When such an opportunity [for Russian democracy] was available, it was subverted not by Putin and his kleptocratic milieu, but by the West. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union 30 years ago, American economic advisers convinced Russia’s leaders to focus on economic reforms and put democracy on the backburner – where Putin could easily extinguish it when the time came. This is no trivial historical contingency. Had Russia become a democracy, there would have been no need to talk about NATO and its eastward expansion, no invasion of Ukraine, and no debates about whether the West owes Russia’s civilization greater respect. (As a German, I recoil at that last proposition, which has clear echoes of Hitler and his self-proclaimed leadership over a “civilization.”)
...Surrounded by a small group of Russian reformers and Western advisers, Yeltsin used this unique historical moment to launch an unprecedented program of economic “shock therapy.” Prices were liberalized, borders were opened, and rapid privatization began – all by presidential decree. Nobody in Yeltsin’s circle bothered to ask whether this was what Russia’s citizens wanted. And nobody paused to consider that Russians might first want a chance to develop a sound constitutional foundation for their country, or to express through an election their preference for who should govern them.
The reformers and their Western advisers simply decided – and then insisted – that market reforms should precede constitutional reforms. Democratic niceties would delay or even undermine economic policymaking. Only by moving fast – cutting the dog’s tail with one blow of the ax – would Russia be put on a path to economic prosperity and the Communists be kept out of power for good. With radical market reforms, the Russian people would see tangible returns and become enamored with democracy automatically. It was not to be.
Yep. So I'm asking you what reason Poland had to feel threatened by Russia in 1997. Otherwise none of that is legitimate and we'd have to look for other reasons they joined NATO which might be more provocative. — Isaac
What criminal activity? What is the criminal activity in your analogy for Poland in 1997. What had Russia done that puts them in the 'criminal activity' role in your analogy? — Isaac
Whose homes? When NATO started expanding in the late 1990s, whose 'homes' had Russia tried to invade? — Isaac
What do you mean 'once more'. Once more after which previous occurrence?
Your analogy seems flawed. — Isaac
Anyone who doesn't think world politics is a video game. — StreetlightX
But this is about blaming NATO for what Putin is doing. — Christoffer
You all don't seem to understand the difference between defence and offense — Christoffer
No, this is about blaming NATO for what NATO has done. Again, if you feel the need to choose a team, that's your problem. — StreetlightX
You don't seem to understand that these words are meaningless in the real world and this is not a video game. — StreetlightX
Incidentally this is effectively the same shit that the EU does to countries today, who come under its ambit. — StreetlightX
So building a defense within your own nation is considered an offensive act warranting getting offensive acts of invasion or threats of violence against you? That's your logic, right? — Christoffer
Irreverent — StreetlightX
Have you any examples of when NATO threatened Russia and Putin? Because his feelings of being threatened can be valid for explaining his actions, but that doesn't mean there's valid guilt on NATO's part in any of Putin's actions. — Christoffer
Russia's "feelings" do not matter in this. — Christoffer
Russia told NATO to fuck right off, and NATO did the exact opposite of that... — StreetlightX
The reformers and their Western advisers simply decided – and then insisted – that market reforms should precede constitutional reforms.
How is building a defense within your borders and act that creates guilt on your part if someone invades you? Explain already. — Christoffer
In order to move on to more valid geopolitical talk, we have to establish if NATO is to blame or not. — Christoffer
So I ask again for any clear sign of guilt so that we can establish that as truth. — Christoffer
Because if we can establish that NATO is guilty, have equal blame for the actions Russia takes, be it the invasion of Ukraine, invasion of Sweden/Finland, or a nuclear strike, then that changes the discussion entirely compared to if Putin acts alone and "feels threatened" by the west. — Christoffer
This is kindergarten philosophy. — Christoffer
Have you concrete evidence that, of all the things Putin has said about his motives, the ones you've picked out are his 'true' motives? Not just informed speculation, concrete evidence. — Isaac
Has nothing to do with establishing the guilt of NATO. — Christoffer
It doesn't matter if they were actually threatened, it doesn't matter the reasons. — Christoffer
I'm making the analogy based on the guilt blaming of NATO in today's conflict with Russia. — Christoffer
The reasons can be the general security that each nation wanted to have. Maybe the general security was because the collapse of the Soviet Union was a bit of an unknown factor. Who knows? — Christoffer
Show me concrete threats to Russia, I've asked many times, just answer for once. — Christoffer
Those who have built empires have not been madmen. Some perhaps have been, but not all.But I'm still not seeing any link to this passionate dismantling of any and all attempts to talk about the role the US, Europe and NATO have played in bringing this crisis about. After all, that narrative requires that Putin is an empire building madman. — Isaac
It would be like explaining WW2 by talking only about the war crimes that the Western allies did. — ssu
No I literally rejected the very terms in which you framed the problem, so maybe before we get to 'logic' we can ask if you are capable of literacy first. Baby steps. — StreetlightX
Greece and Spain are now debtors prisons and fascism is on the rise across the continent. — StreetlightX
And just when have I denied that NATO expansion isn't one reason for Putin to attack?Scroll back through the thread. In what way have those blaming the US/NATO/Europe attempted to make the conversation only about that? — Isaac
Human feelings are extremely complex and difficult to decipher, from observation of a person's actions. That's why psychology is borderline science. And, in psychology the patient is supposed to try and make one's feeling known to the psychologist. When an individual intentionally hides one's feelings, the acts are twisted around multiple motives, so psychological problems are often referred to as a "complex". Jealousy for example manifests itself in very strange ways. — Metaphysician Undercover
"Feelings" are attributable to individual human beings, very unique and particular to the individual, as they are tied up within the highly structured and organized chemical system within the human being. It makes absolutely no sense to say that an entity like "Russia" has feelings. — Metaphysician Undercover
Greece and Spain are now debtors prisons and fascism is on the rise across the continent.
— StreetlightX
No. You are just obsessed of classify everything in economics and GDP. Did you know the French GDP is more indebted that Spain's one?
You don't know anything about my country and do not speak please.
But, as jamalrob said, it is better to stay in the topic. — javi2541997
But I still love my country, and I relish its cultural output--not all of it uniformly. Much of American culture was imported from elsewhere--like coffee which has never been grown here. Coffee is a very good thing. — Bitter Crank
It's the xenophobia involved in nationalism that I object to, as well as the many fake nationalistic histories in currency right now. The many lies underlying the nation state, everywhere. — Olivier5
in previous episodes Aimen Dean dismisses the inside job conspiracy theory about the Russian apartment bombings, and he's a person who knows a lot about the North Caucasian jihad. — jamalrob
Unfortunately, the nation state seems to be a necessity in organizing the world, unless we want an amorphous mass of humanity ruled from Washington or New York.
And as the state is a political construct, this involves a narrative or "foundation myth" that, almost inevitably (like all things in politics), will contain counterfactual elements. Even in their personal life, people tend to tell myths, or lies, to themselves and to others. — Apollodorus
"Liberal democracy" literally sustains itself off the back of corrupt thugs like Putin — StreetlightX
“It’s been very discouraging, and very sad, to have people I know who have supported me, and always said they respected me and found me to be honest, who suddenly don’t trust me because of what some guy told them on the internet,” McBroom said. “And they’re like, ‘Yeah, but this is a good guy too.’ And I’m like, ‘How do you know that? Have you met him? You’ve met me. So why are you choosing to believe him instead of me?’”
After having kept quiet for much of the day—cooking, sweeping, applying Band-Aids, directing traffic, shooing the children outside to complete their chores—Sarah McBroom spoke up.
“That’s what has struck me. It’s seeing people that we know—some of them we know very well—who are choosing not to believe Ed, because they believe someone on Facebook they’ve never met,” she said. “I just don’t understand. Like, really? You believe that person over Ed?”
Same shit different outcomes?Incidentally this is effectively the same shit that the EU does to countries today, who come under its ambit. — StreetlightX
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.