The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Statistics on Article 282
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I have noted that one of the reasons that one of many reasons Putin can’t be considered to be a nationalist is that… well, he locks up so many of them under Article 282.

See my article Country 282: Avoiding Russia’s Hate Speech Laws

Since conviction rates are virtually 100%, getting charged with Article 282, even for the most absurd reasons, will result in an almost certain conviction and a probable jail term of two to five years.

Kommersant recently published a chart with stats on this (the yellow bar represents numbers convicted under Article 282):

prosecutions-282

This confirms my anecdotal observations that the runaway craziness with Article 282 is a product of the past five years, and especially the last couple.

One interesting observation I can make is that whereas hate speech laws are justified in Western Europe in highly moralistic language that is often implicitly anti-white, in Russia these apologia are more functional and revolve around (1) keeping the “multi-national” country together and (2) not offending the feelings of WW2 veterans.

Problems:

(1) 95%+ of the people now getting convicted for hate speech would have been let go with a slap on the wrist or not even bothered with in the 2000s, when as I recall Russia didn’t break up, let alone in the 1990s… when there were, of course, big problems with separatism.

(2) There were also a lot more WW2 veterans a decade ago, when outright Neo-Nazis with swastika flags were free to (and did) march until the early 2010s or so. There were 2.3 million 80+ year old men to be potentially offended in 2005; there were just 350,000 90+ year old men by 2015. So explaining this as a measure to protect the feelings of WW2 veterans – as apologists for Article 282 often do – is quite cynical.

(3) Not to equate speech with violence, but even the number of deaths from “racist attacks” (as defined by the liberal NGO the Sova Center) has collapsed by an order of magnitude in the past decade, from a peak of 109 deaths in 2008 to just 9 deaths by 2015.

In other words, Article 282 has metastasized out of control just as the issues it was ostensibly aimed to deal with have vastly diminished in importance.

PS. Polish Perspective asks the question of why this is happening: “There are two options as I see it. Either there has been a nationalist development of the last few years that was missing before in the eyes of the authorities, or there had been an ideological shift compared to the 2000s. I’m leaning towards the former explanation.

I think the real explanation is far more banal: Institutional rot.

The ЦПЭ (Center Against Extremism – “Center E”) doesn’t attract the most intelligent and conscientious people, to put it mildly. It has also been saddled with ever rising quotas, which are used to quantify its “effectiveness”, which in turn translate into bonuses, etc. Result is perfectly expectable – a rise in absurd convictions [e.g. latest examples – student gets 2.5 years for extremism in an academic paper about extremism; 1,000 ruble fine for reposting a Soviet propaganda poster that had a swastika on it, thus “propagandizing” Nazism; etc] as investigators take the path of least resistance, namely trawling the VK social network. Furthermore, since Russia doesn’t have an independent judiciary, there are no stops to the metastasizing madness.

Here is a very telling account from a Center E employee who left the organization in disgust after it refocused from tackling Wahhabism to ruining lives over questionable VK avatars:

Lightly edited Google Translate of a few relevant paragraphs:

When I was transferred to Center E, I thought that I would fight terrorists, engage in mega-serious business – well, of course, I was a little disappointed that I had to look for pictures on the Internet. Personally, I always [it] resented – well, these administrators themselves, when a person for a picture of “VKontakte” is given 5-10 days of arrest. I would have found something to do besides drawing administratively for pictures.

Basically, it was all on the Internet, when people write “VKontakte” all sorts of stupid things. It is very simple. Just write in the search for “VKontakte”, say, the name “Adolf Hitler” or “Beat gingers”, roughly speaking. You are given a list of these communities, you open the most massive, where the most participants are; [then they need to] sort through the city, and you go to the users pages, you look. Choose, which avatars have the most unacceptable pictures – with Adolf Hitler, with a swastika – here you are, found a picture. …

According to the lists of cases, a variety of people [get punished] – from right-wing ones, who placed the symbols of the RNU who posted swastikas, and up to random citizens who copied the funny picture with the swastika, but I did not do it on such lines. I tried to tackle just the most odious ones. …

We have such a thing as APPG – the same period last year. That is, if so many crimes were detected last year, then in the next year you should reveal more. Well, the difference is … If you [did not uncover more crimes], then you’re like a rascal, a loafer and a slacker.

I was told by one of the investigators I know that he had been verbally told by the boss: if there are no crimes, they are not committed – then go steal a jar of coffee and open a caste against yourself. Well, I don’t know if that’s true or not.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Freedom of Speech, Hate Speech, Law, Russia 
Hide 46 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I’ve read heated debates on this at WN forums on just how anti-russki Putin is and whether a better alternative practically exists… the problem is the current geopolitical situation makes me feel it’s not the right time for such discussion. You have to ask how many of these people are American agents just fomenting instability.
    That, and my ethnic backround naturally keeps me from sympathising wholly with such people.

  2. Article 282 has metastasized out of control just as the issues it was ostensibly aimed to deal with have vastly diminished in importance.

    Every government lies about its motivations. The crucial question to ask is why there has been such an upsurge in the last few years. There are two options as I see it. Either there has been a nationalist development of the last few years that was missing before in the eyes of the authorities, or there had been an ideological shift compared to the 2000s. I’m leaning towards the former explanation.

    You have hinted before that the Sovok myth, while still strong, has greatly diminished since the 1990s. It also seems to decline with age. Sovoks may be dumber and more amenable to the authorities rather than Russian nationalists – who realise that today’s Russia is not a country on behalf of the Russian people.

    There is a further wrinkle in this puzzle. As I’ve remarked before, today’s situation is actually quite unique in that ethnic Russian comprise a greater share of the national population than in a really long time. This gives nationalists a potential opening that did not exist nearly to the same extent for decades if not centuries.

    Sovokism is reaching for a bygone era when the Russia was much more multicultural, and where Russian identity had been subsumed. For those who wish to build a continuation of the same structure – though with different ideological overtones – Sovokism is not a major ideological threat. But Russian nationalism is.

    So it’s either one or the other. Either Putin and his gang always had this conviction but didn’t consider nationalists as a threat nearly to the same extent before, which implies a significant growth in the Russian nationalist sphere. Or there has been somekind of ideological shift in the last 5-10 years which we have not read about and if that is the case, it would be important to understand the reasons for it, because it frankly looks puzzling to me.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Events in the Ukraine have also discredited the nationalism movements, and behaviour of America has also discredited the liberal movements.

    The sad thing is that the economy needs more liberals' ideology right now - but it's a case of 'saving liberalism from embarrassing behaviour of liberals', as well as recently becoming, disproportionately unfriendly policy of countries that practice and cleverly try to market themselves as the unique providers and guarantors of the ideology, and its economic benefits.

    , @Dmitry

    There are two options as I see it. Either there has been a nationalist development of the last few years that was missing before in the eyes of the authorities, or there had been an ideological shift compared to the 2000s. I’m leaning towards the former explanation.
     
    If there were more extremist groups growing, then you would expect comparable increases in convictions under 282.1, 282.2 at least.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Good points, but I think the explanation is much more banal: Institutional rot.

    Added reasons why I think that to the main post.
  3. From /r/Europe:

    It appears to be only concerning 2016, which is less ideal than looking at whole period, but given that this is a new funding round we still don’t have that many years to count. Once again Greece and even Czechia(!) get more cash than we do. Regarding Czechia, but I have earlier posted that they have huge imbalances between private and public flows, to the ratio of 8 to 1 in favor of the former, which benefits Western European investors greatly. Slovenia, a richer country than we are, gets about the same as we.

    This would also show that Poland is less reliant on EU funds than even I thought. The 2000-2016 chart I showed before put us at 6th place. It now appears most of that cash was concentrated in the first decade or so. This is good news, since it means we have even less to ‘lose’ than I thought. Hell, even a rich country like Ireland gets more from the EU than they pay in into it.

    The best outcome, then, would be to cut these subsidies to zero and then to tax foreign enterprises in low-productivity sectors like retail where FDI is frankly not needed and which just drain our coffers. Since the pattern is the same all over the CEE, it would be best with a co-ordinated action, which would diminish the Western propaganda of “look, country XYZ is going rogue and undemocratic, we must intervene!”. Even submissive countries like Romania have begun to make noises that there is a huge Western rent-seeking capitalist class which got in early in low-productivity sectors like utilities, retail, transportation etc and just invest minimally required and then collect rents.

    The EU funding proposal will come next month. Curiously, there will also be attempts to create a unified asylum system (Dublin actually works well, the problem is countries like Sweden or Germany who want to invite half the third world who fuck it up) which would spread all the third worlders around. Obviously a non-starter. 2018 shapes up to be an important political year for CEE.

  4. I would add a comment – it might be useful to compare with liberals.

    As it’s not only ‘far-right’ (which is probably the right word, rather than ‘nationalists’ – which has a slightly different meaning in the West), but also ‘liberals’ (also a bit different to in the West), which have ‘died off’ over the last ten years.

    It could also be written that some can say how the government has crushed them (it’s only the case with far-right), and how much because they have been just discredited by reality and society (it’s more the case of liberal ideologies).

    But the reality is that neither group was so large at any time. The far-right was simply more visible in the past. And as visibility was disproportionate, and hence it is very easy for the government to control it. In the case of liberals, they have the same visibility as always, but a lower degree of credibility and ideological coherence.

    By the way, it will be interesting to read the posts about Portugal.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    My read is that nationalists haven't been so much discredited as purged of their worst elements (pro-Ukrainians, Neo-Nazis, liberal nationalists - the Potkins, Maltsevs, Tors, and for that matter, Navalny no longer bothering to pretend to be a nationalist).
  5. @Polish Perspective

    Article 282 has metastasized out of control just as the issues it was ostensibly aimed to deal with have vastly diminished in importance.
     
    Every government lies about its motivations. The crucial question to ask is why there has been such an upsurge in the last few years. There are two options as I see it. Either there has been a nationalist development of the last few years that was missing before in the eyes of the authorities, or there had been an ideological shift compared to the 2000s. I'm leaning towards the former explanation.

    You have hinted before that the Sovok myth, while still strong, has greatly diminished since the 1990s. It also seems to decline with age. Sovoks may be dumber and more amenable to the authorities rather than Russian nationalists - who realise that today's Russia is not a country on behalf of the Russian people.

    There is a further wrinkle in this puzzle. As I've remarked before, today's situation is actually quite unique in that ethnic Russian comprise a greater share of the national population than in a really long time. This gives nationalists a potential opening that did not exist nearly to the same extent for decades if not centuries.

    Sovokism is reaching for a bygone era when the Russia was much more multicultural, and where Russian identity had been subsumed. For those who wish to build a continuation of the same structure - though with different ideological overtones - Sovokism is not a major ideological threat. But Russian nationalism is.

    So it's either one or the other. Either Putin and his gang always had this conviction but didn't consider nationalists as a threat nearly to the same extent before, which implies a significant growth in the Russian nationalist sphere. Or there has been somekind of ideological shift in the last 5-10 years which we have not read about and if that is the case, it would be important to understand the reasons for it, because it frankly looks puzzling to me.

    Events in the Ukraine have also discredited the nationalism movements, and behaviour of America has also discredited the liberal movements.

    The sad thing is that the economy needs more liberals’ ideology right now – but it’s a case of ‘saving liberalism from embarrassing behaviour of liberals’, as well as recently becoming, disproportionately unfriendly policy of countries that practice and cleverly try to market themselves as the unique providers and guarantors of the ideology, and its economic benefits.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Somewhat relates to this piece:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/04/26/fm-meeting-in-toronto-g7-engaged-frenzied-anti-russia-hysteria.html

    Often referred to the "international community", that's missing China, India, Russia, Brazil, South Africa and a number of other countries.

    Kiev regime controlled Ukraine was there though, at the prodding of Canada's Ukrainian nationalist FM.
  6. @Dmitry
    Events in the Ukraine have also discredited the nationalism movements, and behaviour of America has also discredited the liberal movements.

    The sad thing is that the economy needs more liberals' ideology right now - but it's a case of 'saving liberalism from embarrassing behaviour of liberals', as well as recently becoming, disproportionately unfriendly policy of countries that practice and cleverly try to market themselves as the unique providers and guarantors of the ideology, and its economic benefits.

    Somewhat relates to this piece:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/04/26/fm-meeting-in-toronto-g7-engaged-frenzied-anti-russia-hysteria.html

    Often referred to the “international community”, that’s missing China, India, Russia, Brazil, South Africa and a number of other countries.

    Kiev regime controlled Ukraine was there though, at the prodding of Canada’s Ukrainian nationalist FM.

  7. @Polish Perspective

    Article 282 has metastasized out of control just as the issues it was ostensibly aimed to deal with have vastly diminished in importance.
     
    Every government lies about its motivations. The crucial question to ask is why there has been such an upsurge in the last few years. There are two options as I see it. Either there has been a nationalist development of the last few years that was missing before in the eyes of the authorities, or there had been an ideological shift compared to the 2000s. I'm leaning towards the former explanation.

    You have hinted before that the Sovok myth, while still strong, has greatly diminished since the 1990s. It also seems to decline with age. Sovoks may be dumber and more amenable to the authorities rather than Russian nationalists - who realise that today's Russia is not a country on behalf of the Russian people.

    There is a further wrinkle in this puzzle. As I've remarked before, today's situation is actually quite unique in that ethnic Russian comprise a greater share of the national population than in a really long time. This gives nationalists a potential opening that did not exist nearly to the same extent for decades if not centuries.

    Sovokism is reaching for a bygone era when the Russia was much more multicultural, and where Russian identity had been subsumed. For those who wish to build a continuation of the same structure - though with different ideological overtones - Sovokism is not a major ideological threat. But Russian nationalism is.

    So it's either one or the other. Either Putin and his gang always had this conviction but didn't consider nationalists as a threat nearly to the same extent before, which implies a significant growth in the Russian nationalist sphere. Or there has been somekind of ideological shift in the last 5-10 years which we have not read about and if that is the case, it would be important to understand the reasons for it, because it frankly looks puzzling to me.

    There are two options as I see it. Either there has been a nationalist development of the last few years that was missing before in the eyes of the authorities, or there had been an ideological shift compared to the 2000s. I’m leaning towards the former explanation.

    If there were more extremist groups growing, then you would expect comparable increases in convictions under 282.1, 282.2 at least.

  8. I have to ask if Dailystormer is available in Russia, and if not what if you are caught reading it via some proxy or other censorship bypass tool?

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    1. Yes, it even has a VK group. Nobody cares about English language material.

    2. Nothing. I haven't heard of any prosecutions merely for reading anything.
  9. @Dmitry
    I would add a comment - it might be useful to compare with liberals.

    As it's not only 'far-right' (which is probably the right word, rather than 'nationalists' - which has a slightly different meaning in the West), but also 'liberals' (also a bit different to in the West), which have 'died off' over the last ten years.

    It could also be written that some can say how the government has crushed them (it's only the case with far-right), and how much because they have been just discredited by reality and society (it's more the case of liberal ideologies).

    But the reality is that neither group was so large at any time. The far-right was simply more visible in the past. And as visibility was disproportionate, and hence it is very easy for the government to control it. In the case of liberals, they have the same visibility as always, but a lower degree of credibility and ideological coherence.

    By the way, it will be interesting to read the posts about Portugal.

    My read is that nationalists haven’t been so much discredited as purged of their worst elements (pro-Ukrainians, Neo-Nazis, liberal nationalists – the Potkins, Maltsevs, Tors, and for that matter, Navalny no longer bothering to pretend to be a nationalist).

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    In relation to Ukraine. I mean the effect on everyone is more in an indirect way, as a kind of moral of story, now as the whole world has been witnessing a theatre of stupidity that we never expected to see in our own life-time - that you, really, probably, should 'never go full Ukraine':


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLrlDqOqfc
  10. @neutral
    I have to ask if Dailystormer is available in Russia, and if not what if you are caught reading it via some proxy or other censorship bypass tool?

    1. Yes, it even has a VK group. Nobody cares about English language material.

    2. Nothing. I haven’t heard of any prosecutions merely for reading anything.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Yes the danger for getting in trouble, seems to be only if it's in Russian. I wonder if there is any case of a conviction for someone who publishes in English. Technically the laws do not specify language, but the issue is a realization of the law by legal authorities.

    The other thing I wonder about is internet comments. I often read commentators threatening other commentators - against other people, mentioning the law so that they could be convicted for a comment they have made, under blogs and under even online newspaper articles. I'm not read about a single case yet, in which a person is convicted for comments underneath another person's blog (it also seems to be always the original blogger who is convicted). So commentators on your blog are double safe - by language and since you're taking all liability :)

    I am also wondering about the ambiguity in context of mass publication, applied to the internet. It seems they already stretch the law, so anything that is published publicly on the internet is fulfilling criteria of mass publication according to the legal authorities. So I could imagine them in the future suddenly stretching law so that people writing a comment under another's blog or youtube video, would be going to jail. This would probably only be if they start to no longer find any more people stupid enough to write it on their own website or blog.

    Overall it is actually a little uncanny, even if there is little sympathy either for most who are convicted.

  11. @Anatoly Karlin
    1. Yes, it even has a VK group. Nobody cares about English language material.

    2. Nothing. I haven't heard of any prosecutions merely for reading anything.

    Yes the danger for getting in trouble, seems to be only if it’s in Russian. I wonder if there is any case of a conviction for someone who publishes in English. Technically the laws do not specify language, but the issue is a realization of the law by legal authorities.

    The other thing I wonder about is internet comments. I often read commentators threatening other commentators – against other people, mentioning the law so that they could be convicted for a comment they have made, under blogs and under even online newspaper articles. I’m not read about a single case yet, in which a person is convicted for comments underneath another person’s blog (it also seems to be always the original blogger who is convicted). So commentators on your blog are double safe – by language and since you’re taking all liability 🙂

    I am also wondering about the ambiguity in context of mass publication, applied to the internet. It seems they already stretch the law, so anything that is published publicly on the internet is fulfilling criteria of mass publication according to the legal authorities. So I could imagine them in the future suddenly stretching law so that people writing a comment under another’s blog or youtube video, would be going to jail. This would probably only be if they start to no longer find any more people stupid enough to write it on their own website or blog.

    Overall it is actually a little uncanny, even if there is little sympathy either for most who are convicted.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I think the banal fact is that the investigators go for the low-hanging fruit (so, mostly unfortunate posts, reposts, and likes by schmucks on VK), policing English language material is a major pain in the ass.

    I fully suspect they'll start policing Russian Facebook before going for Anglophones anywhere.

    I think my chances of getting charged with 282 are low (hopefully I didn't just jinx that). I mostly (though not exclusively) publish in English, am not pro-Ukrainian, not a Neo-Nazi, not even oppositionist as such. Risk factors would appear to be pretty low.
  12. @Polish Perspective

    Article 282 has metastasized out of control just as the issues it was ostensibly aimed to deal with have vastly diminished in importance.
     
    Every government lies about its motivations. The crucial question to ask is why there has been such an upsurge in the last few years. There are two options as I see it. Either there has been a nationalist development of the last few years that was missing before in the eyes of the authorities, or there had been an ideological shift compared to the 2000s. I'm leaning towards the former explanation.

    You have hinted before that the Sovok myth, while still strong, has greatly diminished since the 1990s. It also seems to decline with age. Sovoks may be dumber and more amenable to the authorities rather than Russian nationalists - who realise that today's Russia is not a country on behalf of the Russian people.

    There is a further wrinkle in this puzzle. As I've remarked before, today's situation is actually quite unique in that ethnic Russian comprise a greater share of the national population than in a really long time. This gives nationalists a potential opening that did not exist nearly to the same extent for decades if not centuries.

    Sovokism is reaching for a bygone era when the Russia was much more multicultural, and where Russian identity had been subsumed. For those who wish to build a continuation of the same structure - though with different ideological overtones - Sovokism is not a major ideological threat. But Russian nationalism is.

    So it's either one or the other. Either Putin and his gang always had this conviction but didn't consider nationalists as a threat nearly to the same extent before, which implies a significant growth in the Russian nationalist sphere. Or there has been somekind of ideological shift in the last 5-10 years which we have not read about and if that is the case, it would be important to understand the reasons for it, because it frankly looks puzzling to me.

    Good points, but I think the explanation is much more banal: Institutional rot.

    Added reasons why I think that to the main post.

  13. @Anatoly Karlin
    My read is that nationalists haven't been so much discredited as purged of their worst elements (pro-Ukrainians, Neo-Nazis, liberal nationalists - the Potkins, Maltsevs, Tors, and for that matter, Navalny no longer bothering to pretend to be a nationalist).

    In relation to Ukraine. I mean the effect on everyone is more in an indirect way, as a kind of moral of story, now as the whole world has been witnessing a theatre of stupidity that we never expected to see in our own life-time – that you, really, probably, should ‘never go full Ukraine’:

    • Replies: @Dmitry

    ‘never go full Ukraine’:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLrlDqOqfc
     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6WHBO_Qc-Q
    , @AP

    In relation to Ukraine. I mean the effect on everyone is more in an indirect way, as a kind of moral of story, now as the whole world has been witnessing a theatre of stupidity that we never expected to see in our own life-time – that you, really, probably, should ‘never go full Ukraine’:
     
    This is turn is a myth: Ukraine is not as bad as Russian media portrays it to be. You seriously compared it to Angola, which is absurd. But the Russian media has effectively done its job.
  14. @Dmitry
    In relation to Ukraine. I mean the effect on everyone is more in an indirect way, as a kind of moral of story, now as the whole world has been witnessing a theatre of stupidity that we never expected to see in our own life-time - that you, really, probably, should 'never go full Ukraine':


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLrlDqOqfc

    ‘never go full Ukraine’:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLrlDqOqfc

  15. @Dmitry
    Yes the danger for getting in trouble, seems to be only if it's in Russian. I wonder if there is any case of a conviction for someone who publishes in English. Technically the laws do not specify language, but the issue is a realization of the law by legal authorities.

    The other thing I wonder about is internet comments. I often read commentators threatening other commentators - against other people, mentioning the law so that they could be convicted for a comment they have made, under blogs and under even online newspaper articles. I'm not read about a single case yet, in which a person is convicted for comments underneath another person's blog (it also seems to be always the original blogger who is convicted). So commentators on your blog are double safe - by language and since you're taking all liability :)

    I am also wondering about the ambiguity in context of mass publication, applied to the internet. It seems they already stretch the law, so anything that is published publicly on the internet is fulfilling criteria of mass publication according to the legal authorities. So I could imagine them in the future suddenly stretching law so that people writing a comment under another's blog or youtube video, would be going to jail. This would probably only be if they start to no longer find any more people stupid enough to write it on their own website or blog.

    Overall it is actually a little uncanny, even if there is little sympathy either for most who are convicted.

    I think the banal fact is that the investigators go for the low-hanging fruit (so, mostly unfortunate posts, reposts, and likes by schmucks on VK), policing English language material is a major pain in the ass.

    I fully suspect they’ll start policing Russian Facebook before going for Anglophones anywhere.

    I think my chances of getting charged with 282 are low (hopefully I didn’t just jinx that). I mostly (though not exclusively) publish in English, am not pro-Ukrainian, not a Neo-Nazi, not even oppositionist as such. Risk factors would appear to be pretty low.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Yes considering the publication of non-inciting blog in English on an American website, it is very very unlikely, I would - randomly - guess your chance of being in trouble is somewhere less than 0.1%, (somewhere less than 3 times small than your chance of dying in a car accident over 80 years).

    The only issue which I would avoid, at least in the future, is putting the full name of the linguistics experts in the articles on the law. http://www.unz.com/akarlin/country-282/

    So that if those people google themselves in English, or the judges (more likely) googles them in English to find out whether to call them as witnesses - (unlikely but not 100% impossible), they could get angry. I would just re-write their names as initial of their first name, and then their surname.

    , @Mr. Hack
    Yes, it does seem rather ironic that being right of Vladimir Putin on the nationalist scale could land somebody in jail under these draconian measures. Welcome back to Russia Anatoly! I wonder how the much more vocal and visible Zhirinovsky seems to immunize himself from these possible infractions? Since you're a supporter of his, you could possibly fall under his umbrella?
  16. @Anatoly Karlin
    I think the banal fact is that the investigators go for the low-hanging fruit (so, mostly unfortunate posts, reposts, and likes by schmucks on VK), policing English language material is a major pain in the ass.

    I fully suspect they'll start policing Russian Facebook before going for Anglophones anywhere.

    I think my chances of getting charged with 282 are low (hopefully I didn't just jinx that). I mostly (though not exclusively) publish in English, am not pro-Ukrainian, not a Neo-Nazi, not even oppositionist as such. Risk factors would appear to be pretty low.

    Yes considering the publication of non-inciting blog in English on an American website, it is very very unlikely, I would – randomly – guess your chance of being in trouble is somewhere less than 0.1%, (somewhere less than 3 times small than your chance of dying in a car accident over 80 years).

    The only issue which I would avoid, at least in the future, is putting the full name of the linguistics experts in the articles on the law. http://www.unz.com/akarlin/country-282/

    So that if those people google themselves in English, or the judges (more likely) googles them in English to find out whether to call them as witnesses – (unlikely but not 100% impossible), they could get angry. I would just re-write their names as initial of their first name, and then their surname.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    The only issue which I would avoid, at least in the future, is putting the full name of the linguistics experts in the articles on the law.

    So that if those people google themselves in English, or the judges (more likely) googles them in English to find out whether to call them as witnesses – (unlikely but not 100% impossible), they could get angry.
     
    Well, that's sort of the point. I do want human rights abusers such as Galina Melnik and Rezeda Salahutdinova to appear on Google and for this to have impacts on their careers in the West (in all fairness, given that Western academia is commie, these days it's probably going to be a positive for them anyway. But still).

    I estimate that I am better positioned to deflect or avoid the consequences of politicized prosecutions than about 95% of Russians. Why should I shirk, least of all on such minor matters?
  17. @Anatoly Karlin
    I think the banal fact is that the investigators go for the low-hanging fruit (so, mostly unfortunate posts, reposts, and likes by schmucks on VK), policing English language material is a major pain in the ass.

    I fully suspect they'll start policing Russian Facebook before going for Anglophones anywhere.

    I think my chances of getting charged with 282 are low (hopefully I didn't just jinx that). I mostly (though not exclusively) publish in English, am not pro-Ukrainian, not a Neo-Nazi, not even oppositionist as such. Risk factors would appear to be pretty low.

    Yes, it does seem rather ironic that being right of Vladimir Putin on the nationalist scale could land somebody in jail under these draconian measures. Welcome back to Russia Anatoly! I wonder how the much more vocal and visible Zhirinovsky seems to immunize himself from these possible infractions? Since you’re a supporter of his, you could possibly fall under his umbrella?

  18. AP says:
    @Dmitry
    In relation to Ukraine. I mean the effect on everyone is more in an indirect way, as a kind of moral of story, now as the whole world has been witnessing a theatre of stupidity that we never expected to see in our own life-time - that you, really, probably, should 'never go full Ukraine':


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCLrlDqOqfc

    In relation to Ukraine. I mean the effect on everyone is more in an indirect way, as a kind of moral of story, now as the whole world has been witnessing a theatre of stupidity that we never expected to see in our own life-time – that you, really, probably, should ‘never go full Ukraine’:

    This is turn is a myth: Ukraine is not as bad as Russian media portrays it to be. You seriously compared it to Angola, which is absurd. But the Russian media has effectively done its job.

    • Replies: @neutral

    You seriously compared it to Angola
     
    Angola does not have jewish head state last time I checked, Ukraine does, that makes it so much worse.
    , @Dmitry
    I compared their GDP per capita, which for Angola is higher.

    I don't compare other aspects of their countries or say they are on the same level in any other metrics (unless there is someone from Angola on this forum, I doubt any of us know so much about the positives/negatives of Angola).

    I have friends from Ukraine, including a guy I know from Odessa. And a couple weeks ago I was browsing on this website and Karlin blog over the afternoon and ended up talking on Skype at the same time. So as everyone here is arguing endlessly about it, I tried to ask a little a bit about politics - and all he says is 'it's worse than you imagine' and a few less polite words, and no more. Actually he also was telling me about insane inflation at the moment, which is suddenly accelerating.

    That said, I will acknowledge the video I posted above (fortunately for Ukraine, more than for Kazakhstan) turns out to be fake-news. Apologies for this, although it was too funny not to post it, and almost symptomatic given many real things everyone here (I am sure) has seen.

  19. @AP

    In relation to Ukraine. I mean the effect on everyone is more in an indirect way, as a kind of moral of story, now as the whole world has been witnessing a theatre of stupidity that we never expected to see in our own life-time – that you, really, probably, should ‘never go full Ukraine’:
     
    This is turn is a myth: Ukraine is not as bad as Russian media portrays it to be. You seriously compared it to Angola, which is absurd. But the Russian media has effectively done its job.

    You seriously compared it to Angola

    Angola does not have jewish head state last time I checked, Ukraine does, that makes it so much worse.

  20. Thank you to AK for having opened my eyes a couple of years ago about the anti-WN of the Russian govt. I was not aware of it, as I remained under my impressions gleaned during a Russia trip in the mid 90s, when it indeed seemed perfectly fine for some people to go about as openly Uber-88.

    This trend that you showed with the ballooning of article 242 convictions is obviously known to “Putler”. So what’s the deal here? Is he thinking that the real opposition to his regime in the long run is a genuinely Russian nationalist one (as opposed to the liberal paper tigers who only survived on J money from abroad)?

    I like your commentaries. BTW I am about 1/3 of the way of the Red Wheel. Amazing read.

  21. @AP

    In relation to Ukraine. I mean the effect on everyone is more in an indirect way, as a kind of moral of story, now as the whole world has been witnessing a theatre of stupidity that we never expected to see in our own life-time – that you, really, probably, should ‘never go full Ukraine’:
     
    This is turn is a myth: Ukraine is not as bad as Russian media portrays it to be. You seriously compared it to Angola, which is absurd. But the Russian media has effectively done its job.

    I compared their GDP per capita, which for Angola is higher.

    I don’t compare other aspects of their countries or say they are on the same level in any other metrics (unless there is someone from Angola on this forum, I doubt any of us know so much about the positives/negatives of Angola).

    I have friends from Ukraine, including a guy I know from Odessa. And a couple weeks ago I was browsing on this website and Karlin blog over the afternoon and ended up talking on Skype at the same time. So as everyone here is arguing endlessly about it, I tried to ask a little a bit about politics – and all he says is ‘it’s worse than you imagine’ and a few less polite words, and no more. Actually he also was telling me about insane inflation at the moment, which is suddenly accelerating.

    That said, I will acknowledge the video I posted above (fortunately for Ukraine, more than for Kazakhstan) turns out to be fake-news. Apologies for this, although it was too funny not to post it, and almost symptomatic given many real things everyone here (I am sure) has seen.

    • Replies: @AP

    I compared their GDP per capita, which for Angola is higher
     
    Only nominal, which is affected by currency fluctuation. By that measure Romania, Lebanon, the African nation of Equatorial Guinea, Panama, etc. are all higher than that of Russia.

    When taking into account purchasing power parity Ukraine's per capita GDP is 50% higher than that of Angola. Furthermore, income inequality in Angola approaches twice that of Ukraine.
    , @for-the-record
    unless there is someone from Angola on this forum, I doubt any of us know so much about the positives/negatives of Angola

    Not from Angola (I live in Portugal) but can assure you that it is one of the most thoroughly corrupt countries in the world, with (oil, diamonds) wealth concentrated obscenely in the hands of the "nomenklatura".

    The Angolan elite lives in a world almost entirely disconnected from the rest of the country's population of 20 million.

    Its playground is the Ilha, a stretch of sand that curves out from Luanda, dotted with luxury villas, beachside restaurants and glitzy nightclubs.

    The rich and the beautiful sip $60 cocktails, as gleaming Porsches purr past, the wrists of their drivers heavy with Rolex watches.

    Prices are astronomical. It is as if they have been set deliberately high to enable people to show off just how wealthy they are.

    Why else would supermarkets charge up to $100 for a watermelon, $200 for a chicken?

    Looking out at Luanda from the Ilha, it is hard to believe this is the capital of a country that a little more than 10 years ago was fighting a vicious civil war.

    Shiny white super-yachts luxuriate in the blue of the sea.

    A swarm of new skyscrapers lines the horizon. One of the multi-million-dollar penthouse apartments has a helicopter landing pad.

    It is here one starts to hear whispers of the name "Isabel": "This nightclub belongs to Isabel," "This is Isabel's restaurant," "That business is Isabel's, so is that one, that one, and that one."

    Isabel is the eldest daughter of President Dos Santos.

    President Dos Santos has developed remarkable cunning in playing off one foreign power against the other, just like he does in domestic politics.

    Worth an estimated $3.4bn, she has been described by Forbes magazine as Africa's richest woman.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32067602

     

    Isabel is actually half-Russian, and describes herself as a "self-made businesswoman" who got her start by selling chicken eggs at age 6.

    She was born in 1973 in Baku, Azerbaijan, then a Soviet outpost that welcomed promising young students from communist-aligned African liberation movements. Her father, one of them, met her mother, a Russian chess champion, while both were studying engineering. There were later rumours, dismissed by their daughter, that they were “introduced by the KGB”.

    https://moneyweek.com/isabel-dos-santos-angolas-princess-dethroned/
     
    Isabel has run into problems recently, as her father was forced out of office in September last year, and the new President is seeking to reorient income flows. But even if she were to lose her Angolan fortune, she still owns a fair share of Portugal -- in 2015 her Portuguese investments (banking, energy, telecommunications) were valued at over 3 billion euros. She is not alone in this, Angolan money has literally "bought" much of Portugal, to the extent that it has been labelled a "financial colony" of Angola. Or, as it has been said, "the colonizer has been colonized".

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/22/world/europe/angola-portugal-money-laundering.html?mtrref=expresso.sapo.pt

    Numerous politicians (and, it is rumoured, much of the press) have been "bought off" by Angolan money.
  22. AP says:
    @Dmitry
    I compared their GDP per capita, which for Angola is higher.

    I don't compare other aspects of their countries or say they are on the same level in any other metrics (unless there is someone from Angola on this forum, I doubt any of us know so much about the positives/negatives of Angola).

    I have friends from Ukraine, including a guy I know from Odessa. And a couple weeks ago I was browsing on this website and Karlin blog over the afternoon and ended up talking on Skype at the same time. So as everyone here is arguing endlessly about it, I tried to ask a little a bit about politics - and all he says is 'it's worse than you imagine' and a few less polite words, and no more. Actually he also was telling me about insane inflation at the moment, which is suddenly accelerating.

    That said, I will acknowledge the video I posted above (fortunately for Ukraine, more than for Kazakhstan) turns out to be fake-news. Apologies for this, although it was too funny not to post it, and almost symptomatic given many real things everyone here (I am sure) has seen.

    I compared their GDP per capita, which for Angola is higher

    Only nominal, which is affected by currency fluctuation. By that measure Romania, Lebanon, the African nation of Equatorial Guinea, Panama, etc. are all higher than that of Russia.

    When taking into account purchasing power parity Ukraine’s per capita GDP is 50% higher than that of Angola. Furthermore, income inequality in Angola approaches twice that of Ukraine.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The Angolan economy depends entirely on foreign engineers operating their oil wells. This is untrue of either Ukraine or Russia. It’s obscene to compare either to African countries.
    , @Dmitry
    In PPP (price purchasing parity), Ukraine is it is true in front, but not in a dramatic way.

    The GDP per capita is higher for Angola, but when adjusted for PPP it is higher for Ukaine.

    Overall on this metric they are quite close - in both ways.

    http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=76&pr.y=16&sy=2015&ey=2017&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=614%2C926&s=NGDPDPC%2CPPPPC&grp=0&a=

    As for other comparisons, on other metrics - no-one has made them.
  23. @AP

    I compared their GDP per capita, which for Angola is higher
     
    Only nominal, which is affected by currency fluctuation. By that measure Romania, Lebanon, the African nation of Equatorial Guinea, Panama, etc. are all higher than that of Russia.

    When taking into account purchasing power parity Ukraine's per capita GDP is 50% higher than that of Angola. Furthermore, income inequality in Angola approaches twice that of Ukraine.

    The Angolan economy depends entirely on foreign engineers operating their oil wells. This is untrue of either Ukraine or Russia. It’s obscene to compare either to African countries.

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    No-one has compared their economies. The comparison was between the GDP per capita of Ukraine and Angola.

    No more or no less.

    Well the original context was to point out that Ukraine has a low GDP per capita, which is true (it is lower than Angola, when it has not been adjusted for Price Purchasing Parity).

  24. Check out the fertility rate of Angola, say what you want about Africans, but at least one cannot criticize their fecundity.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    No one was criticizing their fecundity...
  25. @neutral
    Check out the fertility rate of Angola, say what you want about Africans, but at least one cannot criticize their fecundity.

    No one was criticizing their fecundity…

  26. @AP

    I compared their GDP per capita, which for Angola is higher
     
    Only nominal, which is affected by currency fluctuation. By that measure Romania, Lebanon, the African nation of Equatorial Guinea, Panama, etc. are all higher than that of Russia.

    When taking into account purchasing power parity Ukraine's per capita GDP is 50% higher than that of Angola. Furthermore, income inequality in Angola approaches twice that of Ukraine.

    In PPP (price purchasing parity), Ukraine is it is true in front, but not in a dramatic way.

    The GDP per capita is higher for Angola, but when adjusted for PPP it is higher for Ukaine.

    Overall on this metric they are quite close – in both ways.

    http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2018/01/weodata/weorept.aspx?pr.x=76&pr.y=16&sy=2015&ey=2017&scsm=1&ssd=1&sort=country&ds=.&br=1&c=614%2C926&s=NGDPDPC%2CPPPPC&grp=0&a=

    As for other comparisons, on other metrics – no-one has made them.

  27. @reiner Tor
    The Angolan economy depends entirely on foreign engineers operating their oil wells. This is untrue of either Ukraine or Russia. It’s obscene to compare either to African countries.

    No-one has compared their economies. The comparison was between the GDP per capita of Ukraine and Angola.

    No more or no less.

    Well the original context was to point out that Ukraine has a low GDP per capita, which is true (it is lower than Angola, when it has not been adjusted for Price Purchasing Parity).

    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    No more or no less.
     
    Well, then, it had nothing to do with the point at hand. It means nothing to have lower per capita nominal GDP than Angola, or lower than Equatorial Guinea, also an African country. As it happens, by that one metric, Russia has lower per capita GDP than Equatorial Guinea. Boo-hoo! It just shows how meaningless this number is.

    Angola's GDP (like that of Equatorial Guinea) is inflated by an oil windfall, which won't last, and which only exists because foreign engineers are operating the oil wells, and foreigners now find it cheaper and/or more convenient and/or more moral to just bribe the Angolan political class instead of taking the oil wells by military force and extracting the oil without permission from the local leaders.

    Angola is something like Kuwait, plus a huge countryside with subsistence farming. The subsistence farming part is what is normally thought of as "African level poverty," while the rich part is really like Kuwait in Southwest Africa.

    Anyone who knows anything about African countries and Ukraine knows that the Ukrainian economy is incomparably better and more developed than any African economies. By the way Angola is one of the richest African countries, again, due to the Kuwait-like small part which distorts the average. So your comparison was not even very honest in that you didn't just choose a random African country, but chose an oil-rich high-income African country. I guess it's a Russian nationalist meme that you just took from a Russian website or comment board.
  28. In other words, Article 282 has metastasized out of control just as the issues it was ostensibly aimed to deal with have vastly diminished in importance.

    Looks like you have the cause and effect confused. Logic and experience says that the issues diminished precisely because the government started to do something about them.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    Yes, I am sure that the only reason Russia was disintegrating in the 1990s was because Great Russian chauvinists made fun of churki without legal repercussions. /s
  29. @anonymous coward

    In other words, Article 282 has metastasized out of control just as the issues it was ostensibly aimed to deal with have vastly diminished in importance.
     
    Looks like you have the cause and effect confused. Logic and experience says that the issues diminished precisely because the government started to do something about them.

    Yes, I am sure that the only reason Russia was disintegrating in the 1990s was because Great Russian chauvinists made fun of churki without legal repercussions. /s

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
    No, I'm talking about your two graphs, which seem to be inversely correlated -- one with 'hate speech' law convictions and another with hate crimes. Correlation isn't always causation, but in this case causation makes more sense than conspiracy theory.
  30. The best outcome, then, would be to cut these subsidies to zero and then to tax foreign enterprises in low-productivity sectors like retail where FDI is frankly not needed and which just drain our coffers. Since the pattern is the same all over the CEE, it would be best with a co-ordinated action, which would diminish the Western propaganda of “look, country XYZ is going rogue and undemocratic, we must intervene!”.

    I agree with you and I wish the Baltic states would at least try to make an effort in that direction. There is some talk about it in the public, and some of the nationalists and economic nationalists have made a few subtle noises about it (one MP suggested taxing retail to fund programs for young families), but it’s still a very marginal opinion. It would be important to spread this idea in certain parts of the business community. Btw, our foreign affairs minister said something funny the other week – “There will be an EU, but it may have fewer members”. And then he went on to talk about Poland and Hungary and how the Baltics shouldn’t fall in that group (which is against how a significant part of the public feels) and that he’s very concerned, some stuff he heard in Brussels or whatever, – he’s a neoliberal so no surprise – but to say something like that so openly… not only is it rude towards Poland and Hungary, but I don’t think there would be phrases like that flying around even just a couple of years ago…

    But, yea, I agree about the phrasing… they should just say “But look at Trump! Look at what he says! Look at what he’s doing, wow!” LOL

  31. On topic, I remember communicating with some Russian and other Slavic nationalists back around mid 2000s or so, and, yea, there was a lot of freedom for them back then.

  32. @Dmitry
    I compared their GDP per capita, which for Angola is higher.

    I don't compare other aspects of their countries or say they are on the same level in any other metrics (unless there is someone from Angola on this forum, I doubt any of us know so much about the positives/negatives of Angola).

    I have friends from Ukraine, including a guy I know from Odessa. And a couple weeks ago I was browsing on this website and Karlin blog over the afternoon and ended up talking on Skype at the same time. So as everyone here is arguing endlessly about it, I tried to ask a little a bit about politics - and all he says is 'it's worse than you imagine' and a few less polite words, and no more. Actually he also was telling me about insane inflation at the moment, which is suddenly accelerating.

    That said, I will acknowledge the video I posted above (fortunately for Ukraine, more than for Kazakhstan) turns out to be fake-news. Apologies for this, although it was too funny not to post it, and almost symptomatic given many real things everyone here (I am sure) has seen.

    unless there is someone from Angola on this forum, I doubt any of us know so much about the positives/negatives of Angola

    Not from Angola (I live in Portugal) but can assure you that it is one of the most thoroughly corrupt countries in the world, with (oil, diamonds) wealth concentrated obscenely in the hands of the “nomenklatura”.

    The Angolan elite lives in a world almost entirely disconnected from the rest of the country’s population of 20 million.

    Its playground is the Ilha, a stretch of sand that curves out from Luanda, dotted with luxury villas, beachside restaurants and glitzy nightclubs.

    The rich and the beautiful sip $60 cocktails, as gleaming Porsches purr past, the wrists of their drivers heavy with Rolex watches.

    Prices are astronomical. It is as if they have been set deliberately high to enable people to show off just how wealthy they are.

    Why else would supermarkets charge up to $100 for a watermelon, $200 for a chicken?

    Looking out at Luanda from the Ilha, it is hard to believe this is the capital of a country that a little more than 10 years ago was fighting a vicious civil war.

    Shiny white super-yachts luxuriate in the blue of the sea.

    A swarm of new skyscrapers lines the horizon. One of the multi-million-dollar penthouse apartments has a helicopter landing pad.

    It is here one starts to hear whispers of the name “Isabel”: “This nightclub belongs to Isabel,” “This is Isabel’s restaurant,” “That business is Isabel’s, so is that one, that one, and that one.”

    Isabel is the eldest daughter of President Dos Santos.

    President Dos Santos has developed remarkable cunning in playing off one foreign power against the other, just like he does in domestic politics.

    Worth an estimated $3.4bn, she has been described by Forbes magazine as Africa’s richest woman.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32067602

    Isabel is actually half-Russian, and describes herself as a “self-made businesswoman” who got her start by selling chicken eggs at age 6.

    She was born in 1973 in Baku, Azerbaijan, then a Soviet outpost that welcomed promising young students from communist-aligned African liberation movements. Her father, one of them, met her mother, a Russian chess champion, while both were studying engineering. There were later rumours, dismissed by their daughter, that they were “introduced by the KGB”.

    https://moneyweek.com/isabel-dos-santos-angolas-princess-dethroned/

    Isabel has run into problems recently, as her father was forced out of office in September last year, and the new President is seeking to reorient income flows. But even if she were to lose her Angolan fortune, she still owns a fair share of Portugal — in 2015 her Portuguese investments (banking, energy, telecommunications) were valued at over 3 billion euros. She is not alone in this, Angolan money has literally “bought” much of Portugal, to the extent that it has been labelled a “financial colony” of Angola. Or, as it has been said, “the colonizer has been colonized”.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/22/world/europe/angola-portugal-money-laundering.html?mtrref=expresso.sapo.pt

    Numerous politicians (and, it is rumoured, much of the press) have been “bought off” by Angolan money.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Your article makes it sound like a 'fairy kingdom', without the positive connotation of - and ruled by an evil princess.

    That said, you can imagine the reality is stranger even than the description.

  33. @Dmitry
    No-one has compared their economies. The comparison was between the GDP per capita of Ukraine and Angola.

    No more or no less.

    Well the original context was to point out that Ukraine has a low GDP per capita, which is true (it is lower than Angola, when it has not been adjusted for Price Purchasing Parity).

    No more or no less.

    Well, then, it had nothing to do with the point at hand. It means nothing to have lower per capita nominal GDP than Angola, or lower than Equatorial Guinea, also an African country. As it happens, by that one metric, Russia has lower per capita GDP than Equatorial Guinea. Boo-hoo! It just shows how meaningless this number is.

    Angola’s GDP (like that of Equatorial Guinea) is inflated by an oil windfall, which won’t last, and which only exists because foreign engineers are operating the oil wells, and foreigners now find it cheaper and/or more convenient and/or more moral to just bribe the Angolan political class instead of taking the oil wells by military force and extracting the oil without permission from the local leaders.

    Angola is something like Kuwait, plus a huge countryside with subsistence farming. The subsistence farming part is what is normally thought of as “African level poverty,” while the rich part is really like Kuwait in Southwest Africa.

    Anyone who knows anything about African countries and Ukraine knows that the Ukrainian economy is incomparably better and more developed than any African economies. By the way Angola is one of the richest African countries, again, due to the Kuwait-like small part which distorts the average. So your comparison was not even very honest in that you didn’t just choose a random African country, but chose an oil-rich high-income African country. I guess it’s a Russian nationalist meme that you just took from a Russian website or comment board.

    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Well, then, it had nothing to do with the point at hand. It means nothing to have lower per capita nominal GDP than Angola, or lower than Equatorial Guinea, also an African country. As it happens, by that one metric,
     
    It was relevant to the point in hand - which was pointing out that Ukraine's GDP's per capita is low. It in reply to your own argument about America's economy being based on farming land.

    Russia has lower per capita GDP than Equatorial Guinea. Boo-hoo! It just shows how meaningless this number is.

     

    Equatorial Guinea was in the high-income bracket, at least before the oil crash.


    Angola’s GDP (like that of Equatorial Guinea) is inflated by an oil windfall, which won’t last, and which only exists because foreign engineers are operating the oil wells, and foreigners now find it cheaper and/or more convenient and/or more moral to just bribe the Angolan political class instead of taking the oil wells by military force and extracting the oil without permission from the local leaders.

    Angola is something like Kuwait, plus a huge countryside with subsistence farming. The subsistence farming part is what is normally thought of as “African level poverty,” while the rich part is really like Kuwait in Southwest Africa.

    Anyone who knows anything about African countries and Ukraine knows that the Ukrainian economy is incomparably better and more developed than any African economies. By the way Angola is one of the richest African countries, again, due to the Kuwait-like small part which distorts the average. So your comparison was not even very honest in that you didn’t just choose a random African country, but chose an oil-rich high-income African country. I guess it’s a Russian nationalist meme that you just took from a Russian website or comment board.
     
    Thank you for information about Angola.

    As for 'Russian nationalist meme'. This is a topic Ukrainians, including news, discuss themselves. There's not cover up of their poverty issue.
  34. @Anatoly Karlin
    Yes, I am sure that the only reason Russia was disintegrating in the 1990s was because Great Russian chauvinists made fun of churki without legal repercussions. /s

    No, I’m talking about your two graphs, which seem to be inversely correlated — one with ‘hate speech’ law convictions and another with hate crimes. Correlation isn’t always causation, but in this case causation makes more sense than conspiracy theory.

  35. @reiner Tor

    No more or no less.
     
    Well, then, it had nothing to do with the point at hand. It means nothing to have lower per capita nominal GDP than Angola, or lower than Equatorial Guinea, also an African country. As it happens, by that one metric, Russia has lower per capita GDP than Equatorial Guinea. Boo-hoo! It just shows how meaningless this number is.

    Angola's GDP (like that of Equatorial Guinea) is inflated by an oil windfall, which won't last, and which only exists because foreign engineers are operating the oil wells, and foreigners now find it cheaper and/or more convenient and/or more moral to just bribe the Angolan political class instead of taking the oil wells by military force and extracting the oil without permission from the local leaders.

    Angola is something like Kuwait, plus a huge countryside with subsistence farming. The subsistence farming part is what is normally thought of as "African level poverty," while the rich part is really like Kuwait in Southwest Africa.

    Anyone who knows anything about African countries and Ukraine knows that the Ukrainian economy is incomparably better and more developed than any African economies. By the way Angola is one of the richest African countries, again, due to the Kuwait-like small part which distorts the average. So your comparison was not even very honest in that you didn't just choose a random African country, but chose an oil-rich high-income African country. I guess it's a Russian nationalist meme that you just took from a Russian website or comment board.

    Well, then, it had nothing to do with the point at hand. It means nothing to have lower per capita nominal GDP than Angola, or lower than Equatorial Guinea, also an African country. As it happens, by that one metric,

    It was relevant to the point in hand – which was pointing out that Ukraine’s GDP’s per capita is low. It in reply to your own argument about America’s economy being based on farming land.

    Russia has lower per capita GDP than Equatorial Guinea. Boo-hoo! It just shows how meaningless this number is.

    Equatorial Guinea was in the high-income bracket, at least before the oil crash.

    Angola’s GDP (like that of Equatorial Guinea) is inflated by an oil windfall, which won’t last, and which only exists because foreign engineers are operating the oil wells, and foreigners now find it cheaper and/or more convenient and/or more moral to just bribe the Angolan political class instead of taking the oil wells by military force and extracting the oil without permission from the local leaders.

    Angola is something like Kuwait, plus a huge countryside with subsistence farming. The subsistence farming part is what is normally thought of as “African level poverty,” while the rich part is really like Kuwait in Southwest Africa.

    Anyone who knows anything about African countries and Ukraine knows that the Ukrainian economy is incomparably better and more developed than any African economies. By the way Angola is one of the richest African countries, again, due to the Kuwait-like small part which distorts the average. So your comparison was not even very honest in that you didn’t just choose a random African country, but chose an oil-rich high-income African country. I guess it’s a Russian nationalist meme that you just took from a Russian website or comment board.

    Thank you for information about Angola.

    As for ‘Russian nationalist meme’. This is a topic Ukrainians, including news, discuss themselves. There’s not cover up of their poverty issue.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor

    your own argument about America’s economy being based on farming land.
     
    I never wrote that.
  36. @for-the-record
    unless there is someone from Angola on this forum, I doubt any of us know so much about the positives/negatives of Angola

    Not from Angola (I live in Portugal) but can assure you that it is one of the most thoroughly corrupt countries in the world, with (oil, diamonds) wealth concentrated obscenely in the hands of the "nomenklatura".

    The Angolan elite lives in a world almost entirely disconnected from the rest of the country's population of 20 million.

    Its playground is the Ilha, a stretch of sand that curves out from Luanda, dotted with luxury villas, beachside restaurants and glitzy nightclubs.

    The rich and the beautiful sip $60 cocktails, as gleaming Porsches purr past, the wrists of their drivers heavy with Rolex watches.

    Prices are astronomical. It is as if they have been set deliberately high to enable people to show off just how wealthy they are.

    Why else would supermarkets charge up to $100 for a watermelon, $200 for a chicken?

    Looking out at Luanda from the Ilha, it is hard to believe this is the capital of a country that a little more than 10 years ago was fighting a vicious civil war.

    Shiny white super-yachts luxuriate in the blue of the sea.

    A swarm of new skyscrapers lines the horizon. One of the multi-million-dollar penthouse apartments has a helicopter landing pad.

    It is here one starts to hear whispers of the name "Isabel": "This nightclub belongs to Isabel," "This is Isabel's restaurant," "That business is Isabel's, so is that one, that one, and that one."

    Isabel is the eldest daughter of President Dos Santos.

    President Dos Santos has developed remarkable cunning in playing off one foreign power against the other, just like he does in domestic politics.

    Worth an estimated $3.4bn, she has been described by Forbes magazine as Africa's richest woman.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32067602

     

    Isabel is actually half-Russian, and describes herself as a "self-made businesswoman" who got her start by selling chicken eggs at age 6.

    She was born in 1973 in Baku, Azerbaijan, then a Soviet outpost that welcomed promising young students from communist-aligned African liberation movements. Her father, one of them, met her mother, a Russian chess champion, while both were studying engineering. There were later rumours, dismissed by their daughter, that they were “introduced by the KGB”.

    https://moneyweek.com/isabel-dos-santos-angolas-princess-dethroned/
     
    Isabel has run into problems recently, as her father was forced out of office in September last year, and the new President is seeking to reorient income flows. But even if she were to lose her Angolan fortune, she still owns a fair share of Portugal -- in 2015 her Portuguese investments (banking, energy, telecommunications) were valued at over 3 billion euros. She is not alone in this, Angolan money has literally "bought" much of Portugal, to the extent that it has been labelled a "financial colony" of Angola. Or, as it has been said, "the colonizer has been colonized".

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/22/world/europe/angola-portugal-money-laundering.html?mtrref=expresso.sapo.pt

    Numerous politicians (and, it is rumoured, much of the press) have been "bought off" by Angolan money.

    Your article makes it sound like a ‘fairy kingdom’, without the positive connotation of – and ruled by an evil princess.

    That said, you can imagine the reality is stranger even than the description.

  37. @Dmitry

    Well, then, it had nothing to do with the point at hand. It means nothing to have lower per capita nominal GDP than Angola, or lower than Equatorial Guinea, also an African country. As it happens, by that one metric,
     
    It was relevant to the point in hand - which was pointing out that Ukraine's GDP's per capita is low. It in reply to your own argument about America's economy being based on farming land.

    Russia has lower per capita GDP than Equatorial Guinea. Boo-hoo! It just shows how meaningless this number is.

     

    Equatorial Guinea was in the high-income bracket, at least before the oil crash.


    Angola’s GDP (like that of Equatorial Guinea) is inflated by an oil windfall, which won’t last, and which only exists because foreign engineers are operating the oil wells, and foreigners now find it cheaper and/or more convenient and/or more moral to just bribe the Angolan political class instead of taking the oil wells by military force and extracting the oil without permission from the local leaders.

    Angola is something like Kuwait, plus a huge countryside with subsistence farming. The subsistence farming part is what is normally thought of as “African level poverty,” while the rich part is really like Kuwait in Southwest Africa.

    Anyone who knows anything about African countries and Ukraine knows that the Ukrainian economy is incomparably better and more developed than any African economies. By the way Angola is one of the richest African countries, again, due to the Kuwait-like small part which distorts the average. So your comparison was not even very honest in that you didn’t just choose a random African country, but chose an oil-rich high-income African country. I guess it’s a Russian nationalist meme that you just took from a Russian website or comment board.
     
    Thank you for information about Angola.

    As for 'Russian nationalist meme'. This is a topic Ukrainians, including news, discuss themselves. There's not cover up of their poverty issue.

    your own argument about America’s economy being based on farming land.

    I never wrote that.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    "about America’s economy being based on farming land."

    About America's economic success being based on farming land. (and weather, coal, and related things, that you write etc, also about the seas protecting it)

    A few words went missing when I was writing that sentence.

    -

    Also you wrote specifically about American having a high GDP per capita.

  38. @reiner Tor

    your own argument about America’s economy being based on farming land.
     
    I never wrote that.

    “about America’s economy being based on farming land.”

    About America’s economic success being based on farming land. (and weather, coal, and related things, that you write etc, also about the seas protecting it)

    A few words went missing when I was writing that sentence.

    Also you wrote specifically about American having a high GDP per capita.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    My argument was so simple that I feel embarrassed merely for repeating it.

    For the US (or any other country) to become a first world economy it needs a high quality population. But to become the foremost economic power, it needed a large landmass, which had been empty, and which had a nice weather so that it was possible to cultivate the land. It attracted the high IQ population, which could then multiply, until eventually there were many of them. This led to economies of scale, which made it even richer. If the land was small, New Zealand would have happened: rich, okay, but not exceptionally so, and not nearly the foremost economic powerhouse of the planet. If it had worse weather, it’d be Canada or Australia: again, rich, but not the US. (If totally uninhabitable, then Antarctica: that is, no country at all.) If it weren’t empty, it’d be like India or Africa: colonized, but eventually reverting back to rule by the locals. Having been protected by two oceans etc. helped it win all of its wars with little effort.

    Without these factors, there’d either be no US, or it wouldn’t nearly be as powerful as it is. It’s impossible to disagree with it, unless you don’t understand it.
    , @reiner Tor

    Also you wrote specifically about American having a high GDP per capita.
     
    In the context of a country being rich or poor, I obviously always mean PPP. Not that the difference is even meaningful for the US, whose currency is used for such measurements.
  39. @Dmitry
    "about America’s economy being based on farming land."

    About America's economic success being based on farming land. (and weather, coal, and related things, that you write etc, also about the seas protecting it)

    A few words went missing when I was writing that sentence.

    -

    Also you wrote specifically about American having a high GDP per capita.

    My argument was so simple that I feel embarrassed merely for repeating it.

    For the US (or any other country) to become a first world economy it needs a high quality population. But to become the foremost economic power, it needed a large landmass, which had been empty, and which had a nice weather so that it was possible to cultivate the land. It attracted the high IQ population, which could then multiply, until eventually there were many of them. This led to economies of scale, which made it even richer. If the land was small, New Zealand would have happened: rich, okay, but not exceptionally so, and not nearly the foremost economic powerhouse of the planet. If it had worse weather, it’d be Canada or Australia: again, rich, but not the US. (If totally uninhabitable, then Antarctica: that is, no country at all.) If it weren’t empty, it’d be like India or Africa: colonized, but eventually reverting back to rule by the locals. Having been protected by two oceans etc. helped it win all of its wars with little effort.

    Without these factors, there’d either be no US, or it wouldn’t nearly be as powerful as it is. It’s impossible to disagree with it, unless you don’t understand it.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    It's one narrative. As I wrote originally on the other post - "American success is some kind of a topic for which there could be dozens of books, each with a different narrative trying to explain it (geographical, ideological, ethnic, religious, etc)."

    I'm not saying it's a mystery. But it's a case where the different theories look like underdetermined. And underdetermination in this case implying incompeteness of explanation.

    So in your theory there is a lack of attention to legal, ideological and cultural factors, which distinguish the history of North Americans, from - for example, Brazil.

    I mention Ukraine, only in the context of mention of factors to do with arable land, weather and coal. It's not to say it is disproving in any way your theory - but that some of these factors (farming land, weather and coal) can perhaps be of little importance, if not accompanied by others we might also mention (including free market, Anglo-Saxon legal structures, etc) .
  40. @Dmitry
    "about America’s economy being based on farming land."

    About America's economic success being based on farming land. (and weather, coal, and related things, that you write etc, also about the seas protecting it)

    A few words went missing when I was writing that sentence.

    -

    Also you wrote specifically about American having a high GDP per capita.

    Also you wrote specifically about American having a high GDP per capita.

    In the context of a country being rich or poor, I obviously always mean PPP. Not that the difference is even meaningful for the US, whose currency is used for such measurements.

    • Replies: @Dmitry

    In the context of a country being rich or poor, I obviously always mean PPP. Not that the difference is even meaningful for the US, whose currency is used for such measurements.

     

    Outside of the US, I have been told - you need to look at both of the metrics (nominal and PPP).

    They are both imperfect measures, in different ways.

    PPP, for example, is often comparing factors which are not at all comparable. For example, price of chocolate in Switzerland might be higher than Brazil, but it is also not the same chocolate - and this happens in every single measure of PPP. This is why some people advocate instead to use things like 'Big Mac Index' - which compares the same product (although even this is very debatable).

    -

    Probably the choice of using Angola as country of comparison though, was the worst choice for me, due to their bizarre situation with cost of living.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK0wMprGMWg
  41. Result is perfectly expectable – a rise in absurd convictions [e.g. latest examples – student gets 2.5 years for extremism in an academic paper about extremism; 1,000 ruble fine for reposting a Soviet propaganda poster that had a swastika on it, thus “propagandizing” Nazism

    Anatoly I used to admire your articles, but this fragment of text is a really bad Apple in the basket. The student was condemned not for his scientific work, but for the fact that this idiot (for “scientific purposes”) posted on the Internet extremist materials (e.g. a crossed out star of David and a call to start a “war of liberation” etc., etc.).

    Andriy Voronin (the second link) was fined 1000 roubles (17 $) for the placement of Adolf Hitler and swastikas in the message in which Voronin equalized the USSR and the Third Reich (easily understand – its the real cause of the fine).
    This can be read in your links (in Russian – incomprehensible to most readers of your blog)
    These trials are indeed harmful idiocy. But outright manipulation its not justified

    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
  42. @reiner Tor
    My argument was so simple that I feel embarrassed merely for repeating it.

    For the US (or any other country) to become a first world economy it needs a high quality population. But to become the foremost economic power, it needed a large landmass, which had been empty, and which had a nice weather so that it was possible to cultivate the land. It attracted the high IQ population, which could then multiply, until eventually there were many of them. This led to economies of scale, which made it even richer. If the land was small, New Zealand would have happened: rich, okay, but not exceptionally so, and not nearly the foremost economic powerhouse of the planet. If it had worse weather, it’d be Canada or Australia: again, rich, but not the US. (If totally uninhabitable, then Antarctica: that is, no country at all.) If it weren’t empty, it’d be like India or Africa: colonized, but eventually reverting back to rule by the locals. Having been protected by two oceans etc. helped it win all of its wars with little effort.

    Without these factors, there’d either be no US, or it wouldn’t nearly be as powerful as it is. It’s impossible to disagree with it, unless you don’t understand it.

    It’s one narrative. As I wrote originally on the other post – “American success is some kind of a topic for which there could be dozens of books, each with a different narrative trying to explain it (geographical, ideological, ethnic, religious, etc).”

    I’m not saying it’s a mystery. But it’s a case where the different theories look like underdetermined. And underdetermination in this case implying incompeteness of explanation.

    So in your theory there is a lack of attention to legal, ideological and cultural factors, which distinguish the history of North Americans, from – for example, Brazil.

    I mention Ukraine, only in the context of mention of factors to do with arable land, weather and coal. It’s not to say it is disproving in any way your theory – but that some of these factors (farming land, weather and coal) can perhaps be of little importance, if not accompanied by others we might also mention (including free market, Anglo-Saxon legal structures, etc) .

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Free markets are the default, outside of communist experiments. Do you need freer markets than Germany or Sweden? (I think Sweden actually has freer markets, but higher taxes.) At most it gives or takes a little bit to GDP. (The biggest difference between Europe and the US is number of hours worked.)

    So of course I didn't mention that you need to avoid communist experiments (it goes without saying; I also didn't mention that you need to avoid wholesale massacre of your own population the way Cambodia did in the 1970s), but absent such absurdities, the default for a high quality high IQ population will always be a first world economy. There's no mystery here.
  43. @reiner Tor

    Also you wrote specifically about American having a high GDP per capita.
     
    In the context of a country being rich or poor, I obviously always mean PPP. Not that the difference is even meaningful for the US, whose currency is used for such measurements.

    In the context of a country being rich or poor, I obviously always mean PPP. Not that the difference is even meaningful for the US, whose currency is used for such measurements.

    Outside of the US, I have been told – you need to look at both of the metrics (nominal and PPP).

    They are both imperfect measures, in different ways.

    PPP, for example, is often comparing factors which are not at all comparable. For example, price of chocolate in Switzerland might be higher than Brazil, but it is also not the same chocolate – and this happens in every single measure of PPP. This is why some people advocate instead to use things like ‘Big Mac Index’ – which compares the same product (although even this is very debatable).

    Probably the choice of using Angola as country of comparison though, was the worst choice for me, due to their bizarre situation with cost of living.

  44. @Dmitry
    Yes considering the publication of non-inciting blog in English on an American website, it is very very unlikely, I would - randomly - guess your chance of being in trouble is somewhere less than 0.1%, (somewhere less than 3 times small than your chance of dying in a car accident over 80 years).

    The only issue which I would avoid, at least in the future, is putting the full name of the linguistics experts in the articles on the law. http://www.unz.com/akarlin/country-282/

    So that if those people google themselves in English, or the judges (more likely) googles them in English to find out whether to call them as witnesses - (unlikely but not 100% impossible), they could get angry. I would just re-write their names as initial of their first name, and then their surname.

    The only issue which I would avoid, at least in the future, is putting the full name of the linguistics experts in the articles on the law.

    So that if those people google themselves in English, or the judges (more likely) googles them in English to find out whether to call them as witnesses – (unlikely but not 100% impossible), they could get angry.

    Well, that’s sort of the point. I do want human rights abusers such as Galina Melnik and Rezeda Salahutdinova to appear on Google and for this to have impacts on their careers in the West (in all fairness, given that Western academia is commie, these days it’s probably going to be a positive for them anyway. But still).

    I estimate that I am better positioned to deflect or avoid the consequences of politicized prosecutions than about 95% of Russians. Why should I shirk, least of all on such minor matters?

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    In my opinion, because, the correct attitude to authority and powerful people (which these experts could be), is "avoid troubles".

    That said, sure I think you'll be fine and safe, as it is in English, on an American site, and without inciting imagery and so on.
  45. @Anatoly Karlin

    The only issue which I would avoid, at least in the future, is putting the full name of the linguistics experts in the articles on the law.

    So that if those people google themselves in English, or the judges (more likely) googles them in English to find out whether to call them as witnesses – (unlikely but not 100% impossible), they could get angry.
     
    Well, that's sort of the point. I do want human rights abusers such as Galina Melnik and Rezeda Salahutdinova to appear on Google and for this to have impacts on their careers in the West (in all fairness, given that Western academia is commie, these days it's probably going to be a positive for them anyway. But still).

    I estimate that I am better positioned to deflect or avoid the consequences of politicized prosecutions than about 95% of Russians. Why should I shirk, least of all on such minor matters?

    In my opinion, because, the correct attitude to authority and powerful people (which these experts could be), is “avoid troubles”.

    That said, sure I think you’ll be fine and safe, as it is in English, on an American site, and without inciting imagery and so on.

  46. @Dmitry
    It's one narrative. As I wrote originally on the other post - "American success is some kind of a topic for which there could be dozens of books, each with a different narrative trying to explain it (geographical, ideological, ethnic, religious, etc)."

    I'm not saying it's a mystery. But it's a case where the different theories look like underdetermined. And underdetermination in this case implying incompeteness of explanation.

    So in your theory there is a lack of attention to legal, ideological and cultural factors, which distinguish the history of North Americans, from - for example, Brazil.

    I mention Ukraine, only in the context of mention of factors to do with arable land, weather and coal. It's not to say it is disproving in any way your theory - but that some of these factors (farming land, weather and coal) can perhaps be of little importance, if not accompanied by others we might also mention (including free market, Anglo-Saxon legal structures, etc) .

    Free markets are the default, outside of communist experiments. Do you need freer markets than Germany or Sweden? (I think Sweden actually has freer markets, but higher taxes.) At most it gives or takes a little bit to GDP. (The biggest difference between Europe and the US is number of hours worked.)

    So of course I didn’t mention that you need to avoid communist experiments (it goes without saying; I also didn’t mention that you need to avoid wholesale massacre of your own population the way Cambodia did in the 1970s), but absent such absurdities, the default for a high quality high IQ population will always be a first world economy. There’s no mystery here.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS