The Unz Review - Mobile

The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection

A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Email This Page to Someone


 Remember My Information



=>
 Russian Reaction Blog

independent-somebodys-child The GDP per capita (PPP adjusted) of Turkey is now 19,000$, versus $26,000 for Greece. But Turkey is a land of contrasts, from the Third Word-like, heavily Kurdish east to the urbane, cosmopolitan west. Turkey’s western regions are now just as prosperous as Greece’s, and there is no fiscal/debt crisis to boot.

So really what were the parents of this child so desperately fleeing from?

Sure, it is a personal tragedy – though the tragedies are going both ways (it’s just that one side isn’t much covered by the media).

It is also a good, well-organized guilt trip campaign with a platantly politicized focus.

But inconvenient questions naturally arise.

 

For those who missed this affair, the aptly urled Russian website bs-life.ru (Business Life) published a secret Kremlin directive to compensate the relatives of 2,000 Russian military KIA and 3,200 WIA .

Alarm bells should have rung from the start.

Looks like the very epitome of a serious professional website dedicated to investigative journalism.

Looks like the very epitome of a serious professional website dedicated to investigative journalism.

Start with the website. The design runs on a free, mass-use Joomla magazine template. I daresay most functional one-author blogs look nicer. WHOIS lists no contacts, the owner being identified as a “private person.” Until it became “famous” in the past few days, it did not register in Alexa’s top 100,000 global websites (for comparison, Unz.com is 53,764 on the list, and Russia Insider, launched less than a year ago, is at 27,585). That a site built in one day for $10 sometime in 2011 would be the one to acquire a leak of such seminal importance seems unlikely to say the least.

The figures also don’t pass the face validity test. Both UAF and NAF casualties are estimated around 2,500 to date, though they are likely substantial underestimates. Even so this would imply that the actual Russian Army accounted for a substantal portion, perhaps the majority, of the Novorossiyan military deaths. Considering its massive preponderance in training and equipment over Ukraine such ratios would be implausible even if it was doing the regular fighting. In actuality, the only time that we can be reasonably sure it got involved was in the Ilovaysk battle, in which the Ukrainian forces suffered a crushing defeat. The 2:3 ratio of killed to wounded is also utterly implausible for any modern army. That’s the kind of ratios you had in pre-antibiotics wars. In WW2, the ratio was 1:3. In modern wars, it’s at least 1:5.

These are some basic investigative and logical questions that any journalist writing about this should have been asking.

In their defense, though, Novy Region, the Ukrainian news site that first republished the story, is engaged in a propaganda war against Russia, as is 90%+ of the Ukrainian media. That is understandable.

And in their defense, neither Paul Goble nor Paul Roderick Gregory, the two Anglosphere pundits who did most to “break” this story in the West, can be considered legitimate journalists. Both are glorified bloggers, much like myself.

Goble’s primary schtick consists in recycling stories from marginal anti-Kremlin commentators and “laundering” them for mass citation in the Western MSM. This is a role for which he is eminently qualified by his long years of service in the CIA, RFERL, the State Department, and various democracy promoting NGOs (quadruple-sic!). As I wrote in an expose on him five years ago: “If one fine day some random Tatar blogger on LiveJournal decides to restore the Qasim Khanate, we’ll certainly hear about it on his blog… and guess what, we do!” His piece “uncovering” Russia’s military casualties for Euromaidan Press, his latest gig, is just his latest and unusually successful laundry day.

I don’t really know much about Gregory, apart from him being an economist who loves the 1%, blogs for Forbes, and really, really dislikes Putin and Russia (including up to and beyond the point of conspiracy theories). I suspect he got the story from Paul Goble since his post was published 11 hours after Goble’s and it is unlikely that they were both monitoring Novy Region, let alone BS-Life.

The real question is how come a whole range of Western media outlets reprinted these claims more or less unquestioningly, including: NBC, The Times, The Independent, IB Times.

Incidentally, The Independent is (was?) considered to be a pro-Russian paper, on account of it being owned by a Russian oligarch (as if Russian oligarchs ever cared about anything beyond their wallets). It’s coverage was singularly incompetent (see bolded), not a surprise perhaps considering the author also writes for VICE and BuzzFeed. And for some reason the Indy expects people to pay for its wisdom.

Whilst Russia continues to deny that its troops are fighting in the ongoing Ukrainian conflict, a respected news site in Russia seemingly inadvertently published secret figures that detail deaths and causalities of forces on the ground.

In fairness, some journalists were properly skeptical of this from the start, such as Leonid Bershidsky, who is likely the best (i.e. least ideological, most fact based) anti-Putin journalist writing at a high profile venue today.

A couple days later, this rumor was taken apart by RT, by revealing the elementary fact that there was no such publication as Business Life. Then the whole affair was comprehensively debunked by Ruslan Leviev (in Russian and translation), a liberal Russian journalist who has actively hunted for traces of Russian military involvement in Donbass. He uncovered that the site was a simple phone number phishing website whose owner went so far as to use stolen identities to keep the scam going.

And some Western journalists such as the AFP’s Dmitry Zaks were very, very sad to see the truth come out.

I said they needn’t worry too much. As is all too typical in this conflict, it is the sensationalist, headlines-generating news items that make the biggest impact. Reddit is probably the single biggest political discussion forum in the West, where upvotes are directly linked to visibility.

Let’s do a quick quantification using the number of upvotes at /r/WorldNews as a proxy:

BS + Reality +
Paul Goble 1129 RT 2
Forbes 374 Ruslan Leviev 0
NBC 219
Independent 28
TOTAL 1750 TOTAL 2

What can one say?

Well, first… Kremlin bots! Olgino trolls! Where the hell are you?!?

Second – the rather mundane observation the vast majority of people who only read the articles on /r/WorldNews – without delving into the comments, which at least in this case strip away the BS quite effectively – would come away reinforced in their impression that Russia is directly involved militarily in Ukraine on a large scale, is getting its ass kicked, and that popular opinion will turn against Putin sooner or later at which point the usual color revolution textbook would be pulled out. This is not an isolated case. It’s just the banal reality of information war. The people who “ordered” this story and then laundered it into the MSM don’t care that it was quickly exposed and that it thus has a short shelf life. It still dominated the Ukraine headlines for a couple of days, so it’s mission accomplished so far as they’re concerned. Only a tiny percentage will maintain interest long enough to see it debunked. So far as the rest are concerned the only effect is to reinforce the dominant narrative and the audience for that is primarily Western.

This is all rather obvious, of course, but even – especially – obvious truths still have to be repeated every so often.

 

So 2015 will almost certainly set a new global temperature record. In so doing, it will also discredit the last lingering skeptic arguments that the 2010s “pause” in global warming somehow negates thermodynamics and a century of observations.

global-temps-1880-2015

Source: NCDC. Red line is 5 year moving average. 2015 figures extrapolated based on Jan-May 2014.

Which does bring a new sense of relevance and perhaps urgency to Emil Kirkegaard’s recent post on tail effects in climate science.

Most of us here have heard of IQ bell curves. We also know that the effects are most pronounced at the edges of the graphs. For instance, assuming a 15 point S.D, a 100 IQ population will have 50% of its members above the 100 threshold, relative to 16% of an 85 IQ population. A large difference, but ultimately not that cardinal. But move the threshold to 160 – the approximate level of elite scientists – and the difference becomes onehundredfold. Certain intellectual achievements possible in a 100 average IQ society become impossible in an 85 average IQ society.

tail-effects-in-climate-science

Being all about bell curves and thresholds it is not surprising that you would see similar dynamics in climate science.

Small changes in general conditions = potentially big changes in the frequency of extreme events (major new scientific discoveries, intense hurricanes and droughts).

Small changes in general conditions = rising probability of entirely unprecedented events (the Scientific Revolution, clathrate gun scenario – both of which, incidentally, were and would be greatly self-sustaining).

Many ecological systems are also highly susceptible to threshold effects. Liebig’s law states that crop growth is limited by the scarcest resource available, not the total sum of resources. Change net climatic conditions, and the most extreme events can create stresses that impinge on some minimum or other (e.g. max temperature, water availability), leading to sweeping dieoffs of organisms that had become adapted to previously stable steady states and are unable to change in time.

Humans are a sapient, highly K-selected species. They can adapt. A lot. This is a good argument against climate change denialism’s opposite, climate alarmism.

Still, there are limits to this too.

One example: There are models that indicate “zones of uninhabilibility” – levels of thermal stress that mammals just can’t withstand in principle – will start to appear past a 7C rise, and encompass half of the world given another 5C rise, and most of the world with another 5C.

Of course the probability of this is really low, according to conventional climate models, and virtually non-existent within the 21st century.

But then again the probability distributions of future temperature increase are themselves subject to the same rules of bell curves and thresholds. And most feasible climate shocks/changes in assumptions would shift those bell curves right, not left, making the formerly impossible, possible, or even likely.

Both effective altruists and more dispassionate strategic planner types would do well to bear this in mind.

 
• Category: Science • Tags: Global Warming, RealWorld, The Bell Curve

Greenpeace meets Wolverines in this new Norwegian TV series.

Much as Russians would appreciate this, are there really no other hotbutton issues in Norway worthy of being explored in TV series and documentaries?

 
• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Norway, RealWorld

In response to Razib’s post.

Economically, Communist regimes are far from monolithic. You had:

  1. State capitalist/”market socialist” countries like today’s China and Belarus, the NEPist USSR, tradionally Communist-ruled Kerala for that matter. Note that even Western countries, e.g. dirigiste France, have flirted with this.
  2. Central planning as practiced from the late 1920s in the USSR, in which markets are near totally repressed but workers and enterprises still have some incentives to improve productivity.
  3. The complete lunacy that is Maoist economics, with no markets or incentives. You had a statistically bigger chance of dying on your job than getting a transfer.

Likewise these systems differ quite cardinally in the sorts of economic outcomes/per capita output levels they can achieve relative to a free market theoretical maximum.

  1. Probably 80%+. Any differences/problems will only emerge once you start moving into the highest tiers.
  2. Likely no more than 50%, at least beyond the heavy industrialization stage of development. With some help from high oil prices, the USSR reached ~40% of US GDP per capita in the 1970s (or 50% of that of the advanced West European economies), then remained at basically that same relative level until it collapsed. North Korea maintained GDP per capita (PPP) parity with South Korea until the 1970s, then flatlined, and is today no more prosperous than it was 40 years ago. East Germany was at 50% of Western Germany. Hungary did untypically well, but then again, its “goulash communism” was closer to (1); this I suspect is the main reason its post-Communist performance has been fairly unimpressive compared to Poland or Czechia, it having less of a “gap” to close relative to what it “should have been” in the first place.
  3. Maybe 20%.

In regards to India’s underdevelopment:

The Licence Raj didn’t help – according to the above schema, India would have been somewhere between (1) and (2) – but that couldn’t have been the main source of India’s development problems. Note that the USSR, North Korea, to some extent even Maoist China, they all managed to achieve basic heavy industrialization under systems far more market suppressive than the License Raj. Surely the main thing holding India back would have been its low level of social, especially human capital (low literacy rates, ~low 80s average IQ), development. Human capital >> institutions so far as economic growth is concerned in almost all cases.

Finally: I am not a fan of Communism in general but The Black Book of Communism is complete ahistorical propaganda dreck.

 

This has the potential to end up as an exceedingly embarassing post in retrospect, much like the confident blusterings of Wall Street bigwigs in 2007 or 1929 convinced the boom would never end.

Still, I guess someone has to stick their neck out.

(1) Booms tend to precede busts. But… what boom? Most of the developed world has only barely finished recovering their peak (inflation adjusted) GDP per capita of 2007-2008. Of the major economies in this group, only Germany, the US, and Japan have gained ground as of 2014, and of the latter two, only by the thinnest of margins. France and the UK remain 2% below 2007 per capita output; Italy, by about 10%.

world-gdp-per-capita-ppp-history

(2) Usually major recessions come in intervals of at least 10 years, the normal period for the Caution → Overconfidence → Loosening credit standards → Panic → Bust → Caution cycle to run its course. I think we are still very much in the Caution stage from the hangover of the Great Recession. Of course you can also get recessions from supply shocks like the 1970s oil crises, but that is patently not the case now. Apart from those countries that benefit from high oil prices (Russia, etc.) this should if anything act as a counteracting buffer.

(3) By themselves, stockmarket declines do not necessarily mean much, even in economies like the US (and unlike China) where companies get a large percentage of their financing from the financial markets. The 1987 stockmarket collapse remains by far the largest single day decline to date, but did not lead to a recession.

(4) They mean much less in China. As noted by many other columnists here like Eamonn Fingleton, the stockmarket is little more than a casino there. Only 2-3% of the populations participates in it. Companies do not rely on it for financing. They rely on banks, especially the state-owned behemoths.

shanghai-stock-market-longterm

Shanghai’s 40% drop in recent months looks concerning… until one notes that the net effect has merely been to return it to the average level of January 2015, which in turn was still double that of 2014 as a whole.

(5) Growth in the Chinese economy has crashed from its typical 10% to… well, 7%. Not much of a crash, is it? Note that China now produces about ten times as much steel and twice as many automobiles as the US. The potential for further 40% investment of GDP-driven growth in heavy manufacturing that has powered it for the past twenty years is now over and focus has to move over into consumption and services. This is an entirely natural development for a successfully catching up economy. South Korea also underwent a transition from ~10% growth in 1990 and earlier, to ~7% by 2000 and ~4% now. China’s GDP per capita level (both nominal and PPP) is today approximately analogous to Korea’s in the early 1990s, so given their similar human capital profiles, it is reasonable to expect China’s growth trajectory to resemble Korea’s with a 20 year time lag. In other words, it should be slowing right about now. Doesn’t mean it will collapse like the Sino-pessimists claim.

No shortrun shocks can change this fundamental picture, just as the 1998 Asian financial crisis had no permanent impact on South Korea. And unlike South Korea and the other Asian “tigers” at that time, China has much bigger buffers in the way of foreign currency reserves: Enough to cover 322% of its foreign currency debts, compared to 22% in Korea in 1998. So a currency crisis of that sort is simply out of the question. This is all rather obvious, of course, but even – especially – obvious things need to be repeated from time to time.

(6) There has been a spike in volatility (as proxied by VIX), but historically this has not led to recessions about as frequently as it has. Below is a historical graph. Note that it leaves out the 1987 event, which saw VIX reaching an all time peak at 150.

vix-index

 

The Baltic Dry Index, a proxy for the cost of shipping, which people were making a big deal of back in 2007-2008, is currently at historically normal, unremarkable levels.

(7) Even Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, who has predicted about twelve of the past zero Chinese recessions, is unusually upbeat (relatively speaking). Though given his record, this admittedly might be more a source of panic than placation.

Disclaimer: Needless to say, this is not official investment advice.

 
• Category: Economics • Tags: Economics, Financial Crisis, RealWorld

Nearly every other day brings another scary headline about Russia’s economic apocalypse. Inflation is robbing Russians of buying power and Putin propagandists are denying it. The “wheels are coming off” the regime according to our friends at the RFERL, the end of the regime is nigh according to Bill Browder, and Putin’s days are numbered, at least in the creative imagination of Ukrainian nationalist academic Alexander Motyl.

Masha Gessen’s friends can no longer get their little Gruyères, the “legendary” (primarily for losing his clients’ money) Moscow investor Slava Rabinovich is predicting food shortages, and things are only about to get worse with oil falling to $25 per barrel and the ruble to 125/$1, at least according to the Khodorkovsky-funded Interpret Mag’s Paul Goble, who has made something of a professional career forecasting Russia’s takeover by Muslims and the Chinese.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the guy who has predicted all twelve of China’s past zero recessions amongst other forecasting accomplishments, says that Russia is “in a full-blown depression.”

One would think from all the noise that we are looking at some sort of Greece-like depression, or an imminent rerun of the collapse of the post-Soviet economy in the 1990s.

Now for the rather banal reality. Real GDP is expected to contract by around 2.7% this year according to the World Bank, but then recover to 0.7% in 2016 and 2.5% in 2017.

The reasons behind this are likewise pretty banal. They don’t have a great deal to do with Western sanctions, which hurt the ability of Russian companies to raise capital but otherwise have had little bite, and they have even less to do with any particular feature of Russia’s political system/kleptocracy/lack of economic freedoms that both anti-Russian establishment pundits like Ariel Cohen and pro-Western liberals in Russia like former Finance Minister Alexey Kudrin like to claim as dooming it to economic stagnation. If they were right, then East-Central Europe – most of which is rated as a lot economically freer and less corrupt than Russia on the various indices that proclaim to measure such – would not also have been stuck in a relative economic rut since around 2007.

No, the reason for Russia’s recession is quite simple and boils down to the sharp collapse in oil prices from ~$100 in 2014 to ~$50 this year.

Though the Russian economy is about far more than just oil – natural resource rents are 18% of GDP – it is true that oil is the key component of Russia’s export basket. So when oil prices collapse, in the absence of massive and unsustainable interventions, the ruble devalues. This is indeed what happened. Imports went down, goods became more expensive, and inflation rose. The Central Bank jacked up interest rates in order to prevent runaway inflation, but at the price of a decline in aggregate demand and consequently a short-run decrease in the GDP. If one is really searching for a comparison, the correct one would be not to Greece (which is locked in a monetary straitjacket by the ECB) nor to the late Soviet Union (wholly irrelevant) but to the Volcker recession in the early 1980s US.

Sergey Zhuravlev's permanent oil shock model. Steady growth line represents $100 oil scenario; trough and recovery line represents $50 oil scenario.

Sergey Zhuravlev’s permanent oil shock model (click to enlarge). Steady growth line represents $100 oil scenario; trough and recovery line represents $50 oil scenario.

There is now a very substantial output gap. Dependence on Western credit is now much reduced relative to 2013, to say nothing of 2007. Meanwhile, there are active and serious efforts to develop Russia’s own financial system, which remains woefully underdeveloped for an economy of its size and scope.

Finally, even if oil prices drop permanently to $50 – which is entirely possible, given the removal of the Iran sanctions, this would not mean the Russian economy would be necessarily doomed to years of stagnation. To the contrary, econometric modeling by Russian economist Sergey Zhuravlev indicates that it would result in a ~1.5 year recession (which began in mid-2013, versus 2012 in his model; but otherwise it remains very relevant) followed by accelerated GDP growth thanks to exports.

Otherwise, macroeconomic indicators remain unremarkable. Corporate debt repayments scheduled for the second half of the year are twice lower than in the first half. The budget deficit is forecast to be 3-4% of GDP for the year and overall state debt levels continue to be very low. (Incidentally, this figure is 20% for Saudi Arabia. Which should put the nail in the coffin of the idiotic conspiracy theory that the fall in oil prices has been orchestrated by them and the US to undermine Russia).

russia-unemployment-rate

Unemployment in Russia (Trading Economics).

Unemployment has barely budged, not even reaching 6% at its peak. In comparison, it was at 10% throughout much of the 1990s. This is almost entirely an output recession.

Now inevitably when recessions occur, living standards tend to fall, and people have to live more frugally. Reading the Western media, one would think that the recession has led to a tsunami in worker protests, criminality, and elite intrigues against Putin.

But in statistical terms, the real impacts of the downturn have been modest. According to Levada opinion polls, the percentage of people having difficulty buying food and clothing increased to 32% this year from 21% in 2014, but this is still lower than the figure for (pre-crisis) 2012, when it was at 33%, to say nothing of the early 2000s (higher than 50%) or the 1990s (around 80%). The percentage of Russians who spend either “almost all” or “two thirds” of their incomes on food, another measure of poverty, is 26% this year, completely unchanged from 2014, and actually lower than in 2013 (33%) or the 2000s in general (40%-50%), to again say nothing of the 1990s (consistently around 80%). These numbers have been confirmed credible by observers such as Russia Insider’s Gilbert Doctorow and Alexander Mercouris, who have personally assessed the situation on the ground, in stark contrast to the New York Times’ Masha Gessen’s reliance on her “Je suis fromage” liberal Russian friend.

Index of "protest potential" based on percentage of Russians saying they'd be willing to partake in protests.

Index of “protest potential” based on percentage of Russians saying they’d be willing to partake in protests.

It is deeply unfashionable to say this but Russian living standards have improved astronomically in the 15 years of Putin’s rule – more so than the headline GDP figures. As such, even a recession like the current one only kicks living standards back by one or two years.

As such, it is not surprising – if deeply disappointing to the Western elites who want to stir up a color revolution in Russia – that Russia’s level of “protest potential” (the percentage of Russians saying they would be willing to participate in protests, or rating the likelihood of protests as being high) is currently near record lows.

Naturally, any such attempts to put the effects of an ultimately modest ~3% drop in GDP into statistical perspective will be met with accusations of callous indifferent to the plight of the Russian people, and the work of Olgino trolls to boot. I have seen this replayed numerous times on the Internet, even when the people making such arguments were Russians living in Russians, whose only sin was to recount their own (generally modest) experiences and impressions of the recession.

Make no mistake – there is a well coordinated media effort in the West to leverage any Russian economic problems to destabilize the Kremlin. Note the chorus of condemnation around the destruction of food illegally imported from the EU in contravention of Russian sanctions, even though the destruction of excess food is routine under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy.

Naturally, this is driven by their altruistic and heartfelt commitment to the wellbeing of the Russian people. Though isn’t it just a wee bit strange that those journalists and “activists” who tend to shout loudest about the burning of European food also tended to be the ones who maintained the thickest silence about the burning of Russian people in Odessa in the new European Ukraine.

 

A couple weeks ago, Steve Sailer wrote about how homicide rates have sharply spiked in Baltimore this year relative to 2014 ever since #BlackLivesMatter became a thing.

But apparently it’s not just Baltimore.

Homicide rates have been spiking in quite a few cities in the first half of this year. I summarize the data in that article. (Indianapolis, LA, Phoenix, and San Diego are only given as “declines.” I arbitrarily assign that a value of -10% and assume that homicide rates in 2015 ≈ homicide rates in 2012, which is the last year for which we have data in a convenient format. Multiplied by 7/12 to take into account that the data for 2015only covers the first 7 months).

Murders14 Murders15 ΔMurders Population
Baltimore 105 155 48% 623
Chicago 171 203 19% 2,723
Dallas 53 68 28% 1,281
Houston 105 150 43% 2,240
Indiapolis 64 57 -10% 849
Los Angeles 199 179 -10% 3,929
Milwaukee 41 84 105% 600
Minneapolis 15 22 47% 407
New Orleans 72 98 36% 384
New York 145 161 11% 8,491
Philadelphia 117 123 5% 1,560
Phoenix 83 74 -10% 1,537
St. Louis 58 93 60% 317
San Antonio 43 53 23% 1,437
San Diego 31 28 -10% 1,381
Washington DC 62 73 18% 659
TOTAL 1363 1622 19% 28,418

Now this sample is highly urban, accounts for less than 10% of the US population, and might have been nitpicked for the areas with the most drastic increases for inclusion. So conceivably and even probably at the national level there will not quite be the ~17% increase in the homicide rate (minus 1% point to account for immigration into the cities) observed here. And it is also possible that things will start calming down in the next few months.

Even so, a significant increase of 10% seems all but inevitable, which once it comes to pass would constitute a drastic reversal of the post-1990 trend towards decreased homicide levels. This reversal appears to be especially sharp in predominantly Black areas (compare the increases in Baltimore, Milwaukee, and St. Louis to those in San Diego or Phoenix).

“Why is there a synchronicity among these cities?” said Peter Scharf, an assistant professor at the LSU School of Public Health whose research focuses on crime. “One reason may be President Obama is broke. Governors like Bobby Jindal are broke, and mayors like (New Orleans’ Mitch) Landrieu are broke. You don’t have the resources at any level of government to fund a proactive law enforcement.”

Or maybe, just maybe, with SJWs, #BLM activists, and their political enablers running circles around the forces of authority, the former become demoralized and effectively go on strike.

Janard Cunningham is lucky to be alive. Pulled over by an Alabama police officer for erratic driving, Cunningham exited his vehicle during the traffic stop, aggressively approached the police officer and delivered a debilitating sucker punch to the officer’s head.

When any police officer is debilitated by a criminal’s blow to his head, it’s a life or death moment. Threatening deadly force against an attacker is perfectly reasonable. Even using deadly force to terminate the attack might be justified. But thanks to the fashionable demonization of police officers driven by activists and their enablers in the media, that’s not what happened next.

Instead, Cunningham seized the stunned officer’s firearm and pistol whipped him senseless. The officer said he didn’t defend himself because of fear of what the media and the activists would do to him. “A lot of officers are being too cautious because of what’s going on in the media,” the unnamed police officer told CNN. “I hesitated because I didn’t want to be in the media like I am right now. It’s hard times right now for us.”

And those Blacks for whom Black Lives don’t Matter in the least take over the streets.

So much for “expanding circles of empathy.”

 

So as you might have noticed I took a somewhat extended hiatus in the past two months.

This was pre-arranged with Ron Unz, as was the reduction in the number of my slots on the front page from three to one. I had to take care of some very time-demanding business related issues. But this is all done now and I now have more free time than I’ve had in years, so consequent blogging should henceforth be very productive.

***

Now of course blogging is never just about time but also about motivation and productivity. And during my hiatus I’ve thought about those two issues a lot as well and have come up with some tentative solutions. I’ll share them on the off chance that they end up helping other bloggers and writers.

  1. MIRI_office

    MIRI/CFAR HQ

    Philosophical argument against procrastination. I visited a LessWrong/CFAR (Center for Applied Rationality) meetup a couple of months ago. Highly liberal, ~135 IQ people discussing arcane topics on probability distributions, maps and territories, etc. A bit too arcane for me, at any rate. That said, the one extremely useful thing I took away from it and which has since been positively influencing me in my everyday life is a certain simple but really quite profound way of looking at procrastination. When you are procrastinating, you are essentially trusting your future self to do the work that your present self does not want to. But if you make a habit of procrastination, of being unreliable, would it then be rational of your present self to depend on your (presumably equally fallible and unreliable) future self to do that what your present self is too lazy and slothful to do today? It’s grossly irrational and irresponsible! So you make the rational decision to stop procrastinating and finish up your tasks after all. The whole philosophical exercise acts as a sort of positive feedback loop that gradually chips away at habits of procrastination until you become very disciplined and reliable, at which point – rather ironically – it actually becomes rational of you to practice procrastination every now and then. It’s not bad to take a break like that, in fact I suspect it’s psychologically healthy in the longterm. And any sustained return to procrastination would be auto-corrected.

  2. Establishing a “working reserve” of blog posts. One potential pitfall is that when you don’t write anything for a while, a sort of paralyzing apathy can frequently set in. You are thinking that you really need to publish something truly deep and amazing to “justify” the previous delay in new posts, but as the scope of any such “exculpatory” post gets ever more monumental with each passing day of continued inactivity, a spiral of sluggishness inevitably sets in. The obvious solution to this is to write a number of posts prepared in advance for those days when you are too busy or lazy to write anything new and keep them as part of a permanent reserve (much like how to cook effectively you need to have ingredients mise en place).
  3. CaptureImproving access to sources of material and creative inspiration. It is an oft cited truism that writers need to read more anyone else so as to get material and inspiration for their own posts (articles, books, etc). This is just one consequence of society operating as a hive mind on the macro scale; cutting yourself off from it means impairing your own intelligence and creativity. But since there is a low signal-to-noise ratio on the Internet, there also has to be some pretty rigorous filtering in place to prevent one from engaging in aimless browsing (an easy habit to fall into). My latest idea in this eternal battle is to create a custom home page aggregating all the links I tend to find most useful on one page, so I am never tempted to browse at random from page to page. On the right is my implementation of this to give you an idea of what I’m talking about (click to enlarge). The HTML file can stored locally.
  4. Continued commitment to the Evernote/Secret Weapon productivity system. Which is covered at length in this (admittedly dated) post. I will try to get it updated fairly soon.

Well, that’s pretty much it! Blogging frequency should pick up as I build up my “working reserve,” and hopefully I should be back to ~3 front page slots and regular posting by start of September. There’s a lot of interesting stuff in the works, including big posts exploring the idea of constructing an index of (comprehensive) national power for 2015, and a sneak preview into the core ideas of Apollo’s Ascent, the book that I’m writing that aims to unify psychometrics, world history, and economic growth/innovation theory.

Incidentally, I will also be giving a speech on the ideas of Apollo’s Ascent at a forthcoming conference on “The Future of Politics” on October 18th, 2015. Tickets can be bought here. This is part of a series of transhumanist conferences organized by Hank Pellissier in the Bay Area over the past few years. Apart from being a transhumanist and a Managing Director at IEET, Pellissier is also very much interested in psychometrics, having written the book Brighter Brains: 225 Ways to Elevate or Injure IQ which is a definitive aggregating of existing scientific knowledge on the subject. One of his current projects is, amongst other things, aimed at deworming children in Africa, which is probably one of the most cost-effective ways of fostering development in Africa and elevating average global IQs.

***

Finally, I have also taken the opportunity to update the Russian Reaction’s blogroll, as well as add a bunch of inspirational quotes. You can access it below.

While I don’t agree wholly or even mostly with many of the people on it, I do find them all to but at the very least interesting and noteworthy. At such, excluding the multi-group efforts that appear in the first category, it would be interesting to get some statistics about the list. Take what it says about me as you will.

1) There are 3 women out of a total of 68. That’s 4.4% women… pretty low, but nonetheless twice as much percentage-wise as in Charles Murray’s database of eminent figures in Human Accomplishment.

2) Ideologically:

  • 29% Conservative – Note that I classify NRxers as such, though granted their definition of conservatism relative to society’s as a whole is… somewhat different.
  • 28% Moderate – Note that a substantial part of society – SJWs, cuckservatives, etc. – defines anyone who takes HBD/IQ seriously as a raving far right loon, even though some who fit that description like Robert Lindsay are outright commies! so I will be using a more commonsense definition for people who just appear to be largely scientific/a-ideological).
  • 12% Liberal – E.g. Jayman, or someone like Pinker who’s work I follow even though he doesn’t appear in a blogroll.
  • 4% Left – E.g., Robert Lindsay.
  • 12% Anti-Imperialist – Those people who tend to combine Left/Alt-Right elements e.g. The Saker who simultaneously supports People’s Republics and talks about Anglo-Zionists. The main enemy is globalism.
  • 10% Right – As in hard right: Spencer, Greg Hood, Heartiste, etc.
  • 4% X – Those people whose views are so radically idiosyncratic that they defy categorization, e.g. the Russian blogger and political gadfly Yarowrath who supports Putin, national socialism, pontificates about the coming era of transhuman “emergence,” worships the Chaos Gods, supports LGBT rights, and plays FPS video games while jacked up on LSD.

3) Thematically:

  • 29% Politics – Which also includes geopolitics, international relations, economics, etc.
  • 4% History – Including cliodynamics and economic history.
  • 15% HBD – Involves a couple better described as just non-ideological anthropologists.
  • 6% Psychometrics – HBD and psychometrics do overlap a lot, but this category tends to more technical discussions of g with less of the social and political commentary you see in the former.
  • 4% Game/Masculinity – I.e., Heartiste, Roosh, Forney.
  • 7% Transhumanism – There are actually some fascinating convergences between H+ and psychometrics, HBD, and even NRx which is especially evident in the Bay Area. I suppose what unites all of them to some extent is the willingness both to think big and to think outside the box, fox-like.
  • 6% NRx – Neoreaction, Dark Enlightenment, etc. Ties in a lot of these themes.
  • 18% Russia – Self-explanatory.
  • 10% Ukrainian Conflict – Self-explanatory.

***

The new blogroll:

Against the Mainstream

  • Unz Review – Hosts about 20% of the people on this list
  • Russia Insider – Uncovering Western propaganda against Russia
  • Taki’s Mag – Entertaining columnists like the Derb, Jim Goad, and Taki himself
  • Off Guardian – Exposing the Guardianista phenomenon
  • JRL – David Johnson aggregates Russia news, takes care to present all sides

Top Thinkers (Mostly HBD/IQ)

  • Steve Sailer – Our Lord, the King of the HBDsphere
  • West Hunt – Cochran & Harpending’s 10,000 Year Explosion
  • hbd* chick – The Hajnal Files, or: Why banging your cousins is bad
  • Razib Khan – Population genetics plus history
  • Emil Kirkegaard – Possibly the highest IQ IQ-blogger
  • Craig Willy – EU affairs journalist skirting borders of respectability
  • James Thompson – The most comprehensive IQ-blogger
  • Pumpkin Person – Possibly the most entertaining IQ-blogger
  • JayMan – Black-Asian American proving HBD with maps and stats+
  • Robert Lindsay – HBD from a Hard Left perspective
  • Steve Hsu – Adding 1,000s of S.D.’s to IQ via CRISPR
  • Peter Turchin – Mathematizing history with cliodynamics
  • Peter Frost – Heretical anthropologist, genetic pacification
  • Pseudoerasmus – Economic historian who understands HBD
  • Ron Unz – The person who ensures many on the list here don’t starve

Top Russia Watchers

  • Patrick Armstrong – Retired diplomat producing invaluable Russia Sitreps
  • Alexander Mercouris (fb) – Very erudite columnist on Russian politics, IR, and Greece.
  • Paul Robinson – Academic professional on Russian history and excellent blogger
  • Danielle Ryan (RI) – An up and coming journalist on Russia
  • Dmitry Trenin – The intellectual “intermediary” between official Moscow and D.C.
  • Mark Chapman – Self proclaimed Kremlin Stooge; prominently kicks Russophobe ass
  • Dmitry Gorenburg – Expert on the Russian military
  • Sean Guillory – Academic skeptical of neocons, capitalism, and Putin
  • András Tóth-Czifra – Presents the yuppie Bruseels liberal perspective on Russia with texts
  • Mark Adomanis – Presents the yuppie Beltway liberal perspective on Russia with charts
  • Jacques Sapir (fr) – French expert on the Russian economy
  • Xin Zhang (cn) – Presents the Shanghai technocrat perspective on Russia in Chinese
  • Maxim Kononenko (ru) – Programmer, graphomaniac columnist, moderate Putinist
  • Sergey Zhuravlev (ru) – Russian economy expert
  • Sputnik i Pogrom (ru) – Egor Prosvirnin et al., or: The closest thing Russia has to a US-style Alt Right
  • Yarowrath (ru) – H+, 14/88, and Chaos Magic FTW!

Ukraine

  • The Saker – Former military expert now specializing in geopolitics and the Donbass War
  • Fort Russ – Invaluable translations from Russian and Ukrainian media
  • Gleb Bazov – Perhaps the single best Twitter source to follow for coverage of Donbass War
  • Graham W. Phillips – British video journalist working at ground zero
  • Vladimir Suchan – Skeptical take on Russia’s “betrayal” of Novorossiyan resistance
  • Colonel Cassad (ru) – Military expertise and comprehensive coverage with the best maps
  • Anatoly Shary (ru) – Ukrainian journalist in exile from new democracy covering junta crimes

Top Intellectuals

Inspiring Quotes

He who does not love his mother more than other mothers and his country more than other countries, loves neither his mother nor his country. – Charles de Gaule (my view on nationalism)

When will Russia get an idea for which one can live for and create for? Galina Dmitrievna, – for our children, our grandchildren, for our Motherland, Russia, it always was, is, and will be worth living for and creating for. What else is there? However we might try to come up with a national idea, it has to be said directly: There is nothing closer to someone than his family, his close ones, and his own country. – Vladimir Putin (my view on ideology)

There is no left or right, only nationalists and globalists. – Marine Le Pen (my view on ideology)

After communists, most of all I hate anti-communists. – Sergei Dovlatov (both tend to be faggots)

Whoever speaks of Europe is wrong. Europe is a geographical expression. – Bismarck (my view on the “Is Russia Europe or Asia?” debates)

I am an atheist, but an Orthodox atheist! – Alexander Lukashenko (my view on religion)

He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. – Luke 22:36, NIV (they don’t teach this kind of Christianity nowadays)

Everyone who isn’t us is an enemy. – Cersei Lannister (clannishness defined in 7 words)

Personally, I’ve been hearing all my life about the Serious Philosophical Issues posed by life extension, and my attitude has always been that I’m willing to grapple with those issues for as many centuries as it takes. – Patrick Hayden (my view on life extension)

The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the light into the peace and safety of a new dark age. – H.P. Lovecraft (my view on the ultimate fate of the human noosphere)

 
• Category: Miscellaneous • Tags: Admin, AdminRR

world-gdp-ppp-1990-2015

 

At least according to the latest revision of the World Bank’s PPP-adjusted GDP estimates.

China has long been expected to overtake the US economy (one economist dated it to as early as 2010), and there had already been a flurry in the media when the IMF claimed the same thing in December last year. The World Bank’s new figures just confirm the new reality and scaremongering about a bad night at the irrelevant casino that is the Chinese stockmarket is not going to materially change the fact. Annual growth continues at 7% per year, much the same as South Korea when it was at a similar stage of per capita development in the 1980s.

Russia’s PPP-adjusted GDP actually marginally overtook Germany’s back in 2013, and it managed to maintain this small lead into 2014 despite falling into recession. Of course with GDP expected to fall by around 3% this year, there will almost certainly be a reversal of this, but not by any radical amount – the hystrionical pronunciations of the Western media regardless – and will likely be temporary anyway import substitution really kicks in.

Financial, military, and cultural power are all ultimately functions, if lagging functions, of productive economic power. Although it would be a bad idea to go overboard with it, the spectacle of the same year (give or take) seeing both Russia overtaking the former biggest economy in Europe, and China overtaking the former biggest economy in the world, is really quite symbolic.

 

vsevolod-ivanov-man-and-bear

Artwork by Vsevolod Ivanov.

A few months ago, I had the pleasure of participating in an “Ascending the Tower” podcast produced by neoreactionary luminaries Surviving Babel and Nick B. Steves.

We talked about foreign policy, especially as it pertains to Russia, modern European and American history, the rise of Western universalism, neocons, and the Ukrainian Conflict in the context of neoreactionary geopolitical theory. Despite the length of time it took to get this podcast organized, the discussion in it has lost none of its relevancy.

Below are the links to the podcasts – due to their length, Surviving Babel split them in two – together with a copy of their “table of contents” and show-related hyperlinks.

***

Episode VII, Part 1: “This Kaleidoscope Of Truths”

Notes:

4:44 – Introducing Anatoly Karlin
7:17 – Putin and his perception in the West
16:26 – Gradual erosion of Russian respect for the US
22:10 – Russia Today vs. Western media outlets
28:05 – Brief thoughts on Alexandr Dugin
32:05 – Mid-19th c. burgeoning Cathedral foreign policy

Related show links:
Opening Music (excerpt): “Thirst For Truth” by Sons of Northern Mist
https://www.jamendo.com/en/track/1174735/thirst-for-truth

Closing Music (excerpt): “You is Light” by KORDYUKOV
https://www.jamendo.com/en/track/1207353/you-is-light

Anatoly Karlin’s Blog
http://www.unz.com/akarlin/

Discussion of 19th c. Russian liberal-conservatism
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/putins-philosophy/

More on Russian attitudes towards the US
http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/07/14/chapter-1-the-american-brand/

Ofcom and Russia Today
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/mar/02/russia-today-anti-western-ukraine-crosstalk-kremlin

Gregory Hood on Dugin
http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2014/6/23/why-the-conservative-movement-needs-dugin

Russian involvement in US Civil War
http://www.voltairenet.org/article169488.html

***

Episode VII, Pt. 2 – “The Worship of the West”

Notes:
1:03 – Woodrow Wilson, progenitor of the Cathedral
5:46 – Family structure and its influence on political ideology
11:30 – The failure of the League of Nations
15:13 – The post-WWII East-West polarization
19:58 – Competing visions of the nature of Ukraine
29:32 – Euromaidan and the Russian reaction
38:41 – Forecasting the near future of Ukraine
44:04 – Out of Left Field — Impact of the EAEU

Related show links:

Opening Music – “Opening Game” by aktarum
https://www.jamendo.com/en/track/1134793/opening-game

Closing Music – “The Gardener” by Mister_Even_Steven
https://www.jamendo.com/en/track/1245965/the-gardener

Anatoly Karlin’s blog
http://www.unz.com/akarlin/

Anatoly discusses Apollo’s Ascent
http://akarlin.com/2015/01/blogging-at-unz-review/

Woodrow Wilson and the League of Nations (warning: Cathedral source)
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1914-1920/fourteen-points
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1914-1920/league

Covenant of the League of Nations
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/leagcov.asp

hbdchick’s posts on Emmanuel Todd’s family formation theory
https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/tag/todds-family-systems/

Eurasian Economic Union (officially EAEU in English)
http://www.eaeunion.org/?lang=en

Sponsorship:

If you are interested in sponsoring Ascending the Tower, e-mail me at Surviving Babel at gmail dot com. Sponsorships start at $10 an episode, and all proceeds will either go back into the podcast or provide some compensation for your most grateful host. You can purchase a mention or short message, or you can choose to sponsor the Out of Left Field question or even an entire episode.

***

A Gentle Introduction to NRx

Kickstarted by the Jewish Silicon Valley-based programmer Mencius Moldbug in the late 2000s, neoreaction – or NRx, as it is commonly abbreviated – is a radically new look at our social and political systems through the prism of Human Biodiversity, the theory of private government, and the writings of dead white male reactionaries such as Thomas Carlyle and Julius Evola. This set of theories and ways of thinking has been termed the “Dark Enlightenment” by the British philosopher Nick Land. Since the days of Moldbug, NRx has branched off into three distinct directions: The (original) elitist, philo-Semitic, technophilic, and cognitively elitist wing, basically disillusioned libertarians who realized that the average person is a 100 IQ idiot who shouldn’t be trusted with democracy; the more populistic, Semitic-neutral traditionalists, ethnonationalists, thede-preservers, and old-school Christian conservatives who will never have any truck with gay marriage (I believe my interlocutors in this podcast largely belong to this category); and the wave of nationalists, Internet trolls, anti-Semites, and overt Nazis who have been making their way into the movement in more recent months. The entrance of the latter has been especially traumatic, producing a lot of drama and hysterics. Many of the Nazis wanted to overthrow NRx outright – some of them call it JRx, you can guess what that stands for – and sweep up the fragments into White Nationalism. But they haven’t met with success, since by and large the NRx OG’s – the techno-commercialists and the traditionalists – have resisted the assaults of the stormfags. And despite the recent political jitters, a lot of quality work continues to be written under the NRx umbrella.

This is a barebones summary. I will probably write more about neoreaction in the future, but for now, readers who want to find out more about this movement are directed to the following articles.

Personally, I agree with maybe 60% of the NRx platform – heck, check my blog name – but I should stress that I do not identify as NRx. Not out of any misplaced concern for respectability and employability; that ship has long sailed. Just that some of their ideas I disagree with, and quite cardinally so – for instance, the viability and desirability of private government. I don’t really adhere to any ideology but I do generally sympathize with Left positions economically. Like virtually any other ideology, they prefer narratives over facts. Their narrative (I think) happens to be closer to reality than the mainstream SWPL Liberal or Cuckservative narratives, but it contains predictable blindspots like rejection of climate science and statistically questionable claims denying the longterm decline in violence. Plus, they have a solid stance against entryism. That is their right and I will respect it.

PS. Administrative note -

As you may have noticed, my blog has been reduced from three slots to one slot on the front page. This is temporary, and was done by my own request. Basically, for various personal-related reasons, I will be very busy until about mid-August. Hence, my blogging will likely be very infrequent during this period. I will get much more free time come late August and September, when I will return to my regular blogging schedule and the old front page arrangement.

 

The Guardian’s Shaun Walker reports on the latest activities of Andrey Babitsky, the anti-Putin journalist who was fired from RFERL close to a year ago amidst a conspiracy of silence.

In an office just off Lenin Square in Donetsk, a small group of journalists is plotting the launch of a new television channel, to be based in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic. In the polarised media climate around the conflict in east Ukraine, it is no surprise that a new channel is being set up in the Russia-backed statelet. More surprising is the journalist leading it: Andrei Babitsky, who for years was accused by many in Russia of being a traitor to his country.

Here is my full article on Babitsky’s account of his work and departure from RFERL, including translations from an interview he did with a Czech newspaper (the single biggest exposure his case had in the Western MSM).

TL;DR – Working with RFERL since 1989. Feted as an anti-Putin hero journalist for explaining how Chechens decapitating Russian POWs on camera isn’t sadism but a way of making the war more palpable. Emigrated to Prague, where RFERL has its HQ, permanently in 2000. Continued traveling to Russia occasionally, most notably for taking an interview with the terrorist Shamil Basayev – he of Beslan school siege fame – in 2005. Consistent in his support for local autonomy and self-determination, he was okay with Crimea’s reincorporation into Russia, for which he was suspended without pay from RFERL. Soon afterwards, he uncovered evidence of Aidar war crimes in Donbass, which he videod and sent back to RFERL HQ. Was almost immediately fired from RFERL.

Virtually no mention of a Russian journalist being fired from an American state-owned media organization in the Western media, apart from a single interview in a Czech newspaper several months after the fact. Compare and contrast with the days long furor in the Western MSM when an American journalist resigned from a Russian state media outlet live on air. If this isn’t evidence of the Western media being controlled – it doesn’t have to be direct – then I don’t know what is. At any rate, Babitsky evidently agreed:

“I think the situation has changed a lot since the conflict sprung up between Russia and the west. And to a significant extent, Radio Liberty, which for a long time was a journalistic organisation, has become a propaganda instrument,” Babitsky claimed in an interview in Donetsk recently.

Which is why he is now setting up a TV channel in Donetsk.

He described his new project as an “independent internal channel which will fill a new niche”. It will be called Dialogue and the idea is to hold discussions between Donetsk and the rest of Ukraine.

“We want to move away from the language of hate, to use more analysis, and to try to bring in voices from the other side of the lines,” said Babitsky. He insisted the channel was not affiliated with state structures in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic, and said the modest funding had come from local businessmen. He plans to hire around six people to get the channel up and running within a month.

“Humans should remain human in any circumstances, and that is difficult to achieve in times of war. Hatred towards the enemy twists human feelings and we need to hear calm voices.”

It is worth pointing out that Guardianista sentiment towards Babitsky is about 75% negative, accusing him of being a Putinbot and a turncloak. Here is probably the best comment there, from one “Shatford Shatford”, an amusing blend of gay fever and Putin Derangement Syndrome (the latter displayed here in the implication that his claws reach all the way to Prague):

He was given a choice:

Either you shut up and start saying you love Putin or we a) jail you for 30 years; b) gun you down in the street and blame it on homosexuals; or c) repossess the homes of all your family members and kill their pets.

Sometimes people just aren’t willing to sacrifice everything for their ideals. Not everyone is Thomas Moore.

Babitsky is no friend of Putin or even of Russia. Nor, as it now turns out, is he an uncritical friend of the West either, as Boomerang Babitsky has come flying back to make a plant square on their face.

As for his own journey, Babitsky said there is nothing surprising about someone who was once considered a traitor by many Russians now espousing pro-Kremlin views.

“At that time I felt for the Chechens, because I thought that if these people want to live by their own traditions and move away from Russia then they should be able to. Probably we should have listened to those moods and not killed so many people,” he said.

“It’s the same here. I think Russia is playing a significant role here, but the reasons are not to be found in Russia, they are internal. This is a civil war, where the interests of two parts of Ukraine that consider themselves linked to two cultural traditions are clashing with each other.”

He is simple a man for whom his own principles come first. For all too many, especially those Westerners who view themselves as being invariably on the side of the Light, Truth, Progress, and Independent Media, the very notion is well nigh inconceivable.

 

Masha Gessen, the androgynous Tsarnaev sympathizer who shares her children with three mothers and five fathers (or something like that, not that I actually keep track), and stalwart enemy of the bloody Putin regime(TM), writes in the NYT:

It is cheese that Russians write home about when they go abroad. “It’s my first time in Europe after all that’s happened,” the journalist and filmmaker Inna Denisova, a critic of the annexation of Crimea, wrote on her Facebook page in February. “And it’s exceedingly emotional. And of course it’s not seeing the historic churches and museums that has made me so emotional — it’s seeing cheese at the supermarket. My little Gorgonzola. My little mozzarella. My little Gruyère, chèvre and Brie. I held them all in my arms — I didn’t even want to share them with the shopping cart — and headed for the cash register.” There, Ms. Denisova wrote, she started crying. She ended her post with a sort of manifesto of Europeanness and a question: “Je suis Charlie et je suis fromage. I want my normal life back — can it be that it’s gone forever?”

What will those poor Russians possibly do without their little Gorgonzola and their little Gruyère?

I cri evrytiem. ((((

These are the same class of people who pay for subscriptions to Snob magazine. In my observations, European cheese is a favorite obsession of theirs. They are far more insufferable than the high flyers who plop down for multiple bottles of Dom Pérignon. At least with the latter one doesn’t usually have to suffer pretensions to sophistication.

With enemies like these, Putin needs no friends.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Class Warfare, Liberalism, Russia

rainbow-kiselev

A few days after the Supreme Court legalized gay marriage throughout the US, a fairly (in)famous Russian TV presenter expressed his support for gay civil unions on the nation’s second biggest TV channel in front of a big projector screen blaring out “Love Works Miracles.”

No, he was not beaten up by skinheads with iron bars for his temerity live on air, nor was he fired, nor did anything happen to him whatsoever (which is surely shocking enough by itself for many Westerners). What is all the more surprising is the identity of this TV presenter: Dmitry Kiselev. He is a personality who has a highly chequered reputation in the West, reliably generating headlines with soundbytes about Russia’s ability to turn the US into radioactive ash and the necessity of burning the hearts of dead homosexuals. He is arguably regarded as being second only to Putin in terms of his godly powers in Ukraine, and has been sanctioned by the EU for being a “central figure” in Russian state propaganda.

And to hear him “come out” this way – “Love Works Miracles,” indeed. Snide jokes about his imminent gay marriage to Milonov inevitably follow. Even if he is serious, how exactly is Russian society – where support for gay marriage is at a mere 7% according to opinion polls, down by half from 15% just a decade ago – supposed to accept gay civil unions?

gay-marriage-russia-poll

But far from being the raving firebrand and Slavic Glenn Beck that he is typically regarded as, Kiselev is in fact a fairly intelligent and urbane person who speaks four foreign languages, successfully cultivated ties with important people who didn’t necessarily share his ideological outlook – here is a photo of him serving fried potatoes to Poroshenko and Buzina, in nicer, older days – and overall, an able servant of the state who is ultimately paid to propagate its thoughts, priorities, and feelers.

This episode must force us to consider an unusual proposition: The granting of concessions to the Russian LGBT community, up to and including civil unions. So far as the Russian state is concerned, this is arguably both realistic and adaptive and might happen far sooner than one might otherwise imagine.

The first major point to bear in mind is that Russian attitudes towards homosexuality – as well as social conservatism in general – have always been far more functional than ideological and/or theological in nature. This might be a surprising assertion to some, but it is backed up by history. The Soviet state was the fourth major European country (France, the Ottoman Empire and Italy were first) to effectively decriminalize homosexuality in 1917, along with abortion. The “reactionary” ancien regime had been overthrown, and so too were its cultural and legal accoutrements to be consigned to the dustbin of history. This policy was sharply reversed by Stalin in 1933, when (male) homosexuality was once again made illegal. Despite the rhetoric, its goals were purely pragmatic: The Stalinist leadership was concerned about falling birth rates (which they ascribed to the liberal policies instituted under the Old Bolsheviks, including legal homosex and abortion), made especially germane due to the looming threat of war with Nazi Germany; and the latent homoeroticism of much of Nazi art and culture (compare Kameradschaft to Worker and Peasant Girl) coupled with the regime’s search for scapegoats made homosexuals an easy target. These policies were maintained after Stalinism, when homosexuality was associated with effete capitalist societies that had no place in a worker’s state. The USSR might have been Marxist, but it was by no means culturally Marxist (a fine point that oft happens to be lost on US conservatives).

gchq-gay

Turing? More like Orwell.

Then the winds of history shifted, and sodomy was (re)decriminalized in 1993 – that’s ten years earlier than some US states, for context. In the absence of the state declining to take a strong position one way or the other, attitudes towards homosexuality steadily crept up well into the Putinist 2000s – albeit from a very low base. But then in 2012, Russian politics took a starkly conservative turn as Putin, following the mini-shocks of the 2011-12 elections protests, forsook the urbane and cosmopolitan class of Muscovite latte-sippers in favor of the “real Russia” of the Uralvagonzavod workers in the hinterland. The law against propaganda of homosexuality to minors was adopted in 2013. Locked in an increasingly bitter culture war with the West, which has now began not only embracing but actively weaponizing the international LGBT movement against its geopolitical foes – conventional wisdom must assess the prospects for LGBT rights in Russia as bleak for the foreseeable future.

Or maybe not. Here are the reasons:

(1) As per above, the Russian state’s policies on social conservatism are functional, not ideological. If the cost-benefit calculatinos change in a certain direction, so too will state policy. This is especially the case today since unlike the Soviet Union, Russia is an avowedly non-ideological state. When asked if Russia has a “national idea,” Putin replied, “For our children, our grandchildren, for our Motherland, Russia, it always was, is, and will be worth living for and creating for. What else is there? However we might try to come up with a national idea, it has to be said directly: There is nothing closer to someone than his family, his close ones, and his own country.” In other words, strident conservatism might be adaptive today – but tomorrow is another day.

alexeyev-outburst

“He dared call me a hypocrite? KGB must have hacked him!” – some American faggot.

(2) From a McCarthyite conspiracy theory, the US and Co. have managed to make Homintern into reality, highly intertwined with SJWs (with Buzzfeed as their flagship) and wielded with aplomb against countries unfriendly to the West (I suspect that as much has been written in the American MSM about Russia’s “persecution” of gays just in relation to the Sochi Olympics than about the totality of LGBT experiences in Saudi Arabia). What is all the more remarkable is that all this came together just a mere decade or so after the end of institutionalized discrimination against homosexuals in the US. This is no mean achievement and can be said without the slightest trace of irony.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean that all or even most homosexuals are now fully on board with Western imperialism. To the contrary, Manning and Greenwald plainly disprove that. The Russian LGBT movement as a whole has been highly subservient to Homintern, but this is neither a universal position nor even an entirely non-understandable one in the context of the Russian state’s turn against LGBT in the early 2010′s. For instance, Nikolay Alexeyev – a prominent leader in Russia’s gay movement – doesn’t like the West anymore than he does Putin, after he fell out with America’s Homintern (specifically John Aravosis and the AMERICAblog) because of their attacks on him following his refusal to toe their line calling for a boycott of the Sochi Olympics.

(3) To avoid falling behind the global Zeitgeist. If you can’t beat it – and let’s not kid ourselves, Russia objectively can’t – then join it on your own terms. As Razib Khan points out, it is the high IQ people who set policy – even in the US, the religious conservative types have next to zero influence over policy – and the great bulk of high IQ people in the West now support the gay agenda. This percentage is not going to diminish anytime soon. Like it or not, but opponents of gay marriage are going to find themselves increasingly surrounded by blithering idiots (Khanian qualifier: on average). And fat, drunk, and stupid – well, just fat and stupid, I’m talking about the US not Russia here – is no way to exert influence.

The counterargument is that the Western power is sinking anyway with the rise of BRICS, so why adapt to their world now of all times? Even if one insists on viewing it that way, though, it’s hardly an exclusively Western phenomenon. For that matter, two BRICS members – South Africa and Brazil – already have gay marriage.

homosexuality-world-poll-pew

As religiosity decreases, and it is decreasing virtually everywhere, tolerance for homosexuality and consequently support for gay marriage tends to rise. China and Russia are the only two major exceptions to this trend, due to their socialist legacy, but will they remain exceptions indefinitely? With the homosexuality = effete capitalists ideology now defunct, I wouldn’t bet on it in the longterm.

One concern for Russian conservatives might be that civil unions would be a slippery slope. To the contrary, evidence so far indicates that they are more of a line in the sand. It’s striking that Germany – a country far more socially liberal than the US, and which has had gay civil unions since 2001 – still doesn’t have gay marriage, while the US is fining bakers hundreds of thousands of dollars just for following their religious beliefs on homosexual unions. Americans can thank their pathetic cuckservatives for that, who spent many years slavering about the evils of gay marriage only to do a volte-face as soon as support for gay marriage crossed the 50% bar.

(4) One of the main purposes of traditionalism in Russia right now is as a foreign policy to consolidate the Near Abroad (e.g. Novorossiya) and undermine the NWO (e.g. Nazi conferences, support for Front National and Scottish independence – Europe, “The South will Rise Again!” – the US). The No Homo position is a consistent, if unnecessary, complement.

Why unnecessary? First, because consistency in foreign policy is overrated. Nobody pays anything but lip service to it. At various points since the fall of the Soviet Union, the US supported Chechen jihadists, its pet Moscow liberals, and literal liberal Nazis like Navalny – and the US is, after all, the country that invented the very concept of “color revolution.” Smart countries would do well to learn from the master. And I think some are doing just that. Today’s Russia supports both Left and Right, Syriza and the National Front, Occupy and Texas secessionists.

gay-marriage-europe-map The naive view is that No Homo will be more of a draw in the Near Abroad, where society is just as or even more homophobic than in Russia. For instance, a mere 5% of Ukrainians support gay marriage. The problem? It’s about the 20th item on the typical Ukrainian nationalist’s list of priorities (Putin is #1-#3, Europe is #4). More so, in a country where street “lustrations” and Far Right thuggery are a daily occurence, with the police powerless to intervene, any Ukrainian knows that his country is in precisely zero danger of being overtaken by a gay mafia anytime soon. That is why Russian online trolling of Ukrainians about “Gayropean values” and how at this rate they would soon be marrying dogs to toasters is like water off a duck’s back.

In dealing with this… cult (see video above), that happens to worships Europe, what would be a guaranteed way to mindfuck svidomy skulls? To inflict unimaginable levels of butthurt amongst Maidanists? Adopting same-sex civil unions just like in (the very European countries like) Germany, Czechia, Croatia, and Estonia that they love and look up to so much.

(5) Conservatism has certainly been useful in restoring Russia’s 1990s-depleted patriotism levels and fertility rates, but were it to be taken much further, its overall utility will become questionable. One distant if not altogether impossible outcome is falling into genuine retarded obscurantism. This is currently faked in Russia, not least by characters like Kiselev himself, but as in the Borgesian fable, the map can become the territory.

This would cripple transhumanism in Russia along with associated technological vectors like indefinite life extension and superintelligence. Too “real” and self-sacrificing – or “passionate,” in the Gumilevian sense – a commitment to traditionalism would increase the risks of this scenario coming to pass. Starkes Herz, starker Stahl! Dudes with AKs or even Armatas would always end up getting wrecked by Googletopia’s drones, Belltower augs and NWO terminators.

A loosening of No Homo policies can be a useful and timely reminder to people not to take the Spiritual Braces (dukhovnye skrepy) too seriously.

Now for sure this must all remain speculation. But I do not think Kiselev’s announcement of his support for gay civil unions was entirely out of the blue, and as covered here, there are solid and logical reasons for why it might presage a deeper turn in Kremlin policy in the not too distant future. And though I wouldn’t take even odds on it, I do think it’s likelier that Russia will into homosex by 2020 than that the President’s first name is going to be to be something other than Vladimir or Sergey (Shoygu).

***

PS. To preempt any claims of opportunism: I have supported same sex civil unions with some of the rights and privileges of marriage since the early 2000s when I became politically aware and my position on that hasn’t changed substantially since even though I zigzagged ideologically quite a bit during this period. Searching my blog would confirm that at least for 2008. Ironically, this means in American terms that I went from being a raving liberal under early Bush to a hateful bigot redneck today.

 
shutterstock_143582296

Chanda Chisala’s article on black/white IQ differences has been making quite the stir in the HBDsphere. It is well worth reading in its entirety, as some of the points he makes – e.g., the evidence for high IQ amongst certain African ethnic groups such as the Igbo – are quite compelling and novel even to those well versed in this debate. But the central plank of his argument is ultimately a strike against the “hereditarian position” in IQ on the basis that the children of African immigrants are failing to regress to the mean.

The predictable response of the hereditarians is to adopt the environmentalist argument of super high immigrant selection to explain this unexpected trend: where some environmentalists propose that these immigrants are the most driven achievers in their countries, the hereditarians say they are the most intellectually elite, the ones from the topmost segment of the IQ bell curve in their countries; the outliers who got some lucky genes in an otherwise poor-gene environment. But like the hyper-driven-personality hypothesis, this argument cannot explain the equally, if not more impressive, achievements of their children: lottery winners never have children who also win the lottery. The stubborn refusal of their children to conspicuously regress to the much lower African genetic mean IQ (and not even to the African American mean IQ) predicted by hereditarians is simply inexplicable under their racial genetic hierarchy.

The problem is that African IQs from all social groups are highly repressed because of Third World factors like malnutrition and parasitic load. Very significantly so – around 15 points, or one standard deviation. When Third Worlders migrate to the First World, they experience a sort of “accelerated Flynn Effect” as their children with one plane ride get to enjoy advantages such as superior nutrition, medicine, etc. that had taken their host countries a century to build up. It’s not so much that regression to the mean isn’t happening but that it is being cancelled out by Flynn. This is a point that with apparently just one exception on the part of the IQ blogger Pumpkin Person has been overlooked in both Chisala’s article and the comments to it.

Let’s do a few back of the envelope calculations based on several plausible scenarios to demonstrate this.

The (commonly accepted) phenotypic IQ of Sub-Saharan Africans is typically estimated at 65-80, with 70 being a particularly common estimate. Their genotypic IQ is around 85 extrapolating from African Americans (there are issues such as ~20% Caucasian admixture, selection effects during slavery, diversity in Africa itself, etc. but let’s keep things simple). As is also well known, and cited by Chisala himself, African immigrants to both the UK and the US tend to be highly credentialed (more credentialed in fact than any other ethnic immigrant group). A reasonable estimate of their average phenotypic IQ would be 100, i.e. two S.D.’s above the Nigerian/Ghanaian/etc. average (three S.D.’s would be too implausible since there are so very few of them), and a genotypic IQ of 115.

Some at this point would object that the genotypic/phenotypic difference diminishes for higher IQ Africans since they’d be wealthier and more “elite” on average than the commoners, and hence have access to better food, medicine, etc. This is a good argument, but actual height data indicates that in the Third World entire populations are shifted down – both commoner and elites – relative to their counterparts in the First World. You can see the same phenomenon not only geographically but historically, e.g. average US Presidential heights, which increased by more than three inches between 1776 and today (and that is despite the US being very well fed by global standards even two centuries ago).

Assume the standard method of calculating offspring IQ: The average of the father’s and mother’s IQs, plus some degree of convergence to the mean of the parents’ racial genotypic IQs, i.e. what is otherwise known as regression to the mean, which is usually estimated at 40%.

Now let’s assume our African immigrant is an economic migrant, i.e. an educated and credentialed Nigerian, as opposed to a semi-literate refugee from wartorn Somalia or DRC. (Average IQ of Black African immigrant offspring in the UK is about 93 according to the CAT tests, as Chisala points out and as I mentioned three years back. Since this group will include a lot of these very low IQ Somali/Eritrean/etc. refugees, the average IQ of children of African economic migrants should logically be a lot higher, i.e. maybe around the White average. This hypothesis will be further supported below).

Let’s assume our African immigrant is male for simplicity’s sake – plus the fact there are somewhat more men than women amongst African immigrants anyway – and that he made some of the following marriage choices:

  • Marries another cognitively elite Black immigrant woman just like himself, i.e. phenotypic IQ of 100, and genotypic IQ of 115, resulting in average offspring IQ of 107, i.e. standard “model minority”-level performance. It would not be particularly surprising or strange if Britain’s best performing secondary student in one particular year – Chidera Ota, prominently featured in Chisala’s article – was to come from the high end of this particular group’s bell curve.
  • Marries a Black immigrant woman whom he married back at home, thus she did not undergo the selection for higher IQ that is the selection process for economic migrants, thus has a phenotypic IQ of 85 and a genotypic IQ of 100. Resultant average IQ of offspring: 101.
  • Marries an African American woman with a phenotypic and genotypic IQ of 100 (i.e. associational mating). Expected offspring IQ: 101.
  • Marries a Caucasian woman with a phenotypic and genotypic IQ of 100 (i.e. associational mating). Expected offspring IQ: 103.

Here’s a summary:

Genotypic IQs F (ego) F (race) M (ego) M (race) S & D
Black immigrant (elite) + Black immigrant (elite) 115 85 115 85 107
Black immigrant (elite) + Black immigrant (nonelite) 115 85 100 85 100.5
Black immigrant (elite) + US Black (assoc) 115 85 100 85 100.5
Black immigrant (elite) + US White (assoc) 115 85 100 100 102.5

So you see the pattern? Cognitively, the children of African immigrants are basically Caucasians, i.e. a standard deviation above African Americans, but nowhere close to an elite cognitive group like Ashkenazi Jews or US Indians who are almost a full S.D. above Caucasians. They will come to form a population group with a fixed cognitive profile set around 100 or slightly higher (since regression to the mean stops after one generation), and as such they will do fairly well socially and economically. Most likely, better then Caucasians, since they will benefit from affirmative action policies in education and employment designed to benefit 1 S.D. duller African Americans while in fact being cognitively similar to Caucasians (think Ashkenazi Jews counting as Whites in university admissions). All of this, in fact, seems to be happening in real life.

Chisala might not have “disproven” the hereditarian or HBD position (at least its nuanced, non-White Nationalist part that pays due respect to auxology and Flynn dynamics). But he did demonstrate that African immigrants are doing fairly well for themselves. Indeed, as a cognitively elite Zambian immigrant, Chisala would presumably be quite the expert on it.

And don’t get me wrong, this is a genuinely attractive message, at least so long as you are an egalitarian blank slatist (US liberals), a cultural supremacist (US conservatives), or even a cognitive elitist who doesn’t attach any value to racial particularism. Liberals can point to them as living proof that Blacks are just as mentally gifted as Whites, and it is structural racism which is keeping African Americans down. As such, there needs to be more affirmative action, more racial quotas, more laws against hate speech, etc. to end it. Conservatives too would welcome it. They will praise the work ethic and family values of these African immigrants, citing the lack thereof amongst African Americans as the real cause of why they lag so much behind other ethnic groups in the US. That in turn will enable them to continue to wage their culture war against genuine African American culture. The economists and economic rationalists will be happy. Surely this is a good reason to expand immigration from Sub-Saharan Africa? More jobs, more skills, more entrepreneurialism. If anything, the only unhappy people would be the White Nationalists, and who cares about those primitive troglodytes anyway?

Even so, it should be pointed out that this argument can be critiqued even from morally universalistic, if still cognitively elitist, principles. An argument could be made that accepting African cognitive elites might improve the host societies, at least in the views of non-nativists: By increasing the size of the middle class, solving skills shortages, and providing fuel for the egalitarian narrative which – whatever its problems with logic, reason, and data – is nonetheless morally superior to “kneejerk” ideologies based on real racism and exclusion.

But proponents of these views should also seriously consider what effect their policies are going to have on the African societies that the high IQ immigrants are abandoning. It is becoming increasingly accepted in development economics that countries with high numbers of “smart fractions” – either via a high average IQ, like China, or at least a substantial “Brahmin” class, like India or South Africa – tend to do much better than low IQ and cognitively homogenous countries, like… most of Sub-Saharan Africa. The region has very few cognitive elites to start off with, and a large percentage of them are getting sucked up into Western societies that frankly have orders of magnitude less need of them than their own cognitively-strapped countries. These losses are not just financial, though those are no small matter even just by themselves: It takes a lot of money to train a doctor or an engineer, money which Sub-Saharan Africa generally doesn’t have. Even worse are the cognitive losses, as the stock of competent administrators and businessmen dwindles, reducing the size of Africa’s smart fractions even further and resulting in even more poverty and dysfunction.

It is adaptive to adopt the language of the Left on this issue. Enabling educated African immigration at a large scale is Western cognitive colonialism against the African continent, and is nothing more than a subtler version of the resource rapine that it subjected Africa to back in the days when imperialism was overt and didn’t bother concealing its iron fist beneath a velvet glove. Colonialism is bad and morally unjustifiable, and all foes of the global plutocratic elites must unite against it.

 

In recent days, some Armenians have been up in arms over increases in electricity tariffs by the evil Russian-owned electricity monopoly that will bring them up to… well, a level slightly higher than in Russia and about 2-3x lower than in most EU countries (don’t you love comparative context?). Discourse in both Russia and the West has now shifted to the familiar template of color revolution. Cookie girl Victoria Nuland was in Armenia last February in a closed meeting with NGOs, which is never a good sign, and the Maidanist Ukrainian elites are salivating over the prospect of a color revolution in Yerevan, with Interior Minister (and ethnic Armenian) Arsen Avakov going so far as to express his support for the “Electromaidan” couched in a bizarre anecdote about his adventures with a thermos in (Ukraine’s) Euromaidan.

Does this presage the overthrow of Russia’s colonial “puppet” in Armenia and its inevitable transition to the promised land of freedom, prosperity, and end-of-history that all such revolutions inevitably entail? At first, one might have cause to be skeptical. The numbers of protesters has been few so far: No more than 1% of Yerevan’s one million strong population. And while they do include the usual young pro-Western and anti-Russian types, there’s also plenty of older leftists and apoliticals, so for the most part it could be said to be a domestic political affair with no particular connection to questions such as Armenia’s membership in the Eurasian Economic Union or its hosting of a Russian military base in Gyumri. In opinion polls, Armenians are highly positive towards Russia. On the other hand, pretty much of all of this could also have been said of Ukraine’s Euromaidan before November 2013.

There is however one very critical difference between Ukraine and Armenia and it is summarized in the following chart (figures are from SIPRI):

armenia-azerbaijan-military-spending

Azerbaijan does not much like Armenia. The two fought a war in the early 1990s soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union over the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, which was officially Azeri but populated by Armenians (thanks to Georgia’s Stalin). Occupying favorable defensive positions and enjoying high morale and funds from the diaspora, the Armenians got by far the better of the exchange, and Nagorno-Karabakh has since been de facto theirs, albeit that is hotly disputed by the Azeris and unrecognized by the world community. Azerbaijan is fully committed to revanche, and relations between the two countries are poisonous to an almost slapstick degree. This is mostly amply demonstrated by the case of an Azeri military officer who murdered an Armenian counterpart while on a NATO exchange program in Hungary. Upon being sent back to Azerbaijan to serve the rest of his life sentence, he was immediately set free by Presidential decree, named a national hero, and given a free flat. Azerbaijan is backed to the hilt by Turkey, but is constrained by uncertainty over Russia’s possible response to overt aggression.

The two countries maintained a rough parity in military spending until the mid-2000s, with Armenia also benefitting from below market cost Russian weapon supplies. Since then, however, Azerbaijan has surged massively ahead, and its oil-fueled military spending is now higher than Armenia’s entire state budget. It now enjoys an approximately threefold preponderance in air and armor, and its equipment is on average more modern. Once relatively isolated, Azerbaijan now enjoys good relations with Turkey, Israel, the US (especially its neocon/corporatist nexus), and even Russia. A new war between them – absent Russian support – will almost certainly no longer be a repeat of the early 1990s when the Azeris suffered debacle after military debacle.

As a result, any even minimally sane Armenian administration will take great pains not to alienate Russia, even if they should come to power as a result of a color revolution. For a country surrounded by two avowed enemies (Azerbaijan and Turkey), a neutral (Georgia), and one lukewarm friend (Iran), alienating Russia would be so phenomenally stupid and counterproductive that it would be functionally close to treason. The discomfiting thing, though, is that said stupidity and chiliastic fanaticism is a feature of all Maidan-like movements in Eurasia. If the Washington Obkom commands them to sacrifice their national interests just to spite and undercut Russia, they will generally do so with pleasure – as happened in Saakashvili’s Georgia and (twice) in Maidanist Ukraine – since if worst comes to worst ,they can always retire to a comfortable position at Columbia University, while it is the ordinary people who are left to pick up the pieces.

 

The second one in my new series. This one is substantially shorter, as will be most consequent sitreps.

Gallup

Has conducted a very comprehensive poll about attitudes in the EU, Russia, Ukraine, and the US to various aspects of the Ukrainian crisis. Here is the link to it. I will highlight the most important findings.

1) Support for joining NATO, EU, military aid is high in Anglo-world, France, and Poland, but substantially lower in Germany and Italy.

nato-public-aid-to-ukraine-gallup

2) Willingness in NATO countries to defend allies. Incidentally, all of the figures here are higher than the results of a previous Gallup poll about willingness to fight for one’s country (presumably under any circumstances).

nato-defense-poll

3) The headline figure is “NATO publics support Ukraine, but Ukrainians want more.” But ironically, the NATO median for Ukraine becoming a NATO member (57%) is higher than in Ukraine itself (53%).

4) NATO countries and Russia both generally have an increasingly poisonous view of each other, but that is hardly news.

nato-russia-poll-gallup

5) A plularity of Ukrainians, even in the west, support a negotiated settlement with the separatists and Russia over continued use of military force to fight the rebels. There is also significant support for Donbass receiving greater autonomy from Kiev (a plurality in the east). That the regime ardently refuses to even talk about this once again illustrates that it represents the viewpoints of only the west of Ukraine and its zealously unitary ideological ambitions.

6) It’s a fun and counterintuitive fact but Putin is more popular in the US (21%) than he is in any major NATO country bar Germany (23%). Moreover, the US takes the lead if only West Germany is counted (19%), since the overall German score is influenced by the unusually Russophilic attitudes of the East (40%). Maybe because Americans respect manliness, at least marginally more so than limp-wristed Europeans if dank memes on the Internet are anything to go by? But I have no idea, really.

However, tallying attitudes towards Russia the country as opposed to Putin its leader, France is the most Russophilic (i.e. least Russophobic) major NATO country, at 30%, while Poland (15%) and the UK (18%) are unsurprisingly the least Russophilic.

7) Russians’ confidence in Putin (88%) and his foreign policy (82%-90%) remains high. There is slim majority support for Donbass becoming either part of Russia or an independent state; near universal opposition to Ukraine joining NATO, strong majority against it joining the EU, and plurality support for it joining the Eurasian Economic Union.

As covered earlier, as in the West towards Russia, Russian opinion towards its Western “partners” has plummeted.

russia-opinion-on-nato-countries-gallup

8) 66% of Ukrainians think the economy is very bad, while another 28% think it’s somewhat bad. Only 3% consider it good. With inflation running at 60% and possibly imminent default, this is not surprising.

It appears that the “current government in Kiev” has already lost the great bulk of its popularity, with 59% saying it is exerting a bad influence, and more than 60% of respondents disapproving of Poroshenko’s performance on the economy and corruption (cleaning up corruption was one of the Maidan’s main promises).

While 56% of people in Western Ukraine primarily blame Russia for the violence in Eastern Ukraine, only a third in the East do so. After more than a year of intensive anti-Russian propaganda it is indeed impressive that the figures are so low. Nonetheless, it must be acknowledged that Russia’s once high approval rating in Ukraine has almost completely collapsed, and is now at 21%, while the approval rating of the EU (72%), NATO (58%), and the US (69%) has increased.

Protests, Disorder, Far Right Antics

With things relatively quiet, the Right Sector, Azov, and sundry “activists” and other freaks tend to run amok, and this is pretty much what’s been happening this past week.

Kiev gay pride march violently dispersed by Right Sector after 30 mins (the Guardian feigns ignorance on the identities of the assailants). As Alexander Mercouris explains, following their betrayal by Yanukovych and the Maidan cooup, the Ukrainian security services are terminally demoralized and can no longer be relied upon to maintain regime stability. But far right hoodlums are more reliable. So their criminality and thuggishness has to be tolerated, even when it goes against the regime’s cargo cult efforts to ingratiate itself with the Western white men (e.g. by allowing an LGBT parade). Only in the most extreme cases, like that of Alexander “What bitch will take the gun from my hands” Muzychko and Vita Zaverukha, does the regime dare crack down on them.

A mob of 40 masked thugs carried out a series of knife attacks in Kharkov that landed three people in hospital in serious condition. The Russian consulate in Kharkov was pelted with paint and eggs. Some more Lenin statues went down, but that’s not really news since it happens near every week. (If Ukrainians so greatly want to purge the man who did more than any other to create Ukraine as we know it, Russians should not complain). Euromaidan and Right Sector activists occupied the Communist Party office in Odessa. In Kiev, activists set up tents and demanded the overthrow of Poroshenko. Right Sector marched in Lvov against Poroshenko, yelling traditional classics such as “Glory to the Nation,” “Glory to Ukraine,” “Putin khuylo” (“Putin is a dickhead”) interspersed with newer creations like “Poroshenko khuylo” and “Yatsenyuk khuylo.” Here is what one activist had to say about it:

Poroshenko’s regime is no better than Yanykovych’s. It’s the absolute same! Patriots are sitting in prison. At the same time, Poroshenko and his team gave the LGBT community the go ahead to have a gay parade in Kiev. Sane people, with traditional values and normal morals, decided to protest this degeneracy. They were made into criminals and terrorists, and locked up. Did the Heavenly Hundred fight so that Ukrainian patriots ended up in prison? People, prepare for the worst, tighten your belts, for nothing good will come from this regime. We have to unite. Only the people can take everything in their own hands, and not some oligarchs of non-Ukrainian lineage.”

While we wish them the best in their glorious struggle, unfortunately at least up till now they have been all bark and no bite when it came to confrontations with the Poroshenko regime. Because… see above. Birds of a feather flock together.

US Won’t Train Azov

azov-emblemBecause they are Neo-Nazis. Here is what its head Andrey Biletsky has to say about its ideology:

The historic mission of our nation in this critical moment is to lead the White Races of the world in a final crusade for their survival. A crusade against the Semite-led Untermenschen.

Its emblem features not one, not two, but THREE, Nazi-associated symbols.

Although it goes against the traditional no-fascists-in-Ukraine line generally adopted in Western rhetoric, I suppose that doing anything otherwise is just a tad too much in the way of hypocrisy overload.

But politics aside, this is rather fortunate, since enthusiasm for fighting in the ATO is much lower amongst typical Ukrainians who are not far right nutters. And not only lower enthusiasm, but probably lower competence too: According to those same American instructors, Ukrainian soldiers don’t know even the most elementary things, such as turning up for training without their helmets and putting unexploded grenades in their pockets.

ATO Chronicles

A deserter from the ATO was arrested for raping his one year old daughter. This is far from the first case of Ukrainian soldiers losing their minds once they get back from the war, inflicting a continuing toll on society, and it will not be the last. No wonder that even according to the commander of the pro-Kiev batallion Tornado, some 99% of the people he knows in Donbass hate Ukraine by now.

An advisor to Poroshenko confirms that junta casualties are systemically underestimated (see the last sitrep for background).

LNR/DNR, Crimea, Federalism

The story – seized upon by the Ukrainian media – about the DNR/LNR refusing to recognize Crimea as Russian, unsurprisingly and predictably, turned out to be complete BS.

As seasoned Russia expert Paul Robinson points out, insofar as all this reintegration with Ukraine talk is concerned, the “DNR is merely going through the motions,” almost certainly doing so under Russian pressure, which in turn is connected with Minsk 2 and the hope of reversing Western sanctions.

Ukraine Economy

Negotiations deadlocked. IMF says it will continue support Ukraine regardless, because it is implementing reforms. But creditors can sue because in the case of a default (or a “moratorium” on repaying debt, but that’s really the same thing), which is looking ever more imminent, they can make the case that they should be compensated first.

Sanctions

If Putin was counting on Minsk 2 to make the EU ease up on sanctions when they are up for review this July, the chances of that are slipping, with Obama maintaining that sanctions will be maintained after the G7 meeting and the EU Parliament Vice President Richard Charnetsky even touting the possibility of Russia being cut off from SWIFT (the economic “nuclear” option).

One of the main criticisms of Putin from the patriotic/nationalist right (e.g. Sputnik i Pogrom, El Murid) has been that if you are going to rob a bank, you might as well take $1 billion (Novorossiya) instead of $1 million (Crimea). Either way, the bank and the feds (the US/West) will be out hard for your ass. It’s a pretty simple-minded argument, all things considered, but if the sanctions continue or especially if they are stepped up even further, then it will be only further fuel for their wrath, and that is something Putin would wish to avoid. So at a minimum we can be sure that tightening sanctions will be unlikely to have the effects that the US wants, i.e. Russia’s capitulation in Ukraine.

 

I am basically at the stage where I find reading paper books to be almost physically painful. I can do it if I have to but given the choice I’d much rather do in my tablet’s Kindle app or even as a PDF file. I’d positively hate to be in an non-cyberpunk apocalypse by now.

ak-reading Apart from portability and ease of access across multiple platforms and devices, the thing that really seals the deal about ebooks is the ability to highlight and annotate, and crucially, the ability to get those highlights and annotations as an ordered list. I typically make dozens of highlights in literary works like fantasy or sci-fi, and hundreds and occasionally close to a thousand highlights in serious non-fiction works. I access these excerpts at this page on Amazon page and copy them over to an Evernote notebook (i.e. folder) that is exclusively dedicated to book excerpts.

This has some big advantages:

  • Very accessible, indexed, and searchable database of books whose usefulness for research grows in tandem with its overall size.
  • Makes the writing of book reviews much easier, especially if you wish to be detailed and include long quotes.
  • The contents of books you’ve read in the past, even those from several years back, can be easily recalled just by a quick skim through the highlights. This effect is well known in psychology where people start recalling massive amounts of information after getting a few relevant reminders.

That said, while this Kindle/Amazon system works, there are still some major spheres in which it falls short.

  • The biggest problem by far is that highlights are only supported for books bought from the Amazon store. This means that epubs, PDFs, etc, bought from other stores, or otherwise acquired from the Internet, cannot be highlighted and clipped over. This is of course an issue since many books aren’t available at Amazon. In particular, its national online storefronts remain remarkably fragmented for this day and age, and as such the foreign language selection is very meager. For instance, as regards Russian, pretty much only the classics and translations of popular Anglo crap like The Hunger Games is available. Neither of the two most recent high profile “political” books from France, The French Suicide by Zemmour or Submission by Houellebecq, are available in French on American Amazon.
  • One possible solution is to use a Kindle reader, read any epub, PDFs, etc. there, and copy over the highlighted material from MyClippings.txt. But reading PDFs on a Paperwhite is a pain, and besides obviously requires you to get a Kindle or a Paperwhite in the first place.
  • The Amazon/Kindle ecosystem can also be rigidly proprietary, and I’m not even talking of scandals like the “unbookening” of copies of 1984 that arise every now and then. Some books, especially the more academic ones, have a limit to how many highlights you can make. Once you pass that limit, you get the dreaded “You have reached the clipping limit for this item” and… that’s it. If you were doing serious research, congratulations, you’ve just lost a big chunk of your time for nothing (needless to say they don’t warn you of what those limits are before you buy your books). If you pay $25 for a book, you might feel that you should have the right to make as many highlights and annotations on them as you wish, and have full access to all of them. But publishers evidently disagree, on the principle that you do not “own” your ebooks in any real sense but just get regular access to them subject to certain conditions. Just as with overly intrusive DRM in video games, it hurts legitimate users way more than it hurts pirates. (Sure, the DRM in Kindle books can be stripped away using tools like Calibre, but then it would become an “outside” book and you would no longer be able to access its clippings on the web).
  • Despite being an established system, it continues to be infested with bugs, such as highlights and notes made while not connected to the Internet disappearing.
  • This is drifting into fantasyland, but I would also really like it if it were possible to highlight and clip tables, graphs, maps, images, etc. along with text. I mean it’s not like it’s hard to do manually – open up the required page, print screen, and copy over into GIMP or paint – but it is a lot more time consuming that way.

For PDF files and books, my very (substandard) solution right now is to read them and make highlights/annotations in Foxit. So far as I know, however, those highlights and annotations can’t be exported as a list of clippings.

I have not been able to find a good alternative to the Kindle/Amazon system. It does do 75% of what I want it to, which is to work across different platforms and supports highlights and annotations that can be exported. I would like to move over to something that does that plus supports “outside” files, including those in epub, fb2, and PDF format, and in the ideal scenario also supports the highlights and clipping of non-text media like tables and images.

Does something like this exist? Surely it should, in this information age… surely. But if so I haven’t found it.

If not, consider making something like this, if you have the programming skills. I’m sure there’s a market for such a product, since I can hardly be the only person obsessed with highlighting the books I read and using the accumulating clippings as a research tool.

How do you read ebooks and organize your highlights and annotations on them?

 
• Category: Miscellaneous • Tags: E-books, Reading

This is the first post in a new series that I intend to do in 1-2 week intervals every Friday. Just like Patrick Armstrong does with his RF Sitreps on Russia Insider, these sitreps are intended to cover both developments in the ongoing War in the Donbass. mozgovoy

Assassination of Alexey Mozgovoy

On May 23, the cortege of Mozgovoy, the second most powerful man in the LNR (Lugansk) after President Plotnitsky, was shot up and he was killed along with his press secretary, driver, and bodyguards. Responsibility remains unclear. The pro-Kiev partisan organization Teni (“Shadows”) claimed responsibility, but since it frankly exists more on Facebook than anywhere else, that is unlikely.

The LNR itself blamed Ukrainian special forces, accusing them of seeking to undermine the Minsk Accords. This is a bit likelier, but there is no clear motivation for it, and it is not obvious that Ukraine has the capacity to mount a special operation of such complexity deep in the enemy rear. Objectively speaking, the most likely culprits – and this is an assessment shared by many ardent Novorossiya supporters as well as its enemies – is either Plotnitsky, the Kremlin, or both.

He was long a thorn in the LNR’s side, on bad relations with Plotnitsky personally, for his independent, populist stance and uncompromising opposition to the Minsk Accords. He wanted to press the war on until Kiev’s liberation.

But paradoxically, he also enjoyed a degree of support in the rest of the Ukraine greater than that of the other separatist leaders because of his reputation as a “genuine” person, and his stance that both the people of Donbass and Western Ukraine had a common enemy in the form of Ukraine’s oligarchs and political elites (one of the few things that most of Ukraine can agree on).

His populism and uncompromising stance was painted by his enemies as a kind of Orthodox extremism. His most infamous stunt was presiding over a “people’s trial” of a rapist who was sentenced to death (though the sentence was never carried out), and expressing ideas about the proper role of women that are, how should we put it… would have been considered unremarkable in the 19th century (though in his defense, that particular comment was clearly meant to be sarcastic).

If so, this would not be the first assassination of its kind. The warlord Alexander Bednov, nom de guerre Batman, was killed under similarly shady circumstances this January. If so, this would make it part of a ongoing project to centralize power in the breakaway republics, with the Byronic idealists who drove the initial rebellion getting displaced by toady but effective political managers vetted by Moscow. (Igor Strelkov, unlike Batman and Mozgovoy, was probably wise getting out when he did, assuming himself guaranteed invitations to Russian nationalist talk shows and conferences for life and acquiring himself a hot young wife in the process).

In his case, Buronic in the literal sense: He was also a surprisingly decent poet, and as it turns out, a tragically prophetic one, too (translation by Gleb Bazov):

It is a gift to die in May— An easy task to dig a grave, And nightingales will sing their song Inimitably, like their last.In May, the thunder of storms supplants A funerals’ dismal songs and sounds, And rain that comes instead of tears Dissolves the memories’ regret.The shelt’ring barrow of the grave Beneath the emerald of grass; A cross is a redundant mark Among a grove of weary birch.Beneath the rustling newborn leaves, With irrepresible thirst for life, The sun has yet to burn the grass, And every thing is animate.It is a gift to die in May, To stay behind in vernal dew. And though I could not do it all, There are no doubts where none remain… It is a gift, to die in May… Не плохо в мае умереть, Могильщику копать удобно. И соловьи всё будут петь, В последний раз, так бесподобно.Под грохот первых майских гроз, Вместо унылых отпеваний… И дождь, прольётся вместо слёз, Он смоет грусть воспоминаний.Могильный холмик приютит, Под покрывалом трав зелёных. Пусть даже крест там не стоит, Среди берёзок утомленных.Под шелест листьев молодых, Что только к жизни потянулись. Пока ещё нет трав седых, А только, только всё проснулось.Не плохо в мае умереть… Остаться в свежести весенней. И хоть не смог я всё успеть, Но не осталось уж сомнений… Не плохо, в мае умереть…

Saakashvili appointed head of Odessa oblast

See my main article here. In short, Saakashvili’s legend is mostly a con: His achievements in improving the economy and corruption are both massively overstated, Georgians are leaving his “Switzerland of the Caucasus” at an unprecedented rate, and his political and military decisions were complete flops. He is however good at running cargo cults in relation to the West. At least in that respect he’s the real deal. How much more pathetic is it that Ukraine is making a cargo cult of a cargo cultist?

Renewed fighting in Maryinka

This week saw the most severe uptick in fighting since Minsk 2, with the hottest action taking place in Maryinka on June 4 where the NAF launched a largescale counterattack in response to Ukrainian attempts to take the area a couple of days previously. In the familiar pattern, both sides accused each other of breaking the Minsk Accords, and as per usual, both were correct. These events were the single bloodiest since the Debaltseve cauldron. Regime forces claimed 5 of its soldiers dead versus 80 separatists. The separatists in their turn said they suffered 20 dead to the junta’s 400. Colonel Cassad, a pro-Novorossiya but militarily objective analyst with contacts on the ground, said the higher figures are more likely, reporting that just one NAF unit whose representatives he spoke with suffered 25 dead by itself, while total regime losses were estimated at 200.

~Note on Casualties

At this point, a little aside about casualties in general, for reference in future discussions. Both sides in this conflict have sought to minimize their own casualties, while maximizing those of their enemy. Done for obvious propaganda reasons, this has frequently reached the level of farce, both on the Ukrainian side and on the Novorossiyan side.

While the “official” death count for both sides is currently at around 2,000 I suspect the real figures are probably 2x-3x higher, since “real life” accounts from both sides that I have observed during this conflict seem to very consistently paint a much bloodier picture than official figures. Be that as it may, the one thing that I will argue that we can be relatively sure of is that regime and separatist losses are approximately equal. This is dictated not by any detailed tallying or anecdotal impressions but by basic military theory. Given some rudimentary knowledge of force concentrations, equipment, attack/defense status, and the intrinsic quality of the troops (or combat effectiveness value to use the technical jargon), you can make fairly reliable predictions about relative casualties.

Applying this to the Donbass conflict, the first two are broadly equal, with the NAF now as well armed as the Ukrainian forces thanks to Russia’s military surplus stores, though the Ukrainians still probably enjoy a quantitative edge. But this is irrelevant for most engagements since what matters is achieving a preponderance of firepower at the local level, and neither side is very good at that because neither side has the capability to wage true combined arms warfare (Russia does, and the Ukrainian military would be crushed within days were it to ever overtly invade. This was true in April 2014, and it remains true today). The NAF is usually on the attack, which is bad, since the standard casualty ratio for attackers against prepared positions with everything else kept equal is 1.3:1, rising to 1.5:1 against heavily prepared positions. Hence the high casualties incurred by the NAF in the monthslong and strategically dubious assaults on Donetsk Airport. Overall troop quality is low on both sides, though by all accounts morale is much higher in the NAF. (Contrary to sensationalistic reports of Pskov paratroopers getting massacred in their thousands by Ukrainian cyborgs at the Airport, the Russian Army has for the most part avoided direct involvement in the fighting, limiting itself to logistical and informational support. The only two major exceptions to this pattern coincided with Ukraine’s two biggest defeats – the Ilovaysk and possibly the Debaltseve cauldrons).

In short, adding up all these factors, neither the UAF nor the NAF has a clear advantage, so the logical conclusion is that – whether they are closer to 2,000 or to 6,000 – casualties on both sides are broadly similar. Incidentally, this conclusion is backed up by POW counts. POWs are harder to hide than military losses. As of March 2014, some 1,800 separatists were under or had passed through Ukrainian captivity, versus 2,800 Ukrainians. This discrepancy is likely mostly or entirely explained by the higher morale of the NAF, which presumably lowers the proclivity to surrender.

Transnistria blockade

Transnistria, including the big Russian military base there, is now fully blockaded on both sides. Any resupply will now have to take place by air. S-300s have been moved to Odessa, and Saakashvili has been made its governor. There are rumors – so far as I’m aware, only rumors so far – that Ukraine is building up forces along the Transnistrian border. All pretty ominous, and worth keeping an eye on. I don’t think anything really serious will come of this in the foreseeable future, but then again, you can never overestimate the insanity of the Maidan ideologues.

The End of Novorossiya?

Novorossiya as a political project has been officially frozen, ostensibly because it is incompatible with Minsk 2. Pro-Ukrainians gloated and rejoiced. Pro-Novorossiyans wailed over yet another “betrayal,” ironically mirroring nationalist Ukrainian discourse centered around це зрада чи перемога (is this betrayal or victory?). In reality, Novorossiya as a political project died out sometime around April 24, 2014, when Putin decided against repeating the Crimean scenario in Eastern Ukraine in a meeting with his top siloviki. What use is a parliament for eight republics when only half of two of them are in said country in the first place? Since then, and especially since the appointment of Zakharchenko and Plotnitsky as heads of the DNR and the LNR in August, it has for all intents and purposes been running on empty. The two republics already possessed all the organizational structure they needed while Novorossiya’s putative head, Oleg Tsarev, had no particular roots in or connections to the Donbass, and they had no particular wish to share power and funds with alternate structures especially once Novorossiya lost most of its Kremlin backing. Nothing will substantially change on the ground. The People’s Militias will continue fighting under the umbrella Novorossiya Armed Forces, with its blue on red Saint Andrew’s cross flag.

The plan now, as it has been since April 2014, is to federalize Ukraine through the Minsk process, guaranteeing the East wide autonomy which would serve to complicate Ukraine’s integration with the EU and make NATO membership essentially impossible. Like it or not, but Novorossiya is superfluous to this. This is not a “victory,” but nor is it a betrayal. It’s an acknowledgement of today’s realities. Here are a few good articles which will provide a good background understanding of the political processes at play:

Besides, there is one more very important thing that particularly panicky pro-Novorossiyans should take solace in: The completely uncompromising nature of the Maidan ideologues themselves, who absolutely refuse to negotiate with the DNR and the LNR anyway.

“We must ensure fair elections. And we will conduct dialogue with the Donbass, but with a different Donbass, a Ukrainian one.” The same position, but in even harsher terms, was expressed at the Forum by the Prime-Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk. He is prepared to talk to the representatives of the Republics “only once they are behind bars.” “By the way, we have enough empty cells,” he added. According to Yatsenyuk, his government will never deal with the current representatives of the Donbass. “We will communicate only with legitimate representatives of this region, and we want to conduct legitimate elections there,” said the Prime-Minister. Poroshenko also stated that in Ukraine there is no internal conflict whatsoever. “We have no internal conflicts,” said Poroshenko. “On the contrary, Ukraine has now become more united than ever.” “I will do everything possible to ensure that neither language, nor faith, nor the questions of land, nor NATO, nor any other questions split Ukraine,” promised the President. “The second language in schools and universities in Ukraine should be English, not Russian.”

You don’t need friends with enemies like these.

Right Sector angry about DNR gun rights – DNR legalizes virtually all firearms and Right Sector has a hissy fit about it.

  • “That’s right! The freaks in the DNR are allowed to have guns, while Ukrainian citizens have to call for help from useless cops.”
  • This sneaking suspicion that it is Motorola and Givi who are the ones fighting against bureaucracy…”
  • This is shameful. :(“
  • Checkmate, bitches? And if the Rada now buries the proposed law about civil firearms possession, maybe we could join the DNR under conditions of autonomy… :(“

In short: Good on the DNR. And excellent trolling material against the Right Sector and sundry stormfags who claim they are defending Europe against totalitarian commie orcs.

MH17 Developments – Frankly I haven’t studied this issue in any depth and don’t have a strong opinion on it either way. Still it’s clear there’s tons of problems with the official narrative:

War crimes by Right Sector punitive batallionsOpenly and proudly documented by one Yashka Tsygankov, a Right Sector militant, on Facebook. They attacked a DNR blockpost, killing everyone except for one person who surrendered. Here he is in captivity: right-sector-war-crime I suppose it is theoretically possible that his two trigger fingers were blown off in the firefight while leaving no other visible injuries. Of course if you believe that you will believe anything. This kind of action was prevalent in the Yugoslav Wars and is the very definition of a war crime. Of course this being committed by the West’s lapdops means that Facebook will not censor it (unlike say Graham Phillips, who has been blocked from posting to Facebook many times now for posting things like the victims of Kiev’s shellings) nor will their be any outcry in their media about it. In fairness, it should be noted that he denies being tortured. But he is in captivity in some dank, dimly lit basement. So his words can’t be reasonably taken at face value.

EDIT 6/6: He has since been exchanged in a prisoner swap, and in an interview with Patrick Lancaster released just now, he has now confirmed that Right Sector did in fact cut off his index fingers (so also makes clear that previous interview was under duress, which makes Ukraine’s Channel 5 also complicit in this war crime). In response to his maiming, he said that it reinforces his belief in the justice of the Novorossiyan cause, that it is all entirely on the conscience of his captors, and that he intends to rejoin his squad and learn to shoot without his index fingers.

Want your wages? Have a call-up paper instead – Workers at a Kherson oblast plant picketing the Rada over nonpayment of their wages – the factory’s owner having become a deputy – were instead presented with mobilization papers. Recipients included disabled workers, as well as specialized workers without whom the plant would be unable to function. Corrupt deputies, unrestrained oligarchy, farcical pressganging, and the wholesale destruction of labor rights are all kind of everyday occurences in post-Maidan Ukraine, but it’s still somewhat remarkable when they all come together in such a perfect confluence. IMF comes a-calling – Yatsenyuk happily obliges.

Ukraine has stopped paying out welfare payments for pensioners, World War Two veterans, people with disabilities, liquidators of the Chernobyl disaster beginning with Monday, since the law of December 28, 2014, on stabilizing the financial condition of the state has come into force. It affects practically all social security beneficiaries, without defining the mechanisms for providing targeted assistance to low-income groups. Kiev has eliminated transport, healthcare, utilities and financial benefits for former prisoners of Nazi concentration camps and recipients of some Soviet-era orders and titles. Compensations to families with children living in the areas contaminated by radiation from the Chernobyl accident will be no longer paid either.

Stories from Oles Buzina – Translation of a 2009 article by the anti-Maidan journalist, slain by Maidanite orcs with the complicity of the Poroshenko regime and to Western indifference, by Nina Kouprianova: The SS Galizien versus Ukraine. Here are a few quotes from it:

One of the neo-Nazi parties that currently preaches the tradition of SS Galicia Division in Ukraine calls it the “treasure of the nation.” Which nation, I wonder. Like the Austrians during the Habsburg days, Germans did not place much value in the Galicians as war material. If in the Russian army, the natives of Ukraine became generals and field marshals, then in the Austrian one, they became junior officers, at best. An Austrian, Hungarian, or a Croatian native could have a brilliant military career in the Habsburg Empire, but not Galicians. … Not only the commanders of Galicia Division were German, but also the entire headquarters and the vast majority of officers all the way to the company members. Brigadeführer Fritz Freitag led the Division. Major Wolf-Dietrich Heike ran the operations department. Intelligence was under Hauptsturmführer Fritz Niermann. Supply department—under Hauptsturmführer Herbert Schaaf. Sturmbannführer Erich Finder was the Commander’s aide. Friedrich Lenhardt and Herbert Hähnel were assignments officers. Karl Wildner, Hans Otto Forstreuter, Paul Herms, Karl Bristot, and Friedrich Beyersdorff commanded the regiments. Even the pharmacist was German—Hauptsturmführer Werner Benecke (not to be confused with any Beniuk [a Ukrainian name—ed.] by any means!). According to Andrei Bolianovskii, the Division “got a German command spine.” … The Germans filled Galicia with new soldiers from among those volunteers that they initially rejected, no longer embarrassed of their height, but ones who were almost never used in open battles against the regular units of the Red Army. The main task for these “divisioners” was fighting Slovak and Yugoslav guerrillas. Once Galicians even had a skirmish with Ukrainian partisans under Kovpak, who carried out a sabotage raid into Slovakia. German command valued the military qualities of SS Galicia very little. For example, only one of its members was awarded the Iron Cross—Commander Freitag himself—whereas these awards were not uncommon in other Waffen-SS divisions.

But really worth reading in full, not only to see what Buzina was about, but because it is pretty interesting and eye-opening stuff, and you can really see why it would incite such raging murderous hatred on the parts of Ukrainian nationalists.

Poroshenko Corruption – Curious that it is the RFERL writing about this: Questions Raised Over Poroshenko’s Role In Valuable Kyiv Land Deal.

 

In the latest news from the ongoing comedy skit that is Ukrainian politics, we learn that Mikheil Saakashvili has been appointed governor of Odessa oblast.

Who is Saakashvili?

The son of Soviet apparatchiks with ties to the diplomatic service, which was dominated by Georgians in the late USSR, this onetime university dropout enjoyed a great deal of success in the 1990s, picking up various fellowships, grants, stipends, awards, etc. from respectable European and American institutions. Invited back into Georgia by his friend Zurab Zhvania, he soon went into opposition to Gorby’s Foreign Minister turned Georgian President Eduard Shevardnadze. Eventually, this culminated in Shevardnadze’s overthrow in the Rose Revolution of 2003. From then on, it was a familiar story.

Saakashvili was, back then, one of the beacons of pro-Western liberalism and reform in the former Soviet world, the object of regular paeons in the MSM. Some of the lustre has since come off, following his idiotic attack on Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia that resulted in military defeat in 2008, and his own ignominious political end in Georgia itself following revelations of mass abuse in the prison system – under his Presidency, the incarceration rate tripled to become Europe’s highest per capita – relevations that were carefully coordinated by his political opponents. He is now wanted in his native land, which he fled even before his Presidential term came to a formal end, on an array of charges related to corruption as well as possible involvement in various suspicious deaths (including that of Zhvania kek) and murders. Nonetheless, for all his democratic and human rights failings, which all but the most hardcore neocons by now acknowledge, there is still a very widespread impression that he is at least someone who can get the job done – that is, improve living standards, strengthen the country, and root out corruption. After all, did he not liquidate the everyday bribery that is a depressing feature common to the entire post-Soviet world? Did he not make Georgia one of the world’s most attractive places for business? Did he not lay the foundations of, in his own word s, “a future Georgian Switzerland, the future Georgian Singapore, the future Georgian Dubai, the Georgian Hong Kong, and of the greatest Georgia of all times”? And would not Odessa benefit from his impeccable credentials and expertise?

The only problem is that his legend is lies, lurid and false; a con for the ages.

The Economy

The economy did grow under Saakashvili. And across a range of institutional indices like the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business, Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, and various economic freedom indices it did radically improve its position.

georgia-gdp-history

The only problem was that it was doing so from an exceedingly low base, and even today, total GDP per capita (in constant dollars) is still considerably lower than it was in 1990. That’s 25 years and counting! Moreover, the growth rate was virtually the same under the “reformist” Saakashvili as it was under the “Soviet fossil” Shevardnadze. Nor was it any better than that of Georgia’s neighbors. To the contrary, it was far worse than in Azerbaijan, which yes you could ascribe to oil, but was also far worse than in neighboring Armenia and in Belarus. Both Armenia and Belarus are located in geopolitical straits just as trying as Georgia’s – Armenia is blockaded on two sides by Turkey and Azerbaijan, while Belarus is known as “Europe’s last dictatorship” and is under longstanding Western sanctions. Georgia’s performance, including under Saakashvili, only looks adequate in comparison to the total disaster zones that are Ukraine and Moldova. Productivity in the agricultural sector – where around half the Georgian population still works – has remained completely static since the early 1990s, whereas it more than trebled in neighboring Armenia.

Amazing as it might sound, but fanatically-pursued libertarian reforms, US military aid, and a couple of hotels erected by Trump to service gushing Westerners seeking photo-ops with Saakashvili on G.W. Bush Boulevard do not a strong economy make.

Corruption

One of the things that virtually everyone agrees on, even his critics, is that under Saakashvili, Georgia “solved” its corruption problem. If so, this would make it a somewhat unique achievement for the ex-Soviet world, bar only Estonia, and worthy of praise.

Now what does the data say? Certainly Georgia greatly improved its positions on surveys that elites pay a lot of attention to, such as Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, where Georgia increased its rating from an abysmal 18/100 in 2003 to a respectable, Baltic-level 49/100 by 2013. But according to ratings that measure corruption realities as opposed to the perceptions of anonymous “experts” who can be unduly influenced by PR agencies – the likes of Aspect Consulting, Orion Strategies, Public Strategies, and the Glover Park Group, which received millions of dollars under Saakashvili to burnish his reformist image – the improvement on the ground was far more modest. 6% of Georgians reported paying a bribe in the past year in 2004, the first year of Saakashvili’s Presidency, and before his reforms could reasonably be expected to have taken effect; in 2013, the last year of his President, it was 4%. An improvement, sure, but not a particularly radical one. Actual opinion polls by Transparency International suggest that lowlevel corruption was not a big problem in Georgia pre-Saakashvili, and its reduction under him could just as easily have been a simple matter of the general withering away of the state’s regulatory agencies under his libertarian reforms. For instance, the near wholesale removal of university tuition subsidies – essential for democratic access to higher education in a country as poor as Georgia – led to a plunge in tertiary enrollment by almost a third relative to the early-to-mid-2000s. Fewer students automatically translates to fewer bribes for grades. These examples can be extended indefinitely: Less contact with the state automatically leads to “lower” corruption. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s “good” in all cases.

open-budget-index-georgia-russia

What about institutions? According to the Open Budget Index, an organization that asseses the transparency of state accounts according to objective criteria (as opposed to perceptions), Georgia did improve, but has always lagged Putin’s “mafia state.” Now, true, a low score in the OBI doesn’t necessarily imply institutions are more corrupt; they could be both secretive and honest. But in the virtual absence of objective, quantitative measures of institutional quality – of which corruption perceptions by a bunch of anonymous and unaccountable “experts” are most definitely not – it’s the best we have, at least as a rough proxy of states’ eagerness to tackle corruption and willingness to be forthright with their citizens.

Then, in addition to lowlevel and institutional corruption, we also have highlevel corruption. This is the hardest to gauge of them all, even just by definition (how many American bank bailouts are equivalent to how many Chinese or Russian offshore accounts?). That said, this is the one aspect of corruption in Georgia that many people acknowledge is unlikely to have improved and might have even become worse relative to Shevardnadze’s period. To the contrary, all accounts indicate that Saakashvili merely centralized highlevel corruption around his own figure – allegations that have now been given form by concrete criminal charges against him in Georgia.

Added all up, we likely see real but modest improvements in lowlevel and institutional corruption under Saakashvili, which is of course “good” but doesn’t come anywhere near to justifying the panegyrics addressed towards him by Western elites and their lackeys in Ukraine when we consider that these improvements were seen in most of the rest of the ex-Soviet world in the 2000s as well, including in the dark lands themselves, Putin’s Russia. As for highlevel corruption all that happened was that the pig put on lipstick.

Demography

Surely the ultimate litmus test of a political leader’s performance is in whether people want to live in his realm or not. For a long time, for all his foreign policy failings and overblown economic and institutional achievements, it appeared that in this at least Saakashvili had succeeded, with Georgia’s demographic decline stabilizing at around four and half million people after 2002 due to declining emigration and a rebound in the fertility rate from 1.4 children per woman in the early 2000s to 1.8 today.

Then came the 2014 Census, and it emerged that Georgia’s population decline had if anything accelerated under Saakashvili, with the population hitting 3.7 million relative to 4.4 million in 2002 and 4.9 million in 1989 (all figures are minus Abkhazia and South Ossetia).

georgia-population-trends-1959-2014

Where did all the Georgians go? Most went to Russia: Of the $1.26 billion Georgia received in remittances in 2011 (almost 10% of Georgia’s GDP), more than half – $655 million – came from Russia. Surely quite an embarassment that the economy of “Switzerland in the Caucasus” and “oldest Colchis Europe, the most ancient civilization” was essentially held afloat by Georgian Gasterbaiters in a “barbarian” country with “mongoloid brutality and ideology,” as Saakashvili himself put it.

But even as Saakashvili ranted and raved about Russia’s Asiatic barbarity, using vocabulary that had disappeared off respectable European tongues since 1968, it appears that Georgians continued to vote with their feet and emigrate to Russia in ridiculously large numbers. For comparison, Georgia’s population loss over the past decade is equivalent to what saw in Latvia or Lithuania after their accession to the EU. I imagine it is considerably easier for a Balt to move to Ireland than it is for a Georgian to move to Moscow.

Mishiko in Odessa

Now that the myth has been swept away, we have just the man before us, whose essence boils down to an idiosyncratic combination of iconoclasm, vindictive incompetence, and Western cargo cultism.

Perhaps the best real life metaphor for this was the demolition of a Soviet-era monument to victory in the Great Patriotic War in Kutaisi, in which 200,000 Georgians died. Not a monument to Stalin, or anything like that – though it should be noted that Georgians are far more partial towards Stalin than are Russians – but just a simple victory monument. But they couldn’t even get that right. When it was blown up, two people – a mother and her eight year old daughter – were killed by the flying concrete, and four others were seriously injured. This was noticed, even in the West. As a Western cargo cultist in a position of power you really have to fuck up pretty good to even get American state media like RFERL to criticize you.

It takes true skillz to make all three of these people laugh at you.

It takes true skillz to make all three of these people laugh at you.

On getting appointed to head Odessa oblast, despite having at most just ever visited it as a tourist, Saakashvili smarmily proclaimed “I ❤ Odessa.” A whole range of other people were not that happy. Kolomoysky, the oligarch-lord of Dnepropetrovsk, whose protege Igor Palitsa had previously ruled Odessa and who is locked in a simmering conflict with Poroshenko, said that Saakashvili would betray Odessa to the Russians at the first opportunity: “By the way, how many citizenships does Saakashvili have? Would probably beat even me. American, Georgian, Dutch, and now Ukrainian” (Kolomoysky, for the record, has three. When a journalist told him that double citizenship is illegal in Ukraine, Kolomoysky remarked that while that is true, there’s nothing illegal about triple citizenship on the lawbooks. A bona fide Odessan retort if there ever was one). Lyashko, a caricature of a nationalist politician who is also widely regarded as a faggot amongst all Ukrainians, including even his supporters (much more so for his hystrionic grandstanding and violent denials than for the actual details of his sexual orientation), and is also deeply at odds with Kolomoysky, was also against the appointment: “Of all Ukraine’s 45 million citizens, not a single one could be found to head Odessa oblast? … [Poroshenko] admitted before the whole world that Ukrainians are unable to govern themselves. Maybe we should get a President from abroad too?” Sure… why not. Finally, Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s PM and President at the time of the South Ossetian War, undiplomatically remarked: “The comedy show continues. Unhappy Ukraine…”

When you have someone who simultaneously infuriates and/or amuses such an amazingly wide and conflicting range of political forces, you know that the whole thing is a pathetic farce.

Both Western and Russian analysts have linked Saakashvili’s appointment to the mounting blockade of Transnistria, the breakaway Russo-Ukrainian population Moldovan province. With Ukraine now on board as well as Moldova, its position has become very precarious. Short of Russia establishing an air corridor, the garrison within Transnistria is no longer able to resupply. It is not an exaggeration to say that it is now an additional potential flashpoint to an outbreak of overt hostilities between Russia and Ukraine. In this sense, bearing in mind Odessa’s position right next to Transnistria, Saakashvili’s resume is exceptional.

But in reality things are probably somewhat simpler. Odessa is the most unstable province in terms of separatist sentiment along with Kharkov, due to both demographics and memories of the massacre of anti-junta activists in May 2, 2014. Poroshenko needs someone who is able to crack heads if need be, someone who is unrelated to Kolomoysky, his prime rival in Ukraine’s game of thrones, and preferably also someone who as an outsider would be unable to establish his own independent powerbase. Finally, it is a solid “fuck you” to Russia, and fuck what Georgia – one of Ukraine’s putative allies – makes of that. This might not sound very rational to Western ears, but reason and moderation has always been foreign to the Maidan ideologues. That is why they have unleashed a civil war in place of dialog in the first place. That is why they have claimed the not inconsiderable achievement of alienating major figures in the Polish security establishment – traditionally, and understandably, highly anti-Russian – by their maniac worship of Stepan Bandera and his murderous goons.

So in this sense Saakashvili’s appointment is perfectly understandable.

On another level, however, it is also rather sad, and not just in the way it blithely ignores Odessan opinions and lays bare the failure of Ukrainian statecraft. Saakashvili might have been a cargo cultist, obsessed with making the correct gestures – G.W. Bush Boulevards, being the third largest contributor in terms of troop quantity in the occupation of Iraq – to get cargo from the West and even half-succeeding at it – Trump Towers in Tblisi, a few five star hotels in Batumi, copious US military aid, etc. None of that cargo made a difference when Saakashvili’s forces murdered Russian peacekeepers in South Ossetia in the expectation that the US would openly intervene on his side, only to face complete military defeat and the permanent reversal of the Stalinist-era borders that gave ethnically distinct Abkhazia and South Ossetia to Georgia in the first place.

But at least, in his defense, so far as cargo cults go, Saakashvili was the real deal. How much more pathetic is it that Poroshenko’s Ukraine is making a cargo cult of a cargo cultist?

 
Anatoly Karlin
About Anatoly Karlin

I am a blogger, thinker, and businessman in the SF Bay Area. I’m originally from Russia, spent many years in Britain, and studied at U.C. Berkeley.

One of my tenets is that ideologies tend to suck. As such, I hesitate about attaching labels to myself. That said, if it’s really necessary, I suppose “liberal-conservative neoreactionary” would be close enough.

Though I consider myself part of the Orthodox Church, my philosophy and spiritual views are more influenced by digital physics, Gnosticism, and Russian cosmism than anything specifically Judeo-Christian.