwillingness (so far) to divest from Russia (in fact, France and Russia were historical allies; prior to WW1, France had been a major investor in the Russian empire and shared its hostility towards Germany).

The veto power was introduced by the United States in order to assuage non-interventionist legislators who shared the founding fathers' hostility towards foreign entanglements.

He does suggest removing the veto for under-performers, FWIW. (France isn't under-performer, however, so I'm not sure what he'd think about that).

https://youtu.be/-FccHshqDsg?t=991



* I forgot whether or not he mentions this, but successive Ukrainian governments have not acted in the spirit of enlightened, pluralistic, multi-ethnic nation-building. For one thing, laws have been passed that require Russian civil servants to utilize Ukrainian [source], and both sides (pro-Ukrainian vs. pro-Russian) had been trying to rope outside powers into their ethnic civil war. Aligning with NATO isn't just about security but is also a symbolic component of Ukrainian ethno-nationalism (mimicking the nationalisms of other post-Soviet states).

I'm not a Kremlin bot, BTW. In no way am I downplaying the heroism of the Ukrainian defenders, nor am I downplaying the fact that Ukraine has earned its full independence from Russia (there is a human element to all of this which takes precedence over geopolitical calculations).

[xerx]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60697763

No.

Or at the least, not for long.



The obvious tendency of basically every person who knows anything about Russia and wants to look reasonable has been overhyping Russia as having a stronger hand than they actually are.

It'll take time for the dust to settle and information to become clearer, but I don't think I'm being unreasonable in saying that Russia is currently being ruled by a paranoid, delusional man demanding military success from virtually untrained incompetent buffoons, and is in the same state as the Russian Empire during the Russo-Japanese war or maybe even the USSR during Afghanistan.

I'd even argue that Ukraine is currently on track for total victory, assuming they play their cards right (which they have so far demonstrated they are capable of doing, unlike Russia), save for the scarily likely possibility that Putin, in his deranged state, orders some suicidal escalation in a last ditch effort to win.

I've talked about this possibility earlier on. Not everyone will have reason to celebrate a crushing Russian defeat. There are bigger priorities here. Russia could become overly reliant on China (a regime that is far more autocratic than Russia, as depressing as that sounds), with all the consequences that entails. As Russian oil is taken off the market over the next few years, the rise in oil demand will help Saudi Arabia, a regime that has been conducting an even more horrific war in Yemen.

But integration with Europe would have at least aided the rise of a liberal middle class (educated in European universities, with cultural ties to western Europe, etc.). Democracy is also more likely to flourish when a country is territorially and financially secure, not when it is under cold war-style diplomatic isolation and extreme(r) censorship.

[silke]

I wonder how many Russians will actually see this. And what they would think after watching it.

Well Russians are certainly not counting on too many US or NATO officials seeing this.

By the sound of the video, Schwarzenegger has completely forgotten about the struggles that the people faced in that part of the region. He's never opened their war-torn letters and only remembered about them when it was time for him to PR, to put on a mask of hypocritical faux morality.

On a personal note, I'm not surprised that after all his lies, artifice, and falsity, his wife had to divorce him.

[Ryan]

@xerx are you Russian?

You word things in a strange way, as if other nations should have a vested interest in making sure Russia comes out of this war in a better condition. Why would anyone want that? Speaking from a purely self interested view. Do you understand the amount of good will Russia lost when it decided to wage this war?

Also I for one do not believe that the people are innocent, not in nazi germany time nor now. We are all complacent in what our governments do. There are various degrees of responsibility but I would at least have more respect for someone who doesn’t make excuses for wrongdoing.

[xerx]

@xerx are you Russian?

You word things in a strange way, as if other nations should have a vested interest in making sure Russia comes out of this war in a better condition. Why would anyone want that? Speaking from a purely self interested view. Do you understand the amount of good will Russia lost when it decided to wage this war?

Also I for one do not believe that the people are innocent, not in nazi germany time nor now. We are all complacent in what our governments do. There are various degrees of responsibility but I would at least have more respect for someone who doesn’t make excuses for wrongdoing.

I'm neither Russian nor Ukrainian (nor Slavic) and don't have a personal interest in any of this.

I'm just giving my opinion as someone who dislikes foreign entanglements. I don't want my country (a NATO country) to be roped into risky, expensive, and potentially unsustainable defense obligations. If there is a more circumspect way of containing Russia, I'd rather we considered that.

As for Russia itself: I only care that it becomes a vibrant democracy. And detente with the West, in the form of a mutually-beneficial alliance and trade ties, seems like a better way of achieving that than a cold war (in my novice view, as someone who isn't a historian or political scientist). I don't care for Russian nationalism in and of itself, and a part of me is actually happy that it's getting a good bruising.

[Adam Strange]

2008 interview where then PM Vladimir Putin states that Crimea is not disputed territory and that Russia has always, and will always respect the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine




Glad that's settled.

[Adam Strange]

Cheaper than shooting him:

https://twitter.com/KyivPost/status/1506210173366452232

[on a peaceful hiatus]

this IEI is maybe worth watching for some of you guys with an identical type here.

https://youtu.be/C4EA8VSZdZ8

[xerx]

There's been a rise in ultra-traditionalists who support Russia, which they see as a bulwark of Christian civilization against globalized liberalism. There are also many 'authoritarians' (the kind that @Adam Strange talks about) who probably support Russia because they recognize Putin as one of their own.

Does anyone know how common this is? I don't look forward to further Russian infiltration and destabilization of our politics.

Obviously, many (maybe even most) people on the right clearly abhor the invasion; I'm not trying to paint in broad brush strokes.

[Ryan]

There's been a rise in ultra-traditionalists who support Russia, which they see as a bulwark of Christian civilization against globalized liberalism. There are also many 'authoritarians' (the kind that @Adam Strange talks about) who probably support Russia because they recognize Putin as one of their own.

Does anyone know how common this is? I don't look forward to further Russian infiltration and destabilization of our politics.

Obviously, many (maybe even most) people on the right clearly abhor the invasion; I'm not trying to paint in broad brush strokes.

This is true for my country and the region. But I don’t live in a democratic region anyway. Conservatives here in general always seem to fall in love with authoritarians. They are impressed by displays of power. They loved Trump and they love Putin. They were also not happy about the same sex marriage act the US Supreme Court passed which is why they hate Obama and the Democratic Party.

[Adam Strange]

There's been a rise in ultra-traditionalists who support Russia, which they see as a bulwark of Christian civilization against globalized liberalism. There are also many 'authoritarians' (the kind that @Adam Strange talks about) who probably support Russia because they recognize Putin as one of their own.

Does anyone know how common this is? I don't look forward to further Russian infiltration and destabilization of our politics.

Obviously, many (maybe even most) people on the right clearly abhor the invasion; I'm not trying to paint in broad brush strokes.

I've been reading about Authoritarians for a few years now, and the general consensus is that 40% of every country's population is made of strong Authoritarians. Basically, Trump's unwavering approval rating.

There are another 40% who are strongly liberal democratic, and the 20% in the middle are swayable if you scare them enough, because scared people test as being more Authoritarian. Hence the message that Authoritarians commonly revert to is that the country is surrounded by Terrorists who want to destroy our pure way of life, and therefore, we must strike at them first.

H!tler only had about 30% of the popular vote, if memory serves, but he got into power by other means and then it was past saving, because Authoritarians don't believe in free elections.

It's a miracle that Trump didn't succeed in destroying the Republic. The two-party system of presidential nominees and the electoral college are designed to prevent people like Trump from getting anywhere near office, but they failed this time. One can speculate as to why, but my theory is that almost no one who remembers WWII is still alive so most people think "it can't happen here", Fox News can present its hate-mongering in the guise of "opinion" to scare the influenceable, and Reagan's destruction of the unions made the country more unequal which, it turns out, hurt Conservatives more than liberals and created a class of people who feel that the present government is not on their side. To paraphrase one Trump supporter, it isn't hurting the right people.

So, yes, the Authoritarians are among us and always will be, and preserving a liberal democracy will be an unending struggle.

Our present democracy ain't a given. In the words of Benjamin Franklin, we have "A republic, if you can keep it."

[Adam Strange]

There's been a rise in ultra-traditionalists who support Russia, which they see as a bulwark of Christian civilization against globalized liberalism.

There are also many 'authoritarians' (the kind that @Adam Strange talks about) who probably support Russia because they recognize Putin as one of their own.

Does anyone know how common this is? I don't look forward to further Russian infiltration and destabilization of our politics.

Obviously, many (maybe even most) people on the right clearly abhor the invasion; I'm not trying to paint in broad brush strokes.

@xerx, you would be mistaken in thinking that Authoritarians do more than give lip service to Christian values. When the choice is between a lying, cheating, philandering Authoritarian and an honest, upright, Church-going liberal, the Authoritarians abandon whatever Christian values they pretended to have and simply support the Authoritarian, one of their own.

[xerx]

This is true for my country and the region. But I don’t live in a democratic region anyway. Conservatives here in general always seem to fall in love with authoritarians. They are impressed by displays of power. They loved Trump and they love Putin. They were also not happy about the same sex marriage act the US Supreme Court passed which is why they hate Obama and the Democratic Party.

Thanks. Yeah, there are people like this everywhere, even in my country, which is one of the most liberal on Earth. Putin's support base contains lots of people who miss the old Soviet Empire and who want to belong to a global superpower. His annexation of Crimea was especially popular with this crowd.

[Adam Strange]

Thanks. Yeah, there are people like this everywhere, even in my country, which is one of the most liberal on Earth. Putin's support base contains lots of people who miss the old Soviet Empire and who want to belong to a global superpower. His annexation of Crimea was especially popular with this crowd.

Your country APPEARS to be one of the most liberal on Earth. Those 40% Authoritarians are just not speaking up at the moment.

Same as in Germany. Same as everywhere.

[Baqer]

I've been reading about Authoritarians for a few years now, and the general consensus is that 40% of every country's population is made of strong Authoritarians. Basically, Trump's unwavering approval rating.

There are another 40% who are strongly liberal democratic, and the 20% in the middle are swayable if you scare them enough, because scared people test as being more Authoritarian. Hence the message that Authoritarians commonly revert to is that the country is surrounded by Terrorists who want to destroy our pure way of life, and therefore, we must strike at them first.

I mean, I have my doubts on the idea that it's a nearly unchangeable 40/40/20 split, but I'm open to the idea if you can send some material supporting it. Assuming it is the case though, do you think it's something like an alpha/gamma vs. beta/delta split, or not type related at all?

[Adam Strange]

I mean, I have my doubts on the idea that it's a nearly unchangeable 40/40/20 split, but I'm open to the idea if you can send some material supporting it. Assuming it is the case though, do you think it's something like an alpha/gamma vs. beta/delta split, or not type related at all?

I will look for the data, but I think it's in a large and very boring book which is not available for free.

I suspect that being an Authoritarian is a lot like being gay and that it's not type related. That's the best I've got so far.

*EDIT*
I found the book, but I didn't find the number "40%" while glancing through the 370 pages of text. That number might have been made-up in my mind at some point. Remember, my Ti isn't the greatest.

However, it must have come from somewhere. Possibly from the book The Authoritarians by Bob Altmeyer, or from one of the essays on Karen Stenner's website, https://www.karenstenner.com/

I don't think I made it up, but then again, I'm 4D Te.

[Baqer]

I will look for the data, but I think it's in a large and very boring book which is not available for free.

I suspect that being an Authoritarian is a lot like being gay and that it's not type related. That's the best I've got so far.

Authoritarianism is a sexuality? Got it.

[Adam Strange]

Authoritarianism is a sexuality? Got it.

No, it's not even equivalent to being Conservative. But my guess is that it's not type-related.

[xerx]

@xerx, you would be mistaken in thinking that Authoritarians do more than give lip service to Christian values. When the choice is between a lying, cheating, philandering Authoritarian and an honest, upright, Church-going liberal, the Authoritarians abandon whatever Christian values they pretended to have and simply support the Authoritarian, one of their own.

Yeah, rather than taking their cues from Christianity, people like this superimpose their authoritarian beliefs on to it, and will engage with religion as a source of chauvinism more so than a source of spirituality. People like this belong to every religion.

I've been reading about Authoritarians for a few years now, and the general consensus is that 40% of every country's population is made of strong Authoritarians. Basically, Trump's unwavering approval rating.

There are another 40% who are strongly liberal democratic, and the 20% in the middle are swayable if you scare them enough, because scared people test as being more Authoritarian. Hence the message that Authoritarians commonly revert to is that the country is surrounded by Terrorists who want to destroy our pure way of life, and therefore, we must strike at them first.

H!tler only had about 30% of the popular vote, if memory serves, but he got into power by other means and then it was past saving, because Authoritarians don't believe in free elections.

It's a miracle that Trump didn't succeed in destroying the Republic. The two-party system of presidential nominees and the electoral college are designed to prevent people like Trump from getting anywhere near office, but they failed this time. One can speculate as to why, but my theory is that almost no one who remembers WWII is still alive so most people think "it can't happen here", Fox News can present its hate-mongering in the guise of "opinion" to scare the influenceable, and Reagan's destruction of the unions made the country more unequal which, it turns out, hurt Conservatives more than liberals and created a class of people who feel that the present government is not on their side. To paraphrase one Trump supporter, it isn't hurting the right people.

So, yes, the Authoritarians are among us and always will be, and preserving a liberal democracy will be an unending struggle.

Our present democracy ain't a given. In the words of Benjamin Franklin, we have "A republic, if you can keep it."

From what I've learned about the issue, Putin's support base contains lots of lower middle-class "MAGA" types (or "MRGA", I guess) who want Russia to become a global superpower again. Not to put a fine point on it, but think about "Rossiya! Rossiya!" style nationalism (similar to "USA! USA!").

When Putin supported Trump's rise to power, the general feeling was that it was done as a strategic calculation, as Trump is an unsophisticated nitwit who could be easily outmaneuvered. But another, subtler motive may be that Putin saw Trump as someone that he can work with, the two of them being authoritarians.

Your country APPEARS to be one of the most liberal on Earth. Those 40% Authoritarians are just not speaking up at the moment.

Same as in Germany. Same as everywhere.

Jonathan Haidt said something interesting about authoritarians (although I'm not entirely sure whether or not he was referring to the same type of authoritarianism), which is that 'authoritarian' isn't a stable personality at all. It mainly arises when a society is undergoing too much uncontrollable change. Not everyone can apparently handle this, a psychological "authoritarian button" gets pressed, and the person starts more openly enforcing conformity. People with this psychology don't necessarily fit neatly into left-wing vs. right-wing categories (they may have nothing in common in their support for welfare states, militarism, or religion, for instance). This type of authoritarianism goes away when things are "normal" again.

[Adam Strange]

Yes, @xerx, Haidt's assertions are what I remember, too. Stenner said that there were some Authoritarians who were variable like this, but many were fixed in their beliefs.

[Adam Strange]

Starting to worry,

From a popular Russian "current events" show:



The Youtube comments are pretty entertaining.

[Minde]

There's been a rise in ultra-traditionalists who support Russia, which they see as a bulwark of Christian civilization against globalized liberalism. There are also many 'authoritarians' (the kind that @Adam Strange talks about) who probably support Russia because they recognize Putin as one of their own.

Does anyone know how common this is? I don't look forward to further Russian infiltration and destabilization of our politics.

Obviously, many (maybe even most) people on the right clearly abhor the invasion; I'm not trying to paint in broad brush strokes.

The main person I can think of who I knew who really admired Russia and Putin's approach in particular is an ex-felon who converted to Christianity in prison. I'll link to more about him in Random Thoughts because I want to keep the story more private. But I'd say he falls hardcore on the authoritarian side. Years ago, he posted several times about his admiration of Russian Christianity and Putin as a person. He in particular pointed out the "ideal" gender roles and anti-gay policies.

Another person who has expressed fondness for Russia is a childhood friend of mine who lived in Russia for awhile working as a teacher or something like that. She never said anything about the politics, but I do remember she liked sharing about the cultural things, funny language differences, and while she found Russians a bit hard to get to know, she did make some lovely relationships while there. I'm not close to her these days, but I would not put her as authoritarian when I knew her. She seemed to like the people, history, and heritage more than the policies. She is/was Christian.

I vaguely remember that some friends of my parents lived in Russia for several years, too. But I don't remember them well enough to know their philosophical or governance tendencies. They did give me a very pretty wooden painted box and nesting doll. I was friends with their daughter and while I think she retains a fondness for where she used to live she seems pretty chill.


That's probably not as helpful as you were hoping for.

[Poptart]

I will look for the data, but I think it's in a large and very boring book which is not available for free.

I suspect that being an Authoritarian is a lot like being gay and that it's not type related. That's the best I've got so far.

*EDIT*
I found the book, but I didn't find the number "40%" while glancing through the 370 pages of text. That number might have been made-up in my mind at some point. Remember, my Ti isn't the greatest.

However, it must have come from somewhere. Possibly from the book The Authoritarians by Bob Altmeyer, or from one of the essays on Karen Stenner's website, https://www.karenstenner.com/

I don't think I made it up, but then again, I'm 4D Te.

Was this the book? I read it a few months ago after you posted a link on another thread. I don’t remember which one. https://www.evcforum.net/DataDropsit...oritarians.pdf

[Ryan]

@Adam Strange you have many admirers, I too have saved a couple of your recommendations, I think the book you are looking for is "Can It Happen Here? Authoritarianism in America", page 192, the last paragraph.

@Baqer tagging you as well since you were interested

 

[Adam Strange]

Was this the book? I read it a few months ago after you posted a link on another thread. I don’t remember which one. https://www.evcforum.net/DataDropsit...oritarians.pdf

@Poptart, that is one of the books I mentioned. Thanks for posting it again. It is kind of hidden on the present website.

The other book I was looking through is called The Authoritarian Dynamic, by Karen Stenner. This book reads more like a research paper. It is basically all Ti and I'd predict that an LII would love it for its formalism. I found it to be a hard slog. It mostly discusses research about Authoritarians, what they believe and why they believe it, and what conditions in a society cause them to become more or less Authoritarian.

Personally, I found the essays on Stenner's website (https://www.karenstenner.com/) to be more readable.

Easier and more general reads are the great series of articles by Sara Robinson, the first of which can be found here: http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/08...-defining.html, with several more following that one every few days or so.
These are by far my favorite articles.

Then there are the analysis of Trump.

Here is one from Psychology Today: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...rian-nightmare

And here is the article from which I probably got the 40% number. Blame my imprecision on Te. https://theauthoritarians.org/48-2/ "Why Do Trump Supporters Stand By Him, No Matter What?"

[Adam Strange]

@Adam Strange you have many admirers, I too have saved a couple of your recommendations, I think the book you are looking for is "Can It Happen Here? Authoritarianism in America", page 192, the last paragraph.

@Baqer tagging you as well since you were interested

 

@Ryan, I am astounded that you found that reference. Thank you.

I'd like to note here that the figure the book states for Authoritarians in a population is 33%, not 40%. I guess I might just be exaggerating the threat, for some unknown reason.

(Because I'm probably a borderline Authoritarian on my bad days.)

[xerx]

That's probably not as helpful as you were hoping for.

Not at all. Personal stories add an important perspective.

I personally know someone whose life is falling apart because of alcoholism and divorce. He got sucked into the anti-Muslim vortex. The Youtube algorithm introduced him to more and more extreme views (including so-called "news" channels), and now he's a full-blown Putin (and Trump) supporter. He used to be a liberal.

[Adam Strange]

Why is the Russian army so weak?

Basically, it is kept weak by the Russian state so it won't be able to compete with State Security or overthrow the government.

A thread by the excellent Kamil Galeev: https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/stat...y-Abuse-Murder

[Minde]

Well Russians are certainly not counting on too many US or NATO officials seeing this.

By the sound of the video, Schwarzenegger has completely forgotten about the struggles that the people faced in that part of the region. He's never opened their war-torn letters and only remembered about them when it was time for him to PR, to put on a mask of hypocritical faux morality.

On a personal note, I'm not surprised that after all his lies, artifice, and falsity, his wife had to divorce him.

That is... interesting. She seems like a driven and compassionate girl. I think perhaps the most interesting part to me was the alternative reality she mentioned.

I'm curious if there are any pictures of her at those Dunbass schools. The weight-lifting is neat. Curious about the Ukrainian streets being renamed to Nazi heroes. Also curious if she's aware of what's going on in Mariupol and all the first-person accounts of those living or who have recently left there as heard by acquaintances of mine who are helping at the borders. Or Kharkiv, where an acquaintance of mine lives. Furthermore, I'm curious if she's tried expressing anything opposing the official Russian narrative.

No doubt Mr. Schwarzenegger is completely wrong about history and everything that's happening because he's a cheating, selfish jerk.

[Minde]

When I talk to LSEs, a kind of door opens in the air between our heads and a huge amount of Te information flows back and forth without any impedance.

Apparently it even works when another type plays conduit. #science #ididntbreakit

[Baqer]

What I now believe is that the world is divided between those countries where the Law is above Men, and those countries where Men are above the Law.

Surprisingly enough, South Africa is a lawful country, and Argentina and China are Mafia countries. Other Mafia countries are North Korea, Russia, Lebanon, Syria, and parts of New Jersey.

https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/stat...62401060986884

Threat by Kamil (currently being written when I'm posting this). I think you may have a point.

[xerx]

Why is the Russian army so weak?

Basically, it is kept weak by the Russian state so it won't be able to compete with State Security or overthrow the government.

A thread by the excellent Kamil Galeev: https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/stat...y-Abuse-Murder

https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/stat...62401060986884

Threat by Kamil (currently being written when I'm posting this). I think you may have a point.

I can't evaluate his work because I don't know enough about Russia, but this guy is really, really interesting. Thanks for introducing me to him.

[Adam Strange]

https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/stat...62401060986884

Threat by Kamil (currently being written when I'm posting this). I think you may have a point.

@Baqer, I've been in a lot of countries, and most of my visits were for business, not for pleasure. I was mistaken for an Englishman in South Africa. I saw how the ruling class in Argentina can do whatever they like. The police there were hijacking cars off the street for profit. I was interrogated in a basement at 2AM in Brazil by the security forces. I saw how a businessman in China was entirely intimidated by illiterate Communist Party members. I was crossing the mountains in Turkey when I unexpectedly encountered the Turkish security forces with a stopped truck full of contraband. That last one was probably the worst, because I think they were going to shoot the driver. When I interrupted them, they asked for my papers and when they saw that I had an American passport (the soldier held it upside down, but he could read the symbols), they waved me through and I didn't look back.

The world is a seriously fucked up place once you get outside the States. Basically, the armed might of the US government usually protects US citizens, but there are exceptions. Accidents.

One thing I can tell you is that if you don't have the rule of law, then in a mafia country, you only have yourself. You can be strong and intimidating, or you can get totally fucked if you think the law in that country is somehow going to protect you.
If you are brave and entirely fearless, your opponent is going to wonder why you aren't scared of him. He's going to think that you have someone more powerful than his boss who is backing you up, and there is a fairly good chance that you will come out of the encounter with your freedom and all parts intact.

The reality is that it's a completely different world than the one we were taught about in school.

The good thing is that the US actually believes in the rule of law, most of the time, and it has been fighting continuous wars for a very long time. This gives it practice and experience in fighting new wars and that is a huge advantage in winning them. Or at least, not losing them too badly.
And I'm very happy to contribute to making the US more effective at projecting it's principles around the world. Not because we are so great, but because all the others are so much worse.

[Baqer]

@Baqer, I've been in a lot of countries, and most of my visits were for business, not for pleasure. I was mistaken for an Englishman in South Africa. I saw how the ruling class in Argentina can do whatever they like. The police there were hijacking cars off the street for profit. I was interrogated in a basement at 2AM in Brazil by the security forces. I saw how a businessman in China was entirely intimidated by illiterate Communist Party members. I was crossing the mountains in Turkey when I unexpectedly encountered the Turkish security forces with a stopped truck full of contraband. That last one was probably the worst, because I think they were going to shoot the driver. When I interrupted them, they asked for my papers and when they saw that I had an American passport (the soldier held it upside down, but he could read the symbols), they waved me through and I didn't look back.

The world is a seriously fucked up place once you get outside the States. Basically, the armed might of the US government usually protects US citizens, but there are exceptions. Accidents.

One thing I can tell you is that if you don't have the rule of law, then in a mafia country, you only have yourself. You can be strong and intimidating, or you can get totally fucked if you think the law in that country is somehow going to protect you.
If you are brave and entirely fearless, your opponent is going to wonder why you aren't scared of him. He's going to think that you have someone more powerful than his boss who is backing you up, and there is a fairly good chance that you will come out of the encounter with your freedom and all parts intact.

The reality is that it's a completely different world than the one we were taught about in school.

The good thing is that the US actually believes in the rule of law, most of the time, and it has been fighting continuous wars for a very long time. This gives it practice and experience in fighting new wars and that is a huge advantage in winning them. Or at least, not losing them too badly.
And I'm very happy to contribute to making the US more effective at projecting it's principles around the world. Not because we are so great, but because all the others are so much worse.

Do you think it's possible to turn a mafia country into a lawful one? Or if not that, to take a lawful country like South Africa and make it about as good as the US/Europe?

[Adam Strange]

Do you think it's possible to turn a mafia country into a lawful one? Or if not that, to take a lawful country like South Africa and make it about as good as the US/Europe?

Yes, I do. Absolutely. Most countries started out as mafia countries, and some then gradually changed into countries where the rule of law (contracts) became more important than personal, physical force.

I'm not entirely sure how this happens, though. I'm guessing that it involves the loss of power of the elites and the rise in wealth and power of a lower class with skills. Ancient Athens grew more democratic when it became a sea power, since the rich needed men to row the ships to project power. This gave the rowers, who came from the lower, but still "free" classes, bargaining power over the land- and slave-owning elites. The rich were forced to give them some rights under the law if they were going to gain more riches through sea power.

A similar situation occurred in France during the revolution. The ruling class was bankrupted by Louis 14th (because he didn't trust them) while the middle class shop owners were making money. Since money is power, the shop keepers took over the government, and they cemented their gains by written laws.

You might think that Russia is at the same stage as France was in 1789, but France had a small (disenfranchised), but growing, middle class, and a bankrupt ruling class, while Russia seems to be losing it's middle class as the guys at the top steal more and more. Poor, beaten people are not the ones who clamor for their rights, so my feeling is that Russia will remain a mafia state until some other, stronger power displaces the elites. I think that Kamil Galeev had a thread on who might displace Putin, but if Putin is replaced by some class from within Russia, the Russian government will not have any need or reason to abandon mafia tactics.

[xerx]

Do you think it's possible to turn a mafia country into a lawful one?

Yes, because Ronald Reagan defeated the communist Democrats and made Christianity part of the American constitution.

[Adam Strange]

American fighters in Ukraine near Kiev. From the cadence of the narrator's speech, he's SLE from the Northeast.

https://twitter.com/COUPSURE/status/1507092190522064907