Vladimir Putin and Russia

[ewerk 26394]

I should have left the word 'more' out. What I meant was the use of chemical weapons and more indiscriminate killing of civilians.

 

Of course the tactical use of nuclear weapons isn't the sensible move but I fear it could potentially be used to show the West that he's not afraid to use them. I don't think that this is the likely outcome but it certainly is possible.

 

Zelensky's offer of neutrality is a weak one but it's being offered to allow Putin to save some face, I don't think it will be enough. Putin will be pushing at a minimum to formalise the Crimean situation and that of the 'break away' areas and that would be too much for Ukraine to accept.

[Renton 17799]

Yeah, I agree. I think it is wise to give Putin some form of off ramp to save face but at the same time give him nothing that is a political or military advantage. Not sure how this can be done, and Russia should absolutely have to face some of the consequences of reparations. UN controlled referenda in the contended areas may be an option? In reality though, Biden is right although he should have controlled his emotions and spoke with intelligence, not knee-jerk. There can be no satisfactory resolution to this whilst Putin is in charge. 

[Tom 13861]

 

 

[Renton 17799]

What's this about? It's paywalled. 

[ewerk 26394]

 

[Alex 30433]

So he’s acting as peacemaker to get his assets back and as thanks for that Putin has tried to kill him? Have I read that right? 

[Isegrim 8872]

 

[PaddockLad 14602]

13 minutes ago, Alex said:

So he’s acting as peacemaker to get his assets back and as thanks for that Putin has tried to kill him? Have I read that right? 

Does Putin just want to get rid of anyone who knows where all the bodies are buried? …bit like Jimmy Conway after Lufthansa?  🤔

 

 

[Alex 30433]

8 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

Does Putin just want to get rid of anyone who knows where all the bodies are buried? …bit like Jimmy Conway after Lufthansa?  🤔

 

 

Maybe although I’m not sure why he’d care 

[PaddockLad 14602]

Yeah…it’s difficult to see the circumstances where he’d end up in the dock in The Hague….maybe because of the gigantic fuckin pigs ear he’s made of the invasion he’s just feeling intensely vulnerable and paranoid? 

[Rayvin 4964]

Doesn't look like a lethal poison though? You would think someone of Putins "skill" would be able to organise a fatal poisoning.

[sammynb 2929]

47 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Doesn't look like a lethal poison though? You would think someone of Putins "skill" would be able to organise a fatal poisoning.

 

But doesn't he have a history of fucking it up and his only real success is the poor woman who was given the perfume bottle that her partner found in a bin after the failed poisioning of the London based defectors?

The Guardian has a piece on it today.

[The Fish 8994]

12 hours ago, Rayvin said:

Doesn't look like a lethal poison though? You would think someone of Putins "skill" would be able to organise a fatal poisoning.

I think you're overestimating the efficacy of Putin's poisoners and underestimating the skill of medical professionals.

[ewerk 26394]

 

[Rayvin 4964]

Monbiot, as usual, superb. Really well worth a read on the basis that it cleanly identifies the single biggest issue we have as a society, the collapse of a shared frame of reference which is referred to apparently as an epistemic crisis.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/30/putin-lie-machine-history-untruths?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

[Renton 17799]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

Monbiot, as usual, superb. Really well worth a read on the basis that it cleanly identifies the single biggest issue we have as a society, the collapse of a shared frame of reference which is referred to apparently as an epistemic crisis.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/30/putin-lie-machine-history-untruths?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

 

Hmm, I'm not convinced by his last few paragraphs. I don't believe economic growth, in terms as we define it now, can go on indefinitely. Plenty know this. I don't believe the super wealthy should exist. I don't accept these individuals should be allowed to own the media. I don't have answers on how to stop itthough . Alluding to this,I found this quote interesting.

Quote

Nearly everyone who appears in the media, across almost the entire political spectrum, seems to accept that economic growth can and should continue indefinitely on a finite planet.

I came across this other Guardian article, originally penned 8 years ago, but based on data forecasts from the early 1970s. Scientists then did some modelling which so far has proven very accurate to what has happened on Earth concerning population growth and resource use. It predicts our economies will collapse entirely, starting in the 2020s. Is this plausible, is it already happening? I don't know, but I'm not dismissing it.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/02/limits-to-growth-was-right-new-research-shows-were-nearing-collapse

 

[Rayvin 4964]

Plenty know these things yes - but his contention is very few of the plenty who know these things are given platforms to make those views clear in mainstream discussion on current issues. David Attenborough has probably gotten further than most with his climate change documentaries but frankly, any attack on the finite nature of capitalism is being dismissed wholesale as Marxism at this point - if it even gets anywhere near a mainstream platform at all. I mean who is actually standing up and forcing these conversations to happen, out in the open where they can be seen? Johnson certainly isn't, and I don't recall Starmer ever raising such points. They're not vote winners obviously. When was the last time we heard anyone talk about how the overall model of perpetual growth is unsustainable, at the mainstream level?

 

Plenty of Russians know that the Kremlin is full of shit too, but that doesn't mean that Russia is openly challenging itself on its assumptions and views. It's doing the opposite. And I think his point here is that on many issues, we're very much doing the same. Not you, or me, or most of the people on here maybe. But then we're not making the decisions. And we're also political enthusiasts which means our awareness exceeds those of people who are less motivated to explore these things.

[Renton 17799]

11 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Plenty know these things yes - but his contention is very few of the plenty who know these things are given platforms to make those views clear in mainstream discussion on current issues. David Attenborough has probably gotten further than most with his climate change documentaries but frankly, any attack on the finite nature of capitalism is being dismissed wholesale as Marxism at this point - if it even gets anywhere near a mainstream platform at all. I mean who is actually standing up and forcing these conversations to happen, out in the open where they can be seen? Johnson certainly isn't, and I don't recall Starmer ever raising such points. They're not vote winners obviously. When was the last time we heard anyone talk about how the overall model of perpetual growth is unsustainable, at the mainstream level?

 

Plenty of Russians know that the Kremlin is full of shit too, but that doesn't mean that Russia is openly challenging itself on its assumptions and views. It's doing the opposite. And I think his point here is that on many issues, we're very much doing the same. Not you, or me, or most of the people on here maybe. But then we're not making the decisions. And we're also political enthusiasts which means our awareness exceeds those of people who are less motivated to explore these things.

 

Yes, BUT. He is conflating very blatant, specific, and damaging lies from the Kremlin with a failure to recognise or be able to change a less tangible "truth". More burying our heads in the sand tbh. I'm not sure that is helpful. We all know how this will play out. We can't react within the current political and economic systems until we have a crisis, but by then in this case it will be too late. I'll be honest, I'm planning to be dead before we really experience this impending disaster. I do feel for my own and everyone's children though. 

[Rayvin 4964]

4 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

Yes, BUT. He is conflating very blatant, specific, and damaging lies from the Kremlin with a failure to recognise or be able to change a less tangible "truth". More burying our heads in the sand tbh. I'm not sure that is helpful. We all know how this will play out. We can't react within the current political and economic systems until we have a crisis, but by then in this case it will be too late. I'll be honest, I'm planning to be dead before we really experience this impending disaster. I do feel for my own and everyone's children though. 

 

I think he's just fighting the good fight for his own cause really. He's not wrong as far as I can tell.

 

Aside from this particular line though, the main thing that really jumped out to me was his discussion in the first few paragraphs around the epistemic crisis or collapse of the shared frame of reference. Again, nothing we haven't discussed before, but that's probably the most concise description of it that I've seen.

[ohhh_yeah 2770]

   

 

 

[Dr Gloom 19826]

Fucking hell man

[ohhh_yeah 2770]

 

 

 

[Renton 17799]

2 hours ago, ohhh_yeah said:

   

 

 

The trailer!

 

[scoobos 297]

16 hours ago, Renton said:

 

Hmm, I'm not convinced by his last few paragraphs. I don't believe economic growth, in terms as we define it now, can go on indefinitely. Plenty know this. I don't believe the super wealthy should exist. I don't accept these individuals should be allowed to own the media. I don't have answers on how to stop itthough .

 

I'm a bit more optimistic than this - but yeah - Peak Oil is our "economy collapse" , or was to the people in power in the late 90's (e.g. the people in power money wise - not politically) . 

The equivalent of a "man in the pub" was telling me years ago, the change to neoliberalism (get rid of regulation) may have been a response to people in the know, knowing that peak was being reached - science wasn't keeping pace with consumption of oil and the new technologies needed to get it from more difficult sources. Lobbying became more about reducing regulation and getting bailouts, tax breaks etc.

I personally buy into it, there's been a definite change - some striking things are:

1. The IMF basically kicking out an elected government and taking control because of "national debt" in Greece. 
2. The move to neoliberalism , adopted by many nations - basically removing anti monopoly regulations first , allowing what we have today  with the media, multinationals and offshore trading.

3. The start of monitoring of behaviours and intrusive collecting of data of your own citizens private communications (USA , Patriot ACT - UK , Investigatory Powers Act). 
4 . Is the above combined with “Nudge Unit” | The Institute for Government , resulting in Social media manipulation by political actors an industrial scale problem - Oxford report | University of Oxford   ?? Probably - get us hating the foreigners, jobseekers, disabled - scroungers etc - to justify the swiping of funds from their pot into the private sector.

5. The mass redistribution of wealth, from the public purse into the private sector, in many countries worldwide - with the IMF and Financial hubs pushing it as necessary. (Australia gave everyone a cheque to go out and spend in the economy , public purse back to the public - it was very successful - Australians get $900 cheques from government to boost spending (telegraph.co.uk)). 

But, I'm optimistic on it, thankfully. The younger generation are shifting , or in my field they are - many more people don't want to work for Unilever etc.

I do think you can have economic growth without it being tied to consumption of finite resources , but marketing needs regulating - WANTS and NEEDS need to be redefined to something more sensible .

In other news, I just watched the BBC doco "The decade the rich won" - couldn't agree more tbh and I don't understand the mind control that people dont see it.

Edited March 31, 2022 by scoobos

[Renton 17799]

 

7 hours ago, scoobos said:

But, I'm optimistic on it, thankfully. The younger generation are shifting , or in my field they are - many more people don't want to work for Unilever etc.

 

Interesting post, cheers. Not had time to digest it all and personally I don't believe things are organised to the extent you suggest. I think capitalism will always evolve into something worse aided and abetted by people who percieve they benefit, even when they don't.

 

Interested in this bit, really? From my experience young people will jump at yhe chance to work for a multinational. The pay at P&G In palmersville is better than most other places, and think their T&Cs are okay too.

 

In contrast, I left the public sector mainly because of shit pay. T&Cs technically good but implemented by a ruthless HR department who couldn't give a shit about your welfare.

 

In the space of a year, a smallish SME, my company, has been taken over by a larger US-Irish company, which in turn has been taken over by a huge US company. This company was then sold to a US private equity firm, the same ones that now own Morrisons. I looked at the global organisational chart yesterday and I have 9 managers above me. Fucking hell, depressing.  So far my benefits are still good but we'll see. Same thing has happened to my wife, but she's not been so lucky with her working conditions.

 

I just hope to cling on for a decade and retire with enough wedge to be comfortable at this stage. Should be doable but I massively fear for the generations below me.

Edited March 31, 2022 by Renton