The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / On "Economics"
 All Comments / On "Economics"
    The current series of railroad strikes in France are portrayed in the media as “labor unrest”, a conflict between the government and trade union leaders, or as a temporary nuisance to travelers caused by the self-interest of a privileged category of workers. In Anglo-American media, there is the usual self-satisfied tongue-clicking over “those cheese-eaters, always...
  • @peterAUS
    Pointless.

    People as Ms. Johnston should be thinking about the paradigm.

    In the current, this is what has been happening, is happening, and will be happening.
    That's the nature of it.

    Thinking about meaning of life, nature of work, (re)distribution of goods and services and such is the only way to make any difference.

    Otherwise, most of us will be serfs for the top 20 %, "managed" and, if necessary, "retired".

    That's the most likely future, actually.
    The mixture of new Ancient Egypt and Huxley's "New World Order". No slaves and order maintained, mostly, with a gloved hand.

    Working class has been fucked over and nobody was paying attention. On the contrary, the rest liked it.
    Now they are coming for the middle class, with gusto.

    Pleasant dreams.

    There’s blame to go around.
    The post-war history of American labor is of a movement with one strategy and double-down, double-down, double-down, ’till it went broke.
    There are two strategies labor needed to take and bears responsibility for failing at: 1) at about the time when it should have accepted that American laborers were getting a pretty good deal that could only be improved in the short-term by consuming the host, it should have shifted resources to bargain for the long-haul by moving for a German-style public corporate, corporate/labor model, namely where labor had a seat on the board, 2) rather than tunnel-vision resistance to free trade up to and until it simply lost in a total wash-out, it should have looked for alternative models to global trade, one of which has been on display : the British Commonwealth of Nations.
    If in 1975 American labor threw its strength behind those two long-term goals we would have a much different world today – one with much more prosperity, better distributed, and with less identity politics.
    On the right, well: the right seemed absolutely convinced that it could kill its opposition and nothing would replace it.
    You can of course kill your loyal opposition for the incremental pennies on the dollar back that its worth to you – but usually when you kill the loyal opposition its replaced by the disloyal opposition.

    When I go to places where American working class are still found – they still love America. Can’t say that for the left we have, which is the left that we have the Republican right to thank for.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Introduction During his recent visit to New Hampshire on 3/20/18, President Trump declared once again that the US is facing a ‘drug epidemic’. This time he advocated the death penalty for criminal drug dealers as the solution to a national crisis that has killed over 1 million Americans since the 1990’s (when the blockbuster prescription...
  • That’s not genocide. Genocide is what’s been going on in the West, at least as far back as 1965; genocide via race-replacement.

    You have two dog cages. One is full of labrador retrievers, and another is full of golden retrievers. If you keep putting half the labs into the golden retriever cage, eventually you have two cages full of labs.

    You can bla bla bla about consent, about how the labs never fired a shot, about how the golden retrievers can choose not to breed with the labs, bla bla bla, until your gums bleed, but it won’t change what’s going on – the effect.

    That’s what’s going on in the West. Nobody but alt-righters and White Nationalists acknowledges it, but it’s genocide.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The current series of railroad strikes in France are portrayed in the media as “labor unrest”, a conflict between the government and trade union leaders, or as a temporary nuisance to travelers caused by the self-interest of a privileged category of workers. In Anglo-American media, there is the usual self-satisfied tongue-clicking over “those cheese-eaters, always...
  • I hope that French society has a sense of solidarity and won’t be taken apart by Schadenfreude like American society where worsening of somebody’s social position like that of unionized workers is always cheered by the rest of society. However in American rich are excluded form this treatment. They are always admired and everybody wishes them to become richer and richer.

    Somebody did a job on Americans and the suckers do not have a clue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Good to have Ms. Johnston on this site. She has always been a great Counterpunch contributor.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Pointless.

    People as Ms. Johnston should be thinking about the paradigm.

    In the current, this is what has been happening, is happening, and will be happening.
    That’s the nature of it.

    Thinking about meaning of life, nature of work, (re)distribution of goods and services and such is the only way to make any difference.

    Otherwise, most of us will be serfs for the top 20 %, “managed” and, if necessary, “retired”.

    That’s the most likely future, actually.
    The mixture of new Ancient Egypt and Huxley’s “New World Order”. No slaves and order maintained, mostly, with a gloved hand.

    Working class has been fucked over and nobody was paying attention. On the contrary, the rest liked it.
    Now they are coming for the middle class, with gusto.

    Pleasant dreams.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SimplePseudonymicHandle
    There's blame to go around.
    The post-war history of American labor is of a movement with one strategy and double-down, double-down, double-down, 'till it went broke.
    There are two strategies labor needed to take and bears responsibility for failing at: 1) at about the time when it should have accepted that American laborers were getting a pretty good deal that could only be improved in the short-term by consuming the host, it should have shifted resources to bargain for the long-haul by moving for a German-style public corporate, corporate/labor model, namely where labor had a seat on the board, 2) rather than tunnel-vision resistance to free trade up to and until it simply lost in a total wash-out, it should have looked for alternative models to global trade, one of which has been on display : the British Commonwealth of Nations.
    If in 1975 American labor threw its strength behind those two long-term goals we would have a much different world today - one with much more prosperity, better distributed, and with less identity politics.
    On the right, well: the right seemed absolutely convinced that it could kill its opposition and nothing would replace it.
    You can of course kill your loyal opposition for the incremental pennies on the dollar back that its worth to you - but usually when you kill the loyal opposition its replaced by the disloyal opposition.

    When I go to places where American working class are still found - they still love America. Can't say that for the left we have, which is the left that we have the Republican right to thank for.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Branco Milanovic - When autarky becomes the only solution This post-Cold War idea that corporations are taking over the world always seemed ridiculous to me. Consider the following: Wealthiest individual ~$100 billion (Bezos) Wealthiest corporation ~$1 trillion (Apple) Wealthiest country ~ $100 trillion (USA), of which states typically own 20%-70%. Plus, they have 95%+ of...
  • @Spisarevski
    Russia can actually pull of a full autarky even under present conditions if it really wants to. The current elites are too cautious and corrupt to enact radical plans and the majority of the population will not like drastic changes to their lifestyle. Still, it is possible.

    As Anatoly mentioned in an article not long ago, increasing your population is basically a hack to increase your national power.

    So if the 150 million Russians are not enough for the scale that is needed for an internal high tech sector to thrive and be competitive, then you can simply triple your population in 20-30 years time and with something like 500 million people Russia will have all the talent and economy of scale it needs to compete by itself with the best.
    If the likes of Saudi Arabia and Iran could grow their populations like that, then it is certainly possible with Russia's natural resources. Institute white sharia and manage the country's resources in a way which will make sure that having many children is affordable to everyone, and natality should be promoted and incentivized even more than it is now.

    Unlike North Korea, Russia has enough arable land and resources of all kinds to be self-sufficient. It will not starve like NK, or even stagnate, it will just develop slower if it's isolated. Even now it is mostly self-sufficient in terms of culture and technology, and it can be fully self-sufficient if need be. It will lag behind for a time but the weapons it has right now will ensure that it will not be conquered in the next few decades, and then the population boom kicks in.
    Meanwhile Russia's enemies in the West can actually collapse or at the very least become more and more dysfunctional, and with a much bigger population, Russia will be prepared to face the challenges of the future, whatever they may be.

    Russia can’t revert to “socialism in one country”. It just won’t work in the second and third decades of the 21.century. The pull of global economy is just too strong. So it’s “capitulation” or……at this juncture, Russia would be well advised to re-think Ukraine and respond to the next attempt by the Kiev dumbasses to annex Donbass (which has been practically announced for May) by an undeclared overwhelming blitzkrieg and changing the government in Kiev to a pro-Russian one. (Putin has to show he does not give a f*ck about the World Cup!) This should be sold politically in the West as a matter of urgent national security, given the West uncalled-for hostility toward Russia which forces her to re-establish its minimum security perimeter within the former Soviet “near abroad”. (This should have been done in 2014 but what the heck.) No babbling, no useless arguments, no begging, no laments, no calls for international law, which has been shamelessly broken over three decades every time it suits the U.S. and its minions. Should the West respond by maxing the sanctions, threaten the Baltics and re-take them if the West does not relent. Promise to return them if NATO is ditched. Russia absolutely needs a new international posture, and to show an absolute uncompromising determination, taking it to the brink, if need be. That is the only alternative to accepting the U.S. yarlik. Autarky is not an option.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • You continue with the low quality analyses. There is a reason why Russia defied the US, you know. It did not come from nowhere. If you listen to russian FM sources, you will often hear that the world is becoming multipolar and that the last 500 years of western domination are coming to an end.

    Yet you never asked yourself why are they talking like that. Maybe because they have a reason for it?

    These sanctions will simply not matter. There is tectonic shift happening. Most of the worlds economy will be in Asia. Europe is becoming a backwater, it will have only 4 percent of the world’s population. The US is going to cripple itself with massive debt levels.

    Are you aware that most economic studies show that China will eventually have an economy 2 times bigger than that of the US, India will become a larger economy than the US as well, while for a first time in several hundred years the West will no longer be the center of the world economy?

    https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/economy/the-world-in-2050.html

    Are you aware that debt levels in the US are projected to reach astronomical levels, and this under “optimistic” scenarios?

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-13/americas-future-no-longer-looks-sustainable-market-context-deutsche

    Are you aware that IQ in the West stopped increasing and is possibly even dropping, but IQ in the rest of the world continues to increase?

    The consensus among IQ experts has been that IQ will stay the same or drop in western countries and will increase by 6-7 IQ points in the rest of the world, probably due to further Flynn effect gains by better nutrition and medical care, as millions of non-westerners join the middle class. China alone is projected to gain 7 IQ points.

    https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/11/14/a-reversal-of-the-flynn-effect/

    Moreover, if Chinese have equal IQ to Japanese, this would mean that they will eventually have similar per capita GDP to Japan, in other words China will eventually have an economy 3-4 times bigger than that of the US. And this isn’t even factoring the projected IQ increase in China and IQ decline in the US.

    Meanwhile, on the cultural front, Islam is projected to eventually become the world’s largest religion, becoming larger than Christianity. Africa is projected to reach 4 billion people, many of whom will come after Europe.

    That’s multipolarity for you.

    Taking all of this into account, it means that in 20 years the West will simply not matter. And the Russian Gov is aware of that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • On April 6, the US Treasury Department extended sanctions against a number of Russian billionaires, including: Heads of state owned energy giants Sechin (Rosneft) and Miller (Gazprom) Putin's circle of silovarch chums and friendly billionaires, e.g. Kirill Shalamov (Putin's former son-in-law), Fursenko, Patrushev, Zolotov, Dyumin (a long rumored successor) The "oligarchs" (which they are not)...
  • @blahbahblah
    Sorry, but none of this is going to matter much...

    A facebook block is probably the best one to do. It's already hurting. It's the one where it's most easy to say "hey, they're in bed with American security forces". It's the most dangerous. It's the one with the best replacement. Of course, facebook owns instagram which is hugely popular in Russia. Banning instagram in Russia would make a lot of people mad but would also really hurt instagram. I would block tumblr just for shits and giggles.

    I have to say, I lost almost all of my putinphilia when I saw him say so much that seemed technologically illiterate. And because of that I don't think he's up to the historical task set before him.

    "Russia should be prepared to shut down the relevant country’s news bureaus in Moscow"

    This is a no brainer.

    The biggest problem with Russia is that it's so damn insular. America does a good job capturing people's imagination. America gets people out of America to buy into America culturally. If I were Russia I would invite Europeans of a nationalist bent(filtered for skills) to create small charter cities on the black sea and the russian far east. Make it easy for Europeans to vacation and enjoy Russia. Make these areas good for culture creation(movies, music, video games, animation). I'm not really a fan of this, but one thing that would really screw with peoples heads is if Russia let China build a charter city in either Kalingrad or the Black Sea.

    Regarding software, dumping Micro$oft should be a number one priority whether sanctions are involved or simply for software reliability and convenience. It was very sad to see, in Oliver Stone’s fascinating interview series with V. Putin, that the Kremlin computers still run Windows!

    It should be a no-brainer to dump Windows and other Miro$oft products and run GNU/Linux and open source software like Libre Office.

    Regarding inviting foreign visitors, this is a great idea, but Russia makes it very hard. I was invited to attend a film festival in Russia about ten years ago (when relations with the US and Britain were comparatively good), and received in the mail a document in Cryllic script which contained my name and which I assumed was a visa. I neither speak nor read Russian, but booked a flight to Frankfurt with an on-going flight to Moscow. In Frankfurt I learned that the document was not a visa, but an invitation to apply for a visa. I was not allowed to proceed, and returned to the US at my own expense.

    This was to say the least an unfortunate experience!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Introduction During his recent visit to New Hampshire on 3/20/18, President Trump declared once again that the US is facing a ‘drug epidemic’. This time he advocated the death penalty for criminal drug dealers as the solution to a national crisis that has killed over 1 million Americans since the 1990’s (when the blockbuster prescription...
  • @peterAUS
    Yup.

    That's the response all the time.

    All "blabbing sphere", from papers, through radio, TV and Internet, let alone chats in person, is full of critique what's not good with the current paradigm. Becoming boring. No wonder most of people get tired of that sooner or later and simply stop paying attention.

    But, as I said, nobody has a solution. Or, better, nobody has a solution which cold accommodate wishes, even needs, of all layers of society in developed world.

    At the moment we have obvious winners and losers. Nobody can offer anything of substance to losers.
    Well, except some words and plenty of prescription drugs.

    Personally, I've found that very interesting.

    But, as I said, nobody has a solution. Or, better, nobody has a solution which cold accommodate wishes, even needs, of all lawyers of society in developed world.

    FTFY.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Branco Milanovic - When autarky becomes the only solution This post-Cold War idea that corporations are taking over the world always seemed ridiculous to me. Consider the following: Wealthiest individual ~$100 billion (Bezos) Wealthiest corporation ~$1 trillion (Apple) Wealthiest country ~ $100 trillion (USA), of which states typically own 20%-70%. Plus, they have 95%+ of...
  • @Dmitry

    Why are the Russian government some backward in not using a potentially very useful asset
     
    It's an interesting question.

    The government do fund some things abroad, including some NGOs, cultural centers, and language competitions. And they make an effort with things like overseas voting - although with less than 10% voter turn-up.

    But in the far abroad, the few Russian speaking communities - will also contain some paranoia and hostility of anything related to the government. If you consider the 20th century and that these communities have a higher proportion of, and are partly even created as result of dissidents, - and of people that fall into trouble with the authorities.

    Whereas Irish have reached the far abroad, more as pure economic migration.

    By the way, with older people, I believe that paranoia may even have quite an influence on overall voting patterns.

    What Dmitry said, plus:

    Let’s go down my list of The 5 Types of Russian American

    White Russians – Tend to be moderately Russophile, but in a plastic paddy sort of way – no real connection to Russia, rarely speak the language, some insist (not entirely without reason) that Russia remains sovok.

    Sovok Jews – Self-explanatory. Not ethnically Russian, rarely identify as Russians, moreover tend to harbor grievances towards Russia. Sergey Brin: “Russia is Nigeria with snow.”

    Emigre Eggheads – Have a sense of betrayal over getting abandoned by their country after the fall of the USSR, and Putin hasn’t exactly been great at assuaging that. Successful eggheads have already made their careers in the West and have no reason to go back or involve themselves with Russia.

    Russian Brides – Left Russia for rich(er) Western husbands. Self-explanatory. No use from them anyway.

    Putin’s Expats – Most will go back, but they are not a diaspora as such.

    Another reason – Russia’s soft power initiatives are incompetent, badly-funded, and probably corrupt (many positions in these organizations are basically sinecures for distant friends of Putin’s friends). There is absolutely nothing like what China has with its Confucian Institutes. Consider that one of the main organizations in this area, Rossotrudnichestvo, is basically unpronounceable for foreigners.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bardon Kaldian

    Overall, generally Western but with asterisks. Perhaps comparable to Spain if Spain had rejoined the West a couple centuries later than it did.
     
    Perspicacious. Billington has made similar observation, showing parallels between Russia & Spain.

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51KCLBxSruL._SX316_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

    Ukraine joined the West much sooner than did Russia and Ukrainians can feel this difference. It explains much of the friction between these seemingly very similar nations (Russian nationalists who insist on no differences resort to conspiracy theories to explain the friction, when the cause its actually cultural).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP
    I think that feudalism and the Renaissance are also fundamental parts of Western cultural heritage. Russia was pretty much on its own during that time, skipped them, and did not join the West until the period of Enlightenment. But once it joined, it did so very zealously and with impact - Russian high culture of the 19th-20th century is the equal of any European country. OTOH Russia has retained a generally Asian/despotic, rather than Western, political system.

    Russia has Greek, but not Roman heritage.

    Russia does, of course, have Christianity, but in a form that is generally considered to be not quite Western.

    Overall, generally Western but with asterisks. Perhaps comparable to Spain if Spain had rejoined the West a couple centuries later than it did.

    Overall, generally Western but with asterisks. Perhaps comparable to Spain if Spain had rejoined the West a couple centuries later than it did.

    Perspicacious. Billington has made similar observation, showing parallels between Russia & Spain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    Ukraine joined the West much sooner than did Russia and Ukrainians can feel this difference. It explains much of the friction between these seemingly very similar nations (Russian nationalists who insist on no differences resort to conspiracy theories to explain the friction, when the cause its actually cultural).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser

    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
     
    Same reason separation of powers is a (good) thing.
    The USA/West is not a good, benevolent overlord. It is more neutral, at best.
    It needs to be kept in-check.
    Otherwise, you get abuse of power.

    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?
     
    It could have saved the Roman Republic.
    Rome's rise did undermine it till it broke and turned into the original Empire.

    In case of America, it means a lot of foreign and MIC influence on American policy.
    Of course, these foreigners have to do that because of America's immense influence on their fate.

    Concise post and I disagree.

    Bottom line, three separate nuclear powers in conflict is worse than having one ruling the world, IMHO.
    Keyword “nuclear“.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Aslangeo
    Russia does not wish to be a role model. It was tried for 70 years during Soviet times and fat lot of good it did for ordinary Russians. Too many lives and too many roubles and resources wasted on Eastern Europe and the revolutionaries in the third world.

    Today’s Russia just wishes to be a normal country with its own values, treated with respect. The Russians had a go at ruling other people it was not a good experience.

    I do not know enough about China, but from what I have heard they wish for the same

    Crusade, Imposing values by force, is a Western European, catholic and Protestant concept. It is not part of orthodox culture or Chinese culture. The only other similar concept is Jihad

    Russia does not wish to be a role model. It was tried for 70 years during Soviet times and fat lot of good it did for ordinary Russians. Too many lives and too many roubles and resources wasted on Eastern Europe and the revolutionaries in the third world.

    Today’s Russia just wishes to be a normal country with its own values, treated with respect. The Russians had a go at ruling other people it was not a good experience.

    Got into “debate” about that a couple of times so far here.
    Will pass this time. Time waste.

    I am sure there are plenty of people in Russia who feel that way. As there are plenty of people in West who feel the same.
    Doesn’t matter.

    I am absolutely positive that, given a chance, the current elites in Russia and China will do the same, if not worse, than West.
    When I say worse I go with the history of regimes in both countries. Gulags, mass executions and such. And, no, I don’t put that solely on the Communists.

    In any case what you and me spout here isn’t important.
    It’s important what peoples from Baltics to Bulgaria think and feel.
    Or from Taiwan to Vietnam.

    We made our positions here clear.
    Let’s move on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Aslangeo
    Anatoly can you comment please on why the Russian government is so crap at cultivating the diaspora?

    Many other nations such Ireland, Armenia, Israel, India and China have very strong efforts to turn their diasporas into an asset

    There up to 6 million russian origin or descent people living in the far abroad

    Imagine if the 3 million Russians in the USA moved to Florida and voted, US policy would change somewhat quickly

    The Indians for example have a person of Indian origin card, a sort of overseas citizenship, which enables visa free travel, residency and work rights. - you cannot vote however

    Ireland has an excellent diaspora and heritage, outreach programme and China works hard at building networks, he’ll even the ukrops work really hard at this

    Why are the Russian government some backward in not using a potentially very useful asset

    Why are the Russian government some backward in not using a potentially very useful asset

    It’s an interesting question.

    The government do fund some things abroad, including some NGOs, cultural centers, and language competitions. And they make an effort with things like overseas voting – although with less than 10% voter turn-up.

    But in the far abroad, the few Russian speaking communities – will also contain some paranoia and hostility of anything related to the government. If you consider the 20th century and that these communities have a higher proportion of, and are partly even created as result of dissidents, – and of people that fall into trouble with the authorities.

    Whereas Irish have reached the far abroad, more as pure economic migration.

    By the way, with older people, I believe that paranoia may even have quite an influence on overall voting patterns.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    What Dmitry said, plus:

    Let's go down my list of The 5 Types of Russian American

    White Russians - Tend to be moderately Russophile, but in a plastic paddy sort of way - no real connection to Russia, rarely speak the language, some insist (not entirely without reason) that Russia remains sovok.

    Sovok Jews - Self-explanatory. Not ethnically Russian, rarely identify as Russians, moreover tend to harbor grievances towards Russia. Sergey Brin: "Russia is Nigeria with snow."

    Emigre Eggheads - Have a sense of betrayal over getting abandoned by their country after the fall of the USSR, and Putin hasn't exactly been great at assuaging that. Successful eggheads have already made their careers in the West and have no reason to go back or involve themselves with Russia.

    Russian Brides - Left Russia for rich(er) Western husbands. Self-explanatory. No use from them anyway.

    Putin's Expats - Most will go back, but they are not a diaspora as such.

    Another reason - Russia's soft power initiatives are incompetent, badly-funded, and probably corrupt (many positions in these organizations are basically sinecures for distant friends of Putin's friends). There is absolutely nothing like what China has with its Confucian Institutes. Consider that one of the main organizations in this area, Rossotrudnichestvo, is basically unpronounceable for foreigners.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anatoly can you comment please on why the Russian government is so crap at cultivating the diaspora?

    Many other nations such Ireland, Armenia, Israel, India and China have very strong efforts to turn their diasporas into an asset

    There up to 6 million russian origin or descent people living in the far abroad

    Imagine if the 3 million Russians in the USA moved to Florida and voted, US policy would change somewhat quickly

    The Indians for example have a person of Indian origin card, a sort of overseas citizenship, which enables visa free travel, residency and work rights. – you cannot vote however

    Ireland has an excellent diaspora and heritage, outreach programme and China works hard at building networks, he’ll even the ukrops work really hard at this

    Why are the Russian government some backward in not using a potentially very useful asset

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Why are the Russian government some backward in not using a potentially very useful asset
     
    It's an interesting question.

    The government do fund some things abroad, including some NGOs, cultural centers, and language competitions. And they make an effort with things like overseas voting - although with less than 10% voter turn-up.

    But in the far abroad, the few Russian speaking communities - will also contain some paranoia and hostility of anything related to the government. If you consider the 20th century and that these communities have a higher proportion of, and are partly even created as result of dissidents, - and of people that fall into trouble with the authorities.

    Whereas Irish have reached the far abroad, more as pure economic migration.

    By the way, with older people, I believe that paranoia may even have quite an influence on overall voting patterns.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @peterAUS
    Good post. Not that I agree with the crux of it.

    Two points of contention:
    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
    Now, I do know why Rusophiles/Sinophiles want that world. That's just normal.
    But, why the rest, in West, would want it is .......interesting.

    An analogy (used it before):
    The (known) world is ruled by Rome. Now, we have to want that world split into three parts and rules by Rome, Carthage and Parthia.
    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?

    It's shit state in any case; I just believe it's more shitty in multipolar.
    In unipolar, at least, we don't have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc...we are in conflict with "them" so must do that).

    I don't know but shouldn't smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
    Or, there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?
    If that's the case, well....we'll just stop there.

    As for this:


    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here.
     
    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.
    At the other hand, shouldn't people in West actually try to create some alternative financial system as we speak?
    In fact, some alternative economic model. Automation, abundance (instead of that "scarcity") etc. as basic blocks.
    True, too hard.
    Better to stick to what we have. Just need to win and get it.
    All good.

    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?

    Same reason separation of powers is a (good) thing.
    The USA/West is not a good, benevolent overlord. It is more neutral, at best.
    It needs to be kept in-check.
    Otherwise, you get abuse of power.

    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?

    It could have saved the Roman Republic.
    Rome’s rise did undermine it till it broke and turned into the original Empire.

    In case of America, it means a lot of foreign and MIC influence on American policy.
    Of course, these foreigners have to do that because of America’s immense influence on their fate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Concise post and I disagree.

    Bottom line, three separate nuclear powers in conflict is worse than having one ruling the world, IMHO.
    Keyword "nuclear".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @peterAUS
    Good post. Not that I agree with the crux of it.

    Two points of contention:
    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
    Now, I do know why Rusophiles/Sinophiles want that world. That's just normal.
    But, why the rest, in West, would want it is .......interesting.

    An analogy (used it before):
    The (known) world is ruled by Rome. Now, we have to want that world split into three parts and rules by Rome, Carthage and Parthia.
    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?

    It's shit state in any case; I just believe it's more shitty in multipolar.
    In unipolar, at least, we don't have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc...we are in conflict with "them" so must do that).

    I don't know but shouldn't smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
    Or, there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?
    If that's the case, well....we'll just stop there.

    As for this:


    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here.
     
    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.
    At the other hand, shouldn't people in West actually try to create some alternative financial system as we speak?
    In fact, some alternative economic model. Automation, abundance (instead of that "scarcity") etc. as basic blocks.
    True, too hard.
    Better to stick to what we have. Just need to win and get it.
    All good.

    Russia does not wish to be a role model. It was tried for 70 years during Soviet times and fat lot of good it did for ordinary Russians. Too many lives and too many roubles and resources wasted on Eastern Europe and the revolutionaries in the third world.

    Today’s Russia just wishes to be a normal country with its own values, treated with respect. The Russians had a go at ruling other people it was not a good experience.

    I do not know enough about China, but from what I have heard they wish for the same

    Crusade, Imposing values by force, is a Western European, catholic and Protestant concept. It is not part of orthodox culture or Chinese culture. The only other similar concept is Jihad

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    Russia does not wish to be a role model. It was tried for 70 years during Soviet times and fat lot of good it did for ordinary Russians. Too many lives and too many roubles and resources wasted on Eastern Europe and the revolutionaries in the third world.

    Today’s Russia just wishes to be a normal country with its own values, treated with respect. The Russians had a go at ruling other people it was not a good experience.
     
    Got into "debate" about that a couple of times so far here.
    Will pass this time. Time waste.

    I am sure there are plenty of people in Russia who feel that way. As there are plenty of people in West who feel the same.
    Doesn't matter.

    I am absolutely positive that, given a chance, the current elites in Russia and China will do the same, if not worse, than West.
    When I say worse I go with the history of regimes in both countries. Gulags, mass executions and such. And, no, I don't put that solely on the Communists.

    In any case what you and me spout here isn't important.
    It's important what peoples from Baltics to Bulgaria think and feel.
    Or from Taiwan to Vietnam.

    We made our positions here clear.
    Let's move on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    By Western though, do you mean ‘Western Europe’?
     
    I would include Central and Western Europe (Poland, Czechia, Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, western and central Ukraine), Baltics, etc.

    Because America is Western, but it culturally also feels very different (even more different) from Western Europe – in its exotic way, which you feel a moment you walk off the airplane in America
     
    Interesting. Carl Jung had a similar impression, attributing it to some influence of natives upon the original settlers, and this was transmitted across centuries and generations even to new settlers. He observed that Americans even walked differently than did Europeans. And add centuries of African influence (jazz, blues, into rock and roll). Canada OTOH seems to be more European-Western.

    But unlike Russia, America through its British ancestry went through Western feudalism, and Renaissance. Attitude to government and property is Western. Some of America's different-ness may be attributed to it being such an ideological project.

    Interesting. Carl Jung had a similar impression, attributing it to some influence of natives upon the original settlers, and this was transmitted across centuries and generations even to new settlers. He observed that Americans even walked differently than did Europeans. And add centuries of African influence (jazz, blues, into rock and roll). Canada OTOH seems to be more European-Western.

    But unlike Russia, America through its British ancestry went through Western feudalism, and Renaissance. Attitude to government and property is Western. Some of America’s different-ness may be attributed to it being such an ideological project.

    The issue of getting on the boat, leaving your universe behind, sailing across the ocean to a new world, and then settling in it with completely new life and identity. It is more disruptive and changing for the average people/culture than all these other events of Western European history, ‘Renaissance, Reformation’, etc.

    It also continues not only for the immigrating generation, but for all their descendants whose place in the world is determined by their ancestors’ decision to gamble everything. It is the continuing distinction from Western Europeans, remained in the same country or small area.

    In the new country itself, the society is all a result of immigrants’ choices, unlike in the old world where it is inherited without choice or conscious decisions. As a result, there is the sense of freedom, but also responsibility, and of blaming people for the way a cultural situation has resulted, as in a society where nothing was inherited, except what immigrants could take in their suitcase and their imagination.

    Of course for the descendants of Africans who were kidnapped, and slaved, to be taken to the new world, this story of freedom and choice sounds something like a parody.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @peterAUS
    Good post. Not that I agree with the crux of it.

    Two points of contention:
    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
    Now, I do know why Rusophiles/Sinophiles want that world. That's just normal.
    But, why the rest, in West, would want it is .......interesting.

    An analogy (used it before):
    The (known) world is ruled by Rome. Now, we have to want that world split into three parts and rules by Rome, Carthage and Parthia.
    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?

    It's shit state in any case; I just believe it's more shitty in multipolar.
    In unipolar, at least, we don't have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc...we are in conflict with "them" so must do that).

    I don't know but shouldn't smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
    Or, there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?
    If that's the case, well....we'll just stop there.

    As for this:


    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here.
     
    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.
    At the other hand, shouldn't people in West actually try to create some alternative financial system as we speak?
    In fact, some alternative economic model. Automation, abundance (instead of that "scarcity") etc. as basic blocks.
    True, too hard.
    Better to stick to what we have. Just need to win and get it.
    All good.

    there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?

    They are assholes, but at least you can reason with them. They will take if they need something (South China Sea, Crimea, whatever), but they won’t demand that you adopt a crazy ideology just for its own sake. That said, I can understand why Vietnamese or Ukrainians hate them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • AP says:
    @Dmitry
    By Western though, do you mean 'Western Europe'?

    Because America is Western, but it culturally also feels very different (even more different) from Western Europe - in its exotic way, which you feel a moment you walk off the airplane in America (that you are in a different enter a different world again than Western European countries).

    By Western though, do you mean ‘Western Europe’?

    I would include Central and Western Europe (Poland, Czechia, Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, western and central Ukraine), Baltics, etc.

    Because America is Western, but it culturally also feels very different (even more different) from Western Europe – in its exotic way, which you feel a moment you walk off the airplane in America

    Interesting. Carl Jung had a similar impression, attributing it to some influence of natives upon the original settlers, and this was transmitted across centuries and generations even to new settlers. He observed that Americans even walked differently than did Europeans. And add centuries of African influence (jazz, blues, into rock and roll). Canada OTOH seems to be more European-Western.

    But unlike Russia, America through its British ancestry went through Western feudalism, and Renaissance. Attitude to government and property is Western. Some of America’s different-ness may be attributed to it being such an ideological project.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry

    Interesting. Carl Jung had a similar impression, attributing it to some influence of natives upon the original settlers, and this was transmitted across centuries and generations even to new settlers. He observed that Americans even walked differently than did Europeans. And add centuries of African influence (jazz, blues, into rock and roll). Canada OTOH seems to be more European-Western.

    But unlike Russia, America through its British ancestry went through Western feudalism, and Renaissance. Attitude to government and property is Western. Some of America’s different-ness may be attributed to it being such an ideological project.
     
    The issue of getting on the boat, leaving your universe behind, sailing across the ocean to a new world, and then settling in it with completely new life and identity. It is more disruptive and changing for the average people/culture than all these other events of Western European history, 'Renaissance, Reformation', etc.

    It also continues not only for the immigrating generation, but for all their descendants whose place in the world is determined by their ancestors' decision to gamble everything. It is the continuing distinction from Western Europeans, remained in the same country or small area.

    In the new country itself, the society is all a result of immigrants' choices, unlike in the old world where it is inherited without choice or conscious decisions. As a result, there is the sense of freedom, but also responsibility, and of blaming people for the way a cultural situation has resulted, as in a society where nothing was inherited, except what immigrants could take in their suitcase and their imagination.

    Of course for the descendants of Africans who were kidnapped, and slaved, to be taken to the new world, this story of freedom and choice sounds something like a parody.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP
    I think that feudalism and the Renaissance are also fundamental parts of Western cultural heritage. Russia was pretty much on its own during that time, skipped them, and did not join the West until the period of Enlightenment. But once it joined, it did so very zealously and with impact - Russian high culture of the 19th-20th century is the equal of any European country. OTOH Russia has retained a generally Asian/despotic, rather than Western, political system.

    Russia has Greek, but not Roman heritage.

    Russia does, of course, have Christianity, but in a form that is generally considered to be not quite Western.

    Overall, generally Western but with asterisks. Perhaps comparable to Spain if Spain had rejoined the West a couple centuries later than it did.

    By Western though, do you mean ‘Western Europe’?

    Because America is Western, but it culturally also feels very different (even more different) from Western Europe – in its exotic way, which you feel a moment you walk off the airplane in America (that you are in a different enter a different world again than Western European countries).

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    By Western though, do you mean ‘Western Europe’?
     
    I would include Central and Western Europe (Poland, Czechia, Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary, western and central Ukraine), Baltics, etc.

    Because America is Western, but it culturally also feels very different (even more different) from Western Europe – in its exotic way, which you feel a moment you walk off the airplane in America
     
    Interesting. Carl Jung had a similar impression, attributing it to some influence of natives upon the original settlers, and this was transmitted across centuries and generations even to new settlers. He observed that Americans even walked differently than did Europeans. And add centuries of African influence (jazz, blues, into rock and roll). Canada OTOH seems to be more European-Western.

    But unlike Russia, America through its British ancestry went through Western feudalism, and Renaissance. Attitude to government and property is Western. Some of America's different-ness may be attributed to it being such an ideological project.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @dfordoom

    I don’t know but shouldn’t smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
     
    That's fine if you assume that the West is salvageable, or is even worth saving. If the West isn't salvageable then it's desirable that the West's power should be diminished as much as possible.

    An interesting point.

    A lot of “chatty” people believe it’s not salvageable.

    I just have a feeling that a lot of “not chatty” people will try their best to salvage it, no matter what….. unless they see a viable alternative.

    Just a feeling.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @peterAUS
    Good post. Not that I agree with the crux of it.

    Two points of contention:
    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
    Now, I do know why Rusophiles/Sinophiles want that world. That's just normal.
    But, why the rest, in West, would want it is .......interesting.

    An analogy (used it before):
    The (known) world is ruled by Rome. Now, we have to want that world split into three parts and rules by Rome, Carthage and Parthia.
    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?

    It's shit state in any case; I just believe it's more shitty in multipolar.
    In unipolar, at least, we don't have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc...we are in conflict with "them" so must do that).

    I don't know but shouldn't smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
    Or, there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?
    If that's the case, well....we'll just stop there.

    As for this:


    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here.
     
    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.
    At the other hand, shouldn't people in West actually try to create some alternative financial system as we speak?
    In fact, some alternative economic model. Automation, abundance (instead of that "scarcity") etc. as basic blocks.
    True, too hard.
    Better to stick to what we have. Just need to win and get it.
    All good.

    I don’t know but shouldn’t smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?

    That’s fine if you assume that the West is salvageable, or is even worth saving. If the West isn’t salvageable then it’s desirable that the West’s power should be diminished as much as possible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    An interesting point.

    A lot of "chatty" people believe it's not salvageable.

    I just have a feeling that a lot of "not chatty" people will try their best to salvage it, no matter what..... unless they see a viable alternative.

    Just a feeling.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @peterAUS
    Good post. Not that I agree with the crux of it.

    Two points of contention:
    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
    Now, I do know why Rusophiles/Sinophiles want that world. That's just normal.
    But, why the rest, in West, would want it is .......interesting.

    An analogy (used it before):
    The (known) world is ruled by Rome. Now, we have to want that world split into three parts and rules by Rome, Carthage and Parthia.
    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?

    It's shit state in any case; I just believe it's more shitty in multipolar.
    In unipolar, at least, we don't have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc...we are in conflict with "them" so must do that).

    I don't know but shouldn't smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
    Or, there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?
    If that's the case, well....we'll just stop there.

    As for this:


    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here.
     
    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.
    At the other hand, shouldn't people in West actually try to create some alternative financial system as we speak?
    In fact, some alternative economic model. Automation, abundance (instead of that "scarcity") etc. as basic blocks.
    True, too hard.
    Better to stick to what we have. Just need to win and get it.
    All good.

    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?

    They aren’t. China is not remotely the same as the US. Similar in some particulars, sure, but that’s probably inevitable – all are human. I don’t say either Russia or China is a better model. If either were on the verge of global domination I would oppose it.

    In unipolar, at least, we don’t have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc…we are in conflict with “them” so must do that).

    These are not static states, but points on a dynamic progression. The “unipolar world” was not a world of peace and unity, but rather one in which the power centre was actively pushing for increased predominance by forcing other cultures to conform to its dogmas and by using war to suppress those who resisted incorporation.

    You might argue that if we can only achieve unity then a truly unified unipolar world would be a world of peace and plenty – I don’t see it that way. The only ends to a unipolar world are either collapse of the drive towards world government and return to multipolarity, or success of that drive. World government is the end of human liberty, possibly forever.

    I don’t know but shouldn’t smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?

    Multipolarity, and even bipolarity, gives space for national sovereignty and at the least the possibility of liberty. There is no place for either in a unipolar world.

    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.

    Doubtless, but war is not a solution for them. Let them confront that reality (as I believe they did in the White House just the other day) however often they want, in the end they will draw back as they did this time, or all will lose. And all losing is better than them winning. But most likely they will draw back.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bardon Kaldian
    Russia is part of the historical West. She does not have any identity apart from those which define West:

    * Greco-Roman heritage
    * Christianity (any version)
    * rational & scientific spirit of inquiry, prevailing from the 18th C Enlightenment

    There is no Russian form of culture (arts, thought, any science,..) that is Asian (east, south,..). No Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Mongol, Pakistani,... cultural & historical heritage that is, generally speaking, Western.

    I think that feudalism and the Renaissance are also fundamental parts of Western cultural heritage. Russia was pretty much on its own during that time, skipped them, and did not join the West until the period of Enlightenment. But once it joined, it did so very zealously and with impact – Russian high culture of the 19th-20th century is the equal of any European country. OTOH Russia has retained a generally Asian/despotic, rather than Western, political system.

    Russia has Greek, but not Roman heritage.

    Russia does, of course, have Christianity, but in a form that is generally considered to be not quite Western.

    Overall, generally Western but with asterisks. Perhaps comparable to Spain if Spain had rejoined the West a couple centuries later than it did.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    By Western though, do you mean 'Western Europe'?

    Because America is Western, but it culturally also feels very different (even more different) from Western Europe - in its exotic way, which you feel a moment you walk off the airplane in America (that you are in a different enter a different world again than Western European countries).

    , @Bardon Kaldian

    Overall, generally Western but with asterisks. Perhaps comparable to Spain if Spain had rejoined the West a couple centuries later than it did.
     
    Perspicacious. Billington has made similar observation, showing parallels between Russia & Spain.

    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51KCLBxSruL._SX316_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Randal
    The "f it let's just grasp the nettle now" response to hard grind is a natural human one, and it sometimes works and is the best option, but in this case the present policy of wait and see is better imo. It just needs a clear eyed perception of the situation wrt the US - that the US is unappeasable and unceasing in its aggression (because it is built into its cultural nature), and any and every dealing with it must take this into account. No naïve attempts to seek a reasonable grand compromise settlement based on trust.

    The central issue and the real grounds for hope is the rise of China versus the US. Not because China is a shining white knight of altruism, but because world power is zero sum, and Russia desperately needs the world to complete the long term shift back to a world with two real power centres, rather than the one described by Karlin, in which the US economy is so dominant. The strategic logic for China must surely be clear to its leadership - that it needs Russia on its side at least until it outmatches the US and Russia together.

    Indeed, this rather emphasises the delusional incompetence of the US sphere elite, in systematically driving Russia into this situation during the 1990s and early 2000s with a foolish and doomed attempt to grab for a maximalist win (regime change of Russia so that it could be Europeanised as balkanised US sphere satrapies). It was always obvious that Russia's leadership desperately wanted to align itself with the US side, and it took some effort to drive it away irrevocably, as has now been achieved.

    The flip side is that it depends on China's leadership recognising the need to actively undermine and subvert US sanctions, whether they are on Russia or Iran (or even on NK, where China is clearly unhappy about the nuclear developments). Russia is no more a threat to China than it was to the US, and there is nothing to lose by supporting it wholeheartedly, in terms of promoting a rival, at least as long as China can be reasonably confident Russia won't switch sides anytime soon. Sanctions (economic warfare), backed by military power, are a key tool of power projection for the US (as Japan found out) and the more China can undermine their effectiveness, the better for China.

    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here. China's economic sphere is hopefully big enough and diversified enough now to achieve this, especially with Russian involvement.

    Good post. Not that I agree with the crux of it.

    Two points of contention:
    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
    Now, I do know why Rusophiles/Sinophiles want that world. That’s just normal.
    But, why the rest, in West, would want it is …….interesting.

    An analogy (used it before):
    The (known) world is ruled by Rome. Now, we have to want that world split into three parts and rules by Rome, Carthage and Parthia.
    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?

    It’s shit state in any case; I just believe it’s more shitty in multipolar.
    In unipolar, at least, we don’t have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc…we are in conflict with “them” so must do that).

    I don’t know but shouldn’t smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
    Or, there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?
    If that’s the case, well….we’ll just stop there.

    As for this:

    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here.

    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.
    At the other hand, shouldn’t people in West actually try to create some alternative financial system as we speak?
    In fact, some alternative economic model. Automation, abundance (instead of that “scarcity”) etc. as basic blocks.
    True, too hard.
    Better to stick to what we have. Just need to win and get it.
    All good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
     
    They aren't. China is not remotely the same as the US. Similar in some particulars, sure, but that's probably inevitable - all are human. I don't say either Russia or China is a better model. If either were on the verge of global domination I would oppose it.

    In unipolar, at least, we don’t have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc…we are in conflict with “them” so must do that).
     
    These are not static states, but points on a dynamic progression. The "unipolar world" was not a world of peace and unity, but rather one in which the power centre was actively pushing for increased predominance by forcing other cultures to conform to its dogmas and by using war to suppress those who resisted incorporation.

    You might argue that if we can only achieve unity then a truly unified unipolar world would be a world of peace and plenty - I don't see it that way. The only ends to a unipolar world are either collapse of the drive towards world government and return to multipolarity, or success of that drive. World government is the end of human liberty, possibly forever.


    I don’t know but shouldn’t smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
     
    Multipolarity, and even bipolarity, gives space for national sovereignty and at the least the possibility of liberty. There is no place for either in a unipolar world.

    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.
     
    Doubtless, but war is not a solution for them. Let them confront that reality (as I believe they did in the White House just the other day) however often they want, in the end they will draw back as they did this time, or all will lose. And all losing is better than them winning. But most likely they will draw back.
    , @dfordoom

    I don’t know but shouldn’t smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
     
    That's fine if you assume that the West is salvageable, or is even worth saving. If the West isn't salvageable then it's desirable that the West's power should be diminished as much as possible.
    , @reiner Tor

    there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?
     
    They are assholes, but at least you can reason with them. They will take if they need something (South China Sea, Crimea, whatever), but they won't demand that you adopt a crazy ideology just for its own sake. That said, I can understand why Vietnamese or Ukrainians hate them.
    , @Aslangeo
    Russia does not wish to be a role model. It was tried for 70 years during Soviet times and fat lot of good it did for ordinary Russians. Too many lives and too many roubles and resources wasted on Eastern Europe and the revolutionaries in the third world.

    Today’s Russia just wishes to be a normal country with its own values, treated with respect. The Russians had a go at ruling other people it was not a good experience.

    I do not know enough about China, but from what I have heard they wish for the same

    Crusade, Imposing values by force, is a Western European, catholic and Protestant concept. It is not part of orthodox culture or Chinese culture. The only other similar concept is Jihad
    , @Mitleser

    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
     
    Same reason separation of powers is a (good) thing.
    The USA/West is not a good, benevolent overlord. It is more neutral, at best.
    It needs to be kept in-check.
    Otherwise, you get abuse of power.

    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?
     
    It could have saved the Roman Republic.
    Rome's rise did undermine it till it broke and turned into the original Empire.

    In case of America, it means a lot of foreign and MIC influence on American policy.
    Of course, these foreigners have to do that because of America's immense influence on their fate.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Spisarevski
    Russia can actually pull of a full autarky even under present conditions if it really wants to. The current elites are too cautious and corrupt to enact radical plans and the majority of the population will not like drastic changes to their lifestyle. Still, it is possible.

    As Anatoly mentioned in an article not long ago, increasing your population is basically a hack to increase your national power.

    So if the 150 million Russians are not enough for the scale that is needed for an internal high tech sector to thrive and be competitive, then you can simply triple your population in 20-30 years time and with something like 500 million people Russia will have all the talent and economy of scale it needs to compete by itself with the best.
    If the likes of Saudi Arabia and Iran could grow their populations like that, then it is certainly possible with Russia's natural resources. Institute white sharia and manage the country's resources in a way which will make sure that having many children is affordable to everyone, and natality should be promoted and incentivized even more than it is now.

    Unlike North Korea, Russia has enough arable land and resources of all kinds to be self-sufficient. It will not starve like NK, or even stagnate, it will just develop slower if it's isolated. Even now it is mostly self-sufficient in terms of culture and technology, and it can be fully self-sufficient if need be. It will lag behind for a time but the weapons it has right now will ensure that it will not be conquered in the next few decades, and then the population boom kicks in.
    Meanwhile Russia's enemies in the West can actually collapse or at the very least become more and more dysfunctional, and with a much bigger population, Russia will be prepared to face the challenges of the future, whatever they may be.

    So if the 150 million Russians are not enough for the scale that is needed for an internal high tech sector to thrive and be competitive, then you can simply triple your population in 20-30 years time and with something like 500 million people Russia will have all the talent and economy of scale it needs to compete by itself with the best.

    The tricky bit about rapidly raising your population is maintaining levels of wealth per capita at the same time, so you don’t end up with a revolution.

    That said, state measures to remedy the disastrous reproductive rates of indigenous populations across all the white countries is clearly urgently needed. It’s more about halting decline than any aspiration to achieve massive increases though, which look pretty out of reach at the moment. The only current way to reliably increase your population rapidly is to open the immigration floodgates, and that “cure” is definitely worse than the disease it’s supposedly aimed at.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The “f it let’s just grasp the nettle now” response to hard grind is a natural human one, and it sometimes works and is the best option, but in this case the present policy of wait and see is better imo. It just needs a clear eyed perception of the situation wrt the US – that the US is unappeasable and unceasing in its aggression (because it is built into its cultural nature), and any and every dealing with it must take this into account. No naïve attempts to seek a reasonable grand compromise settlement based on trust.

    The central issue and the real grounds for hope is the rise of China versus the US. Not because China is a shining white knight of altruism, but because world power is zero sum, and Russia desperately needs the world to complete the long term shift back to a world with two real power centres, rather than the one described by Karlin, in which the US economy is so dominant. The strategic logic for China must surely be clear to its leadership – that it needs Russia on its side at least until it outmatches the US and Russia together.

    Indeed, this rather emphasises the delusional incompetence of the US sphere elite, in systematically driving Russia into this situation during the 1990s and early 2000s with a foolish and doomed attempt to grab for a maximalist win (regime change of Russia so that it could be Europeanised as balkanised US sphere satrapies). It was always obvious that Russia’s leadership desperately wanted to align itself with the US side, and it took some effort to drive it away irrevocably, as has now been achieved.

    The flip side is that it depends on China’s leadership recognising the need to actively undermine and subvert US sanctions, whether they are on Russia or Iran (or even on NK, where China is clearly unhappy about the nuclear developments). Russia is no more a threat to China than it was to the US, and there is nothing to lose by supporting it wholeheartedly, in terms of promoting a rival, at least as long as China can be reasonably confident Russia won’t switch sides anytime soon. Sanctions (economic warfare), backed by military power, are a key tool of power projection for the US (as Japan found out) and the more China can undermine their effectiveness, the better for China.

    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here. China’s economic sphere is hopefully big enough and diversified enough now to achieve this, especially with Russian involvement.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Good post. Not that I agree with the crux of it.

    Two points of contention:
    Why is the bipolar/multipolar world better than the unipolar when those entities are effectively the same?
    Now, I do know why Rusophiles/Sinophiles want that world. That's just normal.
    But, why the rest, in West, would want it is .......interesting.

    An analogy (used it before):
    The (known) world is ruled by Rome. Now, we have to want that world split into three parts and rules by Rome, Carthage and Parthia.
    Of course that Carthagians and Parthians would love that. But, why Romans?

    It's shit state in any case; I just believe it's more shitty in multipolar.
    In unipolar, at least, we don't have a chance of a major war between those entities. And the rest is probably even worse in mulitpolar (police state etc...we are in conflict with "them" so must do that).

    I don't know but shouldn't smart people start working on making this world (West in particular) better instead of wanting the same just in three parts?
    Or, there are still people that believe the Russia and/or China are the role models?
    If that's the case, well....we'll just stop there.

    As for this:


    The creation of alternative financial structures unreachable by the US and its European poodles, is the heart of what is needed here.
     
    will, most definitely, push for a war no matter what. I am positive.
    At the other hand, shouldn't people in West actually try to create some alternative financial system as we speak?
    In fact, some alternative economic model. Automation, abundance (instead of that "scarcity") etc. as basic blocks.
    True, too hard.
    Better to stick to what we have. Just need to win and get it.
    All good.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous[150] • Disclaimer says:
    @Singh
    https://twitter.com/jatt_sangha47/status/985843188261830656?s=20

    Tl;dr Karlin realizes Russia is fucked immediately turns pro-India।। :D

    Listen man, this was always how it was gonna be.
    We will smash them, together.

    https://twitter.com/jatt_sangha47/status/985740294216761344?s=20

    Also:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da4v2VoXkAESRhC?format=jpg

    Cringe!

    India is just a lapdog to the West. Why would Russia want to ally itself with India of all countries. India would just backstab Russia because America told it to.

    Picking a side is what the West is forcing other countries in its sphere to do. Why would Russia want to take part in that?

    Russia needs to focus on diversifying its trading partners throughout the world so it isn’t forced into being isolated.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @A22
    Since the Americans are imposing sanctions at an accelerating rate, probably reaching a pace of a new package of sanctions every week, let alone the amount of blackmailing the eu engages abusing their leverage of being the largest customer of Russian gas, autarcky seems the only way ahead. This this should not be that bad, capital outflow will be restricted finally! And since the society is now basically mobilized against an enemy, super hardcore fertility encouraging policies should be easier to implement. Tie pensions to a minimum number of children, control the price of property, preferably build new blocks to give away at subsidized rates to people with 4 children. If this does not work impose full white sharia. Even at their current per capita level, a Russia with twice the size will have a larger economy than France and germany combined! With 250mil+ people, you are not desperate for external markets to live, quite the opposite, everyone will beg you to open your market.
    Honestly, a Russia with only 146 mil will always be bullied by the giants neighbouring her. The EU has 500 mil, India and China at 1.5 bil. Russia simply cannot compete without more people. With 500 billion dollar of useless fx reserves, I bet you could pay for the most hardcore fertility encouraging program ever. These 500 billions should be put to a good use. And this is without even counting the amount of offshore money that can be repatriated in such a situation, let alone taxing the super-rich. I think it is very doable if the state really wanted to throw hard money on it and engage in a long term program.

    Thoroughly agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anon
    Americans will try, and will likely succeed in splitting apart Chinese from Russians. Chinese do not prize their collectivity as much as IYIs think. Look at the millions of dickheads in Taiwan, and even HK, who think Americans and Ukies occupying forces are their best friends. It's so easy to trick the Chinese to turn their backs on their nation. It must be trivial to do it to split them from the Russians. A bit of "good American, bad American", a bit of "but mah Zhenbao", a bit of "free trade makes everyone better off" rhetoric will make the Chinese forget Taiwan, and will sway them, more than actual benefits.

    Chinese are some of the most gullible, splittable idiots (try creating a Taiwan in France, see how that works), and Americans are the greatest masters of the splitting strategy. Russians should not assume Chinese are on their side.

    and Americans are the greatest masters of the splitting strategy.

    A gone era. Current American political cadres are quite degraded. They keep buying the own propaganda. You can’t find a new Nixon or a new Kissinger in the Neocon set.
    They are still very powerful but they incurred in lots of self-inflicted defeats.

    Chinese are on their side.

    They are not. They are on the Chinese side and they are smart enough to not buy Western smoke and mirrors anymore. China will keep maneuvering to position itself as the center of the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen
    Capitulation now makes sense, provided Russia gets some face-saving concessions (which they're more likely to get now under Trump than later under someone else). Can always try autarky later.

    No. Simply because Neocons are hatred-driven and will ask always for more and more. They are nor agreement capable. Look at Trump. He is constantly trying to appease them but they are grilling him. Trump will, likely, end destroyed (by impeachment or by other means). Some fate for Russia, but just on a geopolitical level. In face of Neocons, appeasement means dead.
    Anyway, Persians already showed to be more than capable to sustain Western pressure. So, Russians can.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @anonymous coward

    Russia has in past 400-500 years been an uneasy extension of Europe.
    ...
    Russia belongs to the West, and not to the technicized far East.
     
    "Europe" and "the West" are countries that were created and shaped by the Roman Empire. (Either as direct parts of it, as a continuation of the Empire in the shape of a Roman Church, or as a reaction to said Church.)

    Russia is none of that, and not in any way 'Europe' or 'Western'. Despite being racially white, Russia's political history is completely alien to any Western nation.

    This means that while Russia and China have no common culture, they will always be able to cut an amiable political deal. No political deal is possible with a Western nation.

    Russia is part of the historical West. She does not have any identity apart from those which define West:

    * Greco-Roman heritage
    * Christianity (any version)
    * rational & scientific spirit of inquiry, prevailing from the 18th C Enlightenment

    There is no Russian form of culture (arts, thought, any science,..) that is Asian (east, south,..). No Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Mongol, Pakistani,… cultural & historical heritage that is, generally speaking, Western.

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP
    I think that feudalism and the Renaissance are also fundamental parts of Western cultural heritage. Russia was pretty much on its own during that time, skipped them, and did not join the West until the period of Enlightenment. But once it joined, it did so very zealously and with impact - Russian high culture of the 19th-20th century is the equal of any European country. OTOH Russia has retained a generally Asian/despotic, rather than Western, political system.

    Russia has Greek, but not Roman heritage.

    Russia does, of course, have Christianity, but in a form that is generally considered to be not quite Western.

    Overall, generally Western but with asterisks. Perhaps comparable to Spain if Spain had rejoined the West a couple centuries later than it did.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen
    Capitulation now makes sense, provided Russia gets some face-saving concessions (which they're more likely to get now under Trump than later under someone else). Can always try autarky later.

    How do you imagine this happening? Putin personally begs USA for forgiveness and then surrenders himself to the Hague tribunal? lol

    One can talk about ‘Capitulation’ as an abstract idea, but in the current Russian political climate any leader seriously entertaining this idea will be committing (political) suicide.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Bardon Kaldian
    Sad to say, but- with all caveats- Russia has in past 400-500 years been an uneasy extension of Europe. Culture- and identity-wise, it still is.

    And much as I admire China & believe a big chunk of future belongs to it, frankly, China is basically an alien world. Even if we, for a moment, put aside possible territorial aspirations- Russia belongs to the West, and not to the technicized far East.

    But, whites have, in past 100 years shown remarkable propensity for self-destruction & idiocy.

    Russia has in past 400-500 years been an uneasy extension of Europe.

    Russia belongs to the West, and not to the technicized far East.

    “Europe” and “the West” are countries that were created and shaped by the Roman Empire. (Either as direct parts of it, as a continuation of the Empire in the shape of a Roman Church, or as a reaction to said Church.)

    Russia is none of that, and not in any way ‘Europe’ or ‘Western’. Despite being racially white, Russia’s political history is completely alien to any Western nation.

    This means that while Russia and China have no common culture, they will always be able to cut an amiable political deal. No political deal is possible with a Western nation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    Russia is part of the historical West. She does not have any identity apart from those which define West:

    * Greco-Roman heritage
    * Christianity (any version)
    * rational & scientific spirit of inquiry, prevailing from the 18th C Enlightenment

    There is no Russian form of culture (arts, thought, any science,..) that is Asian (east, south,..). No Chinese, Japanese, Indian, Mongol, Pakistani,... cultural & historical heritage that is, generally speaking, Western.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Sad to say, but- with all caveats- Russia has in past 400-500 years been an uneasy extension of Europe. Culture- and identity-wise, it still is.

    And much as I admire China & believe a big chunk of future belongs to it, frankly, China is basically an alien world. Even if we, for a moment, put aside possible territorial aspirations- Russia belongs to the West, and not to the technicized far East.

    But, whites have, in past 100 years shown remarkable propensity for self-destruction & idiocy.

    Read More
    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    Russia has in past 400-500 years been an uneasy extension of Europe.
    ...
    Russia belongs to the West, and not to the technicized far East.
     
    "Europe" and "the West" are countries that were created and shaped by the Roman Empire. (Either as direct parts of it, as a continuation of the Empire in the shape of a Roman Church, or as a reaction to said Church.)

    Russia is none of that, and not in any way 'Europe' or 'Western'. Despite being racially white, Russia's political history is completely alien to any Western nation.

    This means that while Russia and China have no common culture, they will always be able to cut an amiable political deal. No political deal is possible with a Western nation.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen
    Is NATO membership that easy to reverse? If it were, I'd think Turkey would have been kicked out by now.

    No, but there’s no way Russia will be offered. All the rest will be easy to reverse.

    And actually, it’d be far into the future. It’s not possible to grant Russia immediate membership (and could later easily be vetoed by other countries like Estonia), while the Russian concessions would be upfront.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen
    Is NATO membership that easy to reverse? If it were, I'd think Turkey would have been kicked out by now.

    Kicked out? Erdogan has NATO by the balls.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    Russian NATO membership is impossible. Putin asked about it back in the early noughties, but it came to nothing even when relations with the West were much better and there was yet very little bad blood between the West and Russia.

    In general I don’t think it’s realistic to expect territorial concessions in Ukraine, when it’s pretty clear that 1) they won’t be able to regain those (should relations go south once more), and 2) the only result of the much larger territorial concessions in 1988-91 was that the West took advantage of it.

    It’s an asymmetric position where Russia needs to make permanent upfront concessions in return for easy to reverse later to implement policy changes in the West. It’s a bit like immigration policy reform, amnesty in exchange for tougher enforcement. The amnesty is permanent and upfront, while enforcement can be easily reversed.

    Is NATO membership that easy to reverse? If it were, I’d think Turkey would have been kicked out by now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William
    Kicked out? Erdogan has NATO by the balls.
    , @reiner Tor
    No, but there’s no way Russia will be offered. All the rest will be easy to reverse.

    And actually, it’d be far into the future. It’s not possible to grant Russia immediate membership (and could later easily be vetoed by other countries like Estonia), while the Russian concessions would be upfront.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dmitry
    Have you got historical examples.

    It seems fertility rate can fall as much in non-democratic societies - see the fertility rates in Iran or China.

    The counter example I can think of is two-sided one. Fertility rate in Russia fell under the replacement rate for first time under Brezhnev, in 1976. And then in the Soviet Union they put a lot of effort, and could raise fertility to around replacement rate in the late 1980s.

    (And as for the rest - for the last 27 democratic years in Russia, it has been below replacement rate every year, although less extremely far below the replacement rate nowadays than 15 years ago.)

    I am sorry, I did not mean that the fertility problem is strictly a democratic society phenomenon, however, what I meant is that in our times, most of the societies that are interested in reversing the population decline are democratic societies. Democratic societies, aka countries in the western camp,are wealthy, and can afford to grow in population since their public infrastructure is mature. In fact, the only way for a developed country to significantly grow its economy is by population growth, as know to most people. However, these countries cannot adopt hardcore fertility promoting policies for obvious reasons. As for Iran and China, in countries like these, flat population for now is favourable since public infrastructure is still developing and population growth will put strain on it, slowing the growth in quality terms ( most spending will go to building new schools to accommodate the growth rather than buying advanced new equipment for existing schools which will increase the quality, for example).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @A22
    Probably that is because the the countries that suffer the low fertility rate problem are mostly democratic. Democratic nations by definition cannot engage in any meaningful policy to increase its fertility since it will be rejected by a large portion of the population. Also, most of these leaders only care about reelection after 4 years, these kind of policies need long term commitment. Hence, any meaningful policy can only be passed by a strong nationalist totalitarian regime.

    Have you got historical examples.

    It seems fertility rate can fall as much in non-democratic societies – see the fertility rates in Iran or China.

    The counter example I can think of is two-sided one. Fertility rate in Russia fell under the replacement rate for first time under Brezhnev, in 1976. And then in the Soviet Union they put a lot of effort, and could raise fertility to around replacement rate in the late 1980s.

    (And as for the rest – for the last 27 democratic years in Russia, it has been below replacement rate every year, although less extremely far below the replacement rate nowadays than 15 years ago.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @A22
    I am sorry, I did not mean that the fertility problem is strictly a democratic society phenomenon, however, what I meant is that in our times, most of the societies that are interested in reversing the population decline are democratic societies. Democratic societies, aka countries in the western camp,are wealthy, and can afford to grow in population since their public infrastructure is mature. In fact, the only way for a developed country to significantly grow its economy is by population growth, as know to most people. However, these countries cannot adopt hardcore fertility promoting policies for obvious reasons. As for Iran and China, in countries like these, flat population for now is favourable since public infrastructure is still developing and population growth will put strain on it, slowing the growth in quality terms ( most spending will go to building new schools to accommodate the growth rather than buying advanced new equipment for existing schools which will increase the quality, for example).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anon
    Americans will try, and will likely succeed in splitting apart Chinese from Russians. Chinese do not prize their collectivity as much as IYIs think. Look at the millions of dickheads in Taiwan, and even HK, who think Americans and Ukies occupying forces are their best friends. It's so easy to trick the Chinese to turn their backs on their nation. It must be trivial to do it to split them from the Russians. A bit of "good American, bad American", a bit of "but mah Zhenbao", a bit of "free trade makes everyone better off" rhetoric will make the Chinese forget Taiwan, and will sway them, more than actual benefits.

    Chinese are some of the most gullible, splittable idiots (try creating a Taiwan in France, see how that works), and Americans are the greatest masters of the splitting strategy. Russians should not assume Chinese are on their side.

    and Americans are the greatest masters of the splitting strategy

    That title belongs to the jew.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    Increasing the population as a result of a change in policy has actually never been achieved by anyone. Increasing it threefold is probably impossible.

    Probably that is because the the countries that suffer the low fertility rate problem are mostly democratic. Democratic nations by definition cannot engage in any meaningful policy to increase its fertility since it will be rejected by a large portion of the population. Also, most of these leaders only care about reelection after 4 years, these kind of policies need long term commitment. Hence, any meaningful policy can only be passed by a strong nationalist totalitarian regime.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    Have you got historical examples.

    It seems fertility rate can fall as much in non-democratic societies - see the fertility rates in Iran or China.

    The counter example I can think of is two-sided one. Fertility rate in Russia fell under the replacement rate for first time under Brezhnev, in 1976. And then in the Soviet Union they put a lot of effort, and could raise fertility to around replacement rate in the late 1980s.

    (And as for the rest - for the last 27 democratic years in Russia, it has been below replacement rate every year, although less extremely far below the replacement rate nowadays than 15 years ago.)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Since the Americans are imposing sanctions at an accelerating rate, probably reaching a pace of a new package of sanctions every week, let alone the amount of blackmailing the eu engages abusing their leverage of being the largest customer of Russian gas, autarcky seems the only way ahead. This this should not be that bad, capital outflow will be restricted finally! And since the society is now basically mobilized against an enemy, super hardcore fertility encouraging policies should be easier to implement. Tie pensions to a minimum number of children, control the price of property, preferably build new blocks to give away at subsidized rates to people with 4 children. If this does not work impose full white sharia. Even at their current per capita level, a Russia with twice the size will have a larger economy than France and germany combined! With 250mil+ people, you are not desperate for external markets to live, quite the opposite, everyone will beg you to open your market.
    Honestly, a Russia with only 146 mil will always be bullied by the giants neighbouring her. The EU has 500 mil, India and China at 1.5 bil. Russia simply cannot compete without more people. With 500 billion dollar of useless fx reserves, I bet you could pay for the most hardcore fertility encouraging program ever. These 500 billions should be put to a good use. And this is without even counting the amount of offshore money that can be repatriated in such a situation, let alone taxing the super-rich. I think it is very doable if the state really wanted to throw hard money on it and engage in a long term program.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Thoroughly agree.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anon
    Americans will try, and will likely succeed in splitting apart Chinese from Russians. Chinese do not prize their collectivity as much as IYIs think. Look at the millions of dickheads in Taiwan, and even HK, who think Americans and Ukies occupying forces are their best friends. It's so easy to trick the Chinese to turn their backs on their nation. It must be trivial to do it to split them from the Russians. A bit of "good American, bad American", a bit of "but mah Zhenbao", a bit of "free trade makes everyone better off" rhetoric will make the Chinese forget Taiwan, and will sway them, more than actual benefits.

    Chinese are some of the most gullible, splittable idiots (try creating a Taiwan in France, see how that works), and Americans are the greatest masters of the splitting strategy. Russians should not assume Chinese are on their side.

    Not while Xi is there. Taiwan won’t make it to 2030, I think.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • If capitulation means adopting western “values”, it would be the last thing you ever did. Fortunately, I think western liberal democracy has peaked, and is only going to decline from now on. Look at all the anti-Russia people. It’s predominantly infertile white liberals. Minorities don’t give a shit. At this rate it’s likely that the America will care less and less about Russia over time.

    For now, it’s better to encourage a global culture of anti-western societies, of which there are many besides China. More Dutertes, more Orbans, more Erdogans, etc. The destruction of liberal democratic values on a global scale will ensure the progress and prosperity of non-western countries.

    Read More
    • Agree: Greasy William
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Putin has thus, through a series of tactical successes, brought to Russia a comprehensive strategic defeat from which neither him, nor the governments that succeed him, will be able to extricate the country.

    As is often the case in international politics, singular events do not really provide the motivating reasons for geopolitical/strategic action. Singular events provide only opportunities for action on geopolitical goals. As the sole superpower it is in the interest of the US to prevent the rise of other powers to regional or supra-regional hegemony not to speak of global hegemony. They would have found other occassions to throw sticks into Russias wheels, even if Russia had the best intentions. Intentions can change easily with leadership and then it comes down to a nations ability. The US pursues a military and economic containment policy against Russia and China for just that reason.

    The recent sanctions are also partly in line with the current protectionist policy of the US. I dont think that they will pose a big problem, since Russia is largerly self-sufficient (exports make only around 10% of its GDP) and trade with the US is low anyway. The macroeconomic situation is relatively stable and they can still trade with China and Europe. The Europeans will be reluctant to escalate their sanction policy with their huge dependence on Russian oil and esp. gas. The conflicts between Russia and the US in Syria, Georgia (Nabucco), Ukraine/Nord-Stream (all potential or actual transit countries) are mainly about the control of European energy supplies and Russias score card is not too bad on this. As it looks, the Europeans will stay reluctant to antagonize Russia too much.

    Russia has enough opportunities, ressources and human potential to develop their country. It is now up to Russian leaders to realize that potential. Putin recently announced a lot of investments. It will be interesting to see what comes of them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anon[445] • Disclaimer says:

    Americans will try, and will likely succeed in splitting apart Chinese from Russians. Chinese do not prize their collectivity as much as IYIs think. Look at the millions of dickheads in Taiwan, and even HK, who think Americans and Ukies occupying forces are their best friends. It’s so easy to trick the Chinese to turn their backs on their nation. It must be trivial to do it to split them from the Russians. A bit of “good American, bad American”, a bit of “but mah Zhenbao”, a bit of “free trade makes everyone better off” rhetoric will make the Chinese forget Taiwan, and will sway them, more than actual benefits.

    Chinese are some of the most gullible, splittable idiots (try creating a Taiwan in France, see how that works), and Americans are the greatest masters of the splitting strategy. Russians should not assume Chinese are on their side.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Not while Xi is there. Taiwan won't make it to 2030, I think.
    , @neutral

    and Americans are the greatest masters of the splitting strategy
     
    That title belongs to the jew.
    , @Aedib

    and Americans are the greatest masters of the splitting strategy.
     
    A gone era. Current American political cadres are quite degraded. They keep buying the own propaganda. You can’t find a new Nixon or a new Kissinger in the Neocon set.
    They are still very powerful but they incurred in lots of self-inflicted defeats.

    Chinese are on their side.
     
    They are not. They are on the Chinese side and they are smart enough to not buy Western smoke and mirrors anymore. China will keep maneuvering to position itself as the center of the world.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The Federal Reserve recently increased interest rates to 1.75 percent. This is the highest interest rates have been since 2008, but it still leaves rates at historic lows. While the Fed says economic growth justifies future rate increases, an honest examination of the economy suggests that future rate increases are unlikely. The Fed’s claim that...
  • No doubt the upper decks will try to lock down steerage …

    No doubt about it, and that answers RP’s question, (which need not have been asked):

    The only question is whether the existing system will be replaced by a free market and limited constitutional government or we will complete our descent into totalitarianism.

    In fact, if we’re not living under totalitarianism as we speak, then what would qualify?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Branco Milanovic - When autarky becomes the only solution This post-Cold War idea that corporations are taking over the world always seemed ridiculous to me. Consider the following: Wealthiest individual ~$100 billion (Bezos) Wealthiest corporation ~$1 trillion (Apple) Wealthiest country ~ $100 trillion (USA), of which states typically own 20%-70%. Plus, they have 95%+ of...
  • @Dave Pinsen

    Makes sense for who?
     
    Why not for everyone, if there's a grand bargain? How about something like this:

    Russia:
    - concedes on Ukraine and other territorial flash points.
    - agrees to cooperate with some sort of multinational, but not-completely-biased-against-them investigation into the recent assassinations, etc. it's been accused of.
    - pulls out of Syria.
    - agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore (however bogus this charge was).

    The West:
    - drops all sanctions on Russia.
    - invites Russia to join NATO.
    - agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore.

    The West gets:
    - a historic diplomatic win.
    - maybe another half century or more of great power peace in Europe.
    - a strategic bulwark against the rise of China
    - lower gas prices at the pump as Russian oil resources are developed.
    - an economic windfall in exports of goods and services to Russia.

    Russia gets:
    - a security guarantee in the west.
    - a huge economic windfall as trade and investment flows into Russia.
    - a strategic bulwark against the rise of China.

    Pointless. The West is not agreement capable – no deal is possible.

    Read More
    • Agree: Randal, dfordoom
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Russian Autarky would be tough due to the spread of new ideas – Russians love to travel and a return to an isolated state similar to the Soviet Union would not be welcomed by the public. What most ordinary Russians want is to be normal country, unfortunately the West does not look willing to let that happen. Russia therefore needs to enable a disengagement for survival – this would look something like this.

    1. Ensure non western, i.e domestic, Chinese, India, Korean etc. substitutes for all western imports – for example HTC or Samsung rather than Apple – domestic market incentives will work to grow domestic industries – look at agriculture (although this could be done smarter)

    2. Energy exports will continue for at least a generation – hydrocarbon demand is not slowing despite the greens – the renewable technologies are niche as yet – might grow in the distant future but will not make a dent anytime soon despite the green propaganda – this ensures that Russia has a positive trade balance and is actually a net creditor nation. Capital export should be discouraged

    3. Develop knowledge industries, universities and human capital, unfortunately Russian politicians like grand projects for traditional cultural prestige reasons and graft opportunities rather than small incremental steps like Israel

    4. Diaspora Politics – Israel, Ireland, China , India and Armenia are very effective at this Russia is crap at this. For example if Russian origin Jews in Israel formed a positive voting block. Diasporas can act as a political influence bank in western nations

    5 Ensure the China alliance is maintained – work really hard at this – without a friendly China Russia has problems – China also benefits hugely from an alliance – secure western border, access to energy , materials and food, diplomatic support and partnership in technology

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Tl;dr Karlin realizes Russia is fucked immediately turns pro-India।। :D

    Listen man, this was always how it was gonna be.
    We will smash them, together.

    Also:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Da4v2VoXkAESRhC?format=jpg

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Cringe!

    India is just a lapdog to the West. Why would Russia want to ally itself with India of all countries. India would just backstab Russia because America told it to.

    Picking a side is what the West is forcing other countries in its sphere to do. Why would Russia want to take part in that?

    Russia needs to focus on diversifying its trading partners throughout the world so it isn't forced into being isolated.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen

    No, Trump would be impeached. Trump has to be tougher lest he gets branded a Russian agent. It’d probably be easier for a well established liberal president to start a detente with Russia. Someone who is not attacked for his domestic agenda and so has more room to defy lobbies in foreign policy.
     
    I'm not sure how reconciliation with Russia at this point would increase Trump's chance of impeachment. He's already proven his not-a-Putin-puppet bona fides to rational people by nearly destroying one of Russia's largest industrial companies, defying it in Syria, etc. And it's clear at this point (again, to normies) that the collusion narrative was bogus. If anything, a grand bargain with Russia now would likely decrease Trump's chance of getting impeached by making him appear to be a strong, effective leader on foreign policy, and one who is making a future disastrous war less likely.

    In contrast, it may be too hard for a future liberal president to do a deal with Russia because their major donors will still be off their rockers about Russia, still linking it with the original sin of preventing the election of the first woman president and most qualified candidate ever.

    Just look at these recent articles. They unironically refer to Russian election meddling as if it did happen. The February article is interesting in that it makes it totally undisputed because even Trump’s then top national security adviser stated it in no uncertain terms. The new sanctions announced on April 7 had the election meddling as a reason.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/383205-comey-says-trump-reacted-to-news-of-russian-meddling-by-asking-if-it

    https://www.rferl.org/a/zuckerbook-says-facebook-should-have-spotted-russian-election-meddling-earlier-testimony-congress/29155692.html

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-07/us-imposes-new-sanctions-against-russian-elite/9629568

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/17/donald-trump-hr-mcmaster-russia-election-meddling-investigation

    So normies unironically believe there was election meddling by the Russians, and I’d think the vast majority of them believe that it was to help Trump. Collusion is just one step away from this. Should Trump behave in any way which is possible to be interpreted as pro-Russia, he’d immediately be accused of it. Or at least it’s difficult to see otherwise.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen

    No, Trump would be impeached. Trump has to be tougher lest he gets branded a Russian agent. It’d probably be easier for a well established liberal president to start a detente with Russia. Someone who is not attacked for his domestic agenda and so has more room to defy lobbies in foreign policy.
     
    I'm not sure how reconciliation with Russia at this point would increase Trump's chance of impeachment. He's already proven his not-a-Putin-puppet bona fides to rational people by nearly destroying one of Russia's largest industrial companies, defying it in Syria, etc. And it's clear at this point (again, to normies) that the collusion narrative was bogus. If anything, a grand bargain with Russia now would likely decrease Trump's chance of getting impeached by making him appear to be a strong, effective leader on foreign policy, and one who is making a future disastrous war less likely.

    In contrast, it may be too hard for a future liberal president to do a deal with Russia because their major donors will still be off their rockers about Russia, still linking it with the original sin of preventing the election of the first woman president and most qualified candidate ever.

    The Russian election meddling is still unironically used in all MSM articles I’ve ever seen about the maliciousness of Russia. And I’m still seeing lots of those articles.

    Trump might’ve proved right now he’s not a Russian stooge. But the moment he offers Russia a grand bargain, he’ll be accused of it again. In at least an indirect way (by talking about Russian “interference”) he’s still accused of it every day.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Spisarevski
    Russia can actually pull of a full autarky even under present conditions if it really wants to. The current elites are too cautious and corrupt to enact radical plans and the majority of the population will not like drastic changes to their lifestyle. Still, it is possible.

    As Anatoly mentioned in an article not long ago, increasing your population is basically a hack to increase your national power.

    So if the 150 million Russians are not enough for the scale that is needed for an internal high tech sector to thrive and be competitive, then you can simply triple your population in 20-30 years time and with something like 500 million people Russia will have all the talent and economy of scale it needs to compete by itself with the best.
    If the likes of Saudi Arabia and Iran could grow their populations like that, then it is certainly possible with Russia's natural resources. Institute white sharia and manage the country's resources in a way which will make sure that having many children is affordable to everyone, and natality should be promoted and incentivized even more than it is now.

    Unlike North Korea, Russia has enough arable land and resources of all kinds to be self-sufficient. It will not starve like NK, or even stagnate, it will just develop slower if it's isolated. Even now it is mostly self-sufficient in terms of culture and technology, and it can be fully self-sufficient if need be. It will lag behind for a time but the weapons it has right now will ensure that it will not be conquered in the next few decades, and then the population boom kicks in.
    Meanwhile Russia's enemies in the West can actually collapse or at the very least become more and more dysfunctional, and with a much bigger population, Russia will be prepared to face the challenges of the future, whatever they may be.

    Increasing the population as a result of a change in policy has actually never been achieved by anyone. Increasing it threefold is probably impossible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @A22
    Probably that is because the the countries that suffer the low fertility rate problem are mostly democratic. Democratic nations by definition cannot engage in any meaningful policy to increase its fertility since it will be rejected by a large portion of the population. Also, most of these leaders only care about reelection after 4 years, these kind of policies need long term commitment. Hence, any meaningful policy can only be passed by a strong nationalist totalitarian regime.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen

    Makes sense for who?
     
    Why not for everyone, if there's a grand bargain? How about something like this:

    Russia:
    - concedes on Ukraine and other territorial flash points.
    - agrees to cooperate with some sort of multinational, but not-completely-biased-against-them investigation into the recent assassinations, etc. it's been accused of.
    - pulls out of Syria.
    - agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore (however bogus this charge was).

    The West:
    - drops all sanctions on Russia.
    - invites Russia to join NATO.
    - agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore.

    The West gets:
    - a historic diplomatic win.
    - maybe another half century or more of great power peace in Europe.
    - a strategic bulwark against the rise of China
    - lower gas prices at the pump as Russian oil resources are developed.
    - an economic windfall in exports of goods and services to Russia.

    Russia gets:
    - a security guarantee in the west.
    - a huge economic windfall as trade and investment flows into Russia.
    - a strategic bulwark against the rise of China.

    Russian NATO membership is impossible. Putin asked about it back in the early noughties, but it came to nothing even when relations with the West were much better and there was yet very little bad blood between the West and Russia.

    In general I don’t think it’s realistic to expect territorial concessions in Ukraine, when it’s pretty clear that 1) they won’t be able to regain those (should relations go south once more), and 2) the only result of the much larger territorial concessions in 1988-91 was that the West took advantage of it.

    It’s an asymmetric position where Russia needs to make permanent upfront concessions in return for easy to reverse later to implement policy changes in the West. It’s a bit like immigration policy reform, amnesty in exchange for tougher enforcement. The amnesty is permanent and upfront, while enforcement can be easily reversed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    Is NATO membership that easy to reverse? If it were, I'd think Turkey would have been kicked out by now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Russia can actually pull of a full autarky even under present conditions if it really wants to. The current elites are too cautious and corrupt to enact radical plans and the majority of the population will not like drastic changes to their lifestyle. Still, it is possible.

    As Anatoly mentioned in an article not long ago, increasing your population is basically a hack to increase your national power.

    So if the 150 million Russians are not enough for the scale that is needed for an internal high tech sector to thrive and be competitive, then you can simply triple your population in 20-30 years time and with something like 500 million people Russia will have all the talent and economy of scale it needs to compete by itself with the best.
    If the likes of Saudi Arabia and Iran could grow their populations like that, then it is certainly possible with Russia’s natural resources. Institute white sharia and manage the country’s resources in a way which will make sure that having many children is affordable to everyone, and natality should be promoted and incentivized even more than it is now.

    Unlike North Korea, Russia has enough arable land and resources of all kinds to be self-sufficient. It will not starve like NK, or even stagnate, it will just develop slower if it’s isolated. Even now it is mostly self-sufficient in terms of culture and technology, and it can be fully self-sufficient if need be. It will lag behind for a time but the weapons it has right now will ensure that it will not be conquered in the next few decades, and then the population boom kicks in.
    Meanwhile Russia’s enemies in the West can actually collapse or at the very least become more and more dysfunctional, and with a much bigger population, Russia will be prepared to face the challenges of the future, whatever they may be.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    Increasing the population as a result of a change in policy has actually never been achieved by anyone. Increasing it threefold is probably impossible.
    , @Randal

    So if the 150 million Russians are not enough for the scale that is needed for an internal high tech sector to thrive and be competitive, then you can simply triple your population in 20-30 years time and with something like 500 million people Russia will have all the talent and economy of scale it needs to compete by itself with the best.
     
    The tricky bit about rapidly raising your population is maintaining levels of wealth per capita at the same time, so you don't end up with a revolution.

    That said, state measures to remedy the disastrous reproductive rates of indigenous populations across all the white countries is clearly urgently needed. It's more about halting decline than any aspiration to achieve massive increases though, which look pretty out of reach at the moment. The only current way to reliably increase your population rapidly is to open the immigration floodgates, and that "cure" is definitely worse than the disease it's supposedly aimed at.
    , @JiriS
    Russia can't revert to "socialism in one country". It just won't work in the second and third decades of the 21.century. The pull of global economy is just too strong. So it's "capitulation" or......at this juncture, Russia would be well advised to re-think Ukraine and respond to the next attempt by the Kiev dumbasses to annex Donbass (which has been practically announced for May) by an undeclared overwhelming blitzkrieg and changing the government in Kiev to a pro-Russian one. (Putin has to show he does not give a f*ck about the World Cup!) This should be sold politically in the West as a matter of urgent national security, given the West uncalled-for hostility toward Russia which forces her to re-establish its minimum security perimeter within the former Soviet "near abroad". (This should have been done in 2014 but what the heck.) No babbling, no useless arguments, no begging, no laments, no calls for international law, which has been shamelessly broken over three decades every time it suits the U.S. and its minions. Should the West respond by maxing the sanctions, threaten the Baltics and re-take them if the West does not relent. Promise to return them if NATO is ditched. Russia absolutely needs a new international posture, and to show an absolute uncompromising determination, taking it to the brink, if need be. That is the only alternative to accepting the U.S. yarlik. Autarky is not an option.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen

    Makes sense for who?
     
    Why not for everyone, if there's a grand bargain? How about something like this:

    Russia:
    - concedes on Ukraine and other territorial flash points.
    - agrees to cooperate with some sort of multinational, but not-completely-biased-against-them investigation into the recent assassinations, etc. it's been accused of.
    - pulls out of Syria.
    - agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore (however bogus this charge was).

    The West:
    - drops all sanctions on Russia.
    - invites Russia to join NATO.
    - agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore.

    The West gets:
    - a historic diplomatic win.
    - maybe another half century or more of great power peace in Europe.
    - a strategic bulwark against the rise of China
    - lower gas prices at the pump as Russian oil resources are developed.
    - an economic windfall in exports of goods and services to Russia.

    Russia gets:
    - a security guarantee in the west.
    - a huge economic windfall as trade and investment flows into Russia.
    - a strategic bulwark against the rise of China.

    Could have worked in the early 2000s, but not now.

    Vladislav Surkov, long considered an important ideological figure within the ‘Putin regime’, has previously been described as a ‘relative Westernizer’ among Vladimir Putin’s advisors. But even he is apparently now fed up with the West. In an article published yesterday in Russia in Global Affairs, Surkov declares that Russia is neither of the West nor of the East. Instead it stands alone.

    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2018/04/10/the-loneliness-of-the-half-breed/

    At this point, just preventing more escalation would be an achievement.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor
    The black minority in the UK is set to become a majority within less than a century. It’s not a one-off event to increase their number from zero to 1-10% and then it stops. It never stops.

    The black minority in the UK is set to become a majority within less than a century

    This fact is why Russia should not capitulate, a non white UK and USA will not be able to rule the world, even if it had the will to do so. The dangerous time is right now when there are just enough whites to provide enough latent power to still try to rule the world under the ideologies of diversity and multiculturalism. Once whites in the USA (or UK, France, Germany, etc) are less than somewhere around 20%/30% the state will not have the abilities any more to dictate terms.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Spisarevski
    Crimea itself was a reaction to the coup in Kiev, though.

    Yes, but at that point the Maidanists in Kiev were not really doing anything about Crimea.
    They intended to, but the Russians on Crimea and the Kremlin showed initiative and did not wait till Kiev could respond.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser

    I’ve never seen a move by Russia that seized the initiative. Moscow is forever on the back foot.
     
    Crimea

    They did not wait for the arrival of the Maidanists on Crimea.

    http://abload.de/img/rusm7bkbq.png

    Crimea itself was a reaction to the coup in Kiev, though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Yes, but at that point the Maidanists in Kiev were not really doing anything about Crimea.
    They intended to, but the Russians on Crimea and the Kremlin showed initiative and did not wait till Kiev could respond.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @reiner Tor

    provided Russia gets some face-saving concessions
     
    Highly unlikely.

    which they’re more likely to get now under Trump than later under someone else
     
    No, Trump would be impeached. Trump has to be tougher lest he gets branded a Russian agent. It’d probably be easier for a well established liberal president to start a detente with Russia. Someone who is not attacked for his domestic agenda and so has more room to defy lobbies in foreign policy.

    No, Trump would be impeached. Trump has to be tougher lest he gets branded a Russian agent. It’d probably be easier for a well established liberal president to start a detente with Russia. Someone who is not attacked for his domestic agenda and so has more room to defy lobbies in foreign policy.

    I’m not sure how reconciliation with Russia at this point would increase Trump’s chance of impeachment. He’s already proven his not-a-Putin-puppet bona fides to rational people by nearly destroying one of Russia’s largest industrial companies, defying it in Syria, etc. And it’s clear at this point (again, to normies) that the collusion narrative was bogus. If anything, a grand bargain with Russia now would likely decrease Trump’s chance of getting impeached by making him appear to be a strong, effective leader on foreign policy, and one who is making a future disastrous war less likely.

    In contrast, it may be too hard for a future liberal president to do a deal with Russia because their major donors will still be off their rockers about Russia, still linking it with the original sin of preventing the election of the first woman president and most qualified candidate ever.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The Russian election meddling is still unironically used in all MSM articles I've ever seen about the maliciousness of Russia. And I'm still seeing lots of those articles.

    Trump might've proved right now he's not a Russian stooge. But the moment he offers Russia a grand bargain, he'll be accused of it again. In at least an indirect way (by talking about Russian "interference") he's still accused of it every day.
    , @reiner Tor
    Just look at these recent articles. They unironically refer to Russian election meddling as if it did happen. The February article is interesting in that it makes it totally undisputed because even Trump's then top national security adviser stated it in no uncertain terms. The new sanctions announced on April 7 had the election meddling as a reason.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/383205-comey-says-trump-reacted-to-news-of-russian-meddling-by-asking-if-it

    https://www.rferl.org/a/zuckerbook-says-facebook-should-have-spotted-russian-election-meddling-earlier-testimony-congress/29155692.html

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-07/us-imposes-new-sanctions-against-russian-elite/9629568

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/17/donald-trump-hr-mcmaster-russia-election-meddling-investigation

    So normies unironically believe there was election meddling by the Russians, and I'd think the vast majority of them believe that it was to help Trump. Collusion is just one step away from this. Should Trump behave in any way which is possible to be interpreted as pro-Russia, he'd immediately be accused of it. Or at least it's difficult to see otherwise.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @anonymous coward

    Capitulation now makes sense
     
    Makes sense for who?

    Can always try autarky later.
     
    There was never a point in history when Russia wasn't and autarky.

    Makes sense for who?

    Why not for everyone, if there’s a grand bargain? How about something like this:

    Russia:
    – concedes on Ukraine and other territorial flash points.
    – agrees to cooperate with some sort of multinational, but not-completely-biased-against-them investigation into the recent assassinations, etc. it’s been accused of.
    – pulls out of Syria.
    – agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore (however bogus this charge was).

    The West:
    – drops all sanctions on Russia.
    – invites Russia to join NATO.
    – agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore.

    The West gets:
    – a historic diplomatic win.
    – maybe another half century or more of great power peace in Europe.
    – a strategic bulwark against the rise of China
    – lower gas prices at the pump as Russian oil resources are developed.
    – an economic windfall in exports of goods and services to Russia.

    Russia gets:
    – a security guarantee in the west.
    – a huge economic windfall as trade and investment flows into Russia.
    – a strategic bulwark against the rise of China.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Could have worked in the early 2000s, but not now.

    http://abload.de/img/russiaselite2016surve3osao.png

    Vladislav Surkov, long considered an important ideological figure within the ‘Putin regime’, has previously been described as a ‘relative Westernizer’ among Vladimir Putin’s advisors. But even he is apparently now fed up with the West. In an article published yesterday in Russia in Global Affairs, Surkov declares that Russia is neither of the West nor of the East. Instead it stands alone.
     
    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2018/04/10/the-loneliness-of-the-half-breed/

    At this point, just preventing more escalation would be an achievement.
    , @reiner Tor
    Russian NATO membership is impossible. Putin asked about it back in the early noughties, but it came to nothing even when relations with the West were much better and there was yet very little bad blood between the West and Russia.

    In general I don’t think it’s realistic to expect territorial concessions in Ukraine, when it’s pretty clear that 1) they won’t be able to regain those (should relations go south once more), and 2) the only result of the much larger territorial concessions in 1988-91 was that the West took advantage of it.

    It’s an asymmetric position where Russia needs to make permanent upfront concessions in return for easy to reverse later to implement policy changes in the West. It’s a bit like immigration policy reform, amnesty in exchange for tougher enforcement. The amnesty is permanent and upfront, while enforcement can be easily reversed.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    Pointless. The West is not agreement capable - no deal is possible.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Lemurmaniac
    Moscow has been playing defence ever since it got back on its feet partially and the neocons launched the Georgian War.

    I've never seen a move by Russia that seized the initiative. Moscow is forever on the back foot.

    Maybe its time for the 'dark ruler' that I think you wrote about once at Da Russaphile

    I’ve never seen a move by Russia that seized the initiative. Moscow is forever on the back foot.

    Crimea

    They did not wait for the arrival of the Maidanists on Crimea.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Spisarevski
    Crimea itself was a reaction to the coup in Kiev, though.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    I think you left out some major points.

    1) One Belt One Road is a huge game changer, not just for Russia and China but for the entire world. The potential for this project to link Europe with Asia and bypass Western controls is a major advancement.

    Once it is complete, the center of the economic universe will be Eurasia, not the west.

    2) The reason China and Russia have been working so closely together is they have mutual interests. Neither country wants to be under the thumb of uncle Sam. So I see both countries working to create parallel markets and systems.

    So why so glum? Being shut out of the declining western system going forward has less of an impact every day.

    3) Europe needs Russian resources. So it's not like the West has the power to completely shut out Russia from global trade.

    4) As I see things evolving, the West has limited options going forward. Russia just has to sit tight and keep cooperating with Iran and China to create a strong alternative block.

    Once this group attracts Germany, game over for the west.

    A friend of mine is Austrian and he and his company do a lot of business in Russia. Sanctions or not business with Russia goes on for most of Europe and will come in time to do more. Look at the EU reaction to US attempts to impose new sanctions on Iran, in reality a mere trifle in trade terms. Sanctioning Europe in retaliation for US sanctions was a mistake, the US should be squeezed in favour of European and Asian business.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    Capitulation isn't terrible. Japan surrendered and life is fine for the Japanese. There is one big difference in that Russians are closer to Europeans and Western ideals have more of an appeal with Russian elites, and also the language barrier is not as high for those ideas to make it across. So capitulation would mean eventually a humans rights regime that leads to a black minority of 1-10% in Russia and highly visible number of interracial couples in the center of Moscow.

    The black minority in the UK is set to become a majority within less than a century. It’s not a one-off event to increase their number from zero to 1-10% and then it stops. It never stops.

    Read More
    • Replies: @neutral

    The black minority in the UK is set to become a majority within less than a century
     
    This fact is why Russia should not capitulate, a non white UK and USA will not be able to rule the world, even if it had the will to do so. The dangerous time is right now when there are just enough whites to provide enough latent power to still try to rule the world under the ideologies of diversity and multiculturalism. Once whites in the USA (or UK, France, Germany, etc) are less than somewhere around 20%/30% the state will not have the abilities any more to dictate terms.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen
    Capitulation now makes sense, provided Russia gets some face-saving concessions (which they're more likely to get now under Trump than later under someone else). Can always try autarky later.

    provided Russia gets some face-saving concessions

    Highly unlikely.

    which they’re more likely to get now under Trump than later under someone else

    No, Trump would be impeached. Trump has to be tougher lest he gets branded a Russian agent. It’d probably be easier for a well established liberal president to start a detente with Russia. Someone who is not attacked for his domestic agenda and so has more room to defy lobbies in foreign policy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    No, Trump would be impeached. Trump has to be tougher lest he gets branded a Russian agent. It’d probably be easier for a well established liberal president to start a detente with Russia. Someone who is not attacked for his domestic agenda and so has more room to defy lobbies in foreign policy.
     
    I'm not sure how reconciliation with Russia at this point would increase Trump's chance of impeachment. He's already proven his not-a-Putin-puppet bona fides to rational people by nearly destroying one of Russia's largest industrial companies, defying it in Syria, etc. And it's clear at this point (again, to normies) that the collusion narrative was bogus. If anything, a grand bargain with Russia now would likely decrease Trump's chance of getting impeached by making him appear to be a strong, effective leader on foreign policy, and one who is making a future disastrous war less likely.

    In contrast, it may be too hard for a future liberal president to do a deal with Russia because their major donors will still be off their rockers about Russia, still linking it with the original sin of preventing the election of the first woman president and most qualified candidate ever.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous[405] • Disclaimer says:

    Capitulation isn’t terrible. Japan surrendered and life is fine for the Japanese. There is one big difference in that Russians are closer to Europeans and Western ideals have more of an appeal with Russian elites, and also the language barrier is not as high for those ideas to make it across. So capitulation would mean eventually a humans rights regime that leads to a black minority of 1-10% in Russia and highly visible number of interracial couples in the center of Moscow.

    Read More
    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    The black minority in the UK is set to become a majority within less than a century. It’s not a one-off event to increase their number from zero to 1-10% and then it stops. It never stops.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dave Pinsen
    Capitulation now makes sense, provided Russia gets some face-saving concessions (which they're more likely to get now under Trump than later under someone else). Can always try autarky later.

    Capitulation now makes sense

    Makes sense for who?

    Can always try autarky later.

    There was never a point in history when Russia wasn’t and autarky.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen

    Makes sense for who?
     
    Why not for everyone, if there's a grand bargain? How about something like this:

    Russia:
    - concedes on Ukraine and other territorial flash points.
    - agrees to cooperate with some sort of multinational, but not-completely-biased-against-them investigation into the recent assassinations, etc. it's been accused of.
    - pulls out of Syria.
    - agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore (however bogus this charge was).

    The West:
    - drops all sanctions on Russia.
    - invites Russia to join NATO.
    - agrees to not interfere in foreign elections anymore.

    The West gets:
    - a historic diplomatic win.
    - maybe another half century or more of great power peace in Europe.
    - a strategic bulwark against the rise of China
    - lower gas prices at the pump as Russian oil resources are developed.
    - an economic windfall in exports of goods and services to Russia.

    Russia gets:
    - a security guarantee in the west.
    - a huge economic windfall as trade and investment flows into Russia.
    - a strategic bulwark against the rise of China.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anonymous
    I think you left out some major points.

    1) One Belt One Road is a huge game changer, not just for Russia and China but for the entire world. The potential for this project to link Europe with Asia and bypass Western controls is a major advancement.

    Once it is complete, the center of the economic universe will be Eurasia, not the west.

    2) The reason China and Russia have been working so closely together is they have mutual interests. Neither country wants to be under the thumb of uncle Sam. So I see both countries working to create parallel markets and systems.

    So why so glum? Being shut out of the declining western system going forward has less of an impact every day.

    3) Europe needs Russian resources. So it's not like the West has the power to completely shut out Russia from global trade.

    4) As I see things evolving, the West has limited options going forward. Russia just has to sit tight and keep cooperating with Iran and China to create a strong alternative block.

    Once this group attracts Germany, game over for the west.

    The world’s economic center of gravity is already in the Eurasia.

    But I’m not sure how big a deal China’s One Belt One Road initiative will be with respect to that. All else equal (i.e., assuming it doesn’t magically transform central Asian countries into economic dynamos), its effect will mostly be to to shift some China-West trade from sea to land. China already launched a freight train route to the UK last year.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous[392] • Disclaimer says:

    I think you left out some major points.

    1) One Belt One Road is a huge game changer, not just for Russia and China but for the entire world. The potential for this project to link Europe with Asia and bypass Western controls is a major advancement.

    Once it is complete, the center of the economic universe will be Eurasia, not the west.

    2) The reason China and Russia have been working so closely together is they have mutual interests. Neither country wants to be under the thumb of uncle Sam. So I see both countries working to create parallel markets and systems.

    So why so glum? Being shut out of the declining western system going forward has less of an impact every day.

    3) Europe needs Russian resources. So it’s not like the West has the power to completely shut out Russia from global trade.

    4) As I see things evolving, the West has limited options going forward. Russia just has to sit tight and keep cooperating with Iran and China to create a strong alternative block.

    Once this group attracts Germany, game over for the west.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dave Pinsen
    The world's economic center of gravity is already in the Eurasia.

    http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/5293de3d69bedde417e01e2d/how-the-economic-center-of-gravity-moved-around-the-world-from-ad-1-to-ad-2010-map.jpg

    But I'm not sure how big a deal China's One Belt One Road initiative will be with respect to that. All else equal (i.e., assuming it doesn't magically transform central Asian countries into economic dynamos), its effect will mostly be to to shift some China-West trade from sea to land. China already launched a freight train route to the UK last year.
    , @LondonBob
    A friend of mine is Austrian and he and his company do a lot of business in Russia. Sanctions or not business with Russia goes on for most of Europe and will come in time to do more. Look at the EU reaction to US attempts to impose new sanctions on Iran, in reality a mere trifle in trade terms. Sanctioning Europe in retaliation for US sanctions was a mistake, the US should be squeezed in favour of European and Asian business.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Options 2 and 3 aren’t mutually exclusive.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Sobering, but, IMHO, a bit simplistic article.

    Wait & See. Another strategy is to just wait it out, in the hope that nationalist movements in Europe opposed to the US gain power. This is indeed the kremlins’ current approach.

    Not really.
    Wait for The Empire to implode.

    On practical level, a war in either/or/both Iran and North Korea could make The Empire overstretch, get exhausted, weak and then simply break unto itself.
    Could, not necessarily will, of course. Nobody can really know.

    I really believe this is the core of Kremlin strategy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Capitulation now makes sense, provided Russia gets some face-saving concessions (which they’re more likely to get now under Trump than later under someone else). Can always try autarky later.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    Capitulation now makes sense
     
    Makes sense for who?

    Can always try autarky later.
     
    There was never a point in history when Russia wasn't and autarky.
    , @reiner Tor

    provided Russia gets some face-saving concessions
     
    Highly unlikely.

    which they’re more likely to get now under Trump than later under someone else
     
    No, Trump would be impeached. Trump has to be tougher lest he gets branded a Russian agent. It’d probably be easier for a well established liberal president to start a detente with Russia. Someone who is not attacked for his domestic agenda and so has more room to defy lobbies in foreign policy.
    , @Felix Keverich
    How do you imagine this happening? Putin personally begs USA for forgiveness and then surrenders himself to the Hague tribunal? lol

    One can talk about 'Capitulation' as an abstract idea, but in the current Russian political climate any leader seriously entertaining this idea will be committing (political) suicide.
    , @Aedib
    No. Simply because Neocons are hatred-driven and will ask always for more and more. They are nor agreement capable. Look at Trump. He is constantly trying to appease them but they are grilling him. Trump will, likely, end destroyed (by impeachment or by other means). Some fate for Russia, but just on a geopolitical level. In face of Neocons, appeasement means dead.
    Anyway, Persians already showed to be more than capable to sustain Western pressure. So, Russians can.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Moscow has been playing defence ever since it got back on its feet partially and the neocons launched the Georgian War.

    I’ve never seen a move by Russia that seized the initiative. Moscow is forever on the back foot.

    Maybe its time for the ‘dark ruler’ that I think you wrote about once at Da Russaphile

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser

    I’ve never seen a move by Russia that seized the initiative. Moscow is forever on the back foot.
     
    Crimea

    They did not wait for the arrival of the Maidanists on Crimea.

    http://abload.de/img/rusm7bkbq.png
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Yes, it seems to me that Sanctions are not because of Syria and Ukraine, rather that Syria and Ukraine are there to justify more Russian sanctions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Beckow
    The choices are not that clear-cut. In extremis, one can talk about a partial autarky combined with wait-and-see. Few points:

    - Europe has a very substantial trade with Russia and gets 30% of its energy from Russia. The alternative is to pay more for energy and lose markets in Russia. Is that really going to happen, e.g. in Italy or Germany?

    - World is a dynamic place, an isolated Russia could be very destabilising. With nothing to lose, they could arm anyone, block lots of logistic routes, ignore IP rights (the 'piracy' model), act as a shelter.

    - The surrounding European areas - from Finland to Bulgaria would suffer most economically. Both in terms of being insecure (who would want to invest there?) to losing their current profitable trade with Russia.

    There is also a fourth option: Russia could line up its nukes and threaten to go for it. After all, why not? Autarky is not much fun and they do have the means to destroy at the minimum most of Europe and Middle East. Russians traditionally don't have a good sense of boundaries as one can see reading Dostoevsky. Post Putin one could see an apocalyptic anger erupting and the obvious blackmail weapon - 'we will nuke you' - rolled out. I think we would all be better of not escalating this any more and starting to think more rationally. Before it gets out of hand.

    There is also a fourth option: Russia could line up its nukes and threaten to go for it. After all, why not? Autarky is not much fun and they do have the means to destroy at the minimum most of Europe and Middle East. Russians traditionally don’t have a good sense of boundaries as one can see reading Dostoevsky. Post Putin one could see an apocalyptic anger erupting and the obvious blackmail weapon – ‘we will nuke you’ – rolled out.

    Wouldn’t work. (Strategic) nuclear weapons are defensive weapons.
    The nuclear weapons of the DPRK did not make them rich either.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dmitry
    And curiosity from the 'hype', because Mcdonald's company took so many years, and obstacles, to start their first restaurant, and only one at first in the whole Soviet Union (which was the 52nd country). (The agreement was signed in 1988, and the restaurant in Pushkin Square, opened in 1990. But there were talks to build it between Soviet representatives since 1976.)

    When they advertised for staff at the restaurant a few weeks before opening, 25,000 people submitted job applications.

    As noted by commentators, in the first frame of the video – the Mcdonald’s logo (perhaps a sinister symbol of American capitalism) like ominous spider stands above the small flag of the USSR, whose death was less than two years later.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The choices are not that clear-cut. In extremis, one can talk about a partial autarky combined with wait-and-see. Few points:

    - Europe has a very substantial trade with Russia and gets 30% of its energy from Russia. The alternative is to pay more for energy and lose markets in Russia. Is that really going to happen, e.g. in Italy or Germany?

    - World is a dynamic place, an isolated Russia could be very destabilising. With nothing to lose, they could arm anyone, block lots of logistic routes, ignore IP rights (the ‘piracy’ model), act as a shelter.

    - The surrounding European areas – from Finland to Bulgaria would suffer most economically. Both in terms of being insecure (who would want to invest there?) to losing their current profitable trade with Russia.

    There is also a fourth option: Russia could line up its nukes and threaten to go for it. After all, why not? Autarky is not much fun and they do have the means to destroy at the minimum most of Europe and Middle East. Russians traditionally don’t have a good sense of boundaries as one can see reading Dostoevsky. Post Putin one could see an apocalyptic anger erupting and the obvious blackmail weapon – ‘we will nuke you’ – rolled out. I think we would all be better of not escalating this any more and starting to think more rationally. Before it gets out of hand.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser

    There is also a fourth option: Russia could line up its nukes and threaten to go for it. After all, why not? Autarky is not much fun and they do have the means to destroy at the minimum most of Europe and Middle East. Russians traditionally don’t have a good sense of boundaries as one can see reading Dostoevsky. Post Putin one could see an apocalyptic anger erupting and the obvious blackmail weapon – ‘we will nuke you’ – rolled out.
     
    Wouldn't work. (Strategic) nuclear weapons are defensive weapons.
    The nuclear weapons of the DPRK did not make them rich either.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @inertial
    Anyone remembers American sanctions on China post Tiananmen? Or on India after they exploded a nuke? I'm just saying that wait and see is the best strategy for now.

    Incidentally, those people standing in line to McDonald's? They are doing it because they are curious. They want to see for themselves what this thing is like.

    And curiosity from the ‘hype’, because Mcdonald’s company took so many years, and obstacles, to start their first restaurant, and only one at first in the whole Soviet Union (which was the 52nd country). (The agreement was signed in 1988, and the restaurant in Pushkin Square, opened in 1990. But there were talks to build it between Soviet representatives since 1976.)

    When they advertised for staff at the restaurant a few weeks before opening, 25,000 people submitted job applications.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    As noted by commentators, in the first frame of the video - the Mcdonald's logo (perhaps a sinister symbol of American capitalism) like ominous spider stands above the small flag of the USSR, whose death was less than two years later.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYM-NYj053A
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’m not sure trade-sanctions with the West have – after some initial shock – much impact or importance.

    The main exports (natural resources commodities), are sold at the world market prices with no problem, or non-substitute possible for European customers (gas) .

    Overall, the economy is much more correlated to oil prices, than any other variable.

    If oil prices go high, so does the economy. And if low, so does the economy.

    The main challenge is how to transition to the time (2030s), when oil prices will likely be falling. But after such a future economy scenario, it could become an economy more vulnerable to sanctions (transition itself could be exchanging current vulnerability to oil prices, for future vulnerability to trade conditions).

    As for the last paragraph about nationalists.

    There’s something to be careful with in the fake news – for example, the claim that the Kremlin helped to elect Donald Trump. This is just domestic American politics – where one side tries to attack the other by claiming this.

    But the idea this is such an important aim for Russia also relates to the fake news that Western sanctions have so much impact on economic situation, which is currently much more connected to world commodity prices than specific relations to the West.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anyone remembers American sanctions on China post Tiananmen? Or on India after they exploded a nuke? I’m just saying that wait and see is the best strategy for now.

    Incidentally, those people standing in line to McDonald’s? They are doing it because they are curious. They want to see for themselves what this thing is like.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dmitry
    And curiosity from the 'hype', because Mcdonald's company took so many years, and obstacles, to start their first restaurant, and only one at first in the whole Soviet Union (which was the 52nd country). (The agreement was signed in 1988, and the restaurant in Pushkin Square, opened in 1990. But there were talks to build it between Soviet representatives since 1976.)

    When they advertised for staff at the restaurant a few weeks before opening, 25,000 people submitted job applications.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • On April 6, the US Treasury Department extended sanctions against a number of Russian billionaires, including: Heads of state owned energy giants Sechin (Rosneft) and Miller (Gazprom) Putin's circle of silovarch chums and friendly billionaires, e.g. Kirill Shalamov (Putin's former son-in-law), Fursenko, Patrushev, Zolotov, Dyumin (a long rumored successor) The "oligarchs" (which they are not)...
  • @Polish Perspective

    Long-term efforts also need to be made to cultivate Germany, South Korea, and Japan.
     
    I would put greater stress on China, to be frank. All three above are US colonies in all but name. Germany in particular is completely slavish to US dictates. Merkel even spied on EU "allies" on behalf of Washington when Obama was president. The only thing keeping her to a more strident EU-line lately is Trump's constant attacks on the EU. The moment he gets booted out and a neoliberal is elected, preferably a woman if the ZOG elites have their way, Merkel will turn on a dime to become the biggest supplicant possible.

    China is already quite advanced in numerous industries and the fact that the latest tariffs against them have, in part, been motivated by the rapid advances in Chinese AI capabilities underlines this point.

    The only argument against China, and it's a good one, is to avoid putting all eggs in one basket. Diversification is always a good strategy. But to the extent that any non-Chinese country should be approached, I would focus on SK and Japan over any European country. I think Japan in particular would be a good partner, given that SK is much more in need of immediate US military protection due to the obvious problem above the 38th parallel, which in turn increases Washington's leverage over SK.

    The Chinese have shifted their gaze away from Japan and now focus more intently on India, especially post-BJP rule, which means that the geopolitical glue will gradually become weaker. Still, the US influence over both SK and Japan is still substantial and the room for serious co-operation will be hindered by this alone. China really is the best bet, to the extent this can be played.

    China’s “advances” are actually American advances, stolen by China.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Philip Owen
    Australia, Brazil and Canada don't get these problems. Interesting or not?

    I guess with Brazil it might just be lack of state capacity, and the elite enjoying their life too much.

    The impressive governments for me – for staying out of relative trouble with the world – are China and Belarus. And places like Singapore, also maybe Hungary and Poland (who are taking EU money, without EU obligations).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Philip Owen
    Yes, Russia's solution to backwardness has àlways been to import a few tens of thousands of "Germans". Unforunately, bringing Welsh engineers to the Donbass was the last big import. The next one is already a century overdue. Yeltsin's reluctance to allow foreign companies to participate in Russian privatisation was a mistake in so many ways.

    Yeltsin’s reluctance to allow foreign companies to participate in Russian privatisation was a mistake in so many ways.

    Depends on the level of participation.
    Letting foreigners take over the Russian economy would be an even bigger mistake than letting Russian thieves do that.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Thank God for the corporate media. If it wasn’t for them, and the ADL, I’d have probably never discovered that I’m a Nazi. Apparently, I’ve been one for quite some time … which is weird, as I had no idea. Here I was, naively believing that I’d been writing about global capitalism and the realignment...
  • @Seamus Padraig
    Wow! CJ's really stepping out here. Is he about to have a Joe Sobran moment? (It happened to Phil Giraldi a while back.) I wonder how much longer CounterPunch is going to continue publishing him? Attacks on globalization are exactly what got ex-CounterPunchers like Diana Johnstone and Jean Bricmont dropped. I'm just waiting to see what Alexander Reid-Ross has to say about this!

    Thank God for the corporate media. If it wasn’t for them, and the ADL, I’d have probably never discovered that I’m a Nazi.
     
    Well, once you realize it's actually the (((corporate media))) then it all begins to make sense.

    When you’re a Nazi thought criminal (as I apparently am), it doesn’t matter what you think you’re thinking. What matters is what the global capitalist ruling classes tell you you’re thinking ...
     
    The thing about it is, whenever they go on a tear lambasting anyone who criticizes the banks, the media or our foreign policy (and I mean foreign in every sense of the word!) as an 'anti-Semite', they're tacitly admitting that all that stuff is really Jewish-controlled. It's hilarious! They think they're attacking you, but all they're really doing is outing themselves.

    Well, once you realize it’s actually the (((corporate media))) then it all begins to make sense.

    I would say… those who OWN the corporate media…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • On April 6, the US Treasury Department extended sanctions against a number of Russian billionaires, including: Heads of state owned energy giants Sechin (Rosneft) and Miller (Gazprom) Putin's circle of silovarch chums and friendly billionaires, e.g. Kirill Shalamov (Putin's former son-in-law), Fursenko, Patrushev, Zolotov, Dyumin (a long rumored successor) The "oligarchs" (which they are not)...
  • It started:

    Russia to stop exporting titanium to Boeing in counter-sanctions against US – draft law

    https://www.rt.com/business/424003-russia-will-stop-exporting-titanium/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Randal

    Australia, Brazil and Canada don’t get these problems. Interesting or not?
     
    Not particularly interesting as far as I can see, Those countries are broadly obedient serfs on almost all important issues, though Brazil recently felt the slap of US correction when it got a little uppity:

    Brazil: Lula, Dilma, Mujica, Correa Condemn US Interference


    Former Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said the U.S. government remains uptight with those in the region who claim “self-determination.”

    A quartet of former South American presidents - Luiz Inacio 'Lula' da Silva (Brazil), Dilma Rousseff (Brazil), Jose Mujica (Uruguay) and Rafael Correa (Ecuador) – took to an improvised stage in the central square of Santana do Livramento, near the border between Brazil and Uruguay, to denounce U.S. interference in Latin American politics. Lula said the “hand of the United States” was involved in the “coup” that ousted Rousseff.
     
    Why do you think I should find them interesting in this context?

    Brazil deserved to be corrected.

    While I don’t agree with our stupid policy on Iran, Brazil attempting to intervene in the issue was simply outrageous.

    Latin America is our backyard and no country in Latin American deserves to act independently of us.

    The Latin American countries are also completely inferior and have nothing to offer the world.

    Brazil in particular is a culture based on dancing and miscegenation.

    Looking forward to Jair Bolsonaro reestablishing order.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Philip Owen
    Australia, Brazil and Canada don't get these problems. Interesting or not?

    Australia, Brazil and Canada don’t get these problems. Interesting or not?

    Not particularly interesting as far as I can see, Those countries are broadly obedient serfs on almost all important issues, though Brazil recently felt the slap of US correction when it got a little uppity:

    Brazil: Lula, Dilma, Mujica, Correa Condemn US Interference

    Former Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said the U.S. government remains uptight with those in the region who claim “self-determination.”

    A quartet of former South American presidents – Luiz Inacio ‘Lula’ da Silva (Brazil), Dilma Rousseff (Brazil), Jose Mujica (Uruguay) and Rafael Correa (Ecuador) – took to an improvised stage in the central square of Santana do Livramento, near the border between Brazil and Uruguay, to denounce U.S. interference in Latin American politics. Lula said the “hand of the United States” was involved in the “coup” that ousted Rousseff.

    Why do you think I should find them interesting in this context?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
    Brazil deserved to be corrected.

    While I don't agree with our stupid policy on Iran, Brazil attempting to intervene in the issue was simply outrageous.

    Latin America is our backyard and no country in Latin American deserves to act independently of us.

    The Latin American countries are also completely inferior and have nothing to offer the world.

    Brazil in particular is a culture based on dancing and miscegenation.

    Looking forward to Jair Bolsonaro reestablishing order.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Philip Owen
    Australia, Brazil and Canada don't get these problems. Interesting or not?

    The US does not see them as a potential threat to be neutralized. And they aren’t nuked up.The US moves into everything that Russia does not defend, like Ukraine. Obama did not intervene in Syria with a massive airstrike and Russia almost immediately took advantage. That is just the way the world works when you are big enough to be a rival of the top dog.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Positive side is that this helps Putin’s stated goal of “nationalizing” Russia’s infamously comprador elites and repatriate their money back to Russia.

    In my opinion that is the intended goal of all this for Putin.

    After WW2 Charles de Gaulle threatened that unless it was allowed to keep its colonies, France would side with the USSR. Putin could announce a major reduction in battlefield nukes, and as Russia’s zillions of clunky old tactical nuclear weapons are there for deterring China from a conventional attack, it would be seen as a very negative alteration in the balance of power for America. A total non-aggression pact between China and Russia( and possibly even technical cooperation on ICBMs) would be the ultimate threat to the US.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Randal

    Stepmone. Rebuild credibility. Georgia wasn’t an example of truth in war but Ukraine was a travesty. In PR terms, the Skripal case was even worse. The Russian Ambassador refused to engage with the UK and the foreign ministry went into denial and obfustication by reflex.

    Putin personally lied to Merkel, who previously trusted him about Ukraine That’s not repairable.

    So first stop digging.
     

    This appears to be a big exercise in "blaming the victim".

    If Merkel didn't want to be lied to, she shouldn't have insisted on responses to questions that could only result in a lie. For instance, Russia supported the Donetsk rebels as an absolutely legitimate response to US/EU aggressive meddling in the Ukraine, but there's no way any Russian leader is going to formally admit as much under pressure, even in a private conversation, any more than German or US leaders are going to formally admit their own involvement in the Kosovo and Ukraine aggressions.

    Press for a response, get a lie, fine. But don't then whinge and whine about being lied to, as Merkel does (mostly as an excuse to rationalise caving in to US pressure).

    As for the PR issue, the Russians are up against the most effective and lavishly funded PR machines in the history of humanity. Yes, they can and should step up their game (and they have to an extent) but in cases like the Skripal issue there is no winning it for the Russians - it's designed that way. US sphere governments can make any accusations they like, because they know their establishment media will carefully refrain from asking awkward questions and will report their allegations as though they are facts, will present their outrageously provocative "ultimatums" to Russia as reasonable and "strong", and misrepresent inevitable Russian responses as unreasonable. There's no way Russia can respond except with denials, which are then painted as "evidence" of guilt.

    Could they have done better? Doubtless. But don't criticise them without recognising the scale of what they are up against.

    So first stop digging.

    Next, re-engage on trade. Drop sanctions against the EU. This will happen soon any way. The original plan was five years. The EU will forget Crimea if Russia withdraws (fails to support) it’s nationalists in Donetsk. Holding on to Donetsk is stiff necked pride anyway. It’s a lose-lose situation for Russia. The US will not forgive Crimea but that is no big deal.
     

    This call for reasonableness basically flies in the face of experience. All the experience of the past three decade suggests that the more Russia compromises, the more it gets pushed. Concede the Cold War - get NATO expansion. Be "reasonable" about western anti-Yugoslav propaganda - get the Kosovo war. Rely on UN treaty agreements to constrain US sphere actions - get the Iraq war. Make what appear to be reasonable concessions to the US sphere's "concerns" in the UNSC - get the overthrow of the Libyan government. Accede to US "democracy promotion" and EU "economic diplomacy", get an attempted "color revolution" in Russia and the overthrow of the Ukraine. Etc, without end.

    The problem is not Russia. The problem for the past three decades has been US and EU triumphalism and systematic, lawless push for achieving maximalist objectives. Until that is recognised and dealt with, no proposals such as the ones you give here amount to anything but a plan for slow surrender.

    Australia, Brazil and Canada don’t get these problems. Interesting or not?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    The US does not see them as a potential threat to be neutralized. And they aren't nuked up.The US moves into everything that Russia does not defend, like Ukraine. Obama did not intervene in Syria with a massive airstrike and Russia almost immediately took advantage. That is just the way the world works when you are big enough to be a rival of the top dog.
    , @Randal

    Australia, Brazil and Canada don’t get these problems. Interesting or not?
     
    Not particularly interesting as far as I can see, Those countries are broadly obedient serfs on almost all important issues, though Brazil recently felt the slap of US correction when it got a little uppity:

    Brazil: Lula, Dilma, Mujica, Correa Condemn US Interference


    Former Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said the U.S. government remains uptight with those in the region who claim “self-determination.”

    A quartet of former South American presidents - Luiz Inacio 'Lula' da Silva (Brazil), Dilma Rousseff (Brazil), Jose Mujica (Uruguay) and Rafael Correa (Ecuador) – took to an improvised stage in the central square of Santana do Livramento, near the border between Brazil and Uruguay, to denounce U.S. interference in Latin American politics. Lula said the “hand of the United States” was involved in the “coup” that ousted Rousseff.
     
    Why do you think I should find them interesting in this context?
    , @Dmitry
    I guess with Brazil it might just be lack of state capacity, and the elite enjoying their life too much.

    The impressive governments for me - for staying out of relative trouble with the world - are China and Belarus. And places like Singapore, also maybe Hungary and Poland (who are taking EU money, without EU obligations).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @myself
    Actually, there is historical precedent for this.

    Imperial Russia, pre-1917, used to have many expatriates (or were they immigrants?) from Prussia, the German States, Austria-Hungary and Sweden living and working there. It was, it seems, a successful program in order to inject economic and industrial dynamism into old Russia.

    Russia could end up being a sort of Eurasian "land of opportunity", a larger and far more populous Canada, with the consequent hold on the global imagination of such a country.

    This is actually a very interesting direction for Russia, if they could implement it.

    Yes, Russia’s solution to backwardness has àlways been to import a few tens of thousands of “Germans”. Unforunately, bringing Welsh engineers to the Donbass was the last big import. The next one is already a century overdue. Yeltsin’s reluctance to allow foreign companies to participate in Russian privatisation was a mistake in so many ways.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser

    Yeltsin’s reluctance to allow foreign companies to participate in Russian privatisation was a mistake in so many ways.
     
    Depends on the level of participation.
    Letting foreigners take over the Russian economy would be an even bigger mistake than letting Russian thieves do that.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson
    Russia and India have had friendly relations for decades, and India remains a major customer for Russian arms. India also allows in Russian metallurgical products tariff free.

    India isn't able to provide Russia with any useful capital goods (or, really, any goods) or diplomatic support.

    Another issue is that India and China are traditionally hostile and growing more so, and Russia and China are drawing closer.

    Its important that if Russia hopes to sell more jets and military equipment to India, to build more in India itself. India is the country of the future as demographic decline pulls down other countries, and the ability to cultivate a positive relationship with a future superpower will have significant dividends in the line.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/12/business/india-defense-lockheed-boeing.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-0&action=click&contentCollection=Asia%20Pacific&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article

    https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/India-will-be-a-superpower-in-20-years/articleshow/428484.cms

    The vedas have also predicted this, as Tamil poet Bharati saw, he is a poet who strongly believed in the power of words. He prayed to goddess to give him words that are Mantras, like the ancient Vedic seers. All the poets see what even Sun cannot see according to Hindi saying, “Jahan na pahunche Ravi, Wahan pahunche Kavi.” He predicted:

    1.India becoming World Guru, i.e, Big Super Power

    2.All children worshipping Undivided India (Akhand Bharat)

    A Bridge between India and Sri Lanka like Rama setu.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Philip Owen
    Russia also has had low recovery rates. Applying enhanced recovery to existing wells can greatly enhance recoverable reserves in older oil provinces, especially Volga Urals.

    Valid point – there were a lot of poor reservoir management practices in Soviet times when oil managers were driven by annual production quota (5 year plan) rather than good oil field practice. Technology has also moved on in the last 30 years and Russian petroleum engineers who have always been innovative have taken on international ideas and come up with some innovative solutions.

    Another point is that about 70-80% of Russian oil costs are in Roubles, with 20-30% in dollars. The Russian oilfield services industry is good but not as great as it should be. The rouble cost base has meant that the break-even prices are significantly lower than US Shale and Russian companies have had positive cash-flows throughout the oil slump unlike virtually all US companies

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Philip Owen
    Stepmone. Rebuild credibility. Georgia wasn't an example of truth in war but Ukraine was a travesty. In PR terms, the Skripal case was even worse. The Russian Ambassador refused to engage with the UK and the foreign ministry went into denial and obfustication by reflex.

    Putin personally lied to Merkel, who previously trusted him about Ukraine That's not repairable.

    So first stop digging.

    Next, re-engage on trade. Drop sanctions against the EU. This will happen soon any way. The original plan was five years. The EU will forget Crimea if Russia withdraws (fails to support) it's nationalists in Donetsk. Holding on to Donetsk is stiff necked pride anyway. It's a lose-lose situation for Russia. The US will not forgive Crimea but that is no big deal.

    Tackle the Korean and Hong Kong King crab pirates in the sea of Okhostsk and give the Japanese fishing licenseS. Arrange visa free travel with Japan.

    Stepmone. Rebuild credibility. Georgia wasn’t an example of truth in war but Ukraine was a travesty. In PR terms, the Skripal case was even worse. The Russian Ambassador refused to engage with the UK and the foreign ministry went into denial and obfustication by reflex.

    Putin personally lied to Merkel, who previously trusted him about Ukraine That’s not repairable.

    So first stop digging.

    This appears to be a big exercise in “blaming the victim”.

    If Merkel didn’t want to be lied to, she shouldn’t have insisted on responses to questions that could only result in a lie. For instance, Russia supported the Donetsk rebels as an absolutely legitimate response to US/EU aggressive meddling in the Ukraine, but there’s no way any Russian leader is going to formally admit as much under pressure, even in a private conversation, any more than German or US leaders are going to formally admit their own involvement in the Kosovo and Ukraine aggressions.

    Press for a response, get a lie, fine. But don’t then whinge and whine about being lied to, as Merkel does (mostly as an excuse to rationalise caving in to US pressure).

    As for the PR issue, the Russians are up against the most effective and lavishly funded PR machines in the history of humanity. Yes, they can and should step up their game (and they have to an extent) but in cases like the Skripal issue there is no winning it for the Russians – it’s designed that way. US sphere governments can make any accusations they like, because they know their establishment media will carefully refrain from asking awkward questions and will report their allegations as though they are facts, will present their outrageously provocative “ultimatums” to Russia as reasonable and “strong”, and misrepresent inevitable Russian responses as unreasonable. There’s no way Russia can respond except with denials, which are then painted as “evidence” of guilt.

    Could they have done better? Doubtless. But don’t criticise them without recognising the scale of what they are up against.

    So first stop digging.

    Next, re-engage on trade. Drop sanctions against the EU. This will happen soon any way. The original plan was five years. The EU will forget Crimea if Russia withdraws (fails to support) it’s nationalists in Donetsk. Holding on to Donetsk is stiff necked pride anyway. It’s a lose-lose situation for Russia. The US will not forgive Crimea but that is no big deal.

    This call for reasonableness basically flies in the face of experience. All the experience of the past three decade suggests that the more Russia compromises, the more it gets pushed. Concede the Cold War – get NATO expansion. Be “reasonable” about western anti-Yugoslav propaganda – get the Kosovo war. Rely on UN treaty agreements to constrain US sphere actions – get the Iraq war. Make what appear to be reasonable concessions to the US sphere’s “concerns” in the UNSC – get the overthrow of the Libyan government. Accede to US “democracy promotion” and EU “economic diplomacy”, get an attempted “color revolution” in Russia and the overthrow of the Ukraine. Etc, without end.

    The problem is not Russia. The problem for the past three decades has been US and EU triumphalism and systematic, lawless push for achieving maximalist objectives. Until that is recognised and dealt with, no proposals such as the ones you give here amount to anything but a plan for slow surrender.

    Read More
    • Agree: dfordoom, utu
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Australia, Brazil and Canada don't get these problems. Interesting or not?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anatoly Karlin

    And at least in 2014 China wasn’t so eager to help Russia out.
     
    I actually disagree with that. It was ready to help - Russia just wasn't desperate enough to need it:
    * Economically: https://russia-insider.com/en/china/ruble-crash-china-pledges-support-russia/ri2105
    * Politically: http://thediplomat.com/2014/03/china-backs-russia-on-ukraine/
    * From the horse's own mouth: http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/846263.shtml

    I think I have said several times that in my opinion building up the China relationship was Putin's greatest legitimate foreign policy success.

    Though it's something that China was and remains very much interested in as well, American "Bear vs. Dragon" fantasies to the contrary.

    Agree with most of the rest of your post, as well as Thorfinnsson's.

    Altogether, I think Russia can do very little, and if it does anything, it’ll just invite further sanctions on itself, so any kind of further escalation in the “sanctions war” will inevitably hurt Russia more than the US.
     
    So long as China doesn't join in, I think the ultimate limits of what the US can do are limited: http://www.unz.com/akarlin/punishing-putler/

    So long as China doesn’t join in, I think the ultimate limits of what the US can do are limited

    There is very little chance that China joins the anti-Russia camp, indeed almost zero.

    Russia would have to display Nazi-level stupidity and actually turn on China first. Barring that, Russian relations with China will remain smooth, whatever the West does.

    Also, it must be pointed out that, whatever crusade the West thinks it’s undertaking, South Korea and Japan will also continue trade relations with Russia.

    Essentially, Russia’s East is secure, to varying degrees. Russia should focus on breaking the Western cordon.

    Germany is not entirely happy under Washington’s domination, and never has been. So they make the most profitable target to split the “Western Alliance”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @blahbahblah
    Sorry, but none of this is going to matter much...

    A facebook block is probably the best one to do. It's already hurting. It's the one where it's most easy to say "hey, they're in bed with American security forces". It's the most dangerous. It's the one with the best replacement. Of course, facebook owns instagram which is hugely popular in Russia. Banning instagram in Russia would make a lot of people mad but would also really hurt instagram. I would block tumblr just for shits and giggles.

    I have to say, I lost almost all of my putinphilia when I saw him say so much that seemed technologically illiterate. And because of that I don't think he's up to the historical task set before him.

    "Russia should be prepared to shut down the relevant country’s news bureaus in Moscow"

    This is a no brainer.

    The biggest problem with Russia is that it's so damn insular. America does a good job capturing people's imagination. America gets people out of America to buy into America culturally. If I were Russia I would invite Europeans of a nationalist bent(filtered for skills) to create small charter cities on the black sea and the russian far east. Make it easy for Europeans to vacation and enjoy Russia. Make these areas good for culture creation(movies, music, video games, animation). I'm not really a fan of this, but one thing that would really screw with peoples heads is if Russia let China build a charter city in either Kalingrad or the Black Sea.

    Actually, there is historical precedent for this.

    Imperial Russia, pre-1917, used to have many expatriates (or were they immigrants?) from Prussia, the German States, Austria-Hungary and Sweden living and working there. It was, it seems, a successful program in order to inject economic and industrial dynamism into old Russia.

    Russia could end up being a sort of Eurasian “land of opportunity”, a larger and far more populous Canada, with the consequent hold on the global imagination of such a country.

    This is actually a very interesting direction for Russia, if they could implement it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Yes, Russia's solution to backwardness has àlways been to import a few tens of thousands of "Germans". Unforunately, bringing Welsh engineers to the Donbass was the last big import. The next one is already a century overdue. Yeltsin's reluctance to allow foreign companies to participate in Russian privatisation was a mistake in so many ways.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.