Is Russia really that bad?

This is a forum for discussing philosophical theories of government and social structure. It is not a venue for partisan rants or plugging favored candidates.

Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby wolfhnd on July 23rd, 2017, 7:28 pm 

Sivad » Sun Jul 23, 2017 11:19 am wrote:The left has gone off the deep end with open immigration and identity politics, but that doesn't make it the vanguard of globalism.


I have no idea how it has come about but there are strange alliances between ideologically opposed groups. Neo Marxist Feminist and women who support Sharia law and by proxy the fascist regime in Saudi Arabia. The anti corporatist left and corporate media. Anti defamation organizations that support a homogeneous Jewish state but are virulently pro immigration for the West. A left that hates Trump who is the only major political figure in recent memory who has talked about rolling back U.S. intervention to protect global financial interest. A left that accepts a globalist labeling workers as deplorables. A left who doesn't question the motives of one of the worst currency manipulators in history who as a child was a Jew hunter. A left who destroyed the occupy wall street movement leaving the banksters to carry on as usual. A left that supports a welfare state that serves primarily to profit the financial sector through unfunded debt.

It could just be coincidence or it could be that the left and corporations, financial institutions have a common enemy liberal democracy.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4700
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby Sivad on July 23rd, 2017, 8:13 pm 

Yeah, the right is fraught with contradictions as well. And "liberal democracy" has never been liberal or democratic. The extreme left, the extreme right, and the radical center have always been intellectually bankrupt. The only sensible position is a well regulated mixed economy welfare state because it's the only thing that's ever been demonstrated to work well for everyone. Everything else is just crank ideology.
User avatar
Sivad
Member
 
Posts: 217
Joined: 11 Jun 2017


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby wolfhnd on July 23rd, 2017, 9:24 pm 

Sivad » Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:13 am wrote:Yeah, the right is fraught with contradictions as well. And "liberal democracy" has never been liberal or democratic. The extreme left, the extreme right, and the radical center have always been intellectually bankrupt. The only sensible position is a well regulated mixed economy welfare state because it's the only thing that's ever been demonstrated to work well for everyone. Everything else is just crank ideology.


It doesn't matter what is it matters what people believe is.

Welfare states historical fail under mountains of debt, remember bread and circus?
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4700
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby wolfhnd on July 24th, 2017, 6:11 am 

BadgerJelly did you come to any final conclusions on how the cold war continues to influence the way we think about Russia?
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4700
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby BadgerJelly on July 24th, 2017, 12:53 pm 

wolfhnd » July 24th, 2017, 6:11 pm wrote:BadgerJelly did you come to any final conclusions on how the cold war continues to influence the way we think about Russia?


I am not really in favour of conclusions. I not completely convinced one way or another and think it is almost impossible to know.

It just remains something to consider. Like I said I know I have been influenced by things in ways I really wouldn't like to admit to myself, but the truth is I cannot really help what my surrounding were like especially in early childhood.

I imagine we tend to cover up such biases rather than address them and I am not entirely convinced they can be completely put to bed either.

I would say that we all have certain ideas of what nations and peoples are like regardless of how rational we are. I remember the first time I visited Bangkok ... I had a very obvious set of expectations even though I didn't think I had any at the time. So often we expect someone or some place to be one thing when the reality of the experience often, if not always, shows how ridiculous our ideas were.

I think we are more likely to address these things in regard to a more positive light, meaning romanticism about something like Paris or New York (I have only visited one of those to date.)

I have seen a very negative impression being expressed about the US, Russia and other nations during my youthful years in the UK. At the time it doesn't seem like a big deal though. We have a tradition of opposing France more than anyone, but this has led to something more like banter in many respects. There are also people who cannot help but dislike the Germans even though they have no personal memory of WWII other than what has been told to them by their parents parents.

I am well aware that the biggest threat to world peace right now is the US. The US is also probably the biggest hope for peace too, but if I am honest I view the US as being more tilted in a direction that immediately opposes world peace.

9/11 although I am skeptical about it being an "inside job" I am less skeptical about the ignorance of the US government (CIA or whoever) about what was going to happen. Having already laid out the plan for invading and distrupting seven nations, all of which (barring Iran) have pretty much happened, I am less and less willing to believe someone doesn't have a purposeful long term plan.

WikiLeaks is probably the only thing we can seriously take as truthful. It has gotten to the point where what was once deemed to be something the public had the right to know about is now deemed a criminal offense to expose to the public. Such followed by slander and attempts to destroy the source.

Due to the nature of modern politics the US has learnt to play it to a certain advantage and get away with it for the most part simply because they are the only power left with enough might to openly do as they please.

The best we can really hope for is brave individuals within these organisations to keep exposing the truth as much as possible. Even now WikiLeaks has been pretty much brushed under the carpet and/or drowned in sensationalism of other nonsense flung in our faces.

I am not one for conspiracy theories and everything I see on news channels or read on established news sites online I vie was being a "conspiracy theory". I simply cannot believe the "news" and have to sift through it all to see what is really going on, what is being hidden that is happening right now, and the general nationalistic position of said sources. In this way watching Russian news and US news, as well as several others can at least paint an outline of what might really be going on.

It is sad because today the news outlets could really present some great counter positions in their reporting and give the public a fuler picture without having to suppress certain opinions. The BBC now absolutely refuses to say anything that coul dbe construed as against Israel (this MANY MANY people have openly said from comedians to reporters, yet the story is still told, or not, according to some ridiculous poltical item set in place by the BBC). No doubt the nonsense is in place for news channels in Saudi Arabia where anyone saying anything even slightly pro-Israeli is pushed aside.

The tiny advantage we have now is the ability to look fo rand present argumentations aginst our better judgements and watch from both sides of the news to better understand the extent of the lies being thrown at us. Further still we can also dig a little here and there online and look into geopolitical histories and political interference.

Everyday we are all to ready to turn a blind eye to what is going on because we don't like to see ourselves as part of it. The point of this thread is more of a reminder to me, and anyone else bothering to read, that we need to slap ourselves about a bit to make sure we don't fall into the trap too far (we will all fall into it a little, I don't honestly think we could live "sane" lives without doing so!)

I am more worried about the effect of the US in Venezuela and Brasil than about the middle east. Guyana is a concern of mine for ecological reasons. The whole amazon basin is probably at risk. If south America is torn up like the middle east there is possibly more at stake. It could just be that institutions are acting to disrupt and hobble certain states to stem the flow of resources to keep prices down, or simply as a proposed model to protect the human race. I think ever since we realized we could destroy humanity some have been trying to prevent such as calamity and may have actually done the exact opposite and brought us closer to the edge?

For those able to attempt to compute all the global machinations of polticals I imagine they are quite necessarily sociopathic in their approach if not in their intent.

To sum up I think we're seriously talking about the last century for humanity or the first. I feel a great part of this will decided by simple people living pretty ordinary lives being able to sift through the information in the media and make good enough life decisions. I doubt very much that governments, corporations or humanitarian institutions will be able to do as much as the common man other than act as catalysts.

You asked for my conclusion so I guess that sums it up well enough? :)

I think we are all duped by ourselves into guilty little holes where we refuse to admit our sheepish mentalities. To understand it is better than trying to deny it. At least that is what I think.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5384
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby wolfhnd on July 24th, 2017, 6:00 pm 

Fair enough, I'm a little concerned with the idea that being objective is sociopathic. I agree that facts will always be somewhat subjective but that has to balance against the tendency of feelings to lead to unintended consequences.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4700
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby Braininvat on July 24th, 2017, 8:07 pm 

Sivad » July 23rd, 2017, 5:13 pm wrote:Yeah, the right is fraught with contradictions as well. And "liberal democracy" has never been liberal or democratic. The extreme left, the extreme right, and the radical center have always been intellectually bankrupt. The only sensible position is a well regulated mixed economy welfare state because it's the only thing that's ever been demonstrated to work well for everyone. Everything else is just crank ideology.


Hi, Sivad. I confess that I do not know what you mean by "the radical center."
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6798
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby BadgerJelly on July 24th, 2017, 11:35 pm 

wolfhnd » July 25th, 2017, 6:00 am wrote:Fair enough, I'm a little concerned with the idea that being objective is sociopathic. I agree that facts will always be somewhat subjective but that has to balance against the tendency of feelings to lead to unintended consequences.


That is not what I said exactly ... but I guess generally speaking it kind of fits. I meant those of such high intellect are likely to forgoe the concerns of the little people in their altruistic goals. We have seen politicians knowingly allow the deaths of innocents because they believed in the long run it would live more lives. Having a tendency to view human life as "collateral damage" is sociopathic.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5384
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby Sivad on July 25th, 2017, 1:13 am 

Braininvat » July 24th, 2017, 5:07 pm wrote:
Sivad » July 23rd, 2017, 5:13 pm wrote:Yeah, the right is fraught with contradictions as well. And "liberal democracy" has never been liberal or democratic. The extreme left, the extreme right, and the radical center have always been intellectually bankrupt. The only sensible position is a well regulated mixed economy welfare state because it's the only thing that's ever been demonstrated to work well for everyone. Everything else is just crank ideology.


Hi, Sivad. I confess that I do not know what you mean by "the radical center."


Modern Democrats like the Clintons and Obama would be radical "third way" centrists, it's basically socially liberal corporatism. In our bizzaro world the actual moderates who are championing the policies and programs that Western civilization most prospered under for generations are regarded as radicals and the people who gutted those policies and programs are called centrists.

"Third Way is this group that pretends sometimes to be center-left but is actually completely a creation of Wall Street—it's run by Wall Street for Wall Street with this false flag operation as if it were a center-left group. It's nothing of the sort." - Bill Black
User avatar
Sivad
Member
 
Posts: 217
Joined: 11 Jun 2017


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby Sivad on July 25th, 2017, 1:40 am 

wolfhnd » July 23rd, 2017, 6:24 pm wrote:
Welfare states historical fail under mountains of debt, remember bread and circus?


The welfare state has been going strong for 80 years, it's a raging success. It's currently being dismantled by rapacious oligarchs, but social democracy is fundamentally sound in both theory and practice.
User avatar
Sivad
Member
 
Posts: 217
Joined: 11 Jun 2017


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby wolfhnd on July 25th, 2017, 3:00 am 

Sivad » Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:40 am wrote:
wolfhnd » July 23rd, 2017, 6:24 pm wrote:
Welfare states historical fail under mountains of debt, remember bread and circus?


The welfare state has been going strong for 80 years, it's a raging success. It's currently being dismantled by rapacious oligarchs, but social democracy is fundamentally sound in both theory and practice.


Yes it worked well in Rome until the built up capital of the previous generations was expended and as long as there was a steady supply of slaves and foreign silver. The Western socialist democracies are exporting their pollution and slave labor to the far east just as Rome came to depend on Egypt for wheat. You can think of the Trump election as a slave revolt of sorts. Sooner or later the Chinese slaves are going to revolt as well. The only thing that can save us from the same fate is automation.

Perhaps the more important analogy is "moral" decay. Moral in this case means responsible and some level of respect for the culture. You can think of "social justice" in this analogy as fulfilling the same destructive role Christianity played in Rome. Just as we can no longer justify a cultural-centric morality Christianity destroyed the duty, honor, family morality of Rome.

The inflated value of Roman coinage is analogous to the artificially inflated value of petrol dollars. If that system collapses because the Chinese get tired of globalist financial systems it will take Europe with it.

The U.S. inherited British hegemony at the end of World War Two. What remains of the British Empire is located in the financial district of London and it is a form of colonialism and a large chunk of the British economy. If it goes so does the welfare state and if you read between the lines that is what the EU is saying when it says the current level of prosperity cannot be maintained. Those people are scared and so should you be.

The fact that the banking system is more international only means that instead of the national banks being able to create "wealth" out of thin air the international financial institutions can do the same thing with unregulated derivatives. It's a dangerous pronzi scheme.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4700
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby BadgerJelly on July 25th, 2017, 12:09 pm 

Just watching this and Zizek pretty much says a part of what I was trying to say above (at 18:00)

Great vid btw so watch from start if you have time:

User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5384
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby wolfhnd on July 25th, 2017, 6:15 pm 

BadgerJelly » Tue Jul 25, 2017 4:09 pm wrote:Just watching this and Zizek pretty much says a part of what I was trying to say above (at 18:00)

Great vid btw so watch from start if you have time:



Plug-in not supported, link please.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4700
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby Sivad on July 25th, 2017, 6:31 pm 

wolfhnd » July 25th, 2017, 12:00 am wrote:
Sivad » Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:40 am wrote:
wolfhnd » July 23rd, 2017, 6:24 pm wrote:
Welfare states historical fail under mountains of debt, remember bread and circus?


The welfare state has been going strong for 80 years, it's a raging success. It's currently being dismantled by rapacious oligarchs, but social democracy is fundamentally sound in both theory and practice.


Yes it worked well in Rome until the built up capital of the previous generations was expended and as long as there was a steady supply of slaves and foreign silver. The Western socialist democracies are exporting their pollution and slave labor to the far east just as Rome came to depend on Egypt for wheat. You can think of the Trump election as a slave revolt of sorts. Sooner or later the Chinese slaves are going to revolt as well. The only thing that can save us from the same fate is automation.

Perhaps the more important analogy is "moral" decay. Moral in this case means responsible and some level of respect for the culture. You can think of "social justice" in this analogy as fulfilling the same destructive role Christianity played in Rome. Just as we can no longer justify a cultural-centric morality Christianity destroyed the duty, honor, family morality of Rome.

The inflated value of Roman coinage is analogous to the artificially inflated value of petrol dollars. If that system collapses because the Chinese get tired of globalist financial systems it will take Europe with it.

The U.S. inherited British hegemony at the end of World War Two. What remains of the British Empire is located in the financial district of London and it is a form of colonialism and a large chunk of the British economy. If it goes so does the welfare state and if you read between the lines that is what the EU is saying when it says the current level of prosperity cannot be maintained. Those people are scared and so should you be.

The fact that the banking system is more international only means that instead of the national banks being able to create "wealth" out of thin air the international financial institutions can do the same thing with unregulated derivatives. It's a dangerous pronzi scheme.



All that is quite a stretch, how about just looking at the history of modern social democracies starting with FDR and post WW2 Europe? None of those systems failed, they didn't implode or go bankrupt, they worked great. They'd still be working great if they hadn't been sabotaged by tax cuts, privatization, and deregulation. And the new systems are failing spectacularly, they've created ginormous wealth gaps, plunged generations into poverty, killed the American dream, subverted democracy, and gave rise to an unsustainable plutocracy. What exactly is the argument against the American system from the late 40's to the late 70's?
User avatar
Sivad
Member
 
Posts: 217
Joined: 11 Jun 2017


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby wolfhnd on July 25th, 2017, 8:17 pm 

Sivad » Tue Jul 25, 2017 10:31 pm wrote:
wolfhnd » July 25th, 2017, 12:00 am wrote:[quote="[url=http://www.sciencechatforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=326001#p326001]Sivad » Tue Jul 25, 2017 5:40 am

All that is quite a stretch, how about just looking at the history of modern social democracies starting with FDR and post WW2 Europe? None of those systems failed, they didn't implode or go bankrupt, they worked great. They'd still be working great if they hadn't been sabotaged by tax cuts, privatization, and deregulation. And the new systems are failing spectacularly, they've created ginormous wealth gaps, plunged generations into poverty, killed the American dream, subverted democracy, and gave rise to an unsustainable plutocracy. What exactly is the argument against the American system from the late 40's to the late 70's?


Absolute poverty is almost a thing of the past and in general is on positive trajectory accept in places such as Venezuela and South Africa where true socialism has reversed the trend. It seems the only thing worse than capitalism is socialism. The form that capitalism takes is obviously important and currently it is about financial markets not "real" markets. Socialism to the extent it exists currently in Western democracy is being propped up by unsubstantable debt, and foreign exploitation. That is the source of the untenable income distribution as national debt and foreign money/derivatives markets primarily benefit the banksters. It almost unavoidable that welfare states will be exploited by politicians and financial institutions. I'm not so much advocating for capitalism as pointing out the flaws in the existing system.

Most of the flaws in the current socialist ideology result from it being intellectually polluted by Marxism. That pollution is direct result of Marx's own flaws. Marxism can basically be boiled down to those that feel like being productive members of society should support those who don't feel like getting out of bed until noon after partying all night. Marx exploited his friends, his family, couldn't be bothered actually visiting a factory and sexually exploited his servant and was overtly racist. All the ingredients of the current cultural Marxism are right there.

Taking a deeper look at what has made the welfare state successful we can examine the various nations of Western Europe. The first key ingredient is homogenous societies where social censure is a strong force. Where expectations that people will cooperate, be productive members of society and accept some level of meritocracy are likely to do better than societies that are diverse or less energetic. In Europe we can divide the more successfully and less successful welfare states along psychological or cultural lines. While intellectuals steeped in Marxist indoctrination either consciously or unconsciously tend to mock protestant work ethics on the grounds that it exploits the naive it is an important factor in how well socialism has done. You can basically divide Europe into protestant and orthodox. Places such as Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland and to a lesser degree France have struggled to make the welfare state functional. By comparison protestant countries such as Sweden, Germany, England and the Netherlands have vibrant capitalism that supports the welfare state fairly effectively.

Let's not forget that in the U.S. the welfare state has been massively restrained by the need to maintain the military industrial complex. That the U.S. has been massively rewarded by the globalist financial institutions by way of first the Bretton Woods agreement and then by the petrol dollar system is undeniable. That system however has destabilized the social fabric in a nation that never was particularly homogeneous. If it fails it will take Europe with it and a European Union Military is not going to stop that. It is in fact ironic that the choice to address the issue is exactly what Trump was calling for but in a form that is anything but a hopeful democratic process. The leaders obviously have a public and private face. Optimism seems more a feature of the masses than the elites in general. This can be summed up by quoting George Soros (the epitome of a banister).
“Europe is similar to the Soviet Union" “With the profound social, economic and moral crisis that Europe is in, we can see a similar process of disintegration.”
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4700
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby BadgerJelly on August 2nd, 2017, 10:19 pm 

Senate pass sanction on Russia by vote 98-2 ... the house 419-3.

Are the sanctions justified?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5384
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: Is Russia really that bad?

Postby BadgerJelly on February 24th, 2018, 12:53 pm 

Not exactly anti-Russian, but it does indicate what I was referring to about painting people with a "Communist" brush:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/jeremy-corbyn-wins-apology-and-payout-from-tory-mp-ben-bradley-over-communist-spy-tweet/ar-BBJwNxF?li=AAmiR2Z&ocid=spartanntp
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5384
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Previous

Return to Political Theory

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests