The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
Twitter Bans for "Undermining Confidence in the NATO Alliance"
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

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

Several months ago, I speculated why Twitter would suspend the Valdai Club (a milquetoast discussion group that largely centers around economics issues and has a large component of systemic liberals within in).

Now we have an answer. RT:

On Tuesday, Russian media reported that the San Francisco-based microblogging platform had confirmed at least 100 of the bans were of accounts supposedly connected with Russia.

According to a company spokesperson, “some of these accounts disseminated messages that were associated with the Russian government, while the rest of the network focused on undermining confidence in the NATO alliance and its stability.”

One of the accounts targeted belonged to the Valdai Discussion Club. A leading Russian think tank, it hosts an annual event in Sochi, which has attracted dignitaries such as ex-Afghan leader Hamid Karzai, one time Finnish President Tarja Halonen, erstwhile South African President Thabo Mbeki, former Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi and China’s richest man, Jack Ma.

In addition, according to Twitter, 31 accounts were deleted for being allegedly associated with the “Internet Research Agency,” which some in the West claim is a state-connected hacker factory, and other Russian government structures. The company added that some of these were engaged in criticism of the EU.

Twitter is an American company and it’s long been clear that it is used along with Facebook and Google to push a pro-American geopolitical agenda (in tandem with cultural SJWism), nothing surprising or even fundamentally objectionable about that false pretensions to universal free speech aside, but still, I don’t get why they have it out for the Valdai Club and the people associated with it in particular. Or for how much longer Russia and other self-respecting countries will tolerate this – especially now that there’s laws under which they can be sanctioned or blocked.

 
Hide 37 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

    Commenting rules. Please note that anonymous comments are not allowed.

  2. I’m starting to the think The Jack is our guy.

    First there was the automated “These materials may have been obtained through hacking” message on any tweet linking the article with the leaked information of the British covertly funded propaganda program. But that just makes the leak look authentic and makes it harder to dismiss as Russian disinformation.

    Now look at the Twitter bans. They don’t even call it disinformation or trolling. Only that the accounts were amplifying anti-NATO narratives. This is just too honest.

    It’s almost as if The Jack is intentionally making the moderation look like one-sided censorship… but most suspicious of all… doesn’t this look a like a man that operates according to the fourth political theory?

    • Agree: mal
    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Mr. XYZ
    @Shortsword

    Jack Dorsey is the US's version of Grigori Rasputin!

  3. Twatter and Mugbook are QuaNGOs… They might as well have CIA and NSA stamps on them.

  4. I don’t get why they have it out for the Valdai Club and the people associated with it in particular.

    The Valdai Club is there to represent Putin’s views and Russian government views to Western Elites.

    Putin just got told that he can get lost – he and the current russian government will never be accepted by western elites.

    CIA Director just said the same thing.

    And even their negotiating tools will be blocked. That is – there is nothing to talk about. Its either my way or the highway. Russia must surrender or else.

    Such kind of blockades also serve to discourage parts of western elites from participating in Valdai discussions.

    Or for how much longer Russia and other self-respecting countries will tolerate this

    China does not tolerate this – it recently blocked BBC. Iran does not tolerate this.

    As for Russia – it is too cucked on the theme of Europe. It constantly begged to be part of it. Putin in Davos again was talking about “Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok”.

    Really. They keep pissing on you and you keep begging to be accepted.

    There is a saying: someone pisses on you and you say: Oh! Its the rain!

    Really. Stop with this begging to be accepted already.

    They don’t want you. How many times they must sh.t on you in order to get it?

    • Agree: Vishnugupta
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    @Passer by


    China does not tolerate this – it recently blocked BBC. Iran does not tolerate this.
     
    They are also cucked, just in different ways from Russia.

    For instance, China actually respected the Trump-era sanctions on Iran for a long time. And Iran has always been happy to get back in the US' good graces, given the possibility (e.g. Boeing orders).

    I don't think Russia is, on average, significantly more "cucked" than China or Iran.

    Replies: @Passer by

    , @Levtraro
    @Passer by


    Really. They keep pissing on you and you keep begging to be accepted.
     
    That's not what's happening, you're way too much into your bleak bias.
    , @Fr. John
    @Passer by

    "Putin just got told that he can get lost – he and the current russian government will never be accepted by western elites."

    Which means what he [Putin] says, probably is more true, than the Fraudulent Regime in D.C., right now....

  5. “undermining confidence”

    [presses UPGRADE button]

    “undermining faith”

    https://twitter.com/lilyslynch/status/1364545817995063299

    • LOL: Daniel Chieh
  6. The word that defines Twitter’s management is HUBRIS.
      

    They are banning everything that does not conform to their anti-Western, SJW Globalist values: (1)

    Twitter appears to be blocking the website for the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) Wednesday as the annual congregation of grassroots conservatives kicks off in several hours.

    Instead of going directly to the website when users click on CPAC.org, Twitter redirects the user to a warning page that it might be “unsafe.”

    Just in the last month, Twitter has censored a Christian ministry for claiming boys and girls are different, Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe for his investigative journalism, and anti-Big Tech activist Mike Davis for demanding prosecution of those who engage in domestic terrorism.

    Twitter has backed off the CPAC ban. However, this level of brinksmanship will blow up in their face. The MAGA candidate’s (2) inaugural address in 2025 will feature the use of Eminent Domain to take Twitter away from the Swampies.

    PEACE 😇
    ___________

    (1) https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/24/twitter-blocked-links-to-cpacs-website-it-now-claims-it-was-just-an-error/

    (2) Will Trump run in 2024? Or, will he pick someone else to carry the MAGA banner?

    [MORE]

  7. Some years ago I stumbled on a pdf document on the internet, written by the fabled George Keenan of the Long Telegram and containment strategy repute which I haven’t saved for reference, unfortunately.

    This document, written in late 1940s early 1950s was in fact an operational manual on carrying the containment strategy in practice.

    One important pillar described there was the investment in private business and non profit partners that would carry actions against the foe for the benefit of the US government that would also provide plausible deniability and thus cover to the US government.

    Seventy years later, the disclosed papers from FCO UK on undermining Russia, and the continuous actions of the media platforms show us and the world how much progress and refinement this operational approach concocted by Mr. Keenan has underwent…

    The truth of the matter is that the US/UK are not competent at really winning land based wars, where many bodies are involved. No government can take another First Day of Somme: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_day_on_the_Somme

    as such, all efforts are taken to undermine the adversary from within and find turncoats to do their bidding while using an iron fist at home on these matters: censoring and shaming… same old same old…

  8. @Passer by

    I don’t get why they have it out for the Valdai Club and the people associated with it in particular.
     
    The Valdai Club is there to represent Putin's views and Russian government views to Western Elites.

    Putin just got told that he can get lost - he and the current russian government will never be accepted by western elites.

    CIA Director just said the same thing.

    And even their negotiating tools will be blocked. That is - there is nothing to talk about. Its either my way or the highway. Russia must surrender or else.

    Such kind of blockades also serve to discourage parts of western elites from participating in Valdai discussions.


    Or for how much longer Russia and other self-respecting countries will tolerate this
     
    China does not tolerate this - it recently blocked BBC. Iran does not tolerate this.

    As for Russia - it is too cucked on the theme of Europe. It constantly begged to be part of it. Putin in Davos again was talking about "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok".

    Really. They keep pissing on you and you keep begging to be accepted.

    There is a saying: someone pisses on you and you say: Oh! Its the rain!

    Really. Stop with this begging to be accepted already.

    They don't want you. How many times they must sh.t on you in order to get it?

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Levtraro, @Fr. John

    China does not tolerate this – it recently blocked BBC. Iran does not tolerate this.

    They are also cucked, just in different ways from Russia.

    For instance, China actually respected the Trump-era sanctions on Iran for a long time. And Iran has always been happy to get back in the US’ good graces, given the possibility (e.g. Boeing orders).

    I don’t think Russia is, on average, significantly more “cucked” than China or Iran.

    • Replies: @Passer by
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times. Definitely braver country than today's Russia, considering its lack of nuclear weapons. As for China - internally they are less cucked. They blockaded the US info field.

    They use foreign businesses only to take the know how and later replace them.

    Externally, they actually signed a 400 billion deal with Iran in the face of Trump Admin. Russia has been more cucked on Iran too, because of hopes to get accepted by "western partners".

    Iran's policy slogan has always been "neither with East, nor with West".

    China's policy slogan is "let's make China a world leader".

    Russia's policy slogan is: "Can we please become part of Europe?"

    Really pathetic.

    Question is, how much more sh.t in the face can the Putin Government take, before it moves away from its dreams to integrate into the West?

    Just recently he was begging at Davos for "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok", and how "love needed to be mutual".

    We love you, we want to be partners and friends, can you please be nicer to us?

    I do not know who is really running Rus foreign policy, but i could have told you even 10 years ago that Europe will never accept the Putin Government.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Levtraro, @Molip

  9. @Anatoly Karlin
    @Passer by


    China does not tolerate this – it recently blocked BBC. Iran does not tolerate this.
     
    They are also cucked, just in different ways from Russia.

    For instance, China actually respected the Trump-era sanctions on Iran for a long time. And Iran has always been happy to get back in the US' good graces, given the possibility (e.g. Boeing orders).

    I don't think Russia is, on average, significantly more "cucked" than China or Iran.

    Replies: @Passer by

    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times. Definitely braver country than today’s Russia, considering its lack of nuclear weapons. As for China – internally they are less cucked. They blockaded the US info field.

    They use foreign businesses only to take the know how and later replace them.

    Externally, they actually signed a 400 billion deal with Iran in the face of Trump Admin. Russia has been more cucked on Iran too, because of hopes to get accepted by “western partners”.

    Iran’s policy slogan has always been “neither with East, nor with West”.

    China’s policy slogan is “let’s make China a world leader”.

    Russia’s policy slogan is: “Can we please become part of Europe?”

    Really pathetic.

    Question is, how much more sh.t in the face can the Putin Government take, before it moves away from its dreams to integrate into the West?

    Just recently he was begging at Davos for “Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok”, and how “love needed to be mutual”.

    We love you, we want to be partners and friends, can you please be nicer to us?

    I do not know who is really running Rus foreign policy, but i could have told you even 10 years ago that Europe will never accept the Putin Government.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    @Passer by


    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times. Definitely braver country than today’s Russia, considering its lack of nuclear weapons.
     
    Small dogs need to yap more aggressively.

    Replies: @Passer by

    , @Levtraro
    @Passer by


    Russia’s policy slogan is: “Can we please become part of Europe?”

    Really pathetic.
     
    Careful, you are over-acting your role, people will notice.

    Replies: @Passer by

    , @Molip
    @Passer by


    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times.
     
    1. Where were the US troops located before they were blown up, eg. were they on the US mainland?

    2. If people in the US felt inclined to blow up invaders why shouldn't Iraqis or Syrians or Lebanese feel inclined to feel like blowing up invaders?

    3. Why blame Iran for the concept of blowing up invaders when the motive is far more likely to be home grown?

    Replies: @216

  10. @Passer by
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times. Definitely braver country than today's Russia, considering its lack of nuclear weapons. As for China - internally they are less cucked. They blockaded the US info field.

    They use foreign businesses only to take the know how and later replace them.

    Externally, they actually signed a 400 billion deal with Iran in the face of Trump Admin. Russia has been more cucked on Iran too, because of hopes to get accepted by "western partners".

    Iran's policy slogan has always been "neither with East, nor with West".

    China's policy slogan is "let's make China a world leader".

    Russia's policy slogan is: "Can we please become part of Europe?"

    Really pathetic.

    Question is, how much more sh.t in the face can the Putin Government take, before it moves away from its dreams to integrate into the West?

    Just recently he was begging at Davos for "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok", and how "love needed to be mutual".

    We love you, we want to be partners and friends, can you please be nicer to us?

    I do not know who is really running Rus foreign policy, but i could have told you even 10 years ago that Europe will never accept the Putin Government.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Levtraro, @Molip

    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times. Definitely braver country than today’s Russia, considering its lack of nuclear weapons.

    Small dogs need to yap more aggressively.

    • Replies: @Passer by
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Killing super power troops is not yapping. Neither is killing israelis.

  11. @Anatoly Karlin
    @Passer by


    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times. Definitely braver country than today’s Russia, considering its lack of nuclear weapons.
     
    Small dogs need to yap more aggressively.

    Replies: @Passer by

    Killing super power troops is not yapping. Neither is killing israelis.

    • Disagree: botazefa
  12. In a world where America were an authoritarian police-state, I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t be allowed to criticize NATO. It’s fascinating just how many attributes similar to life in an authoritarian police-state, we seem to be adopting of late.

    I’m not interested in hearing some libertarian-esque take about how Richie McRich (or his indolent son & heir) can purchase the public square, and then ban everything, and that technically doesn’t violate the 1st Amendment. If that’s your opinion, then go jump in a lake.

    • Agree: dfordoom
  13. @Shortsword
    I'm starting to the think The Jack is our guy.

    First there was the automated "These materials may have been obtained through hacking" message on any tweet linking the article with the leaked information of the British covertly funded propaganda program. But that just makes the leak look authentic and makes it harder to dismiss as Russian disinformation.

    Now look at the Twitter bans. They don't even call it disinformation or trolling. Only that the accounts were amplifying anti-NATO narratives. This is just too honest.

    It's almost as if The Jack is intentionally making the moderation look like one-sided censorship... but most suspicious of all... doesn't this look a like a man that operates according to the fourth political theory?

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/01/09/16/37800402-9129195-Twitter_CEO_Jack_Dorsey_tuned_into_virtual_meetings_from_his_vac-a-88_1610209849516.jpg

    Replies: @Mr. XYZ

    Jack Dorsey is the US’s version of Grigori Rasputin!

  14. The crime committed by Valdai club was discussing Russian foreign policy in a way that implies, that Russia has legitimate interests outside its internationally recognized borders. The West can’t accept that.

    By banning Valdai club the West signals that it will accept nothing less, than complete subjugation from Russia as embodied by people like Navalny, and Kremlin-friendly “moderates” won’t do. It’s worth pointing out that Navalny never talks about foreign policy and international issues. His handlers don’t want Russians to think about international issues, because running the world is America’s job.

    • Replies: @Passer by
    @Felix Keverich

    Exactly.


    His handlers don’t want Russians to think about international issues, because running the world is America’s job.
     
    Not only because of that, but because many issues will put him in either either position, having to choose between Russia and other countries positions. Therefore unmasking him as agent of foreign influence.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    @Felix Keverich


    It’s worth pointing out that Navalny never talks about foreign policy and international issues.
     
    He does. He profusely talks about how Putler is wasting Russian blood and treasure in his Syrian adventures, how he has torpedoed relations with the "brotherly Ukrainian people", and so forth. Populist talking points that will obviously be used as justification to roll back all Russia's post-1990s attempts to claw back some pale shadow of its Soviet-era influence in the world, with the gap (and profits) to be occupied by Navalny's sponsor (the US).

    Replies: @216

  15. @Passer by

    I don’t get why they have it out for the Valdai Club and the people associated with it in particular.
     
    The Valdai Club is there to represent Putin's views and Russian government views to Western Elites.

    Putin just got told that he can get lost - he and the current russian government will never be accepted by western elites.

    CIA Director just said the same thing.

    And even their negotiating tools will be blocked. That is - there is nothing to talk about. Its either my way or the highway. Russia must surrender or else.

    Such kind of blockades also serve to discourage parts of western elites from participating in Valdai discussions.


    Or for how much longer Russia and other self-respecting countries will tolerate this
     
    China does not tolerate this - it recently blocked BBC. Iran does not tolerate this.

    As for Russia - it is too cucked on the theme of Europe. It constantly begged to be part of it. Putin in Davos again was talking about "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok".

    Really. They keep pissing on you and you keep begging to be accepted.

    There is a saying: someone pisses on you and you say: Oh! Its the rain!

    Really. Stop with this begging to be accepted already.

    They don't want you. How many times they must sh.t on you in order to get it?

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Levtraro, @Fr. John

    Really. They keep pissing on you and you keep begging to be accepted.

    That’s not what’s happening, you’re way too much into your bleak bias.

  16. @Passer by
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times. Definitely braver country than today's Russia, considering its lack of nuclear weapons. As for China - internally they are less cucked. They blockaded the US info field.

    They use foreign businesses only to take the know how and later replace them.

    Externally, they actually signed a 400 billion deal with Iran in the face of Trump Admin. Russia has been more cucked on Iran too, because of hopes to get accepted by "western partners".

    Iran's policy slogan has always been "neither with East, nor with West".

    China's policy slogan is "let's make China a world leader".

    Russia's policy slogan is: "Can we please become part of Europe?"

    Really pathetic.

    Question is, how much more sh.t in the face can the Putin Government take, before it moves away from its dreams to integrate into the West?

    Just recently he was begging at Davos for "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok", and how "love needed to be mutual".

    We love you, we want to be partners and friends, can you please be nicer to us?

    I do not know who is really running Rus foreign policy, but i could have told you even 10 years ago that Europe will never accept the Putin Government.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Levtraro, @Molip

    Russia’s policy slogan is: “Can we please become part of Europe?”

    Really pathetic.

    Careful, you are over-acting your role, people will notice.

    • Replies: @Passer by
    @Levtraro

    Empty talkings and no arguments. My "bias" btw was very helpful in predicting things for the last 10 years. So i trust my scepticism a lot.

    Replies: @botazefa

  17. @Levtraro
    @Passer by


    Russia’s policy slogan is: “Can we please become part of Europe?”

    Really pathetic.
     
    Careful, you are over-acting your role, people will notice.

    Replies: @Passer by

    Empty talkings and no arguments. My “bias” btw was very helpful in predicting things for the last 10 years. So i trust my scepticism a lot.

    • Agree: Daniel Chieh
    • Replies: @botazefa
    @Passer by


    Empty talkings and no arguments. My “bias” btw was very helpful in predicting things for the last 10 years. So i trust my scepticism a lot.
     
    Call me a skeptic, but your spelling the word with a 'c' and not a 'k' makes me think @Levtraro may be onto something in comment #11.

    Replies: @Passer by, @EldnahYm

  18. @Felix Keverich
    The crime committed by Valdai club was discussing Russian foreign policy in a way that implies, that Russia has legitimate interests outside its internationally recognized borders. The West can't accept that.

    By banning Valdai club the West signals that it will accept nothing less, than complete subjugation from Russia as embodied by people like Navalny, and Kremlin-friendly "moderates" won't do. It's worth pointing out that Navalny never talks about foreign policy and international issues. His handlers don't want Russians to think about international issues, because running the world is America's job.

    Replies: @Passer by, @Anatoly Karlin

    Exactly.

    His handlers don’t want Russians to think about international issues, because running the world is America’s job.

    Not only because of that, but because many issues will put him in either either position, having to choose between Russia and other countries positions. Therefore unmasking him as agent of foreign influence.

  19. @Felix Keverich
    The crime committed by Valdai club was discussing Russian foreign policy in a way that implies, that Russia has legitimate interests outside its internationally recognized borders. The West can't accept that.

    By banning Valdai club the West signals that it will accept nothing less, than complete subjugation from Russia as embodied by people like Navalny, and Kremlin-friendly "moderates" won't do. It's worth pointing out that Navalny never talks about foreign policy and international issues. His handlers don't want Russians to think about international issues, because running the world is America's job.

    Replies: @Passer by, @Anatoly Karlin

    It’s worth pointing out that Navalny never talks about foreign policy and international issues.

    He does. He profusely talks about how Putler is wasting Russian blood and treasure in his Syrian adventures, how he has torpedoed relations with the “brotherly Ukrainian people”, and so forth. Populist talking points that will obviously be used as justification to roll back all Russia’s post-1990s attempts to claw back some pale shadow of its Soviet-era influence in the world, with the gap (and profits) to be occupied by Navalny’s sponsor (the US).

    • Replies: @216
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Population is power, right?

    Clawing back geopolitical influence is hard when you are in a demographic hole.

    The liberal system ruling the US has the demographic wind at its back, both domestically and abroad.

    ---

    Military adventurism has gone badly for the US Right, unclear for Russia, well for Erdogan, and nonexistent for China.

    Replies: @anonymousperson, @Sean

  20. @Passer by
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times. Definitely braver country than today's Russia, considering its lack of nuclear weapons. As for China - internally they are less cucked. They blockaded the US info field.

    They use foreign businesses only to take the know how and later replace them.

    Externally, they actually signed a 400 billion deal with Iran in the face of Trump Admin. Russia has been more cucked on Iran too, because of hopes to get accepted by "western partners".

    Iran's policy slogan has always been "neither with East, nor with West".

    China's policy slogan is "let's make China a world leader".

    Russia's policy slogan is: "Can we please become part of Europe?"

    Really pathetic.

    Question is, how much more sh.t in the face can the Putin Government take, before it moves away from its dreams to integrate into the West?

    Just recently he was begging at Davos for "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok", and how "love needed to be mutual".

    We love you, we want to be partners and friends, can you please be nicer to us?

    I do not know who is really running Rus foreign policy, but i could have told you even 10 years ago that Europe will never accept the Putin Government.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Levtraro, @Molip

    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times.

    1. Where were the US troops located before they were blown up, eg. were they on the US mainland?

    2. If people in the US felt inclined to blow up invaders why shouldn’t Iraqis or Syrians or Lebanese feel inclined to feel like blowing up invaders?

    3. Why blame Iran for the concept of blowing up invaders when the motive is far more likely to be home grown?

    • Replies: @216
    @Molip


    2. If people in the US felt inclined to blow up invaders why shouldn’t Iraqis or Syrians or Lebanese feel inclined to feel like blowing up invaders?

     

    Contrary to leftist discourse, the US-Mexico border is not militarized anywhere near to the level that Israel's or India's is.

    But still, the Democrats in the legislature and the media constantly scream about mistreated invaders in the US. And you aren't even allowed to use the phrase "invaders" upon penalty of deplatforming.

    The US did Iran a tremendous favor by removing two hostile Sunni regimes on its borders. Iran responded by killing our troops.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

  21. Navalny basically says that it’s a bad thing that Russia spends money on foreign policy. Otherwise, he appears completely disinterested in this subject. He offers no ideas of his own, and will castigate you for even thinking about foreign affairs.

    This isn’t a populist position, because Russians expect their country to behave like a great power, and Putin’s foreign policy record, as opposed to his economic record etc, gets the strongest approval from Russian masses. American libertarians we are not.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    @Felix Keverich


    This isn’t a populist position...
     
    I think it is, the most simplistic/apolitical normies go, "But think about muh underpaid schoolteachers and nurses and why is the country with the most resources in the world raising its retirement age."

    Replies: @216

  22. It would be an exagerration to say that the Valdai Club even discusses economics. I long ago dropped them from my news scanning. Vapid would not be a weak enough term to describe their output. The intent is serious. Jollies for foriegn journalists who might be sympathetic to Russia. Pinchuk did it much better for Ukraine (added politicians).

  23. @Passer by

    I don’t get why they have it out for the Valdai Club and the people associated with it in particular.
     
    The Valdai Club is there to represent Putin's views and Russian government views to Western Elites.

    Putin just got told that he can get lost - he and the current russian government will never be accepted by western elites.

    CIA Director just said the same thing.

    And even their negotiating tools will be blocked. That is - there is nothing to talk about. Its either my way or the highway. Russia must surrender or else.

    Such kind of blockades also serve to discourage parts of western elites from participating in Valdai discussions.


    Or for how much longer Russia and other self-respecting countries will tolerate this
     
    China does not tolerate this - it recently blocked BBC. Iran does not tolerate this.

    As for Russia - it is too cucked on the theme of Europe. It constantly begged to be part of it. Putin in Davos again was talking about "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok".

    Really. They keep pissing on you and you keep begging to be accepted.

    There is a saying: someone pisses on you and you say: Oh! Its the rain!

    Really. Stop with this begging to be accepted already.

    They don't want you. How many times they must sh.t on you in order to get it?

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin, @Levtraro, @Fr. John

    “Putin just got told that he can get lost – he and the current russian government will never be accepted by western elites.”

    Which means what he [Putin] says, probably is more true, than the Fraudulent Regime in D.C., right now….

  24. @Passer by
    @Levtraro

    Empty talkings and no arguments. My "bias" btw was very helpful in predicting things for the last 10 years. So i trust my scepticism a lot.

    Replies: @botazefa

    Empty talkings and no arguments. My “bias” btw was very helpful in predicting things for the last 10 years. So i trust my scepticism a lot.

    Call me a skeptic, but your spelling the word with a ‘c’ and not a ‘k’ makes me think may be onto something in comment #11.

    • Replies: @Passer by
    @botazefa

    I'm not a native english speaker and my english is not one of the best, sorry. Plenty of issues with my writing. Sometimes i even search for proper spelling of a certain word on the internet and use whatever the first search result gives me.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    , @EldnahYm
    @botazefa

    American and British English have different spellings.

  25. @botazefa
    @Passer by


    Empty talkings and no arguments. My “bias” btw was very helpful in predicting things for the last 10 years. So i trust my scepticism a lot.
     
    Call me a skeptic, but your spelling the word with a 'c' and not a 'k' makes me think @Levtraro may be onto something in comment #11.

    Replies: @Passer by, @EldnahYm

    I’m not a native english speaker and my english is not one of the best, sorry. Plenty of issues with my writing. Sometimes i even search for proper spelling of a certain word on the internet and use whatever the first search result gives me.

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    @Passer by

    Both are right (Wiki says skepticism is American English, scepticism is British English). As a European, I imagine you got taught the latter.

  26. @botazefa
    @Passer by


    Empty talkings and no arguments. My “bias” btw was very helpful in predicting things for the last 10 years. So i trust my scepticism a lot.
     
    Call me a skeptic, but your spelling the word with a 'c' and not a 'k' makes me think @Levtraro may be onto something in comment #11.

    Replies: @Passer by, @EldnahYm

    American and British English have different spellings.

  27. @Felix Keverich
    Navalny basically says that it's a bad thing that Russia spends money on foreign policy. Otherwise, he appears completely disinterested in this subject. He offers no ideas of his own, and will castigate you for even thinking about foreign affairs.

    This isn't a populist position, because Russians expect their country to behave like a great power, and Putin's foreign policy record, as opposed to his economic record etc, gets the strongest approval from Russian masses. American libertarians we are not.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    This isn’t a populist position…

    I think it is, the most simplistic/apolitical normies go, “But think about muh underpaid schoolteachers and nurses and why is the country with the most resources in the world raising its retirement age.”

    • Replies: @216
    @Anatoly Karlin

    The Republicans lost the 2019 election for Governor of Kentucky (one of the five reddest states) because of a similar discourse.

  28. @Passer by
    @botazefa

    I'm not a native english speaker and my english is not one of the best, sorry. Plenty of issues with my writing. Sometimes i even search for proper spelling of a certain word on the internet and use whatever the first search result gives me.

    Replies: @Anatoly Karlin

    Both are right (Wiki says skepticism is American English, scepticism is British English). As a European, I imagine you got taught the latter.

  29. @Anatoly Karlin
    @Felix Keverich


    It’s worth pointing out that Navalny never talks about foreign policy and international issues.
     
    He does. He profusely talks about how Putler is wasting Russian blood and treasure in his Syrian adventures, how he has torpedoed relations with the "brotherly Ukrainian people", and so forth. Populist talking points that will obviously be used as justification to roll back all Russia's post-1990s attempts to claw back some pale shadow of its Soviet-era influence in the world, with the gap (and profits) to be occupied by Navalny's sponsor (the US).

    Replies: @216

    Population is power, right?

    Clawing back geopolitical influence is hard when you are in a demographic hole.

    The liberal system ruling the US has the demographic wind at its back, both domestically and abroad.

    Military adventurism has gone badly for the US Right, unclear for Russia, well for Erdogan, and nonexistent for China.

    • Replies: @anonymousperson
    @216

    China has the right idea.

    , @Sean
    @216

    It seems you agree with Matthew Yglesias. who advocates for One Billion Americans, ostensibly because he thinks that way America will stay on top forever. If the demographic argument against Russia was really believed, then East Asian countries with a productive/ military age population that is shrinking far faster than Russia's would be in serious financial trouble already. But that has not happened, only Kyle Bass seriously tried to short Japan (and then China). Markets don't have a meaningful belief in the line of reasoning by which low birthrate and immigration restriction leads to grass growing in the streets. As Eamonn Fingleton has said, they would be putting their money when their mouth is if they did. The American elite have the wind at their back because they are making lots of (generally unrepatriatable) money on paper, meanwhile China's productive capacity is built up. When Bass ended his shorting of China in mid 2019 he said that for the amoral investor China is the place to put money, which is the received wisdom. Biden the other week:


    "And I came back and said they're going to end their One China -- their one child policy, because they're so xenophobic they won't let anybody else in, and more people are retired than working. How can they sustain economic growth when more people are retired?."
     
    There is a schismogenesis in official US projections of continuing global supremacy inasmuch what Wall St are actually doing and Biden's Deep State briefings are mutually inconsistent.

    Military adventurism has gone badly for the US Right, unclear for Russia, well for Erdogan, and nonexistent for China
     
    From having an abundance of strategic space, Russia is fighting 500 miles from Moscow. China attacked the US's forces in Korea and then won in Vietnam through proxies, because the US feared a serious effort to win would provoke a Korea-style intervention by China. If by America's adventurism you mean a use of military force that is in geopolitical terms a trivial diversion from the action necessary to combat threats to the country, then I agree. However, if 'adventurism' is intended to imply the US can simply stay at home militarily--even as the basis of its military power erodes in relation to China--then I am afraid that would be a counsel of learned helplessness rather than strategic analysis. Caveats on the utility of military force learnt from prior faint hearted or misdirected interventions are always in order, but behind closed doors the possible necessity of levying war cannot be ruled out.

    Replies: @216

  30. @Anatoly Karlin
    @Felix Keverich


    This isn’t a populist position...
     
    I think it is, the most simplistic/apolitical normies go, "But think about muh underpaid schoolteachers and nurses and why is the country with the most resources in the world raising its retirement age."

    Replies: @216

    The Republicans lost the 2019 election for Governor of Kentucky (one of the five reddest states) because of a similar discourse.

  31. @Molip
    @Passer by


    Well, Iran has blown up US troops via its various millitias countless times.
     
    1. Where were the US troops located before they were blown up, eg. were they on the US mainland?

    2. If people in the US felt inclined to blow up invaders why shouldn't Iraqis or Syrians or Lebanese feel inclined to feel like blowing up invaders?

    3. Why blame Iran for the concept of blowing up invaders when the motive is far more likely to be home grown?

    Replies: @216

    2. If people in the US felt inclined to blow up invaders why shouldn’t Iraqis or Syrians or Lebanese feel inclined to feel like blowing up invaders?

    Contrary to leftist discourse, the US-Mexico border is not militarized anywhere near to the level that Israel’s or India’s is.

    But still, the Democrats in the legislature and the media constantly scream about mistreated invaders in the US. And you aren’t even allowed to use the phrase “invaders” upon penalty of deplatforming.

    The US did Iran a tremendous favor by removing two hostile Sunni regimes on its borders. Iran responded by killing our troops.

    • Replies: @reiner Tor
    @216


    The US did Iran a tremendous favor by removing two hostile Sunni regimes on its borders. Iran responded by killing our troops.
     
    Because in 2004 and later influential American politicians were openly discussing destroying Iran.

    Or do you believe that it’s impossible for Iranians to know what American politicians are talking about..?

  32. NATO should have been dissolved years ago. But Zionist Washington wants its empire in Europe.

  33. @216
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Population is power, right?

    Clawing back geopolitical influence is hard when you are in a demographic hole.

    The liberal system ruling the US has the demographic wind at its back, both domestically and abroad.

    ---

    Military adventurism has gone badly for the US Right, unclear for Russia, well for Erdogan, and nonexistent for China.

    Replies: @anonymousperson, @Sean

    China has the right idea.

  34. @216
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Population is power, right?

    Clawing back geopolitical influence is hard when you are in a demographic hole.

    The liberal system ruling the US has the demographic wind at its back, both domestically and abroad.

    ---

    Military adventurism has gone badly for the US Right, unclear for Russia, well for Erdogan, and nonexistent for China.

    Replies: @anonymousperson, @Sean

    It seems you agree with Matthew Yglesias. who advocates for One Billion Americans, ostensibly because he thinks that way America will stay on top forever. If the demographic argument against Russia was really believed, then East Asian countries with a productive/ military age population that is shrinking far faster than Russia’s would be in serious financial trouble already. But that has not happened, only Kyle Bass seriously tried to short Japan (and then China). Markets don’t have a meaningful belief in the line of reasoning by which low birthrate and immigration restriction leads to grass growing in the streets. As Eamonn Fingleton has said, they would be putting their money when their mouth is if they did. The American elite have the wind at their back because they are making lots of (generally unrepatriatable) money on paper, meanwhile China’s productive capacity is built up. When Bass ended his shorting of China in mid 2019 he said that for the amoral investor China is the place to put money, which is the received wisdom. Biden the other week:

    “And I came back and said they’re going to end their One China — their one child policy, because they’re so xenophobic they won’t let anybody else in, and more people are retired than working. How can they sustain economic growth when more people are retired?.”

    There is a schismogenesis in official US projections of continuing global supremacy inasmuch what Wall St are actually doing and Biden’s Deep State briefings are mutually inconsistent.

    Military adventurism has gone badly for the US Right, unclear for Russia, well for Erdogan, and nonexistent for China

    From having an abundance of strategic space, Russia is fighting 500 miles from Moscow. China attacked the US’s forces in Korea and then won in Vietnam through proxies, because the US feared a serious effort to win would provoke a Korea-style intervention by China. If by America’s adventurism you mean a use of military force that is in geopolitical terms a trivial diversion from the action necessary to combat threats to the country, then I agree. However, if ‘adventurism’ is intended to imply the US can simply stay at home militarily–even as the basis of its military power erodes in relation to China–then I am afraid that would be a counsel of learned helplessness rather than strategic analysis. Caveats on the utility of military force learnt from prior faint hearted or misdirected interventions are always in order, but behind closed doors the possible necessity of levying war cannot be ruled out.

    • Replies: @216
    @Sean


    If by America’s adventurism you mean a use of military force that is in geopolitical terms a trivial diversion from the action necessary to combat threats to the country, then I agree.
     
    The key point is "the US Right". The Bush wars were electorally devastating to the Right, and appear to have permanently alienated many in Gen Y from both the GOP, but also from Christianity and social conservatism. The fiscal consequences have also been ruinous.

    From having an abundance of strategic space, Russia is fighting 500 miles from Moscow.
     
    Russia is fighting in Syria to preserve a questionable ally, who is far more in debt to Iran. A secondary point is to limit Turkish expansionism, but this has been for naught because of Armenia's defeat.

    Victory for Assad will likely still leave large parts of his territory occupied by foreign powers, and the main benefit for Russia is increased arms/nuclear power exports to other Arab countries.

    The economic cost from sanctions has been considerable, and has alienated many East Europe countries from Russia. A united EU can push back on Russia, and contribute to ideological subversion. A disunited EU might lead to conditions where Le Pen and AFD could win power in their respective countries.

    It seems you agree with Matthew Yglesias. who advocates for One Billion Americans, ostensibly because he thinks that way America will stay on top forever.
     
    I dislike Sr. Yglesias, but its hard to argue with raw neoliberal math, at least until their system unravels. Conservatives in the US are demographically weak, and culturally powerless. The demographic washout in California has left the Right not only powerless in the most powerful state, but has dramatic effects on global culture.

    So we are in a bind, left unchecked, the liberal system will eventually grind our culture into dust. But we don't have the demographic heft to either seize the country back, get a separate country, or even get autonomy. I can't see how we regain self-determination unless the US loses a war to Russia/China. But that puts us in the very dangerous position of advocating treason.
  35. Your reference to illegal migrants is disingenuous. The US replaced “hostile” Sunni regimes with puppets who support US occupation and also attacks Iran via unilateral sanctions.

    The US invents enemies to justify their obscene military expenditure. Only an idiot would believe that other nations want bad relations with the US when they would much prefer just doing their own thing free from constant US military threats.

    If the US was invaded by a foreign military then US citizens would go hell for leather in resisting. That is, it is far more likely that Iraqis, Syrians and Lebanese citizens resisting occupation will attack US troops in their own countries than Iranians who haven’t been invaded.

  36. 216 says: • Website
    @Sean
    @216

    It seems you agree with Matthew Yglesias. who advocates for One Billion Americans, ostensibly because he thinks that way America will stay on top forever. If the demographic argument against Russia was really believed, then East Asian countries with a productive/ military age population that is shrinking far faster than Russia's would be in serious financial trouble already. But that has not happened, only Kyle Bass seriously tried to short Japan (and then China). Markets don't have a meaningful belief in the line of reasoning by which low birthrate and immigration restriction leads to grass growing in the streets. As Eamonn Fingleton has said, they would be putting their money when their mouth is if they did. The American elite have the wind at their back because they are making lots of (generally unrepatriatable) money on paper, meanwhile China's productive capacity is built up. When Bass ended his shorting of China in mid 2019 he said that for the amoral investor China is the place to put money, which is the received wisdom. Biden the other week:


    "And I came back and said they're going to end their One China -- their one child policy, because they're so xenophobic they won't let anybody else in, and more people are retired than working. How can they sustain economic growth when more people are retired?."
     
    There is a schismogenesis in official US projections of continuing global supremacy inasmuch what Wall St are actually doing and Biden's Deep State briefings are mutually inconsistent.

    Military adventurism has gone badly for the US Right, unclear for Russia, well for Erdogan, and nonexistent for China
     
    From having an abundance of strategic space, Russia is fighting 500 miles from Moscow. China attacked the US's forces in Korea and then won in Vietnam through proxies, because the US feared a serious effort to win would provoke a Korea-style intervention by China. If by America's adventurism you mean a use of military force that is in geopolitical terms a trivial diversion from the action necessary to combat threats to the country, then I agree. However, if 'adventurism' is intended to imply the US can simply stay at home militarily--even as the basis of its military power erodes in relation to China--then I am afraid that would be a counsel of learned helplessness rather than strategic analysis. Caveats on the utility of military force learnt from prior faint hearted or misdirected interventions are always in order, but behind closed doors the possible necessity of levying war cannot be ruled out.

    Replies: @216

    If by America’s adventurism you mean a use of military force that is in geopolitical terms a trivial diversion from the action necessary to combat threats to the country, then I agree.

    The key point is “the US Right”. The Bush wars were electorally devastating to the Right, and appear to have permanently alienated many in Gen Y from both the GOP, but also from Christianity and social conservatism. The fiscal consequences have also been ruinous.

    From having an abundance of strategic space, Russia is fighting 500 miles from Moscow.

    Russia is fighting in Syria to preserve a questionable ally, who is far more in debt to Iran. A secondary point is to limit Turkish expansionism, but this has been for naught because of Armenia’s defeat.

    Victory for Assad will likely still leave large parts of his territory occupied by foreign powers, and the main benefit for Russia is increased arms/nuclear power exports to other Arab countries.

    The economic cost from sanctions has been considerable, and has alienated many East Europe countries from Russia. A united EU can push back on Russia, and contribute to ideological subversion. A disunited EU might lead to conditions where Le Pen and AFD could win power in their respective countries.

    It seems you agree with Matthew Yglesias. who advocates for One Billion Americans, ostensibly because he thinks that way America will stay on top forever.

    I dislike Sr. Yglesias, but its hard to argue with raw neoliberal math, at least until their system unravels. Conservatives in the US are demographically weak, and culturally powerless. The demographic washout in California has left the Right not only powerless in the most powerful state, but has dramatic effects on global culture.

    So we are in a bind, left unchecked, the liberal system will eventually grind our culture into dust. But we don’t have the demographic heft to either seize the country back, get a separate country, or even get autonomy. I can’t see how we regain self-determination unless the US loses a war to Russia/China. But that puts us in the very dangerous position of advocating treason.

  37. @216
    @Molip


    2. If people in the US felt inclined to blow up invaders why shouldn’t Iraqis or Syrians or Lebanese feel inclined to feel like blowing up invaders?

     

    Contrary to leftist discourse, the US-Mexico border is not militarized anywhere near to the level that Israel's or India's is.

    But still, the Democrats in the legislature and the media constantly scream about mistreated invaders in the US. And you aren't even allowed to use the phrase "invaders" upon penalty of deplatforming.

    The US did Iran a tremendous favor by removing two hostile Sunni regimes on its borders. Iran responded by killing our troops.

    Replies: @reiner Tor

    The US did Iran a tremendous favor by removing two hostile Sunni regimes on its borders. Iran responded by killing our troops.

    Because in 2004 and later influential American politicians were openly discussing destroying Iran.

    Or do you believe that it’s impossible for Iranians to know what American politicians are talking about..?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS