The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewThe Saker Archive
Could This (Finally!) be the End for the Atlantic Integrationists?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Lavrentii Beria and Mikhail Mishustin

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

By now we all have heard the news, the entire Russian government has resigned and a new Prime Minister, Mikhail Mishustin, has been appointed. And we also know that the Internet has exploded with all sorts of speculations about what this all could mean.

Alas, until we know who will be included in the new government, there is very little we can really say. I mean, yes, in theory, we could hold out breath and expect Glaziev will be appointed to a top position in the so-called “economic block” of the government, but how do we know that it will not be Kudrin instead?!

We don’t.

One thing we do know for sure is what Putin announced in his speech. You can read the full text here for yourself, but here are two things I want to single out:

  1. Putin has announced a major effort to deal with the (still appalling) poverty suffered by many Russians
  2. Putin has announced a major effort to truly re-sovereignize Russia

In the first case, Putin has proposed a number of major government programs to deal with the appalling poverty many Russians still live in including a much beefed up maternity capital (which will also deal with the demographic issue), reduced mortgage rates, free healthy hot meals in schools, etc.

In the second case, Putin announced the following:

“Russia can be and can remain Russia only as a sovereign state. Our nation’s sovereignty must be unconditional. We have done a great deal to achieve this. We restored our state’s unity. We have overcome the situation when certain powers in the government were essentially usurped by oligarch clans. Russia has returned to international politics as a country whose opinion cannot be ignored. ”

and

“I suggest formalizing at the constitutional level the obligatory requirements for those who hold positions of critical significance for national security and sovereignty.”

At the very least, this is a very good sign. As I have suggested many times, the slogan of “restore full sovereignty” can be a battle cry for both Russian and US American patriots. And we also all know who will be absolutely appalled by all this talk of “sovereignty”, don’t we?

And yet.

I feel like I have to caution everybody and remind you all that the problem in Russia (and in the US) is not so much one of personalities, but one of a bad system first and foremost. I won’t touch upon the US side of this problem, but let me quickly spell out what has happened in Russia over the past decades.

Today’s Russia is a product of several factors:

  1. The unreformable Soviet Union of the 1980s which turned into a “cake” of sorts for the Soviet “Nomenklatura” which, when it realized that it would lose control of the country, decided to break up the Soviet Union into 15 different countries (including quite a few totally fictional ones) and re-branded itself from “defenders of the Party and the USSR” into “fervent nationalists”. That was just about as fake a rebranding as ever but there was nothing the majority of the people (who wanted to maintained the Soviet Union) could do about it.
  2. Then came the horrors of the 1990s during which Russia (and the rest of the newly minted republics) were drowned into an orgy of lawlessness, violence, corruption and total, absolute, subservience to the AngloZionist Empire.
  3. Finally, during the 2000s we saw a period of shared power between the Atlantic Integrationists lead by Medvedev and the Eurasian Sovereignist lead by Putin. This was an uneasy partnership in which the Atlantic Integrationists were in control of the “economic block” while the Eurasian Sovereignists were tasked with Russia’s foreign affairs and defense.

As their name suggests, the Atlantic Integrationists want to integrate Russian (and themselves!) into the AngloZionist sphere of control while the Eurasian Sovereignists want a truly sovereign Russia. Now just imagine what that first group felt when they heard Putin declare:

I suggest formalizing at the constitutional level the obligatory requirements for those who hold positions of critical significance for national security and sovereignty. More precisely, the heads of the constituent entities, members of the Federation Council, State Duma deputies, the prime minister and his/her deputies, federal ministers, heads of federal agencies and judges should have no foreign citizenship or residence permit or any other document that allows them to live permanently in a foreign state. The goal and mission of state service is to serve the people, and those who enter this path must know that by doing this they inseparably connect their lives with Russia and the Russian people without any assumptions and allowances. Requirements must be even stricter for presidential candidates. I suggest formalizing a requirement under which presidential candidates must have had permanent residence in Russia for at least 25 years and no foreign citizenship or residence permit and not only during the election campaign but at any time before it too.

This is clearly a death sentence passed on the supreme hope of the Atlantic Integrationists who from now on won’t be able to integrate Russia or even themselves (by means of passports, bank accounts or real estate) into the AngloZionist elites. There is now even a joke running on the Runet (Russian Internet):

13:00 – Путин заявил, что госслужащие должны быть только гражданами России
16:30 – Правительство в полном составе ушло в отставку
translation:
1:00pm – Putin says that civil servants should only have a Russian citizenship
4:30pm – the full Government resigns

And while there is an element of hyperbole here, there is also much truth too!

Still, we always need to remember that in Russian history the internal enemy was always much more dangerous to the leader of Russia than any foreign enemies. In our case, not only will these Atlantic Integrationists resist any and all forms of true sovereignization of Russia, they will be backed by a very powerful and rich Russian political class which make millions by robbing Russia blind in the 1990s, they are also supported by every single western government and the real “deep state” leaders of the AngloZionist Empire.

Then there are those in the putatively pro-Russian blogosphere who were quite happy all these past years to see Russia as a western-style social democracy with a very, shall we say, “liberal” (I prefer the word “capitalist” as it is both more honest and less ambiguous) economy and they will now also feel threatened by what appears to be a pretty hard turn to the Left, meaning that the Kremlin is finally listening to the will of the people and that turbo-capitalism will now be gradually replaced by a sharp increase in social solidarity. I look forward to the mental yoga these folks will now have to engage in to pretend to support Putin while, at the same time, being a propaganda outlet for Atlantic Integrationists.

As I also said it many times, Putin is a very good man at the head of a very bad system and truly reforming a very bad system is an extremely difficult task.

ORDER IT NOW

So while, yes, it IS possible that what will happen next will (finally!) be a purge of all the 5th columnists sitting in the top echelons of power in Russia, this is by no means a done deal and we ought to wait and see what kind of people actually get they key positions in the Russian government and, especially, in the “economic block”.

We should never forget how disappointed the real Russian patriots were when following a triumphant victory at the elections, Putin basically re-nominated most of the (very unpopular) Medvedev government the last time around. Instead of a purge of the 5th column we had the ugly pension reform debacle.

Some in Russia are already daydreaming about a real, Stalin-style, purge of the political ruling elites. They even noticed that the new Prime Minister does have a more than tiny resemblance to Lavrentii Beria, Stalin’s chief of the secret police, see for yourself:

Mikhail Mishustin
Mikhail Mishustin
Lavrentii Beria
Lavrentii Beria

Okay, yes, there is a resemblance, but the TIMES have totally changed! For all the western propaganda about Russia being some kind of autocratic/despotic “Mordor”, the truth is that Russia is a country of law and that Putin is a President who does act strictly withing the confines of Russian law. There will be no mass purges, no nightly arrests, no secret executions.

Personally, I am cautiously optimistic. The language used in Putin’s address has all the right words and expressions, and his suggested reforms all make perfectly good sense. But in the past there were other such Presidential addresses with no less lofty goals, and then the immensely powerful Russian bureaucracy (yes, that is the non-existing 5th column too) made sure that these goals would never be reached.

The new Prime Minister has promised that the full list of appointees to the new government will be made public before the 21st. I suggest that we wait until we have all the fact before making any predictions.

 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Neoliberalism, Russia, Vladimir Putin 
Hide 281 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anon[408] • Disclaimer says: • Website

    I wish the leftist commentators on many dissident sites would stop using the term “capitalism” when what we have is corporatism. Capitalism is still an “unknown” ideal. (Rand). Socialism is not the answer, my friends. ( the impossibility of economic calculation in the socialist commonwealth. Von Mises. The problem is the state, not the private ownership of the means of production.

  2. The new Prime Minister has promised that the full list of appointees to the new government will be made public before the 21st. I suggest that we wait until we have all the fact before making any predictions.

    I can totally see Siluanov being retained in his traditional financial capacity. Nor appearance of Kudrin or Glazyev, for that matter, will mean that much either way. It is clear that strategic goals are NOT set in Russia’s White House but in Kremlin. Those goals are very clear and new government can be sent packing as fast as the previous one if they do not deliver. I think, granted his background, Mishistin clearly understands both challenge but also immense perspectives which open for him in the future if what is stated is fulfilled. As per “integrationists”, they have been defeated in 2014 with mopping up still in progress. In other words, new government will be totally technical government retained for distribution of gigantic funds being pumped in Russia’s economy and social sphere.

    • Replies: @Dr.Areg the 2nd
    , @chris
  3. I don’t think it will be long before we see Congress in the US calling for invasion of Russia on the grounds of a lack of diversity, lack of respect for LGBTP and so forth.

    • LOL: ChuckOrloski
    • Replies: @chris
  4. This is wide of the mark. Mishustin ‘s political allegiances have been with the Union of Right Forces, the crystallization of the turbo charged Capitalist relics from the Yeltsin era. Makes Medvedev look like a socialist. He reformed the cadastral (land registration) system before his master piece with VAT. Both of these accomplishments are huge steps to a transparent market system.

    URF isn’t represented in the Duma so Mishustin’s chances of selection in 2021 (of the Duma elections) are slight unless Putin makes his support very clear. He will probably get the URF over the vote threshold, 5%. A real voice of opposition to United Russia.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  5. @Philip Owen

    This is wide of the mark. Mishustin ‘s political allegiances have been with the Union of Right Forces, the crystallization of the turbo charged Capitalist relics from the Yeltsin era. Makes Medvedev look like a socialist. He reformed the cadastral (land registration) system before his master piece with VAT. Both of these accomplishments are huge steps to a transparent market system.

    For a man who lives (or lived) in Russia you exhibit an astonishing lack of insight and awareness–I guess it is typical fro products of Anglo “education”. To demonstrate that you really have no grasp of the events in Russia, it is enough to remind you that Russian State returned in the last 10-12 years a volume of property (including strategic resources and industrial assets) which amount to 70-75%. In fact creeping re-nationalization was proceeding for quite sometime and Mishustin was part of it in several capacities. Mind you, we live in 2020, not in 2001. Per “transparent market system”…LOL. You, obviously, didn’t listen to Putin’s address either.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @Philip Owen
  6. @Anon

    You toss around the word “socialism” in the same way that you criticize the use of the word “capitalism”. Marxism/communism is Jewish socialism. Many of Marx’s socialist contemporaries were openly anti-Semitic, and opposed to his views. The basis of socialism is co-operatives and self funding. The basis of capitalism is capital, which is provided by banks to the capitalists. Socialism focuses on local economies. Capitalism focuses on growth to “other” markets nationally and internationally.

    The problem is the state, not the private ownership of the means of production.

    If private ownership is not a problem, why should co-operative or government ownership be a problem? The issue is governance. Many government owned enterprises are poorly governed, just as there are co-operatives and “private” enterprises that are poorly governed. What, other than poor governance, could have caused GM, which in 1996, had more cash on hand than any other corporation in the world, to go bankrupt a dozen years later? It sure as hell wasn’t good governance. How did Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers go under? The “state” through Alan Greenspan’s lobbying, “got out of the way” and gave them everything they wanted.
    There is no perfect economic system, they all have their benefits and drawbacks.

  7. Minutu says:

    It’s good to purge CIA’s fifth column, but ultimately the crucial question is, How will international and municipal law relate? That will determine Russia’s influence on the international comity and rule of law.

    Now Article 17 of the Russian Constitution reads “in the Russian Federation rights and freedoms of person and citizen are recognized and guaranteed pursuant to the generally recognized principles and norms of international law and in accordance with this Constitution.” Article 18 states that rights and freedoms of the person and citizen are directly applicable. That prohibits the kind of bad-faith tricks the USA pulls, like declaring “non-self executing” treaties, or making legally void reservations, declarations, understandings, and provisos to screw you out of your rights. Article 46(3) guarantees citizens a constitutional right to appeal to inter-State bodies for the protection of human rights and freedoms if internal legal redress has been exhausted. Ratified international treaties supersede any inconsistent domestic legislation. This is world-standard rule of law that makes Russia leader of the free world.

    https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Countries/ENACARegion/Pages/RUIndex.aspx

    The only attention I’ve seen given to this issue suggests that the intent of any change would be to limit the threat of human rights distortion in the ECtHR. This is reasonable, since the ECtHR’s independence is questionable. ECtHR’s conventional law is the ECHR, a bowdlerized statist subset of the UDHR imposed by the US on a prostrate Europe in the Fifties. The ECHR makes it easier for the state to kill you, for example, and it withholds economic and social rights. The ECtHR’s decisions are affected by the compromised sovereignty of the NATO satellites they rule on.

    Russia is better served by its core human rights rights treaties. Under those treaties Russian law at all levels must come into conformity with Russia’s human rights commitments. Russians’ civil and political rights are irrevocable under the principle of continuity of obligations:

    http://ccprcentre.org/page/view/general_comments/27768

    And treaty body review processes are more comprehensive than ECtHR jurisdiction while being less susceptible to bad-faith CIA lawfare. Judicial review of human rights can increasingly be handled by the ICJ, which has more independence and institutional integrity than the ECtHR. But the essence of Articles 17, 18, and 46 is sound and must be preserved for the sake of Russia’s international standing: human rights are Russian law; Russians have access to individual complaints procedures.

    Expect rearguard action by the Atlanticists to focus on US style attacks on the principles of Article 18. US courts properly interpreted international obligations and commitments in the Supreme Court’s The Paquete Habana decision, but since 1949 CIA has fought to undermine that with legal nonsense called the Charming Betsy canon and the doctrine of deference, retrogressively elaborated into “utmost deference,” and most recently, by CIA’s man on the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh, “deference upon deference,” and presumably “ut-ut-utmost deference upon deference upon deference…” Watch out for logic-chopping references to non self-executing treaties, and restrict reservations to prevent US-style totalitarianism.

  8. A123 says:

    At the very least, this is a very good sign. As I have suggested many times, the slogan of “restore full sovereignty” can be a battle cry for both Russian and US American patriots

    You should add Poland to your list of sovereign patriots. (1)

    Under the new law, [Polish] judges can be punished for implementing a judgment of a supranational court

    The EU’s whole legal architecture, established since case law in the 1960s, rests upon the primacy of EU law and its direct effect in EU member countries. And while no PiS politician actively wants Poland to exit the EU, they have even less appetite for a system in which EU law takes priority and allows European institutions to call out democratic defects in a member state.

    _______

    And we also all know who will be absolutely appalled by all this talk of “sovereignty”, don’t we?

    A good description. Far-left Globalists like Merkel & Macron will be appalled.

    Hopefully this will open the door to more cooperation between Christian Orthodox Russia and Christian Protestant America. There are many opportunities if Cold War grudges can be set aside.

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    (1) https://www.politico.eu/article/poland-autocratic-government-pis-power-grab/

    • Agree: Phil_from_NJ
    • Replies: @the grand wazoo
    , @Johan
  9. FB says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I hope you are correct…

    I saw on your blog that you called this a turn back to socialism, or ‘Sovietism’…this would be the right course indeed…Socialism with Russian Characteristics…

    Russia has huge potential, especially in terms of human capital…perhaps no other nation can come close in this regard, even China [for now]…

    But there is like an ‘invisible hand’ holding a lid on everything…the great scientific and technical minds are creating amazing breakthroughs in propulsion, aerodynamics and many other fields…but turning this into factories churning out airplanes and engines seems to never materialize due to a ‘lack of money’…

    What on earth is going on with that…?

    A Sovereign country makes its own money for infrastructure and industrial development that will pay huge dividends down the road…with interest…again China…[and see PCR who has been preaching this for Russia for at least a decade…]

    Where is the will on the part of the Russian house of finance to cut loose and start funding things properly…?

    Mortgages at 10 percent…again this is going to help grow the economy how…meanwhile China builds entire ‘ghost’ megacities and then we see the finely tuned plan unfold as millions move in and the ‘ghost’ cities come alive…

    You mentioned that you heard something about two percent mortgage rates and other such household incentives mentioned by Putin yesterday…I hope this turns out to be true…

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  10. Many interesting revelations here, was surprised to learn that Russia has been a “western-style social democracy” all these years, but this really takes the cake:

    Then there are those in the putatively pro-Russian blogosphere who were quite happy all these past years to see Russia as a western-style social democracy with a very, shall we say, “liberal” (I prefer the word “capitalist” as it is both more honest and less ambiguous) economy and they will now also feel threatened by what appears to be a pretty hard turn to the Left, meaning that the Kremlin is finally listening to the will of the people and that turbo-capitalism will now be gradually replaced by a sharp increase in social solidarity.

    Mishustin is, as pointed out by Philip Owen above, a hardcore economic liberal. In addition, he’s against higher taxes for the rich, calling them inefficient and irrelevant in Russia’s context.

    https://lenta.ru/news/2020/01/16/nalog/

    I also assume that he doesn’t rape schoolgirls, like the Georgian gangster prominently featured on this post.

    • LOL: AltSerrice
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Passer by
    , @chris
  11. Anonymous[607] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Relax, Karlin, your LDPR already backed him 🙂

  12. @Andrei Martyanov

    Lived and owned a business. Still do business.

    M is active in the Gaidar forum and seems to have been the highest ranking Yeltsinite still around. Time for the pendulum to swing back?

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  13. Greg S. says:
    @Anon

    Very much agreed. That’s the slide that America and Europe are on right now. Do you ever wonder why the highest immigration rates in the world are to places like: socialist Sweden, socialist Canada, socialist Germany, socialist California? I gave you a hint, it’s the socialism. After going too far down the socialist path, these states begin run to like ponzi-schemes, where the only thing propping them is a rapid expansion of population. They need the population increases so bad that they will accept almost anyone and will also offer lavish incentives to encourage third worlders to make the journey (free healthcare, free family reunifications, free education, free housing, etc). We are witnessing the death-throes of these societies. The last ditch effort to keep the party going a few more years. It will fail, and it will fail spectacularly, as socialism always does. If America as a whole goes down that path, by electing any one of the current crop of Democrat crazies, it will be a rapid acceleration of the fall.

    • Agree: Thomasina
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @bluedog
  14. Talking about 5th columns — when will Putin do something about the NGO poison?
    One day everthing’s fine, the next day a “colour” revolution has mysteriously broken out…. (Gee, I wonder why protesters AND police are being snipered down ?)

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  15. Hibernian says:

    Putin is a very good man…

    Mr. Saker, you’d have more credibility if you recognized the evil on both sides.

    • Replies: @Quartermaster
  16. Truly the day has come when Putin finally BTFOs the AngloZioNazis and their dastardly ocean of integration.

  17. @Anon

    If only we could try true capitalism for once!

    • LOL: iffen
    • Replies: @Thomasina
  18. @Greg S.

    None of the countries you mention are Socialist. They have very successful market economies that support modest (in the cases of California and Canada) state welfare systems.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @Thomasina
  19. @animalogic

    Snipers shooting police and protestors in Russia? Examples please.

    • Replies: @animalogic
  20. bluedog says:
    @Greg S.

    Hmm where have you been as our parasitic type capitalism has eaten the host,get those rose colored glasses off and see the real system for what it really is,and as you admit with the “rapid acceleration of the fall” which means the system is already in decay, and of course once it reach’s the tipping point it will accelerate under its own power,which it is doing as transportation has collasped to the 2008 level,the billions poured into the REPO to keep it floating,employment has failed to reach the 2008 point,the whole government and financial system is nothing more than smoke and mirrors for as soon as they plug one hole another appears so they can do it all over again.!!!

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  21. @bluedog

    500 years of Capitalist trade and industry has done more for humanity than the previous 6000 of civilization.

  22. Passer by says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    Weak comment. A “Hardcore economic liberal” who now talks about social justice, traditional values, improving birth rate, and wants to give money to poor families, to people with chidren, raising salaries, to open more free paces in Universities, to give hot meals to students, to helps teachers and doctors, to start large scale government led infrastructure projects, and all of this in the context of banning foreign citizenship for MPs, government members, judges, etc.

    There is economic left wing push coupled with sovereignization and traditional values, which has nothing to do with liberalism.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  23. @Passer by

    Economic liberals can back welfare and social justice. More or less the whole of Europe manages it. The Far East goes some way down that road too compared to the US, albeit not as far. More emphasis on healthcare less on pensions.

    For ordinary people the EU15 of the early ’90’s was ahead of the US once health care, unemployment insurance, pensions and educational cost were considered. The bottom 80% in the US were worse off, the next 15% matched their EU 15 peers and the top 5% were much better off with the top 0.25% (one in 400 income earners) being very much better off. The US came out on top in after tax income but that income had to pay for a lot of things more cheaply provided by the state. In those things choice is an illusion for all but the last 20% and not even most of those throughout a lifetime. Many people reach the top 0.25% for a year or two. It is not a permanent office in life.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Disagree: Polynikes
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  24. @Philip Owen

    M is active in the Gaidar forum and seems to have been the highest ranking Yeltsinite still around.

    OK, let me put it in even simpler terms: when Putin lays out in a front of one (BTW, very competent financier and machine-building engineer by education) such as Mishustin such perspective as through being technical caretaker PM to have a shot at Presidency in a meritocracy which is increasingly pronounced at top echelons of power in Russia, one will abandon all those “Gaidar” child-plays and will become Communist, Fascist or even Jehovah Witness if need be to have such an opportunity. To demonstrate my point–a Wonderkid Sergei Kirienko who was a poster boy for neoliberal econom9ic policies of 1990s. Well, guess what–the Wonderkid headed Rosatom for years, turned this state-owned operation into a corporate global monster, also, to a large degree responsible for a vast number of scientific and technological breakthroughs in the foundation of Russia’s weapons program and voila’. Who today remembers that this highly decorated statesman was ever a part of pool of Chicago “boys” in 1990s? You see how easy it is to change a person when getting this person right orientation and right aims in life and career.

    • Replies: @Dr.Areg the 2nd
  25. @FB

    I saw on your blog that you called this a turn back to socialism, or ‘Sovietism’…this would be the right course indeed…Socialism with Russian Characteristics…

    It is a mixed socially-oriented economy with Soviet features–a Sovietization foreseen by Alexander Zinoviev 25 years ago. It is a complex cultural phenomenon which is difficult to discuss without knowing Russia’s XX Century history.

    But there is like an ‘invisible hand’ holding a lid on everything…the great scientific and technical minds are creating amazing breakthroughs in propulsion, aerodynamics and many other fields…but turning this into factories churning out airplanes and engines seems to never materialize due to a ‘lack of money’…

    This “hand” was a combination of financial conservatism required through the time of Russia’s “decoupling” from the West and concentration of resources and power against the background of a dramatic confrontation with the West and finding people who can control National Projects. Those resources and power had been finally concentrated and people (Medvedev’s team) who were incapable to distribute (as opposed to accumulate–which they did moderately well) resources have been removed. FYI, even with this “hand” actual industrial growth in Russia, even against the background of sanctions, was by no means anemic. In fact, the scale of Russia’s re-industrialization is astonishing even today.

    • Replies: @Sergey Krieger
  26. @Philip Owen

    Economic liberals can back welfare and social justice.

    You are applying Western definitions to a subject which doesn’t fit into Western, primarily Anglo-Saxon economic and social views. Russia’s “economic liberals” are primarily pro-Western laissez-faire-worshiping libertarians who deny Russian people any kind of historic subjectivity. These lunatics are spread between some remnants of, as you said, Gaidar cult in political top and among urban office plankton, much of it thirty-something generation with maturity level of teenagers. Anglo-Saxon economic liberalism never worked and never will work in Russia due to Russia’s history and culture–subjects which, as empirical evidence suggests, are beyond the grasp of Western “elites”. Why it is so, I am writing a third book on this issue. They JUST can’t.

  27. Well, Russia has always been weak at turning research into production. The 19th C iron workers in Ekatrinburg couldn’t do it. To make rails and steel plate for ships they needed British engineers in the Donbass. Same for cannons in Lugansk. And so to Soviet times.

    I greatly admire the Soviet research institute. It is one of the best mechanisms I have seen for turning academic ideas into working prototypes. For spacecraft and a few missiles it is very good. The transfer to mass production usually lacked quality. Productivity was poor at all stages. Assembling prototypes using Ph.D. Labour is unproductive and then there is the Soviet/Russian factory manager exploiting his position. (I do not blame the workers. There are no bad soldiers only bad officers to quote Napoleon).

    “Russia is different” was the excuse of Nicholas I for introducing his nationality project. It didn’t work. Serfdom and the Mir has given Russia a different culture from North West Europe but Russians are not another species. Offer good incentives and they will respond. I give you the Stolylpin peasants as an example. But, even now, the Mir lives in the wreckage of the collective farm system.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
    , @Paul holland
  28. Well, Russia has always been weak at turning research into production

    Yes, she was also largely illiterate and 95% agrarian peasant country. I also look differently in 57 than when I was 10 or even 25. Wonderful “argument”. It may come to you as a surprise but this thesis of your is largely obsolete, including in fields where the West is not even competitor and I am not talking about weapons–West, especially Europe, are not even serious competitors. I am talking about such fields as nuclear energy and aerospace in non-military applications. Last time I checked, Russia was producing some damn good rolling stock and commercial jet engines. Nah, I am not going to waste time here explaining obvious things.

  29. @Andrei Martyanov

    SJ100 is very expensive to maintain but a decent first effort. Trains in Western Europe go faster than 50 km an hour. Nuclear, yes, a now technically developed but expensive design not least because they are in actual production and do not have to meet excessive safety standards. Also a good example of prototype production which I already said was a field of Soviet excellence.

    Imperial Russia was not so far behind in primary education. 10-15 years compared to the UK. Everyone was decades behind Prussia. The Russian Empire compared to Japan at the time. The Soviet Union and Japan were the only countries to complete industrialization in the first half of the 20th C. Imperial Russia was well under way with the process. So not so far behind, certainly compared to the Japanese or even Italy. Momentum was lost from the 1960’s. Soviet economy without Stalinism. All the wrong incentives. Education or the military were the routes into the elite. No room for hard work, enterprise and getting lucky with a business.

    I say Russia has strengths but also weaknesses. You seem to say Russia is all powerful. I expect we are both tired. You are usually a rational man.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @FB
  30. Truth3 says:

    Saker the Stupid Sensationalist… he simply cannot resist.

    Comparing likenesses of Beria to Mishustin is a clown act of the first order.

    Dump this fraud Mr. Unz. Enough already.

  31. @Truth3

    Faker is always so massively wrong and badly written too.

    • Agree: Wally, Marshall Lentini
  32. FB says: • Website

    Here is a comment from a fellow on the Moon of Alabama blog, with which I totally agree…fellow goes by the handle ‘Red Ryder’ and is originally posted here…

    Though Putin seemed to have immense power as an autocratic President, that is only for security issues and security sectors. For Domestic Economic and Social issues, the Left, the West-loving Liberals had a firm grasp in 1999-2000 and had to be accommodated. Russia was at war with mafia organizations and Chechen jihadis. The West had sabotaged the Russian Federation. It was collapsing. Putin had to accommodate the Liberals and share power. They fractured Science, Education, the domestic economy, and continually undermined all Putin’s domestic developments. Medvedev’s government was the tool they used to handicap Russia.

    Putin overcame this, survived the destabilization, color revolutions, NATO encroachments, CIA-terrorist events, the Maidan-Nazi coup in Kiev, and made the bold moves in Georgia, Crimea, Donbass, and then Syria. Reaching a virtual alliance with China enabled Russia to weather the sanctions regimes and the Info-propaganda wars from Washington, London and Brussels.

    Only more recently has Russia reached a state of balance where we assume, incorrectly, it has been for these past 20 years.

    Putin now is showing the way to the future.

    Medvedev is not a partner. He is a useful tool. Putin has boxed him in the Security Council where he will disappear. Patrushev and Putin are the Security Council leaders, with Sergei Ivanov, the single man closest to Putin since their school days in St. Petersburg.

    Putin knows the US is at war with Russia. He is organizing the homeland defense.

    Next will be a deep shakeup among the oligarchs who Putin made deals with to get them out of politics early on. They will have to pay up to boost the economy.

    How Putin stays past 2024 is still unknown. But he knows he is as important to the survival and future success of Russia as the S-400, hypersonic missiles and uninterrupted flow of oil and gas exports. Russia needs Putin in charge for at least another 10-12 years.

    Reshaping the government is part of the defense of the Fatherland.

    • Replies: @KA
  33. Derer says:

    No big deal…Putin wants shift more responsibility/decision making from government to an elected body parliament. Medvedev perhaps disagreed and therefore resigned but will still be important player in Putin administration..

    China is doing just fine without American crony capitalism which is essentially a reckless journey to monopoly in each major sector. Level of GDP means nothing it is poorly distributed and military multipliers account for 65% of the economy. Hence, American economy needs international conflicts, new enemies and perpetual wars and of course anti-free trade sanctions. Russia is main target of American sanctions they are always concocted when Russia is doing well.

    • Replies: @Popeye
    , @Derer
  34. @Philip Owen

    SJ100 is very expensive to maintain but a decent first effort.

    You, of course, never heard of MC-21 and PD-14. I wonder why. SSJ-100 is not “first” effort, historic Russia (as USSR) had and still has one of the best aerospace industries of a full enclosed cycle: from R&D and design to manufacturing. As per SSJ-100, because of Snecma/Safran’s shitty Hot Core of SAM-146 engines SSJs had a number of issues with spare parts from French. Russia is going to substitute it with PD-7. This is just a “little” detail for your file, if one exists. Per Rollin Stock, LOL:

    Trains in Western Europe go faster than 50 km an hour

    Western Europe, pardon my French, is the size of a dick of Angela Merkel. Territory-wise it is about the size of Yakutsk region. Russian freight trains, which actually haul cargo from Vladivostok to Belarus do not go 250 kilometers per hours as Sapsan does between Moscow and St.Pete, but it is not even necessary in Russia. And no, passenger trains in Russia can go and do, depending on segment, go 100 km/hr and even higher.

    Imperial Russia was not so far behind in primary education. 10-15 years compared to the UK. Everyone was decades behind Prussia. The Russian Empire compared to Japan at the time. The Soviet Union and Japan were the only countries to complete industrialization in the first half of the 20th C. Imperial Russia was well under way with the process. So not so far behind, certainly compared to the Japanese or even Italy.

    Oh sure, and if there wouldn’t have been WWI and there would have been eternal peace and Russian army would have been better equipped than even Austrian , not to mention German one, and if there were other wonderful “what if” conditions fulfilled, sure, anything could have been possible, including Russia getting competent political class, and competent Czar instead of Nicholas II. Anything could have been possible, as they say in Russia, if grandma had balls, she would have been a grandpa. Your “argumentation” belongs precisely at gatherings of Russian liberda (a euphemism for ignorant urban plankton), who are listeners to Echo of Moscow and read RBC and Novay for “enlightenment”.

    I say Russia has strengths but also weaknesses. You seem to say Russia is all powerful.

    Please, point me out to a place where I say that. Try as I might, I cannot recall saying that Russia is “all” powerful. She is a superpower, but that is a broad definition, she still has a lot of deformities from 1990s which need to be addressed. In fact, that is why Putin spoke to Federal Assembly recently.

    • Replies: @Steve Naidamast
  35. @Truth3

    Comparing likenesses of Beria to Mishustin is a clown act of the first order.

    Not if you think harder. BTW, have you considered changing your moniker of Truth3 to something more appropriate like Omnipotent2, All-knowing1.0 or maybe even God 2.1? In related news, Beria was a superb industrial engineer and was in charge of Soviet nuclear project and military-industrial complex during WW II–a no small feat. Mishustin is also industrial engineer, who went into financial sector, performed brilliantly, and now is a prime-minister. So, there are some parallels, especially if to consider (for those people who buy into caricature BS in the West known as Soviet History) that Putin can be defined as a softer version of Stalin.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
    , @Truth3
  36. KA says:
    @Philip Owen

    Sniper in Moscow was seen during the parliamentary attack by troops in 1991.

  37. KA says:
    @FB

    Putin’s trust of Israel and often equal or subservient roles in dealing with Israel make one wonder how Russia would be able to fend US off ? It does raise doubt how effective Russia could be against US interference in Russian politics and economy. Russia also can’t afford the Russian Israeli citizen return to Moscow or St Petersburg in case of economic deterioration of Israel which inevitably would follow any repeat of another 2008 in US or any war between US and NK, China or US Iran.

    • Replies: @Steve Naidamast
  38. Seraphim says:

    Western ‘mentality’ cannot renounce the mantra of eternal ‘Russian backwardness’ (which has to do with the Russians not being sufficiently ‘nordic’). That would shatter the belief in their God given ‘superiority’. There has always to be something at which Russians are ‘no good’.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
  39. Wally says:
    @Philip Owen

    Those “market economies” are controlled by the state, therefore they are not market economies and are necessarily doomed to failure.

    recommended:
    Capitalism vs. Socialism / Communism
    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/03/no_author/socialism-for-dummies-and-nature-for-the-savy/

  40. Max Payne says:

    tiny resemblance to Lavrentii Beria

    Mmmmm…..

  41. Miro23 says:

    Personally, I am cautiously optimistic. The language used in Putin’s address has all the right words and expressions, and his suggested reforms all make perfectly good sense. But in the past there were other such Presidential addresses with no less lofty goals, and then the immensely powerful Russian bureaucracy (yes, that is the non-existing 5th column too) made sure that these goals would never be reached.

    There are similarities with Trump in the US, but Putin is surely right that the state (Putin and his fellow sovereignists) need to examine every power holder in Russian society for their sovereignist credentials and track record.

    It’s what the Bolsheviks did after 1917 to cement their hold on Russian society and it’s what the US Zio-Corporate -Globalists are currently doing to cement their hold on US society.

    The alternative is Direct Democracy but Russia at present has no chance of that.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  42. Alfred says:

    The whole thing can be summed up as making the Russian Federation Jew-Proof.

    There must be many very upset people in London, Washington and Tel Aviv whose plans have been turned to dust.

    Thank you Mr Putin the Patriot.

  43. @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia since 1991 has been weak at R&D, if GDP figures are correct for all the wiki/global research sites, around 1.25% of GDP/year for the whole time.

    Given the many papers on the relation between GDP and R&D (https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1047&context=sppworkingpapers, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/82221970.pdf ), I am surprised that Putin’s intelligent allocation of resources has not bumped that number over the last 20 years, especially since it is a STEM strong nation, and China actively raising the % (2.2% of GDP now).

    Russia may be good at military R&D, and that saves her skin, but for the non-military side of the market, at least with the available figures, it is a massive lager to OECD countries, and given R&D is the engine of economic growth, it shows in its low GDP numbers.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  44. Parfois1 says:
    @Philip Owen

    But, even now, the Mir lives in the wreckage of the collective farm system.

    Glad to know that. From what I have learned about Russia, in the “Mir resides her soul”. The Atlanticist “liberals” may have an audience among the nouveaux riches in the cities but deaf ears in the country.

  45. Miro23 says:

    What a revolution there would be in the US if every power holder was checked for their America First credentials.
    Corporate leaders for their outsourcing and H-1b visas, Congress and the administration for dual citizenship, immigration voting record, respect for the Constitution etc. MSM owners going through the same process.

  46. Parfois1 says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    So, there are some parallels, especially if to consider (for those people who buy into caricature BS in the West known as Soviet History) that Putin can be defined as a softer version of Stalin.

    Putin can afford to show a softer side. Although he inherited the wreckage of post-Soviet Russia, he did not have the Herculean task building the Soviet Union from the wreckage of WWI, civil war, foreign aggression on Russian soil and Trotsy fi(l)fth column in the ranks before the colossal feat of defeating the “greatest war machine” (as Hitler called it) ever put on the battlefield.

  47. then the immensely powerful Russian bureaucracy (yes, that is the non-existing 5th column too) made sure that these goals would never be reached.

    And will probably do the same in 2024 and beyond.

    It’s not so much an active power as an immense sludge that no one and nothing can muck out, the entire cultural traction of the Russian Volk expressed in institutions given it by the West. The Soviet generations – all of them, everyone – have to die out before change there even becomes possible.

    And by then Russia won’t be relying on Tajik or Uzbek labor, but the eternal Chinese, Vietnamese, Bangladeshi and Pakistani helotry, so will it matter to anyone white that they no longer have to deal with grumpy old women to get their справка for the overcrowded swimming pool?

  48. Thomasina says:
    @Philip Owen

    Disagree. Canada doesn’t have a “very successful market economy”. It operates exactly as Greg S. says it does: massive immigration from the third world, cranes everywhere with condos bought up by citizens from Hong Kong and China, hedge funds and REITS, money laundering, no culture, no cohesion, sky-high housing prices. It is NOT a pretty picture. Where is this “successful market economy”? Successful for who?

  49. Truth3 says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Truth Cubed suits me just fine. Your attempt to backhand slander simply shows that telling the Truth pisses off lesser lights.

    Beria was not an Industrial Engineer, even though he did study mathematical courses, and definietely was not a superb anything but rapist and murderer. Being politically in charge of aspects of Soviet Industry does not an IE make… and don’t lecture me on Soviet methods or their Industry, or what an IE is, as I know more about all that from actually being there and doing it (yes, even in Extent & Former Soviet Fabriki) than you could ever know.

    Finally… You admiring a caricature version of Beria says more about you than it does about Beria.

    Now… Get lost. Otherwise I will have to get Ron UnZ (Otherwise known as God 2.1) to squash you.

    • Replies: @Truth3
    , @Ilyana_Rozumova
  50. Just a note to say thank you to previous contributors for an engaging and informative exchange of views. Russia’s future is important for us all and it is therefore important that we are able to discuss Russian affairs in a rational way. Mistaking enemies for friends is a serious error, but an equally serious error is to mischaracterise potential friends as enemies.

    • Agree: Marshall Lentini
  51. Thomasina says:
    @Fluesterwitz

    Well, he’s right. What we have is corporatism, not capitalism. It’s about as corrupt as it could get.

    The ratings agencies are paid by the very corporations they’re supposed to give ratings on; corporations are allowed to buy back their own stock (thanks to Reagan); the media is pretty much owned by six corporations (thanks to Clinton’s 1996 Telecommunications Act), and can be as one-sided as they want to be (courtesy of Reagan vetoing the Fairness Doctrine Bill that had been in effect since 1949); the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act (which separated investment banking from retail banking and had been in effect since 1933 – thanks again to Clinton); and then the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (again, thanks to Clinton) made free-wheeling in derivatives and credit-default swaps that much easier.

    Then there’s Greenspan, who manipulated interest rates in order to create artificial booms, Bernanke who couldn’t get enough of QE (quantitative easing) in order to paper over Greenspan’s stupidity, and then Yellen after him. What’s the price of risk? Who knows! It’s all papered over.

    Then there’s the 2008 bank bailouts and “no bankers jailed” (thanks Obama and Holder), even after massive fraud. For committing robbery, which is what they actually did, they get a slap on the wrist and a fine.

    Politicians are owned by big money. Foreign aid flows from the U.S. to the Ukraine and then it goes out through Cyprus into the Biden’s/Kerry’s/whoever else’s Panama bank account.

    This is the tip of the iceberg – the tip. One giant mafia organization engineered and operated by the elite. Monopoly laws, already on the books, are being ignored, and regulations are just laughed at. The courts are owned, the FBI/CIA are corrupt.

    Capitalism? Yeah, right! Capitalism would have smelled risk and crushed every single one of the Wall Street banks, who were all insolvent. They should have been taken over, nationalized, and then sold off in tiny chunks to willing buyers, never to get that big again.

    Don’t blame capitalism. Blame the politicians you elected who themselves got bought off by big money.

    • Agree: bluedog, Turk 152
    • Replies: @Vanusha
    , @Mefobills
    , @Bill
    , @Miha M
  52. Truth3 says:
    @Truth3

    Speaking of Beria, there is much to suggest he was either a Jew, or the very least, a fellow traveler wannabee.

    The so called ‘Doctor’s Plot’ was supposedly aimed at Beria’s ouster. That would only make sense if Beria was Jewish. Shortly after, Beria bragged of killing Stalin… and getting the anti-Jewish actions stopped.

    He was tied in tight with the Jewish Anti-Fascist Committee.

    His entourage was largely Jews.

    He was a master liar (like Dershowitz), a rapist (like Weinstein), and a cold blooded murderer (like Netanyahu). Not hard to see what orchard this rotten apple fell from.

    • Replies: @iffen
  53. anon[119] • Disclaimer says:

    send Medvedev to Libya

    • Replies: @KA
  54. Pandour says: • Website

    The Soviet Union imploded,among other things, because it was an economic basket case and totally morally bankrupt.The best picture of that failed criminal enterprise,destined to disappear into the rubbish heap of history is the figure of the Jewish B.S. artist, so-called journalist Vladimir Pozner,who owned the only Porsche in Moscow.That clown,who during interviews with the incredibly naive and stupid Western media,who considered him a genuine and sincere source.was laughing up his sleeve all the while.You could even read it on his face most of the time,clearly thinking,what a bunch of suckers.

  55. It is “crony-capitalism,” not plain, old people trading goods without government interference “capitalism.” Too many otherwise intelligent people always want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

    • Replies: @Bill
  56. @Alfred

    Exactly. There is some hope in seeing at least one country overthrow its occupiers.

  57. @Andrei Martyanov

    33% increase in Matkapital by the time second child , with this benefit taken over the 1.1 million Rb mark taking into account any mortgage commitment …..is truly incredible policy. Amusing to see the usual liberastic scum and “respected” economists either try and be critical or pretend the policy doesn’t exist!

    Also funny to note that in Banderastan , just for only 11 people who died in Iran, their families get paid FAR less from their government as compensation (culpability is irrelevant , the Russian government always paying out after any disaster,killing or tragedy)…than each of the few MILLION Russian families get each year that use Matkapital!

    On the “plus” side of the nonexistent Ukrop social system…..eye-gouging, sadist,maggot UPA veterans get the same enhanced pension as Great Patriotic War vets

  58. GMC says:

    My thoughts are that the Russian Military has given President Putin their – very strong point of view and has pushed it. No more Israeli planes taking out our planes and army, No more foreign/domestic oligarchs funding our enemies or looting our country, and No Nazis on our border – or else We – Will- do something about it. And I think President Putin, as diplomatic as he is – Agreed to start the change necessary to secure their Russian Sovereignty – Period. The men who have devoted their lives to their country along with their fathers, uncles and grandparents that paid the ultimate price – may have just spoken. Spacibo Saker and Unz Rev.

  59. Mr. Hack says:
    @Seraphim

    Well, there’s at least one thing that Russians are good at, and that’s converting Romanians (at least a few) over to their cause. Not enough quality Romanians to satisfy the Romanian soul, I guess, or perhaps these Romanians aren’t really Romanian at all, but only appear to be so on their passports?…

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @Alligator
  60. iffen says:
    @Truth3

    Bolshevik Jews were instrumental in the victory of the Great Patriotic War, which did away with the possibility of transporting the Jews “to the east,” thereby elicting the Final Solution.

    • Replies: @Avery
  61. The factional discussion here is focused on the traditional left-right axis, but there are institutional factors that don’t fit on that one-dimensional continuum. Russia has ratified the CESCR, which commits the state as a whole to ECOSOC’s development model. ECOSOC’s a UN charter body. In terms of the underlying mission of the UN, beating swords into ploughshares, the Security Council handles swords and ECOSOC handles ploughshares. The development model is based on resource allocation: diverting resources from blowing shit up and locking you up, to the things you need to live at your full potential. Below is the most recent example of ECOSOC’s guidance for Russia.

    https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=E/C.12/RUS/CO/6&Lang=En

    In Western economic dogma, the greedy objective is growth. In the world consensus on development, by contrast, the greedy objective is rights. Does everyone have access to food, housing, a livelihood, education, social insurance? Does everyone have all their civil and political rights? He says, no, Why not? How will the state fix that dereliction of its duty?

    ECOSOC is uninterested in who owns the means of production. They don’t care, they want results. Western economics is the state putting you on a treadmill, work, work work, more, more, more, more, faster, make up for the pension we chiseled you out of. ECOSOC economics lets you put the state on a treadmill. You can say, I don’t want cops in tanks, I want free health care and a job with labor rights and better cheaper education; more of this, less of that nonsense. The recently announced abatement of Russia’s arms buildup and diversion of effort to economic rights is exactly what ECOSOC wants. It’s neither left nor right. It’s what the G-192 – everybody in the world – has decided they want. Even Americans want it, except they’ve been brainwashed to fixate on bullshit abstractions like how many Phillips curves can dance on the head of a pin.

    No matter who gets purged, ECOSOC’s not going anywhere.

  62. Mefobills says:

    Saker says this:

    I mean, yes, in theory, we could hold out breath and expect Glaziev will be appointed to a top position in the so-called “economic block” of the government, but how do we know that it will not be Kudrin instead?!

    There are only a handful of economists in the world (Glaziev is one) who know what they are doing, and are in a position to do it. Here’s to hoping Stolypin Group is elevated!

    https://thesaker.is/paul-craig-roberts-and-michael-hudson-russian-government-is-reconsidering-the-neoliberal-policy/

    (Read my comments here at Unz to get some idea – as there is not much daylight between me and Stolypin group. However, I am more radical, more racist, more nationalist and anti-semite than they are …. their views are more tempered for political reality.)

  63. Vanusha says:
    @Thomasina

    Oh, friend, you are right. BUT… delusional. Who created your BIG Mafia aka Deep State? Did they come from the Moon? What exactly do you mean by your beloved ‘capitalism’? Is it the same utopia bullshit as communism? I think so… When you have – oh, communism is so great, never, never blame communism, it is juts the people that are not perfect and they can’t live as brothers. Capitalism crushes competition. The winner either makes the other disappear or buys it. And capitalism produces monopolies. Monopolies produce corporatocracy. And corporatocracy crushes democracy. Without democratic control, without any way the majority could fight for their rights (which is socialism), you have no rights, but what you have is lower wages, debt, austerity, etc. Whoever controls the means of production controls you. If you don’t control the means of production, you will have somebody control your water, food, wages, energy, Internet, technology and machinery. I don’t want to say that competition is bad. Everything has its bad side. But the economy should serve the people and not the other way round.

    • Replies: @Nonny Mouse
    , @Thomasina
  64. Agent76 says:

    Dec 24, 2019 Putin Calls Out Lenin: “The Old Men” Put a Mine Under 1000-Y-Old Russia By Inventing Artifical State

    In the Kremlin, Russian President Vladimir Putin chaired a meeting of the Council for Civil Society and Human Rights, a consultative body that assists the President in exercising his constitutional authority in this area.

    Jul 26, 2019 World ‘will diminish role of dollar and US banking system’: Russian minister at Non-Aligned Movement

    Anya Parampil sits down with Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov at the meeting of the Non-Aligned Movement in Venezuela. They discuss the emerging multipolar world and efforts to establish a financial system independent of the US dollar.

  65. The two photographed men have no physical resemblance other than both have bald pates…

  66. Vanusha says:

    I want to use the platform of the comments section of the wonderful unz review to point to probably one of the least known sites on deep state politics and fascism https://isgp-studies.com/. There is fascinating information.

    • Thanks: Republic, Parfois1, refl
  67. Mefobills says:
    @Miro23

    The alternative is Direct Democracy but Russia at present has no chance of that.

    You do know that direct democracy would destroy Russia, don’t you?

    An apt aphorism: Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner.

    Then you say this:

    There are similarities with Trump in the US, but Putin is surely right that the state (Putin and his fellow sovereignists) need to examine every power holder in Russian society for their sovereignist credentials and track record.

    You do know that “power holders” are analogous to wolves in the aphorism above?

    The original democracy of Athens consisted only of “men of repute.” One of the major reasons U.S. is on a path of destruction is because “power blocks” manipulate the electorate. Rogues, and not men of repute become controllers of the demos. In the U.S case, these rogues are “internationalists” and could give a damn about the American people. In even more extreme cases, they are Jews who actively subvert the demos for their in-group tribal interests.

    Power block manipulations – using money and propaganda as tools to amplify deception, proves that electorates are too easily duped and maneuvered. Anything approaching direct or universal suffrage democracy is folly.

    We should learn from history and what is obvious on-going evidence right in front of our eyes.

    • Agree: FB
  68. Kapyong says:

    Gday all,

    Putin seems to be well-regarded here, as if he is with us against the (((globalists))).
    I doubt that.

    Putin was close to a Jewish family as a child and speaks well of Judaism.

    He admits the Bolsheviks were mostly Jewish, but claims they made ideological errors (errors back then, not necessarily now.)

    His rise to power was murky and involved terrorism, and possibly secret backers – with Jewish power still strong in Russia.

    He is close to Chabad-Lubavitchers, with Berel Lazar sometimes called Putin’s Rabbi, and he is friendly with Israel and Netanyahu.

    He has spoken out against anti-semitism (happening all over now), and has also said his new Russian wikipedia will target holocaust denial.

    There is a story going around that claims Putin kicked the Rothschilds out of Russia : This un-sourced bullshit looks like agitprop to cover the opposite truth.

    Putin is not a stupid puppet, but I don’t think he is independent of the (((banksters))).

    I’m just a minnow, so I’d be interested to see what the cool kids here think about Putin ?

    Kapyong

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  69. Mefobills says:
    @Thomasina

    Capitalism? Yeah, right! Capitalism would have smelled risk and crushed every single one of the Wall Street banks, who were all insolvent. They should have been taken over, nationalized, and then sold off in tiny chunks to willing buyers, never to get that big again.

    Don’t blame capitalism. Blame the politicians you elected who themselves got bought off by big money.

    Cognitive dissonance much?

    It was capital, in the form of money, which “bought” off and manipulated the politicians.

    It was the “owner class” who actively subverted law and maneuvered to get their way. The entire history of man is one of plutocracy, large land owners, powerful families, etc. trying to kill the King.

    Usury especially, polarizes society. Today, it is FINANCE CAPITALISM, that is operating similarly to the landed elites and feudal aristocracy of the past.

    When people talk about turbo capitalism, they are grasping for words and have no real language to express. Then other people come to the defense of capitalism, and again they do not have proper language.

    There are different forms of capitalism. A mixed economy is the only type of economy shown by history to work. A mixed economy has the government firmly ensconced in the commons and inelastic sectors.

    Privateers in “finance capitalism” want to own the commons and take rents on inelastic sectors, where they then drive up prices.

    The LOWEST PRICE IS WHAT MATTERS. Government in its sector, is the lowest cost producer.

    When government oversteps its bounds… say it encroaches too much into elastic sectors, then prices go up.

    Simon Patten of the “American School of Economy,” said this: “Government is the fourth factor of production.” To decode that, he meant government credit and planning, and involvement in the commons was necessary to lower prices. If government doesn’t do the planning, then that space is left over for finance.

    If finance does the planning, then everything is short term gain.. the vultures come out and eat the body. I got mine and screw you becomes the mantra. No country can survive with this type of economy unleashed. Russia of the 90’s was an example of what not to do.

    Turbo finance capitalism is a creature that needs to be smothered in its crib before it consumes the host.

    Oligarchs and international finance capitalists want to steal Russia’s national resources for themselves. Monetizing Russia into dollars with new loans will help pay the usury underlying Western capital.

    New loans and debt pay off old loans and debt, and this then keeps Plutocrats in power.

    Their gambit in the 90’s didn’t work, thanks to Putin.

    • Agree: Parfois1
    • Replies: @Thomasina
  70. Putin is the George Washington of Russia, the only sane leader on the world stage and the one who has saved Syria from the ZUS and Israels and ZBritains creation of AL CIADA aka ISIS aka Daesh and all off shoots thereof.

    Putin and Russia are the only ones standing in the way of a ZUS attack on Iran, for the unholy trinity of the ZUS and Israel and Britain knows that if they attack Iran, Russia will defend Iran as Putin knows that this is the last remaining piece before the zionists direct attack on Russia.

    God bless Putin and Russia.

  71. KA says:
    @anon

    Medved’s role in Libya is difficult to understand support or even conclude that somej=how it endeared Russia to west.

    Ruissa is now supporting someone who was raised by CIA for 25 odd years . Hafter is also favorite of UAE Saudi and Israel. In the name of not supporting Muslim Brotherhood (MB) , these countries including USA want Hafter because Hafter is one man show with no ideological social or political base .
    It is easier to control a dictator and to replace a dictator There will be no ideological resistance against him from within his own circle or the from the country on any ideological ground. It is easy to control them like Hafter types. MB does not offer that chance . Hafter’s rule also renders the country to transiting dynastic rule once he dies or is replaced .
    Also the eastern part is ruled by Sarraj who might be weak because of the lack of military support despite being UN approved while Hafter has been amassing arms from possibly southern Europe with money from UAE EGYPT and Saudi Arab.
    Russia throwing its lot with Hafter doesn’t make sense . Will he be under Russian inlfcunece at all or will he undermine Russian interest in N Africa?

    • Replies: @Nonny Mouse
  72. Mefobills says:
    @Kapyong

    Putin is not a stupid puppet, but I don’t think he is independent of the (((banksters))).

    Saker’s atlantacist integration argument has at it core, control of Russian Central Bank.

    The central bank still runs under BIS rules, and has integrationists in charge.

    Any country is not completely sovereign unless the money becomes sovereign. By buying up Russian gold, purchased with Rubles, and then stuffing Russian gold into the central bank was within BIS rules, and allowed fractional reserve emission of even more Rubles.

    So, in a way, Putin’s strategy “roped a dope” Atlantacists. There was nothing they could do, because this gold purchase action is fully within BIS rules. Also, the gold stabilized Ruble exchange rates even despite Western Sanctions. The Sanctions were an attempt by Globo-Homo international capital to destroy the Russian economy through exchange rate path.

    The sanction gambit also back-fired as Russia moved toward self-sufficient economic Autarky.

    Bottom line: The West is on the wrong side of history, and (((international capital))) is state sponsored usury. Anything that is fake and on the wrong side of history, ultimately will fail.

    The money power problem in Russia has not been fully addressed yet. It takes time to root out a parasite and eject it from the body. Only a healthy host can address the parasite problem.

    • Agree: Alfred
    • Thanks: NoseytheDuke
    • Replies: @Kapyong
  73. @Ilya G Poimandres

    Most “research” conducted in the field of public policy, economics and sociology in the West is mostly pseudo-scientific trash as it is, in regards to Russia, in general an echo-chamber for floating caricatures. I am not taking 99% of it seriously, a gigantic body of empirical evidence supports me. This phrase, meanwhile:

    Russia may be good at military R&D, and that saves her skin, but for the non-military side of the market

    Is an exhibit A of what I am talking about.Suffice it to say that majority of “military R&D” is dual use by definition.

  74. A123 says:

    The one thing that Putin seems to have missed is a requirement that all office holders be Christian. If Russia is to persist as a Christian Populist nation for centuries to come, it needs defenses against other expansionary religions.

    Making sure that Christian Churches do not become corrupted is a separate problem.

    PEACE 😇

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  75. until we know who will be included in the new government, there is very little we can really say

    Now, this is true. The rest is empty speculation.

  76. @Mefobills

    We should learn from history

    Hegel was right: “We learn from history that we do not learn from history.”

  77. @Alfred

    But Russia will always need alcohol free strong leader.

  78. @Truth3

    No disrespect intended, But engineering field is a little bit more specialized than “industrial engineer”

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @Truth3
  79. Putin: “We have overcome the situation when certain powers in the government were essentially usurped by oligarch clans.”

    Now I wonder who those clans might be.

    • Replies: @Sick of Orcs
  80. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    Industrial engineer has a specific meaning in countries that follow a German engineering tradition. The are the ones who get on and make stuff happen. Production and processes (but not process engineering to the level of a chemical engineer). It’s not quite the top level of qualification.

    Kruschaev was a project engineer. Autocratic systems like engineers. The last Chinese government were all engineers. It’s a good degree for the Middle East too. They get on with things like building railways and spacecraft (too many houses of the wrong sort too – Kruschaev/Deng) rather than politics.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  81. @Hibernian

    He can’t. His Putin worship would come to an end and all his fantasies would come crashing down.

    In the end, all that Putin is doing will consolidate his position. He wants to stay right where he is. It’s been said that he would not survive the loss of his office. I wonder about this, but do think he couldn’t stand to go into quiet oblivion, even if his mafia buddies have no inclination to tie down his loose end.

    • LOL: bluedog
  82. Anon[140] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    DITTO!

    This is so important. Thank you!

  83. @Epaminondas

    Putin: “We have overcome the situation when certain powers in the government were essentially usurped by oligarch clans.”

    Now I wonder who those clans might be.

    ((( 3 guesses ))) one for each set of ( )

  84. @Anon

    Actually, capitalism is an exploitative political system that should be opposed; rather, it’s free markets that should be supported.

    https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/capitalism-free-market-part-1/

  85. Bill says:
    @Thomasina

    Blame the politicians you elected who themselves got bought off by big money.

    Yes, liberal democracy would work great if we could find politicians who can’t be bought off or capitalists who don’t have money. Sort of like communism would work great if populated by New Socialist Man.

    • Replies: @Thomasina
  86. Bill says:
    @therevolutionwas

    Give us back the good old days when robber barons had no influence whatsoever over the eeeebil goobermint!

  87. DaveE says:
    @Curmudgeon

    Here’s my suggestion for the true definition of “communism” (or “socialism”) for all intents and purposes:

    COMMUNISM – a.) Government in control of every aspect of your life. b.) Jews in control of every aspect of the government.

    I won’t bother explaining c.)

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  88. @Vanusha

    Thank you both. My little idea is that a corporation is not a person. No court should have been allowed to say that. A non-corrupt government would retrospectively legislate to undo that, making all corporate mergers / takeovers illegal giving us millions of smallish corporations instead of a few giants.

    • Replies: @Kim
  89. @KA

    He wants to kill Ghaddafi’s son. He led the revolution that destroyed Libya. But is he now the best FOR LIBYA???

  90. GeeBee says:
    @Philip Owen

    ‘500 years of Capitalist trade and industry has done more for humanity Jews than the previous 6000 of civilization.’

    There: fixed it for you.

  91. @Beefcake the Mighty

    Due to differences in ability in humans, different people will have a different level of success in the free market. The more intellgent individuals will likely band together. As such, despite starting out equal (in this theoretical scenario) eventually a great level of inequality will occur as the intelligent build on previous successes with positive feedback loops and the opposite happens for the less successful members, eventually the more successful group will control most of the capital and you will have capitalism where no one has a realistic chance of competing with the big group unless they invent some disruptive technology that changes the game.

    Is life honestly better with Wal-Mart and Costco driving the small-to-medium sized family run shops out of business?

  92. Thomasina says:
    @Mefobills

    “It was capital, in the form of money, which “bought” off and manipulated the politicians.”

    I agree, but only when paying off a politician works. If that doesn’t work, they up the game to threats on your life, your family’s life or, as in time past, threatening to divulge your sexuality, or maybe your propensity for little boys or little girls, etc. Psychopaths use whatever means necessary, and it isn’t just “capital”. Remember Epstein, remember the mafia.

    A few years ago I read how the Catholic Church got what they wanted. You were compromised early, some incriminating information was found out about you, and once they had this, they started promoting you through the ranks. It didn’t matter whether you wanted to advance or not. In fact, they would only advance people who they actually DID have incriminating information on. You had no say. If you said no, your life was about to be destroyed. I can’t imagine it would be any different with politicians.

    I think you and I are more on the same page than not. I am not a lover of capitalism. I was only agreeing with the guy who said that what we had was “corporatism” or “crony capitalism”. We should have firm laws and regulations on the books (many ARE currently on the books, but are being ignored) to prevent monopolies (the Sherman Anti-Trust Act) and finance capitalism. The media should be split up and there should be “fairness” in media again. Glass-Steagall should be reinstated, and then the big Wall Street banks can take all the risks they want on their own dime. I bet they don’t.

    My point is that government(s) are aiding and abetting big money, both sides of the aisle. They are in bed together. That is a very dangerous situation because it leaves the “people” running on a treadmill and destitute.

    It would be great if every country was ruled by a benevolent king, but… And as you said, in the past the lords and the nobles were always after the throat of the king. That’s why good, untouchable laws and regulations must be on the books and enforced religiously so that politicians can’t be compromised.

    But people are uneducated (myself included) to believe, for instance, that a higher minimum wage is what’s required. Well, fine, but that just covers up the misdeeds that made a higher minimum wage necessary in the first place, and all it does it cause prices to increase even more, necessitating another raise in a year or two. Just an example of how governments, under the guise of helping out the “little guy”, is really just trying to help the elite and keep the skimming machine running.

    I guess I’ve seen firsthand (very sad) what happens when people are bailed out and coddled, what happens to their self-esteem, the addictions, the loss of a life. I would not want to see big brother government take the reins either.

    Sorry for going on and on. Take care.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  93. Thomasina says:
    @Bill

    As I said to another commenter, if they can’t compromise politicians with money, they use something else: threats on your life, your family’s life, threatening to divulge your sexuality, whether you like little girls or little boys. Psychopaths use whatever works, and it doesn’t just have to be money.

    Yes, the pendulum will swing back, but that won’t be pretty either.

    Cheers.

  94. @Just passing through

    It sounds like your issue is with human nature as such, and not particular economic systems.

  95. @Andrei Martyanov

    Even Sergei Ivanov is a “forum expert” in the Gaidar forum. Practically all the top Russian officials are in there. I don’t think it means anything significant- Mishustin doesn’t seem to have even taken part in a panel discussion there, ever.

    Maybe VVP is also strongly against the detoxifying of any previous leader, such as Khrushev towards Stalin- hence strong government participation there.

    Nothing to suggest Mishustin is a “Yeltsinite” either.

    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  96. Thomasina says:
    @Vanusha

    There are already laws on the books which prevent monopolies: the Sherman Act of 1890, the Clayton Act of 1914, and the Robinson-Patman Act of 1936. More knowledgeable people may have more examples.

    These laws are already there, but they are NOT being enforced. Everyone is looking the other way.

    As far as racketeering (illegal gambling, bribery, kidnapping, murder, money laundering, counterfeiting, embezzlement, drug trafficking, slavery, and a host of other unsavory business practices), there is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) passed in 1970. How many elite are ever brought up on charges like this?

    We have monopolies in the telecommunications industry, the banking industry, the media, etc. They should be split up ASAP.

    The problem is our current politicians do not dare use these laws. They’d be dead.

    Democracy sounds wonderful, doesn’t it, until you realize they invented it so that, instead of just trying to compromise a powerful king, you could compromise a whole bunch of politicians. There’s always something you can hold over their heads. Nobody listens to the people in a democracy. The people didn’t want the banks bailed out. What happened? They got bailed out.

    There’s probably only one way to get the country back, but it involves blood.

    • Replies: @Steve Naidamast
  97. anonymous[700] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thomasina

    A few years ago I read how the Catholic Church got what they wanted.

    Where did you read that?
    Please state the source.

    PS responding to your #95: Les Miserables is a very good read in such a time as this.
    Hugo discusses the difficulty of evolving from the revolution to stability. takes generations. and lots of light.

    • Troll: Nonny Mouse
    • Replies: @Thomasina
  98. @Andrei Martyanov

    That would be moves in right direction.
    However I do not think that billionaires and millionaires are compatible with socialism.
    I also think all responsibilities and rights of the Soviet citizens must be eventually brought back. That would include free healthcare, education, free place to live and grew families, retirement and rest for working people. Partial measures would not work long term. People is the most valuable resource and must be treated as such.

    • Replies: @JamesinNM
  99. BTW, Mishustin looks nothing like Beria.

  100. JamesinNM says:

    “ But in the past there were other such Presidential addresses with no less lofty goals, and then the immensely powerful Russian bureaucracy (yes, that is the non-existing 5th column too) made sure that these goals would never be reached.” Yes, just as Trump deceived the real Americans and proved he is just another NWO puppet.

  101. JamesinNM says:
    @Sergey Krieger

    But what about personal responsibility and accountability? Do the takers and users now rule until they are total slaves without any true freedom and liberty?

  102. @Beefcake the Mighty

    Actually, capitalism is an exploitative political system that should be opposed; rather, it’s free markets that should be supported.

    Bees against honey? How fascinating!

  103. @Mefobills

    Yes let’s learn from history: democracy, the rule of the many, is rare. Occasionally in the modern setting, it is given its opportunity, via referendum and plebiscites, to express itself. From my vantage point I see no evidence that the many are more easily duped than the few.

    So, for example, Canada had a referendum on proposed Constitutional changes in 1992. The people of Canada were subjected to a massive multi-political-directional campaign of ‘you must endorse this or else’. Now having taken an interest in the proceedings, I thought the proposals for change would be on balance bad, and so when a majority of Canadians said no! I was both delighted in the result, and impressed by the ability of the Canadian people to shed more than a shower – the inundation – of threats, entreaties, ‘logic’, and so on, amounting to SAY YES!

    In Europe we may recall there have been votes in recent decades where the majority of the people again did the unexpected and turned down elite ‘expert endorsed’ projects, but in Europe the strategy seems to be to ignore the vote, or hold another, until finally the result the ‘few’ desire are achieved.

    Pompeo and Merkel and Trump and Macron are among the few; that astute old farmer I chatted with the other day is one of the many: Guess whose political musings I would deem more profound, and whose advice I would take if my life depended on it?

  104. Thomasina says:
    @anonymous

    I’ll see if I’ve still got the link somewhere. Very interesting article written by I believe a Catholic priest.

    I remember thinking: OMG, they’re promoting these guys precisely BECAUSE they have dirt on them.

    I guess if you’re psychopathic, it makes sense to get people who are already compromised. Dastardly.

    I remember reading Les Miserables in school (the condensed version), “the law is the law”. Great story. One day hopefully I’ll get around to reading the whole book. Thanks.

  105. @KA

    I tend to also be concerned regarding President Putin’s dealings with Israel. However, Israel Shamir has emphatically stated in one or two of his pieces on this site that such dealings are merely to retain working relationships. Subsequently, according to Shamir the Israeli government has in reality gotten very little out of Israel in terms of regional policy favorable to the Israeli state…

    • Replies: @Nonny Mouse
  106. @Thomasina

    “There’s probably only one way to get the country back, but it involves blood.”

    I have been saying that for years but I have also designed a mechanism that could avoid a lot of the unneeded bloodshed…

  107. Parfois1 says:
    @DaveE

    I won’t bother explaining c.)

    Good idea. You already have said enough: clueless.

    • Agree: FB
  108. Seraphim says:
    @A123

    Good point, indeed. Putin’s address sounds like an echo-chamber of the ‘Official Nationality’ policy of the Russian state under the Tsars (Pravoslavie, Samoderzhavie, Narodnost), missing the central pillar, Orthodoxy (which created and sustained the Russian state for centuries). There are still ‘soviet’ hurdles to overcome. But things appear to move in the right direction, judging by the anti-Orthodox rage displayed by the progressive ‘free world’.

  109. @Dr.Areg the 2nd

    Even Sergei Ivanov is a “forum expert” in the Gaidar forum. Practically all the top Russian officials are in there. I don’t think it means anything significant- Mishustin doesn’t seem to have even taken part in a panel discussion there, ever.

    Absolutely true. Just another “platform” to be present in. Davos Forum may try to present itself as something important, especially in name dropping, but Davos Civilization (as defined by Huntington) is basically dead, as is mono-polar world. One may also find all kinds of homegrown Russian and foreign loonies being part of Valdai Forum, doesn’t mean that it is a bad platform and so on…

  110. Kim says:
    @Nonny Mouse

    An associated problem is that of limited liability.

    It seems to just be asking for problems to allow humans to control corporate resources and make corporate decisions and yet to be shielded by the corporate veil from the full legal responsibilities for their decisions and actions.

    “You poisoned these people. Your actions led to deaths. Your products were designed to defraud. You were aware that your procedures would allow money laundering n a massive scale. These were your decisions. You must take the full responsibility.”

    Of course, that would leave “progress” only in the hands of societies that did implement limited liability, but isn’t it the way of the world that ultimately evil always wins?

  111. Avery says:
    @iffen

    {Bolshevik Jews were instrumental in the victory of the Great Patriotic War,}

    How were Bolshevik Jews, quote, ‘instrumental’?
    There certainly were Jews in the Red Army, and the officers corps, and they were up there in battlefield losses percentage wise (….per A. Karlin).
    But ‘instrumental’?
    In what way?

    Stalin was Georgian, and had purged most Bolshevik Jews from leadership positions prior to WW2.
    Marshall Zhukov, for example, who was instrumental in USSR’s victory over Nazi Germany was not a Jew.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Ilyana_Rozumova
  112. @Andrei Martyanov

    OK, you two (@Philip Owen), you have got to compromise here as you are both correct.

    BTW, Andrei , I have your second book on the “The Real revolution in Military Affairs”. I agree with your contentions 100%. However, I found initial poor editing very disturbing at times. In addition, though I understand why put the mathematical material in the book in the initial chapters, I believe it only served to slow the reading pace down for the average reader.

    That being said, as a military historian-analyst myself, I have been watching the very trends in US Forces you describe for many years from my own American vantage point. Unless something intelligent happens in senior military thinking in the United States (like stop using the military for every diplomatic issue that arises), the US is toast!

    >>>

    Now back to your arguments on the economic realities of Russia…

    The Soviet Union did quite a good job of modernizing Russian society in terms of industrialization. Not all the modernizing techniques were necessarilly good but prior to WWII they got the job done very well. As Viktor Suvorov and others have clearly demonstrated, the Soviet Army on the eve of the German invasion was quite modern and well equipped. Unfortunately, Soviet Command-And-Control was not that efficient and was a major factor in the many losses the Soviets initially incurred.

    The losses were so high as to be unsustainable. According to military historian, John Mosier (“Death Ride”), had it not been for FDR cozying up to Stalin with his Lend-Lease supply agreements, the Soviet Union would have been toast and Germany would have summarily defeated Russia in 1942/1943. Germany came within a hair’s breadth of doing so in 1941.

    After the war, Russian industrialization slowed as she began to contend with Truman’s initiation of the Cold War. However, Soviet Science was still very much up to the task that eventually produced for example the excellent Mig jet fighters.

    However, as it regards the production of goods there are many variables that go into doing so. In this regard, Mr. Owen, you are not quite correct that Russian R&D could not get designs into production. Russians have always been doing this and beginning to excel at it; slowly to be sure but nonetheless moving towards excellence.

    Going back to the Mig for a minute and why I am using it as an example of Russian production prowess… In the 1980s, the US military finally got its hands on a more advanced Mig aircraft and were amazed at the design and the capabilities of such a machine. If I remember correctly from the piece I read on the subject, the major drawback that was noticed with this particular design was the refinement of the metal finishing on the air-frame. Analysts who were reviewing the aircraft noted that the Russian metallurgical quality still had a way to go as the Mig’s air-frame surface was quite rough compared to US jet designs and implementations.

    So with the Mig, the Soviets were every bit as capable as the United States in aeronautical design with some exceptions.

    By the 1990s, Russian military aircraft designers had developed and put into production the finest emergency ejection system in the world. Nothing the US had could keep a military pilot as safe as the Russian implementation. That is quite a leap from that earlier Mig.

    The later Mig-31 would later startle the entire world with its in air capabilities that even to this day few if any western counterparts can equal.

    Post WWII Soviet and then later Russian Federation capabilities were then never seemingly hobbled by an inability to produce quality products but were instead impeded by the US’ political designs against that region in the world. As a result, Russian design and production emphasis had to be placed on those projects that would assist in Russian survival.

    This is not to say that Soviet and later 1990 Russian leaders were all that good at managing an economic infrastructure. Soviet Russia emerged from a sense of sheer terror and despair after WWII given the nature of the October\November 1917 Russian Revolution and what it portended for the average Russian citizen. And the Yeltsin years set back Russian economic capabilities pretty badly as his rule was primarily marked by what US financil predators could acquire out of Russian society.

    Since Vladimir Putin took office it appears to have been the same but appearances, as they say, can be deceiving. And what things appear to have been are now very much in a state of change. So though the capability has always been there it has been impeded by US prevarications against Russia and her own national interests. Thus the emphasis on Russian military innovation instead of a more western acceptable viewpoint for consumer goods production.

    Let’s look at the Russian Space Shuttle for a moment. As I have read in quite a few articles over the years, the Russian Space Shuttle was at its zenith far superior to the US equivalent. The Russian model was cheaper with lower maintenance costs and was very reusable. True, it did not have all the bells and whistles of the US model, but the Russian space shuttle was designed with an emphasis on transport.

    If one were to look at the more refined US counterpart, it would be found that it never had the utility factor of the Russian model and was far more expensive to maintain. And nor could it launch as often as the Russian ones did.

    So where the US may have led in terms of production refinement, Russia excelled at basic utility, maintenance cost, and far greater re-usability. And this can be also seen as far back as WWII with the Russian T34 tank and the IL2 Sturmovik fighter-bomber, a plane that the Luftwaffe could simply not shoot down.

    Being a 3rd-generation Russian Slav in the United States, I have lived through both most of the post-WWII Soviet Era and the new reborn Russian Federation. And I have watched the changes occur where I was trained to see one as an enemy while coming to completely admire the achievements of President Putin and the evolving Russian Federation.

    As Andrei has noted in his responses, Russian civil aviation is now at a breakout point that could very well make it a major player in the intermediate commercial jet arena with its recent developments of the MC100 (I believe that is the correct model). Simply looking at the recent design and production issues with the Boeing 737-Max as well as critical software design for the standardized Boeing ILS system (Instrument Landing System) one can easily see a remarkable opening for Russian commercial aviation interests as Boeing takes a nose dive form which it will probably never recover. And this is a company that in 1995 won international acclaim for its hardware and software designs of the 757/767 commercial models. What happened?

    What always happens with US developments; greed and very incompetent management. And this is something that began tos eriously plague all US companies startinga s far back asthe 1950s when vested management gave way to what was called “professional management”; managers who never had a vested interest in the welfare of a company.

    So yes, American design and manufacturing prowess may have exceeded that of its rivals. However, in the scheme of things it has been very short lived simply due to American cultural and political deficiencies that were built into the US system of government since the ratification of the US Constitution in 1787/1789.

    Russian commercial airliner development then is a sign that Russian production quality is on the rise while US industrial production quality has for all intents and purposes been the result of its ability to be shielded from world events by having them sit on its shores but mostly due to its situation right after WWII, which had left it completely unharmed by the conflict.

    Today, US manufacturing prowess is just about gone as a result of massive greed on the part of US corporate leaders and sheer stupidity by its political ones. I watched my own profession of software engineering go from a national treasure to now nothing more than a compendium of competing technical ideologies. As a result, the American capabilities in such areas will only be short of 50 years or so in the modern sense while Russian capabilities are in what could be viewed as precursor to a breakout mode; the only thing keeping it from occurring right now being that of continued US animosity to a multi-polar world where the Russian Federation will play a major role.

    We can also look at the rise of Japanes manufacturing prowess in the same light. Growing up in the 1950s and 1960s in the US, Japanese goods were looked down upon as nothing more than cheap junk. Nothing could be said then of Japanese capabilities to manufacture quality goods either. But here again, the Japanese had come out of WWII on the losing end of the stick so it would take some time to rebuild a modern infrastructure that could produce quality. And that they did starting in the 1980s when Japanese auto manufacturing would begin to send a death knell to the US auto industry with its first introduction of the Datsun auto models. By the 1990s, Japanese computer scientists had become the leaders in the nascent AI field of development, expert systems, and early robotics.

    US manufacturing prowess then when compared to such other countries as Russia, Japan, and others cannot be seen in the light of these countries lack of capabilities but instead of how external forces both economic, political, and in some cases military (Russia in Afghanistan in the 1980s, which was engineered by the US) were affecting them at the time.

    In addition, not all US manufacturing was ever really all that good. Going back to the US auto industry for example; until the Japanese created their excellent autos for US consumption, US auto development was considered a joke. And although many US car designs were quite good in R&D, none could get produced to any level of quality that would be respected by most Americans. Ford did not get the moniker, “Found On Road Dead” as result of quality. And this mostly related to massive mismanagement, something we often blame the Soviet period for.

    Plymouth just about went out of business (and should have) with its 1976 Volare, a car that would literally rust itself from the inside out within a few years of ownership.

    And across the manufacturing spectrum, US production capabilities would begin to suffer tremendously with the early implementation of “planned obsolescence” that would turn the United States into the world’s most wasteful society, which it still continues to dominate.

    So Mr. Owen, where you may be correct in your assertions of US prowess in terms of production to that of Russia’s, the argument rests on a very shaky foundation, which is increasingly becoming one of national myth…

    And to Andrei , Russian production prowess has always been there but it has never had the capability to be unleashed. Some of this was due to horrendous Soviet policies while other aspects were a result of US\Western insidiousness. However, it is starting to shine through…

  113. pierog says:

    “Russia can be and can remain Russia only as a sovereign state. Our nation’s sovereignty must be unconditional. We have done a great deal to achieve this. We restored our state’s unity. We have overcome the situation when certain powers in the government were essentially usurped by oligarch clans. Russia has returned to international politics as a country whose opinion cannot be ignored. ”

    sounds very much like Dugin’s book.

  114. iffen says:
    @Avery

    I entertain the objection.

    My point is that the Bolsheviks, and the Jewish Bolsheviks, propelled the USSR into an economic position from which they were able to mobilize the people and the economy to defeat the Nazis. People like AK want to blame them for communism, but the other side of that is that they must be given credit as well for propelling the modernization of the USSR.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
    , @Anatoly Karlin
  115. Seraphim says:
    @Mr. Hack

    Romanians have some words for your type of comments: ‘Dai cu bîta în baltă’. ‘Unde dai şi unde crapă’.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
  116. CanSpeccy says:
    @Philip Owen

    Kruschaev was a project engineer.

    No. Just a pipe fitter. His son obtained a degree in engineering.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  117. Alligator says:
    @Mr. Hack

    No, man! The Romanians suffered the same as the Russians under Communism and its aftermath, both brought upon them by you, hackers! So they can relate, and not just a few. But you knew this, right, professional liar ?!

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
  118. Agent76 says:

    Jan 19, 2020 Vlog: Russia’s lack of population problem by Inessa S.

    • Replies: @Marshall Lentini
  119. Wally says:
    @Just passing through

    said:
    “Is life honestly better with Wal-Mart and Costco driving the small-to-medium sized family run shops out of business?”

    If the Wal-Marts and Costcos can deliver goods & services at lower costs, more efficiently, without government interference, subsidies, etc., then yes, life is better than inefficient mom & pop shops … which often require people, many with the least amount of money, to pay higher prices for goods & services.

    If people thought otherwise they then would continue to pay the higher prices at mom & pop shops.

    • Agree: Beefcake the Mighty
    • Replies: @Kim
    , @Just passing through
  120. Mr. Hack says:
    @Seraphim

    Ai pitici pe creier!

    • Replies: @Daniel.I
  121. Miha M says:
    @Thomasina

    If a system is unable to deal with flaws of human character (corruption in this case) then this is a problem of the system and not as you suggest some external problem in human character. Human character is what it is. You need to make the system fit to it because you sure as hell cant do the other way around.

    TLDR: what you describe as corporatism is natural product of capitalism. Therefore its capitalism.

    • Replies: @Kim
  122. @A123

    I would place the (fake) US neocons at the top of your list of most dissatisfied parties. Merkle and Macron are just figure heads who happen to have been selected to represent their, respectively occupied, nations.

  123. Parfois1 says:
    @iffen

    My point is that the Bolsheviks, and the Jewish Bolsheviks, propelled the USSR into an economic position from which they were able to mobilize the people and the economy to defeat the Nazis. People like AK want to blame them for communism, but the other side of that is that they must be given credit as well for propelling the modernization of the USSR.

    Are you trying to take my hobby-horse for a ride?

    This agglutination of Bolsheviks and Jews, such as in Judeo-Bolshevism and other variants, are intended to besmirch both with the same brush, as in killing two birds with one stone. Who are the promoters of such ploy, cui bono? Obviously, the right wingers (the capitalists, from conservatives to fascists, plus an assortment of fake Socialists) because of their anti-communism – whether for self-interest or subjects of indoctrination; and the anti-Jewry, a substantial coalition of anti-Semites, anti-Israel, anti-crony capitalism, pro-Palestine, etc.

    As I stated before on many occasions: it is crass stupidity to associate Communism with Jewry. Many Jews joined the Bolshevik faction of the Communist movement as well as all other parties and factions arraigned against the Tsar. Their aim was to bring down the Tsar, not install Communism per se. Communism was one of the bandwagons they hitched in their hatred for the Tsar. Hey everyone: the leader of the Bolsheviks, Lenin, was shot by a Jewess member of the Social Revolutionary Party. Stalin spent as much time fighting against the Jewish traitors within as against the Nazis from without.

    The Jewish mind cannot be communist because Communism is against everything Jewish. By the way, the Jewish country the “Great Powers” of Capitalism set up in the Middle East has anything communistic about it? Nothing, zilch; it is a baron robber country, refuge of mafia and crony capitalists and criminals of the highest order.

    • Agree: FB, Andrei Martyanov
  124. @Curmudgeon

    “Marxism/communism is Jewish socialism.”

    Bingo!

    “‘NATIONAL’ AND ‘SOCIAL’ ARE TWO IDENTICAL CONCEPTIONS. It was only the Jew who succeeded, through falsifying the social idea and turning it into Marxism, not only in divorcing the social idea from the national, but in actually representing them as utterly contradictory. That aim he has in fact achieved.” –Adolf Hitler, Munich speech, April 12, 1922:

    “Many of Marx’s socialist contemporaries were openly anti-Semitic…”

    Uh, perhaps, just maybe, they had very good reasons to be?

    You bet! Just like all “antisemites.”

  125. Truth3 says:
    @Ilyana_Rozumova

    No disrespect taken…

    There are a lot of disciplines within engineering… multi-disciplined engineers became the norm during my career.

    I served as seven distinct ‘types’ of engineer in my career…

    Design Engineer (Machine Design & Controls Systems)

    Tool & Gage Engineer (Tool & Gage Design & Fabrication)

    Robotics Systems Engineer (Systems Design and Elemental Design & Programming)

    Automation Systems Engineer (Design & Project Management)

    Advanced Manufacturing Engineer (Concurrent Design & Project Leadership)

    Quality Engineer (DFSS, DFM, DFA, Supplier Quality, Quality Process Planning)

    Product & Industrial Engineer (Product Design, Industrial Engineering, Processes)

    Several times I served concurrently in multiples of roles.

    In essence, I was a troubleshooter, a problem solver, a hired gun. My job was to use a lot of Newtonian physics, geometry, mathematics, statistics & probability, a little bit of chemistry, materials knowledge, process knowledge, industrial methods developed by guys like Ford, Taylor, Demings, and others, and solve whatever the hell was failing. Yesterday. With no budget. While management were shitting their trousers in fear.

    Beria was NOT any of the above. The rat bastard rapist and murderer that he was… that’s Beria.

    I met and worked with a lot of engineers in the USSR. I have great respect for them as a whole. I met and worked with Professor Borys Paton (a genius and son of a genius), and others you would never know but they were amazingly dedicated and intelligent and insightful people.

    Beria wouldn’t have been worth a pimple on Dr. Paton’s butt.

    So stop worshipping Beria as some kind of Hero of the Proletariat Master Builder of Soviet Industry. The monster was simply a murdering rapist, and a coward. May he burn in Hell forever.

  126. anarchyst says:
    @Parfois1

    Hey Parfois1,

    How do you explain the Christian Orthodox Church properties that were “nationalized” and take over by the ((jewish)) communists?

    Christian church property as well as other “private property” was “repurposed” as barns, stables, and warehouses while NOT ONE JEWISH SYNAGOGUE was “nationalized” or “repurposed”.

    In fact, anti-communist and anti-jewish behavior was criminalized under the communist party.

    • Agree: Alfred
    • Replies: @Parfois1
  127. Kim says:
    @Miha M

    Human character is what it is. You need to make the system fit to it because you sure as hell cant do the other way around.

    But any system that fits human nature would be made by human’s, no? And would contain humans, no? And would require human management and leadership, no?

    So how could such a system do anything but reflect human nature? It certainly couldn’t counterbalance or repair it.

    In the end, it is part of the human condition that we must accept the human condition. And that includes understanding that for the most part only sociopaths and psychopaths want to be leaders and rulers. So for the most part we end up with societies that such creatures have designed or tinkered with or imposed on others to suit themselves – and certainly not to repair, counterbalance, limit or obstruct themselves.

    • Agree: Parfois1
  128. Kim says:
    @Wally

    The people of Easter Island chose to chop down every single tree on the island. That was the wisdom of the market. That was the demonstrated preference of the consumer.

    I am not so sure that the wisdom of the market or the consumer is always so very wise that it is a good principle to always assume that it will produce the best of all possible worlds.

    As some apparently do.

  129. Fun says:
    @Anon

    Better sovereign governments than multinational, corporate empires. Preferably we have both, so one form of power doesn’t dominate the other.

  130. FB says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    SJ100 is very expensive to maintain but a decent first effort.

    Howdy, Tampon Phil…

    Didn’t realize you were also an aviation ‘expert’…?

    Perhaps you don’t remember the Tupolev Tu104, which entered service in 1956…the second passenger jet in the world, after the de Havilland Comet…which unfortunately lived up to its name by literally coming apart in midair three times…and had to be grounded…which left the Tupolev the ONLY passenger jet in the world operating between 1956 and 1958, when the Boeing 707 came into service…

    So I would hardly describe the Sukhoi SSJ100, which came into service a few years ago, as a ‘first effort’…

    In fact Russia has been a leading light in aviation from the very beginning…ever been to a town outside Moscow called Zhukowsky…?

    It’s the home of the Central Aerodynamics and Hydrodynamics Institute…TSAGI…as well as the Gromov Flight Test Center…it is easily the most impressive such institution in the world…certainly in scale, no single of NASA’s seven separate facilities can compare…I say that speaking first-hand…

    Named for Nikolay Zhukovsky…‘a founding father of modern aero- and hydrodynamics…’

    Any student of aerodynamics knows this…his circulation theory of lift is one of the most important theoretical frameworks in the discipline…

    By the 1970s the Soviet Union accounted for one quarter of the world’s production of civil aircraft…and fully 40 percent of the world’s military aircraft…

    You really should try to come across less ridiculous…start by cutting down on the amount of twaddle you disgorge here…

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @Philip Owen
  131. @Wally

    Of course, because everything in life is about money isn’t it? Who cares if the community cohesiveness is destroyed as family run stores go out of business thereby not only annihilating the homely feel of a town, but also diverting money away from the local people and into the hands of globalists – as long as the consumer gets a cheaper product…

    People are honestly retarded, they don’t realise how much they lose socially just because they save a few dollars every week. I bet a lot of people think it’s great taking drugs for the first couple of times.

    • Agree: Philip Owen, AnonFromTN
  132. Alfred says:
    @Mefobills

    You do know that direct democracy would destroy Russia, don’t you?

    How exactly is Direct Democracy destroying Switzerland?

    Direct Democracy – with the help of the internet – is a simple feedback mechanism that largely cuts out the role of the middle-man. There is not way of having “omnibus” legislation in such a system. Special interests would no longer be incentivised to spend their money on lobbyists and corruption since it would not longer work. There is no way to bribe the whole population. Political parties would become largely symbolic. There would be no wars of offence. There are many advantages to such a system.

  133. @Agent76

    Inessa who has zero children, and peddles the Duginite opium of explaining away any of the actual problems in this country.

  134. FB says: • Website
    @Steve Naidamast

    …had it not been for FDR cozying up to Stalin with his Lend-Lease supply agreements, the Soviet Union would have been toast and Germany would have summarily defeated Russia in 1942/1943.

    The problem with that is that lend lease to Russia was practically nothing in 1941, and minimal in 1942…it wasn’t until 1943 that lend lease shipments to Russia really started in earnest…by that time the Red Army had crushed the Wermacht at Stalingrad and Kursk, and the Germans were in full retreat for the rest of the war…

    Also…Britain got THREE TIMES AS MUCH lend lease as Russia…

    And what did Britain do to defeat the Wermacht…other than cheering lustily for the Red Army…[and King George forging a commemorative Sword of Stalingrad…]

    Let’s look at the Russian Space Shuttle for a moment. As I have read in quite a few articles over the years, the Russian Space Shuttle was at its zenith far superior to the US equivalent. The Russian model was cheaper with lower maintenance costs and was very reusable. True, it did not have all the bells and whistles of the US model, but the Russian space shuttle was designed with an emphasis on transport.

    If one were to look at the more refined US counterpart, it would be found that it never had the utility factor of the Russian model and was far more expensive to maintain. And nor could it launch as often as the Russian ones did.

    Holy Smokes MAN…

    All of that is exactly the opposite of reality…the Russian Shuttle only flew ONCE, and that was an unmanned flight…notable due to its being the first and only time a winged spacecraft was AUTOLANDED SUCCESSFULLY…

    The Russian shuttle was hugely more advanced than the US model…especially in regards to its crucial heat shield tiles, which for one thing were arranged with their joining lines at an angle to the hot airflow over the body…so as to minimize stress on the weakest point, the joint between tiles…

    There are many more examples of the technical superiority of the Russian Buran…but unfortunately it was the flawed technical design of the US Shuttle which caused the in-flight losses of two shuttle flights…with a loss of 14 astronauts in total…

    Two horrible tragedies that came about as a result of the US system of capitalist contractors that are driven by profit and not by safety…the Soviet Union [and Russia] has never had an in-flight spacecraft breakup…and only three fatalities total…against half again as much more time spent in space as the US…

    Not trying to pick on you here, your long essay of a comment was interesting to read and a fine contribution to the discussion…just you seem to be getting some bits of bad info that needed correcting…

  135. Daniel.I says:
    @Mr. Hack

    WTF are you people arguing over ?

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @Mr. Hack
  136. @iffen

    … that they must be given credit as well for propelling the modernization of the USSR.

    In the industrial era, it’s hard not to modernize under any government. One must think hard to come up with exceptions. Islamic State, I suppose. The Khmer Rouge.

    Though I’m sure they, too, would have “propelled modernization” had they been allowed to exist long enough.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @KA
  137. Seraphim says:
    @Daniel.I

    Things that happen in these parts of the world you have no idea about. Don’t worry. Don’t lose any sleep over. There are not of your concern anyway.

  138. @CanSpeccy

    I am describing what he did not his qualification.

  139. @FB

    All of which was totally destroyed in the Yeltsin era. I visited the YAK 42 factory myself just before it closed. Components like 400 Hz electrics had vanished from production lines at the suppliers. Gyro factories turned into office blocks. Some R&D continued but the production lines had gone or were never there in first place (modern display technology). Don’t talk to me about first hand in Russia.

    The SJ 100 was a fresh start. Like the Armata tank it was packed with foreign components in order to get back in production with the system.

    You clearly still haven’t made the grade with your father. If you don’t grow up I have enough uncouth behaviour from you to make a case for banning. I’ve never blocked anyone here or on twitter but I am willing to make an exception for an idiot like you who shouts his mouth off before thinking.

    • LOL: chris, FB
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    , @bronek
  140. @FB

    A third of the tanks defending Moscow in 1941 were Anglo-Canadian Valentine’s. They were intended as infantry support not main battle tanks but the Germans were at their supply chain limit anyway. Most of the 3000 hurricanes delivered to SU were delivered before US Lend Lease deliveries started. The Russian pilots grumbled they weren’t getting Spitfires but aluminium was short and they only just stopped supplying Germany. Unlike the Americans, we didn’t charge at least early on so these are not in the table.

  141. Smith says:
    @Parfois1

    Israel was partly set up by the USSR, and their kibbutz was an attempt of communism following Marxist line of thought (no family raising children, “communal” raising of children) with plenty Marxists participating.

    It failed.

  142. Parfois1 says:
    @anarchyst

    In fact, anti-communist and anti-jewish behavior was criminalized under the communist party.

    My short comment about the above is: Bullshit (Sorry, I’m getting tired of explaining that the “offending” Art. 59-7 of the Soviet Criminal Code does not even mention Jews or anti-semitism.

    It merely outlaws ” Propaganda or agitation, directed toward arousing national or religious enmity or discord, or likewise the dissemination or preparation and storage of literature of the same character”. It applies to anybody, including anti-Orthodox or anti-Buddhist propaganda or agitation subsumed under the heading of “Crimes against the State”.

    As to anti-Soviet (not anti-communist, different thing) Art.58-10 says:

    ” Propaganda or agitation, containing a call for the overthrow, subversion, or weakening of Soviet authority or for the carrying out of other counterrevolutionary crimes (art. 58-2 to 58-9 of this code), and likewise the distribution or preparation or keeping of literature of this nature shall be punishable by– deprivation of liberty for a term not less than six months.”

    Both offences require an intention to cause national discord or subversion, which is a tall order to prove unless there is an organization plotting something against the social order and government. Any state has similar laws.

    Your “facts” are crappy propaganda for dimwits. Any rational person would resist being made a fool of by regurgitating such childish tomfoolery.

    Sorry for the outburst but I find such crude and malicious ignorance (actually deliberate malevolence) so overwhelming.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  143. @Parfois1

    This agglutination of Bolsheviks and Jews, such as in Judeo-Bolshevism and other variants, are intended to besmirch both with the same brush, as in killing two birds with one stone.

    You are trying to operate with facts within common sense–I feel your pain, I tried it myself before. Many people here have a caricature for history in their minds and they cannot escape from projecting their (for whatever reasons) complexes or, justified I may add, anger at Israeli baneful influence on the US on Russia. Hence the almighty Jew who controls everything in this world from bowel movements to Russia’s development.

    • Thanks: Parfois1
  144. iffen says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    How many governments have moved a country with the % peasant population that the Empire had, defeated one of the greatest war machines ever assembled on earth while losing a staggering chunk of its population and created a nuclear force and launched a Sputnik within the given timeframe?

    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
  145. @Parfois1

    Doubtless, the intent was to suppress discussion of all the Armenians and Kazakhs in the early Bolshevik leadership.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  146. Kapyong says:
    @Mefobills

    “Any country is not completely sovereign unless the money becomes sovereign. By buying up Russian gold, purchased with Rubles, and then stuffing Russian gold into the central bank was within BIS rules, and allowed fractional reserve emission of even more Rubles.”

    Thanks for that, I’ll study up on Russia and the BIS.

    And maybe stock up on gold 🙂

  147. @Steve Naidamast

    The losses were so high as to be unsustainable. According to military historian, John Mosier (“Death Ride”), had it not been for FDR cozying up to Stalin with his Lend-Lease supply agreements, the Soviet Union would have been toast and Germany would have summarily defeated Russia in 1942/1943. Germany came within a hair’s breadth of doing so in 1941.

    If Ph.D in philology and poetry and a famous WW II history falsifier is a working source for you–I would suggest you abandon “military analysis”aspirations. Fantasies and incompetent revisionism by all kinds of self-proclaimed “historians”, such as Mosier, are not good primers for getting into any “analysis”.

    • Replies: @Steve Naidamast
  148. @iffen

    Not unimpressive. Apart from the “a staggering chunk of its population” part, anyway.

    Now imagine what Russia could have done with a 50%+ higher population, not losing more than a decade’s worth of industrial development due to civil war, and not losing 75% of the late Tsarist elite human capital stock.

    I need to come up with a name for this. Perhaps something like the “1914 Fallacy.” The rather bizarre idea that, absent sovokism, Russia would have entered a permanent time warp.

    • Replies: @iffen
  149. Mr. Hack says:
    @Daniel.I

    I’m trying to spur him on to explain the source of his extreme Russophilism. He claims to be a Romanian nationalist too, and I find the mixture of the two if not highly incongruous then mildly suspicious. He’s probably an old sovok Jew who lost a good job during Romania’s about face to the West, and hasn’t really ever fully recovered. I’m glad that you asked, he on the other hand feels that he needs to direct how you, or anybody else reading this blog, needs to appropriate his time and focus (somewhat presumptuous on his part indicating a dictatorial personalty).

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    , @Seraphim
  150. @Philip Owen

    I visited the YAK 42 factory myself just before it closed.

    Yet, precisely in those times Russia still continued low-rate production of TU-204 in Kazan and Ulyanovsk and many of those aircraft will be now refurbished for ASW/Patrol role for the Navy. So, the question–what is your point? The fact that 1990s were a catastrophe? Anyone with a half-brain knows that, but while many competencies were lost in 1990s, very many have been preserved, often despite action of the Yeltsin’s criminal cabal. I am sure you heard that IL-96, purely Soviet project, will be upgraded and will fly with two PD-35 (and probably with composite wing) as Russia’s main wide-body domestically, with CR-929 “honed” for export. Most importantly, TZAGI was preserved and it was this very same Institute of global reputation where everything you see today in Russia’s modern combat aviation, from SU-30 to SU-57 grew out? TZAGI is a purely Soviet institution. Zhukovsky literally coerced Lenin to provide money for it.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  151. iffen says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    I need to come up with a name for this.

    There is already a name for it.

    It’s a universal and it’s called: if, and.

    Some people pronounce it iffen.

  152. Mr. Hack says:
    @Mr. Hack

    Oh, and I forgot to mention that he’s just another lousy Ukrainaphobe, somebody who rarely elicits any sympathy from me. 🙁

  153. KA says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    All you need is exposure and time- both enough and you will succeed . This is true of getting and acquiring to the riches and also true to being civilian or militarily industrialized . Exposure opportunity and no voices stopping you- that’s all required . The people from the upper echelon of society or country become rich with connection exposure opportunity and lack of fear from law and not because they have high IQ. Congo Liberia Nambia India Pakistan 1990 Russia and even USA of post 1990 are good decent examples. No need for high IQ and no existing psychological barrier of any morality

    Similarly for industrialization – opportunity ,time, tranquility and no negative interference .
    Country doesn’t need high IQ.

    Newton Einestein or Maxwell could not be invented by IQ of 100 or 90 but someone with that IQ can understand those geniuses .

  154. Amazing. More than 150 comments on an article that is equivalent to palm reading: there are no hard data to discuss the meaning of proposed changes substantively. We can’t even be sure that the changes will be substantive, rather than cosmetic.

    One result is clear: self-appointed Russian libtard opposition found itself in a very uncomfortable place: Putin proposed everything they were rooting for and more. Now they keep badmouthing Putin, showing themselves for what they really are: US-funded pieces of shit. Maybe the whole point of Putin’s suggestions for reforms was to show to everyone that shit is shit (just in case someone doubted that).

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  155. @Andrei Martyanov

    Andrei…

    Demeaning the works of other writers no matter their background without any critical information to refute such claims, actually makes you the military historian\analyst I would question as to the legitimacy of your viewpoints.

    G. J. Meyer’s first work on World War I, “A World Undone”, was critically acclaimed as a new history of this conflict. However, if I used your viewpoints on this writer, than he should be jettisoned for not being an established historian, though much of what Meyer presents was actually known about WWI starting as early as 1927.

    As to reviews of Mosier’s works, there are both pro and con papers on his book. One such “pro” paper can be found at the following link… https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/2/4/3133, written by Joseph Bishop. Though Bishop faults Mosier for being among the “revisionist historians”, he does see merit in his work.

    An author who does not view Mosier in a good light would be from Alexander Hill at the following link… https://www.historynet.com/deathride-hitler-vs-stalin-1941-1945.htm

    Hill, unlike Bishop, reacts in the same manner as you did to my points, basically eschewing Mosier in very general terms. For example, Hill provides casualty figures that oppose Mosier’s own results in total of around 9 million Soviet casualties. However, most documentation available has presented such casualties in excess of 27,000,000, where as Mosier does not use such a high figure. More recently, some research has demonstrated that to Stalin’s knowledge the casualty total was around 5,000,000.

    However, Hill goes on to say that Mosier used very weak sources. Well what were they in particular and why are they considered weak. And exactly what sources would Hill recommend? Hill does not say.

    I used Mosier as one sample but there are others as well who hold to similar views. However, a little research found these quotes from Nikita Khrushchev himself…

    >>>
    Nikita Khrushchev, having served as a military commissar and intermediary between Stalin and his generals during the war, addressed directly the significance of Lend-lease aid in his memoirs:

    “I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin’s views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were “discussing freely” among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany’s pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don’t think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so.[41]”

    Source:
    Khrushchev, Nikita Sergeevich; Khrushchev, Serge (2004). Memoirs of Nikita Khrushchev: Commissar, 1918-1945. Penn State Press. pp. 638–639. ISBN 9780271023328.
    >>>

    Though I respect your observations in your book regarding US military capabilities since I was already familiar with them, as a serious military analyst you have degraded yourself in my eyes since, as I mentioned above, you provided no serious analysis of the points I presented.

    I would have been more than open to criticisms of my remarks had you done so…

    On the other hand your refutation of my points indicates that Soviet Forces were “all powerful”. From a sociological vantage point alone this would be impossible considering how most people in Soviet Russia were treated at the time. Yes, I know all that bullshit about Soviet patriotism but new works are just starting to appear that demonstrate how nonsensical this view is as most of rural Russian patriotism was quite fragile, ambiguous, and had more pragmatically oriented loyalties towards those forces that just happened to be in the region. One work that demonstrates this view is by Johannes Due Enstad (a Norwegian historian and Russianist. A postdoctoral fellow at the University of Oslo, he is the author of Soviet Russians under Nazi Occupation (Cambridge University Press, 2018). He currently researches far-right militancy in post-Soviet Russia), which can be found at the following link… https://warontherocks.com/2018/08/fragile-loyalties-soviet-russians-between-hitler-and-stalin/

    Lastly but not least, I tend to write comment to some people such is with my post here for this article to see how supposed authorities would respond. You didn’t just fall into my literary trap, you dove right in and sunk to the bottom.

    You responses to my points never once refuted a single point I made on the differing economics of the US and the Soviet Union and today’s Russian Federation. You simply picked on a single point and then denigrated my capabilities as a military analyst. Such responses tend to only come from people who are not all that secure in their own analytical research.

    Let me give you such a critical example of what I mean by this. A professor Thomas Di Lorenzo has written several books demonstrating that Lincoln was not all that over 16,000 books written on him had made him out to be. Now, I tended to agree with Di Lorenzo and still do very much so as a result of other histories I have studied from both northern and southern historians and authors.

    However, in one book that I had from Di Lorenzo, he cites quite a few statements from the Lincoln-Douglas Debates. Out of curiosity I decided to see where such statements were located in the transcripts of these debates. So I went to Yale’s Avalon Project that archives primary source documents for a variety of subjects. Though this archive is supported by the Yale Law School it is also known as a resource for general research. By luck they did have the transcripts of all of Lincoln-Douglas Debates. I was able to do text searches on all the statements provided by Di Lorenzo and found not a single one existed anywhere in the transcripts.

    I wrote to Professor Di Lorenzo regarding my findings. I said that though his quotes were not found in the transcripts at the Avalon Project that did not mean they did not exist as other sources may have had them. I simply asked what those sources were so I could research them for myself.

    The good professor responded with a very terse note stating that he was not a liar and would not put something in his works that could not be supported. However, in this case he did. Further, I never suggested that he was a liar, I just wanted to know what sources he used.

    This is how I viewed your reaction to my comments here. You could very well honestly believe what your research has demonstrated to you and I can see anyone who does put in time to understand such topics as you do would. However, I would never criticize anyone in the manner that you did to me.

  156. @FB

    Based on your comments, I did some research on the Russian space shuttle. The current articles I was able to review puts your views as correct and mine incorrect.

    However, I have an extremely strong memory for such things and I remember reading quite a while ago a comparison between the two shuttle programs. This article definitely gave the Russian shuttle a far superior review and did go on to say that it was a far more successful program than that of the US’.

    Now this is not to say that what I read was accurate at the time. Misinformation has been rampant in the United States since the War for Southern Independence and earlier.

    However, with the knowledge available today that cris-crosses the Internet like a bad dish of spaghetti, one has to wonder if the newer articles I just researched is anymore accurate than what I read years ago.

    What is interesting to note is that at the time I read the initial piece on the Soviet shuttle, there would have been more incentive to denigrate the Soviet program than there is today. But then again with the terrible political environment in the US currently who really knows any more…

  157. @AnonFromTN

    Putin proposed everything they were rooting for and more.

    Removing primacy of International Law from Russian Constitution, among other things, and unrolling a soft “welfare” state honed for preservation of Russian people (I omit here a long term strategy of native replenishment of labor resources), and funds for that ARE available, was and is hardly a subject which (pseudo)Russian libtards were rooting for. If anything else, they were against it all the way. Who WERE for that (in different shapes)? Many pseudo-left (KPRF and their cabal) and many other bidders for power who wrapped themselves into the banner of “patriotism”. It is THEM, not totally discredited and universally hated liberda, who were completely debased. Considering the “quality” of their cadres, ranging from court clown Zhirik to “leaders” such as cretins Platoshkin, Girkin or Boldyrev, I do not expect them to recover any time soon. The other major things are growth of investment into the main funds and new Budget Rule. I think Putin and his team they have impressive enough “credit history” in handling nation and global scale projects quite well.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    , @Nekazva
  158. @Steve Naidamast

    Demeaning the works of other writers no matter their background

    Most “Western” historiography, bar some very few and very notable exceptions, on WW II is written in the last 20+ years primarily by people who have zero qualifications in not just military history, but in fundamental issues which shape military strategy, operational art and tactics of a time period. In other words, and it is my long-standing position openly presented on many public forums and publications, that Western in general, and US in particular, so called Russia Study field is a wasteland of pseudo-academics and people with agenda. I am happy that President Putin declared creation of the open-for-public archives on WW II. Now, in order not to drag this conversation out, you are free to read and rely on whatever sources you want, just expect your “sources” and expertise to be called in doubt. Like this:

    On the other hand your refutation of my points indicates that Soviet Forces were “all powerful”

    1. Soviet Forces were “not all powerful”, I never stated that. They, however, ended up in Berlin in 1945 and combined West since then cannot live with this fact;
    2. I do not “refute” you points–I merely pointed out that your sources, including your latest posted, are mostly revisionist propaganda which relies primarily on Western “view” of Soviet history. A precise view which turned Western Europe into the multicultural shithole and US slap-bitch, while the United States posting an atrocious record of one geopolitical (and military) defeat after another. Things will get worse, much worse, fairly soon.

    These two points are tightly interconnected, because combined West is grossly incompetent in both military affairs, warfare and geopolitics, which, to a large degree were “presented” there by the type of “scholars” you are basing your conclusions upon and who played a crucial role in upbringing current Western “elites” who, for the lack of better word, are imbeciles. You are a free man, as I said, you are free to believe whatever you want.

  159. @Anon

    It is just true that we are running on a form of capitalist software. And it is a total disaster. As a hardcore capitalist, I will admit this.

    I really thought that inflation would rise and put the central banks in check. But it hasn’t. Us Austrains have been wrong for 10+ years.

  160. @Philip Owen

    Yeah yeah. The USSR had capital formation. Much of that capital is still in use today. Like the big smelting plants ect

    The US today is one of the least capitalist places ever. It produces almost nothing. Its biggest export market is Canada. Its an imperial monetary contraption with no name.

    So these whole boiler plate phrases dont comport with reality

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  161. @Paul holland

    It produces almost nothing. Its biggest export market is Canada.

    While there is a lot of truth in your statement, let’s be objective: the United States still remains a number two global commercial aircraft manufacturer (granted they will address Boeing’s problems, we’ll see if they will), it is still self-sufficient in terms of energy and agriculture, it certainly has fairly advanced R&D base, it leads the world in microchips and I would say some US automobiles are pretty good. In other words, the United States is still present in the list of many (not all) predictors of National Power (Status), but, yes, the dynamics is terrifying and I don’t see real re-industrialization happening. In fact, de-industrialization will continue. Just few days ago, when walking around open storage of our local Coastal I decided to look where all those tillers, plows, pullers, seeders what have you originated from, ALL, all of them, without exception Made in China, including electric motors. My question is, what: people who can cut, form, weld metal and attach moving parts to it (including US-made electric motors) somehow disappeared in the thin air, or US doesn’t have many machine shops anymore to produce THAT? And then I recalled, yes–the machine shops are sorely lacking in the US as is the lack of people who want to get down and dirty working good level trades is very pronounced. Youngsters, mostly, want to smoke dope, listen to rap or get degree in Law or Philosophy. Welding, CNC machining, Solid Works? Nah, too boring and hard.

    • Replies: @Paul holland
  162. @Andrei Martyanov

    I like your expression “pseudo-left”, it describes Russian communist party perfectly. I’d also add pseudo-party to their description. They are not all crazy, though. Some are just scoundrels. E.g., old man Zyuganov did pretty well financially by serving as pseudo-leader of a pseudo-party ever since Yeltsin’s times.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  163. @Andrei Martyanov

    Russian civilian aircraft were not optimized for civilian use. They were fuel thirsty and needed a lot of maintenance. It wasn’t just a matter of the collapse of communism. Continuity of civilian manufacture died. Military is a different subject. Performance is the main goal. Fuel and maintenance cost less so. Not the same thing.

    • LOL: FB
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  164. @FB

    Oh, the European Space Agency thought I knew enough about aerospace to hand me their entire patent portfolio to review for commercialisation/technology transfer. The project stopped because of the 2nd space shuttle crash. All the space agencies diverted funds to help out. Those Boeing cockpit fires. I told them the answer ten years before but NIH kicked in.

    The Buran was a better lifting body than the shuttle. Like I said, great prototypes. That said, the Buran was a sports car. The shuttle was a load carrying truck. Divergent requirements.

    • Replies: @FB
  165. @Steve Naidamast

    I have seen twice recently, probably on RT, very blunt language attributed to Putin quite unlike the restrained silence I thought typical of him, and in one he seemed impassioned or raving mad about “antisemitism”. Maybe the translator chose that word.

  166. @AnonFromTN

    I like your expression “pseudo-left”, it describes Russian communist party perfectly.

    There is a reason (a good one) they are called a (K)Commercial Party of Russian Federation (KPRF). 😉 A bunch of losers, well, with the exception, as you correctly pointed out, those who made a very good living from playing the part. Pretty much most of Russia’s “opposition” groups, from nominal “nationalists”, to fringe (and very greedy) “left”, not to mention lowlife creatures such as liberda–are pretty much Lohotrons for office plankton. KPRF eventually will have to completely convert into a typical social-democratic party and be inevitably removed by voters to the fringes of Russia’s political life, same as will happen with LDPR once Zhirik, who is not getting any younger, gets tired of BSing a bunch of morons who populate his personal cottage industry, and finally normal technocratic elites within professional Sosloviya will fully institutionalize. I think professional soslovnost’ is not a bad idea for future political arrangement.

  167. @Andrei Martyanov

    I agree on aircraft MFG, ag , chips and R&D. But I dont agree on energy. What the US is doing with shale, is pumping recycled mercantalist/petro dollars into the ground, to get oil. I’d say about half of the post 2008 oil production is non profitable and will disappear.

    Its the “reserve” ccy status of US debt that is asset stripping the country. Europe does not have this problem. The EU as a block has the biggest trade surplus in the world. Bigger than China or Japan. Germany has no problem competing with Chinese labor. It has run surpluses with China.

    David Stockman surmised that when you take out the reserve ccy ponzi , the govt largess and the military, the US has an 8 trillion dollar economy.

    When this crazy debt reserve system blows up, there will be some pain in the US but then it can rebuild. But first they have to admit that there’s a structural problem.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  168. chris says:
    @Anatoly Karlin

    I was shocked by this same paragraph also, though apparently for completely different reasons.

    … what appears to be a pretty hard turn to the Left, meaning that the Kremlin is finally listening to the will of the people …

    Wait-what ? It’s the first time I’ve ever heard of “the Left” being described as “listening to the will of the people” ! Is this some kind of a joke? The Left is by its own definition not democratic. It putatively exercises power for the ‘greater good’ of society and this is done by an ‘enlightened’ minority.

    After the abject failure of all of its experiments in the last century (some still ongoing, including in the US), how on earth, can anyone ever refer to it as “listening to the will of the people,” I’ll never understand!

    The fact that liberals-progressives-leftists support and take populist positions to carve out a constituency for themselves cannot in any way be equated with listening to the ‘will of the people!’

    Besides hot (free) lunches, ‘the people’ want many things which the Left positively abhors. ‘The people’ also want tax breaks, and cheap fuel, what they really want is to keep the money they earn in order to get rich. Most of all they don’t want to be encumbered by the big ideas and big plans which the Left has in store for them.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
  169. @Paul holland

    I’d say about half of the post 2008 oil production is non profitable and will disappear.

    You could well be right. But for now, at least, nominally US is energy “independent”.

    David Stockman surmised that when you take out the reserve ccy ponzi , the govt largess and the military, the US has an 8 trillion dollar economy.

    My very rough estimates in the last couple of years were around 10-12 Trillion. The rest is financial bubble and cooking of books. But in general, it is an emerging consensus that the REAL size of US REAL economy is much-much smaller than proverbial BS of $21 Trillion GDP.

    • Replies: @Paul holland
  170. chris says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    The paramount problem which Russia has, is that it is dead center in the cross-hairs of the ‘AngloZionist’ empire. Russia has an incredible strategic value for them because of its natural resources, defended by a capable military with nuclear deterrents.

    If you control Russia you have the advantages of:
    1. controlling China
    2. bypassing the Middle Eastern oil producers
    3. (to a lesser degree) controlling Europe

    If you see how viciously the empire is going after all energy and natural resource producers from Venezuela, to Bolivia (Lithium), Iran, Iraq, and of course, last but by no means least, Russia itself, it is very clear that the goal is to corner the entire global market and to not let anyone trade in energy who is not directly and completely controlled by them. The other reason it’s imperative for them to control this key economic segment, is of course, also to ensure the dollar’s viability, by forcing the trade of these resources in the dollar.

    Unfortunately, Russia’s free lunches for students is the telltale sign of turning on the spigot of government entitlements which, as we are seeing in the US for the past decades, will lead it directly to bankruptcy.

    I’d be much more interested in an opinion which considers first and foremost how Russia can preserve its current strategic position, rather than a discussion of the secondary factors.

  171. chris says:
    @Peripatetic Commenter

    LOL, yeah, ultimately we will be going to war with them in order to preserve the ‘sanctity’ of gay marriage.

  172. Seraphim says:
    @Mr. Hack

    You have your way to make us laugh, Mr. Itzhack.

  173. Seraphim says:
    @chris

    This ‘paramount problem’ of Russia has been defined in no uncertain terms by Sir Halford Mackinder 116 years ago in a ‘pivotal’ essay ‘: “The geographical pivot of history”, The Geographical Journal, 1904, 23, pp. 421–37.
    In short:
    “Who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland
    Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island
    Who rules the World Island commands the world”.
    Russia did, does and will do whatever it takes to preserve its current strategic position (which was and is her ‘preserve’ anyway since erh, Russia exists).

  174. Parfois1 says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    Doubtless, the intent was to suppress discussion of all the Armenians and Kazakhs in the early Bolshevik leadership.

    And there we go again… For the lesser endowed, here goes a brief primer.

    Early in 1917 the Russian Empire consisted all the lands from Poland, Baltic states, Finland and Ukraine in the West and all the way to the Pacific Ocean and comprised over 100 nations (not nation states, only Poland had statehood a century before). Prior to the Revolution, the Social Democratic Labour Party had prepared detailed programmes regarding the protection of minority ethnic groups consonant with the Communist agenda for self determination within a Federative Republic. Long before the Bolsheviks or anyone else dreamed of a revolution, they had already planned to create a fair system of governance for all peoples without exceptions or favours, including the preservation of local cultures, languages, religions, self-rule and political representation at federal level.

    Lenin’s ‘Theses on the Nationalities Question” was published in 1913.

    • Thanks: FB
  175. Parfois1 says:
    @Steve Naidamast

    Nikita Khrushchev, having served as a military commissar and intermediary between Stalin and his generals during the war, addressed directly the significance of Lend-lease aid in his memoirs:

    I have very strong doubts about that and will check if there is a skerrick of truth in it. Stalin could not stand the toadyish Kukuruznik, let alone working with him.

    Regardless, using that proven liar to support your argument brings discredit to whatever you say regarding this question. Satis verborum.

  176. @Beefcake the Mighty

    That’s standard Putin’s policy: do not make enemies you don’t have to. So far, this stance served him well. More importantly, it served Russia well.

    • Replies: @Beefcake the Mighty
  177. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Steve Naidamast

    What always happens with US developments; greed and very incompetent management.

    You can’t say that about Boeing. Heck, the new CEO is Dave Calhoun, a graduate in accounting, and a published author whose works include:

    Profiting from Demand-Driven Business Models No Matter What

    (even when the planes you produce aren’t safe — just asking).

    Calhoun is also musician whose CD albums include:

    Day drinkin’.

    Calhoun, who succeeds Dennis Muilenberg, the only Board member with engineering expertise, has served on the Boeing board during the years culminating in the 737MAX (a plane designed by clowns supervised by monkeys, according to one internal Boeing memorandum). What’s more, immediately before Muilenberg’s firing, Calhoun is reported to have said Muilenberg “did everything right.”

    Other leading lights on Boeing’s Board of Directors include leading aircraft designers Caroline Kennedy and Nicky Haley.

    Boeing will surely become the subject of a Harvard Business School case study on the Art of Monkey Management.

    • Replies: @FB
  178. Parfois1 says:
    @Steve Naidamast

    Here is the composition of the STAVKA (Soviet High Command) during WWII:

    Defence minister Marshal Semyon Timoshenko (as its president), the head of General Staff Georgy Zhukov, Stalin, Vyacheslav Molotov, Marshal Kliment Voroshilov, Marshal Semyon Budyonny and the People’s Commissar (Narkom) of the Navy Admiral Nikolai Gerasimovich Kuznetsov.

    Stavka counsellors: Marshal Kulik, Marshal Shaposhnikov, Kirill Meretskov, head of the Air force Zhigarev, Nikolay Vatutin, head of Air Defence Voronov, Mikoyan, Kaganovich, Lavrenty Beria, Voznesensky, Zhdanov, Malenkov, Mekhlis.

    At the end of the war STAVKA was reduced to Stalin (President), Zhukov, Aleksandr Vasilevsky, Aleksei Antonov, Nikolai Bulganin and Kuznetsov.

    Can’t see the lying Khrushchev in there; unless he was the errand boy. But wait, the War Room was next to Stalin’s office and the errand boy was not needed.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  179. FB says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    The Buran was a better lifting body than the shuttle. Like I said, great prototypes. That said, the Buran was a sports car. The shuttle was a load carrying truck.

    T. Phil…you never cease to amaze with your sheer stupidity…

    A ‘load-carrying truck’ that qualifies as probably the biggest [and saddest] engineering disaster in history…

    There were plenty of very significant differences in the rocket systems of the two…the US decided to use solid-fuel rocket motors as the main boosters, which provided 85 p3rcent of the liftoff thrust…

    This is CRAZINESS writ large for manned spaceflight…solid rockets are basically a firecracker with a hole in the bottom…they don’t have an ‘engine’ of any kind that could be controlled or shut down…once lit, that firecracker just is going to burn until it burns out…

    No person in the Russian space program would EVER have contemplated solid rockets on manned flight…

    The Energiya rocket that lifted the Buran was powered by boosters with liquid oxygen and kerosene engines…the most powerful engines ever, the RD170…

    These are also some of the most efficient hydrocarbon fuel engines, using the staged combustion cycle, which the US has never been able to master…and is thus forced to buy Russian RD180s…which are basically half of an RD170…

    The Energiya-Buran also used LOX and liquid hydrogen main engines like the Shuttle…but hydrogen is very low density and hence the huge size of that fuel tank [for very little overall thrust]…hydrogen is great for upper stages, so again the Shuttle configuration was certainly goofy to begin with…

    Incidentally the Russian hydrogen engines edged the US Shuttle engines in specific impulse, the cardinal performance parameter of any rocket engine…

    There were many other major differences…but the fact that the Russians decided NOT to send a crew on the Buran’s maiden flight into space speaks volumes about their conservative approach to crew safety…

    As for your ridiculous noises about ‘prototypes’…wow…just about any space vehicle is more of a prototype than anything else…these systems are designed to operate on the edge of ‘survivability’ of metallurgy and engineering principles…

    Btw…thanks for the laugh about your ‘adventures’ as a budding aerospace ‘expert’…next time go at least visit Samara [rocket engine capital of the world]…or go out east to Irkutsk, where the MC21 and lots of other aircraft are being built…

    You haven’t seen diddly, my friend…you talk nonstop nonsense and make yourself a laughingstock here…

    • LOL: Parfois1
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  180. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @FB

    And what did Britain do to defeat the Wermacht…

    Three things:

    (a) With massive American aid, they bombed German cities, at a cost estimated after the war, at several times the cost in damage to Germany. The objective was to impede Germany’s ability to support its armies in the field. However, I believe post-war investigation suggested that by destroying jobs in the civilian sector, the bombing increased the availability of workers for employment in armaments and munitions factories and may thus have enhanced German military effectiveness.

    (b) They kept the Germans out of the ME and hence short of oil, causing resources to be diverted to production of synthetic oil from coal.

    (c) They defeated the Luftwaffe’s attempt to bomb Britain into submission in 1941. This was critical because it left Germany open to a war on two fronts, the Western front being opened, under American leadership, from Britain in 1944.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  181. @AnonFromTN

    Perhaps. But it’s revealing that it would require sanctioning Jewish hypersensitivity.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  182. @Beefcake the Mighty

    Putin rarely contradicts even obvious BS to avoid making unnecessary enemies. It does not mean that he believes that BS, or even expects others to believe it. Sometimes he uses court clown Zhirinovsky to say things that he does not feel advisable to say himself. He is a politician, after all. A successful politician needs to be a slick operator, but does not need to be honest. Convenient thing about him is that when he actually says something, he does exactly what he said. That confuses Western politicians no end, as in the West it is assumed that every politician is lying 100% of the time.

  183. @Philip Owen

    I think this is sort of nonsense. Russia somehow retained its aviation industry. It can still build jet engines and airframes. Unlike the UK who used to be a world class aviation power, but gave it all up.

    Russia leads the world in civil nuclear plant exports. 39 total units sold or in planning. The US and China have a combined 4 units sold or in planning.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  184. Popeye says:
    @Derer

    Yes China is doing fine without American crony capitalism. Yes indeed. Why? Because there is so much Chinese crony capitalism…interbred with Chinese communist party. Massive corruption. Mao wouldn’t approve IMHO

  185. @Andrei Martyanov

    Exactly. 20 trillion is just a joke. And Americans really somehow believe that they are this much richer than everyone else. Then they understate non dollar bloc countries GDP (like Russia) by more than half. Ive seen think tankers at huge conferences to the audience with a straight face that Russia has a 1.4 trillion dollar GDP. I have Russia’s GDP pegged at around 3.8- 4 trillion.

    Considering

    5th biggest oil consumer
    5th most FX reserves+gold
    6th most billionaires
    5th biggest search engine
    And GDP/PPP comes in around 5th or 6th

    Anyway I just discovered your blog. Its bookmarked.

    I just have content on Twitter @Paul_Hol1000

  186. @Avery

    They were instrumental. Every unit did have commissars.
    All commissars were Jews.
    In Russian attack the function of commissars was to shut every Russian who would turn around.
    Whatever unit was captured the Germans did ask who are commissars.
    Germans did shut commissars on spot.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  187. @Paul holland

    Boeing is not losing market share to Russian aerospace.

    The important bits of a plane are the wings and engines.

    The UK designs and makes both for Airbus. The engines go elsewhere of course and are the standard against which all others are compared. The wings set the standard for composite construction. Airbus was the first to use composites and stays ahead in technique.

    We do the Airbus landing gear too. As well as Airbus there are smaller planes made in Northern Ireland and a great many components and machines. One of my clients dominates the world market for wire marking machines for example. Civilian aerospace is one of our main goods exports.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  188. @CanSpeccy

    And blockaded Germany completely. Germany had no maritime access.

    Meanwhile, we invented an atom bomb, passed to the US for completion 18 months earlier than we might have managed alone. (All those centrifuges). The Hiroshima bomb was the British design (more developed so more reliable) and Nagasaki was the later US design.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @utu
    , @FB
  189. @AnonFromTN

    I hope you are right because I do admire Putin. But some of his recent statements on “anti-semitism” sound like something Jeb Bush would say. Hopefully it is just tactical, as you say. (I don’t anticipate he’ll be going to Uruguay to combat the scourge of anti-Uruguay-ism, e.g.)

  190. @chris

    If you see how viciously the empire is going after all energy and natural resource

    Doing this with Russia is an exercise in futility and once, which is near completion, crucial transport arteries of Eurasia are secured (hence hysteria in the US re: Russia’s latest weapon systems), it is over. It is pretty much over now, it is just that US political class, degenerate as it is, has to enter stages 4 and 4 of Kubler-Ross model without unleashing a global war. Hopefully these creeps begin to understand that they will be hunted down and killed if they do so. Per classic “geopolitics” as conceived by Mackinder and his followers in the US (such as late Zbig)–it is not applicable anymore in a traditional way. When Sir Halford was writing his Geographic Pivot of History there was no satellite groupings for targeting, 5,000+ kilometer range cruise missiles, hypersonic weapons and machine-speed combat networks. They all exist today. Russia long ago moved into the modern warfare paradigm, the United States still resides in the essentially 19th century Gunboat “diplomacy” delusion.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @chris
  191. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    All commissars were Jews.

    And that is why we all live in the post-truth times where facts be damned. If all commissars “were Jews” how come Khrushchev or Brezhnev among vast numbers turned out to be those proverbial Slavs. Hm.

  192. @Parfois1

    Can’t see the lying Khrushchev in there; unless he was the errand boy. But wait, the War Room was next to Stalin’s office and the errand boy was not needed.

    He lifted his “facts” from Wiki, which, as we all know (wink, wink) is a very reliable source on WW II, especially Soviet Part. It is written by many objective, hard-working in archives researches who have absolutely no agenda, like not at all, just one single purpose of pursuit of the truth;))

  193. @Philip Owen

    Boeing is not losing market share to Russian aerospace.
    The important bits of a plane are the wings and engines.

    1. Boeing is losing share to A-321Neo and it will (it is a known fact within industry) have huge issues once MC-21 gets EASA certification early 2021. That is why Irkut ramped up manufacturing plans for 120+ a year of MC-21. Not only MC-21 is a direct competition to B-737, it is also direct competition for A-321. So, yes, Boeing is not losing it YET. But it 100% WILL, because Aeroflot, Russia’s MAIN consumer of both (my favorite) B-777, and B-737 WILL remove its fleet of 66 B-737 in favor of MC-21 for which Aeroflot already has firm contracts. There are, of course, other airlines such as S-7 or Ural, among few others who will gladly disassociate themselves with now toxic B-737Max legacy. Not to mention another interesting fact: SSJ-100s proved themselves excellent not only regional but mid-range aircraft flying such routes as St. Pete-Sochi or Moscow-Krasnodar and so on. People really like them. They will like them even more once they are re-motorized with PD-7.

    2. Composite materials, from fiber-glass to carbon-fiber are used in aerospace since 1950s. Both USSR and US pioneered carbon-fiber blades for helicopters in 1960s. As far as full black wing (fully carbon-fiber wing) only three types of commercial aircraft have them: A-30X (don’t remember which ones from the top of my head), B-787 and MC-21.

    We should expect a lot of “volatility” in commercial aerospace once MC-21 enters service and SSJ-100s get fully Russified.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  194. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    Re: Britain’s naval blockade of Germany and the British role in the development of the atom bomb.

    Yes, it is difficult to grasp, today, that in 1939 England was still a world power, indeed that Britain then still ruled the largest empire the world has ever seen, was the world’s leading power in science and technology, and still possessed the world’s largest navy with 15 battleships and an additional five under construction.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  195. @FB

    Since when has the SJ100 been powered by rocket motors? Off target As usual. Your poor father.

  196. @Andrei Martyanov

    It didn’t work for the Mongols either. Too unwieldy to hold together. “Heartland” belonged to the age of the train. Steamboats were better anyway. The Spice Route through the straits of Malacca was the key to trade, not camels crossing the desert.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  197. @CanSpeccy

    Yes, it is difficult to grasp, today, that in 1939 England was still a world power, indeed that Britain then still ruled the largest empire the world has ever seen

    This is precisely why it pretty much stopped being one by 1939. Especially when one considers where the main Theaters of Operation were and what kind of warfare was decisive. This takes NOTHING from heroism and sacrifice of Britons and Britain’s seamen and soldiers, including those of the Empire as a whole. But it was precisely Empire which made GB lose all of its power (much of it misused and not as great as was thought) and exit WW II a bankrupt state, with crumbling Empire and an American lap-dog, which Suez Crisis merely formalized. Yet, strangely, the largest volume of literature on “strategy”, “geopolitics” and “warfare” somehow is written in English language;)

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @CanSpeccy
  198. @Andrei Martyanov

    Composites – I don’t do military, so when I say first to use composites, I mean civilian airliners. Russia/SU had one small Carbon fibre plant in Balakovo so usage wasn’t high. A new plant was opened about three years ago. I forget where. British equipment at least in part.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  199. @Philip Owen

    “Heartland” belonged to the age of the train. Steamboats were better anyway

    It was my understanding that I clearly stated that “old” geopolitics is dead in the 21 century. What Mongols or steam boats have anything to do with modern warfare and modern means of transportation? Russia can shut any European or any Eurasian choke point for any fleet without even deploying her own fleet. Modern carrier-centric surface fleets are not survivable around Eurasia, simple as that.

  200. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    But it was precisely Empire which made GB lose all of its power

    Not so. British power was based on British economic might, which funded the Royal Navy that ruled the world’s oceans and thus gave Britain the most valuable colonies (think sugar from the Caribbean, cotton and tobacco from the Southern US, and tea from India). But by 1900, Britain (population 37 million) could not keep pace economically with the US (population 76 million), and Germany (population 56 million).

    True the population of the British empire was vast, but it was unproductive. In India, the Brits tried off-shoring labor-intensive industries but their problem was the same as later seen in the Soviet Union, the employers pretended to pay the workers and the workers pretended to work: hence the vast human resources of the empire were largely undeveloped, although many Indians and other subjects of the crown served and died (over 80,000 Indians) in the Imperial forces during WWII.

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  201. utu says:
    @Philip Owen

    “All those centrifuges” – were not used in the Manhattan Project.

  202. Pancho says:
    @Anon

    “I wish the leftist commentators on many dissident sites would stop using the term “capitalism” when what we have is corporatism.”

    Exactly! Monopoly capitalism is either Fascism, where the corporations control the state, or Communism, where the state controls the corporations.

    One of the best characteristics of true capitalism is competition, but monopoly capitalism’s goal is to control the market by eliminating competition. It was not by chance that the guy who said “competition is a sin” was none other than John D. Rockefeller.

    • Replies: @Parfois1
  203. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Yet, strangely, the largest volume of literature on “strategy”, “geopolitics” and “warfare” somehow is written in English language

    Actually, British strategy prior to and during WWII was exemplary. The great threats to the independence of the Western European nations were German and Soviet expansionism. British strategy succeeded in (a) setting the Germany and Russia at war with one another, and (b) getting the US to bear the greatest burden on the Western front, which prevented the victor in the East from rolling West, all the way to the Atlantic.

    True Britain and the rest of Western Europe became vassals and tributaries of the United States, but better that than subjects of a Nazified or Sovietized Europe.

    • LOL: Andrei Martyanov
  204. @Philip Owen

    A new plant was opened about three years ago. I forget where. British equipment at least in part.

    Voronezh, Alabuga, Nizhnii Novgorod, Samara–all have large composite production plants. Voronezh, in fact, has a whole composite cluster. Here is one of them: Lamplex Komposit. Big enough for you?;) You really need to update yourself on Russian economy.

    http://lamplex.ru/news/

    or (in Russian)

    https://lipetsknews.ru/articles/biznes/v-chernozeme-zavershaetsya-pervyy-etap-stroitelstva-zavoda-lampleks-kompozit

    Do not forget that Russia produces largest objects made out of fiberglass composites, namely Mine-warfare ships of pr. 12700.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandrit-class_minesweeper

  205. @CanSpeccy

    Not so. British power was based on British economic might

    Listen, I don’t know you personally, but please, stop blowing smoke up, at least my ass. You really should acquaint yourself with the classic (brilliant) of distinguished (real) British scholar Correlli Barnett “The Collapse of British Power”, then open news for 1941 Autumn by which GB simply ran out of gold reserves and enslaved itself to the United States and then take a look at that:

    https://worldwar2-database.blogspot.com/2010/10/military-production-world-war-ii.html

    It is still grossly inaccurate but it will do. Plus, spare me this naval interpretations of WW II, as naval truism goes–the seat of the government is on land. It is precisely on land where the decision of WW II happened. How about you give this a try, after all, I am sure, you never heard about how Churchill was basically removed from leadership position prior to Tehran Conference and what Americans thought of British at Casablanca.

    https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2016/03/fulton-speech.html

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  206. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Listen, I don’t know you personally, but please, stop blowing smoke up, at least my ass.

    Is that your best argument?

    Pfui.

    As for the idea that power can be measured by gold reserves, LOL. Gold didn’t save the Incas or the Azteks, or the Spanish who stole their gold.

    In an age of total war, power depends on the product of manpower and technology. By 1939 British technology was no longer generally superior to that of Germany or the United States, or even to the Western technology (Koch supplied oil refineries, British and American tank designs, production line assembly plants supplied by Henry Ford) acquired by the Soviets during the 30’s, but British manpower and access to resources was less – much less than that of the US and Russia: hence British eclipse as a global power.

    Nevertheless, due to well conceived strategy, Britain survived WWII as a nominally independent country subservient only to its own creation, the United States, and is now in a position to escape such control as the US still retains: an early step, likely being the abandonment of Britain’s ridiculously expensive aircraft carriers, which have no function except to serve in America’s failing effort to garrison the world.

  207. chris says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Yeah, because of Russia’s military prowess, it would be difficult to move the assaults (like the ones against Iran and Venezuela), against Russia itself, to anywhere beyond the bluffing stage; not that they’re not trying this with the relentless anti-Russian propaganda and sanctions.

    Still, I’m convinced that the neocon plan is to take Russia over from the inside, otherwise, with all them nucular missiles, things could get a little messy.

    The way the MO works is you put the leadership and population under enormous and constant pressure from both the outside and inside. Then, the internal operators have a much greater chance of success. Russia can continue to build up their defenses, because that will be useful later to defend against China. In the meantime, they’re grooming the next oligarch in Tel Aviv to get him ready to jump behind the wheel when Putin retires.

  208. Nekazva says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Platoshkin “cretin”? Would You explain why do You think so?

  209. @CanSpeccy

    Nevertheless, due to well conceived strategy, Britain survived WWII as a nominally independent country subservient only to its own creation, the United States, and is now in a position to escape such control as the US still retains: an early step, likely being the abandonment of Britain’s ridiculously expensive aircraft carriers, which have no function except to serve in America’s failing effort to garrison the world.

    I, frankly, at a loss here, I simply don’t even know how to respond to this, but sure. Let’s say it is so. I was always sympathetic to English culture: my generation grew up with great English Literature, rock-music, and I still root for FC Chelsea. So, sure, I wish UK only real independence, prosperity and return of at least some real statesmen.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  210. @CanSpeccy

    Unfortunately the aircraft carriers are built. Talk about fighting the last war. We have planes on the Falklands now. We are not storming a Gulf Sheikdom or a Chinese island in the South China Sea on our own initiative. A commando carrier for landing peacemakers in Sierra Leone would be enough.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  211. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Andrei Martyanov

    I was always sympathetic to English culture: my generation grew up with great English Literature, rock-music, and I still root for FC Chelsea. LOL

    Chelsea FC = English culture? Owned by a Russian-Israeli oligarch with maybe two English players. LOL.

    As for rock music, beginning with Tommy Steel, flick knives and DA haircuts, it marks the end of English culture as a foundation of civilization.

    As for “great English literature” wadderyermean? Harry Potter, and the Hobbit?

    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
  212. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    Unfortunately the aircraft carriers are built.

    They could flog them off to the Saudis. Or convert them to hospital ships to augment the National Health Service.

    Having got out from under the EU, the Brits would be insane to remain docilely under the American yoke, sending warships and bombing planes in support of a declining America’s regime change operations.

    Britain is a tiny and densely crowded island offering a prize to no one, and except as a vassal of the US, a threat to none.

    Britain should strive to be friend of all the world, an international center of learning, a ready source of international emergency aid, but the homeland, not of footloose Africans and Asians, but of the British nations, English, Welsh Scotch and Irish. And they should keep their own nukes, just in case.

    • Replies: @Herald
  213. Parfois1 says:
    @Pancho

    One of the best characteristics of true capitalism is competition, but monopoly capitalism’s goal is to control the market by eliminating competition.

    Back to Politics 100.

    Indeed, the engine of Capitalism is competition, as opposed to the Socialist model of co-operation. Competition necessarily involves destroying your rivals to become top dog, literally eating them. The result is monopoly, especially in the stage of financial Capitalism.

  214. @CanSpeccy

    As for “great English literature” wadderyermean? Harry Potter, and the Hobbit?

    You, of course, never heard of Shakespeare, or Dickens, nor you ever heard of Jerome K. Jerome (Hungarian by the way who was in charge of The Punch and an author of Three In the Boat), or such minuscule figure like H.G. Wells among many others. I will omit here all those plebes such as Kipling. Other than that–sure, I read Harry Potter and Hobbit non-stop. I also do not forget reading British tabloids. As per Chelsea, do you want me to remind how many Englishmen played for Arsenal circa 2009-10? Have a nice life.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  215. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    or such minuscule figure like H.G. Wells

    –who you admire?

    A totalitarian friend of Joe Stalin, and a Fabian Society member (their mascot a wolf in sheep’s clothing) like the traitor Tony Blair.

    Here’s what George Orwell had to say about Wells.

    And here’s a review of the whole gang of Fabian Society traitors.

    True Wells wrote a couple of good novels, but then became an intolerable political bore. His autobiography would also have been great, except for the vast tracts of political bilge.

    Now Kipling, there was a real artist.

    As for Jerome K. Jerome, he was, so wikipedia relates, born in Walsall, England of British parents: Maguerite Jones and Jerome Clapp.

    But, yes, the incidents concerning the lack of a can opener, and the broken guest house window were genius comedy.

    • Replies: @utu
  216. utu says:
    @CanSpeccy

    Fabiams, you say? Made me think of the IQist, HBDers….Lynn,…, Sailer,… They share the same outlook and attitude towards humanity…similar constraining poverty of ideas…deserve the same place in the hell.

    Taking Tea With Stalin by Ronald Harwood

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  217. yurivku says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Current changings – it’s rearranging beds in a brothel without changing whores, i’m afraid.
    Rare case when I agree with western MSMs in that Putin is arranging his future as undercarpet leader.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  218. @yurivku

    Could be. I believe in experimental evidence, so we’ll see.

    • Replies: @yurivku
  219. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @utu

    Fabians, you say? Made me think of the IQist, HBDers….Lynn,…, Sailer,… They share the same outlook and attitude towards humanity.

    Such people have an emotional need for rigid hierarchy.

    Fabian George Bernard Shaw, the son of a bankrupt Dublin wholesale merchant lived as a penniless scribe with his mother until making a name for himself in his forties. Fabian, H.G. Wells, the son of a chamber maid and an unsuccessful shop-keeper attained a higher education only with great difficulty.

    Achieving success against great odds, such people want a rigid system in which their success will never be reversed.

    In contrast, Bertrand Russell, though a Fabian, was the child of great privilege, heir to a noble title, raised in the home of a former Prime Minister and given the finest education that the world had to offer. Unlike Shaw and Wells, Russell was thus vastly self-assured and consequently had an absolute contempt for totalitarians of both left and right.

    The same pattern of success against extraordinary odds is to be seen in the lives of other totalitarians: Gengis Khan, booted with his mother from his native tribe to fend for himself in the wilderness, Stalin, his mother an alleged prostitute, raised in the cellar below his father’s shoe repair shop, etc.

    I think the pattern fits the IQists too. Everyone knows that in the world of academia, the top brains are to be found in math, physics and philosophy, with the middle brows in biology, and the psychologists down there among the sociologists and students of Home Ec. Naturally, therefore, the psychologists want to establish a rigid hierarchy of intellectual merit of which they are the sole arbiters, thereby gaining for themselves a powerful role in the intellectual firmament.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  220. Derer says:
    @Derer

    Maybe, but they have less outhouses and that is progress.

  221. yurivku says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Well, consider it as a prediction.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  222. @yurivku

    OK. That Mishustin guy appears a lot more capable than “iphonchik” Medvedev. Maybe because it is hard to be less capable. Lavrov and Shoigu remain in place, which is a good thing. But overall, we’ll see.

    • Replies: @yurivku
  223. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    That the combination of success and insecurity underlies the drive to create the totalitarian state explains the role of Russian Jews in the Bolshevik revolution and the role of Western Jews in the creation of the tyranny of political correctness.

  224. yurivku says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Ya, Medvedev is asshole, mishustin is blackhole corrupted as all of them. Not only Lavrov and Shoigu, actually nothing changed.

  225. Herald says:
    @CanSpeccy

    And they should keep their own nukes, just in case.

    I think they would have to ask Uncle Shmuel to press the allow button first. That’s the difficulty with an independent deterrent that’s not really that independent.

  226. @Andrei Martyanov

    Most of my Russian friends have Soviet editions of Herbert Wells (not as we say in the UK, H G, on their bookshelves. And then there is the Soviet television series about the famous detective Watson. Until Sharpe came along apparently everyone’s favourite Englishman.

  227. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    I think they would have to ask Uncle Shmuel to press the allow button first. That’s the difficulty with an independent deterrent that’s not really that independent.

    The Brits have over 100 entirely British warheads – designed and manufactured by the UK’s Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston. The Uranium was refined at the diffusion plant at Capenhurst in Cheshire. Furthermore, the Brits produced and tested a fusion device in 1952.

    The current delivery system is American, but it cannot be beyond the capability of Britain’s engineering profession to develop a nuclear armed cruise missile or robot sub of sufficient reliability to deter a potential aggressor.

  228. FB says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    Meanwhile, we invented an atom bomb, passed to the US for completion 18 months earlier than we might have managed alone. (All those centrifuges). The Hiroshima bomb was the British design (more developed so more reliable) and Nagasaki was the later US design.

    Wow…Tampon Phil is going for the gusto…

    Either that or point to any credible material that even remotely goes in this direction…

    The American atom bomb was invented by Jewish physicists…each and every last one of them…the Jewish family culture pushed and encouraged their kids into hard science…so bright young Jewish kids developed rigorous habits suitable to solving difficult math problems…

    Why do you think there are so many Jewish physics Nobelists…?

    Brits had some bright people, but mostly they had ridiculous popinjay fops from the upper class that were useless eaters…BOJO is the latest example…

    The British had ZERO nuclear technology…everything was done in the US…starting with Fermi [who was Italian]…

    Germans didn’t have anything either…neither did the Russians, until Sakharov [amazingly a non-Jew brilliant physicist, although there were prominent Jewish physicists involved in the project as well] built the Russian thermonuclear [hydrogen] bomb, just months after the US Jewish team accomplished the feat…

    The early fission devices like Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren’t all that powerful, being in the kiloton range…[relatively speaking]…not compared to the megaton two-stage fission-fusion devices known as thermonuclear…the US early monopoly on fission devices certainly wasn’t big enough of a hammer to go after the Soviet Union…which is probably why it never happened…fission bombs cannot wipe out a civilization…fusion bombs can…and quite effectively…

    By the time the American Jewish team tested the megaton class devices in 1954, the Russians were there too, in 1955 they tested the RDS37…even more powerful than the American bombs and also the first air-dropped thermonuclear device…another tribute to top down socialist organization of big science projects…so was the US effort…it certainly wasn’t farmed out to a Musk or a Boeing…

  229. yurivku says:
    @FB

    It’s very demonstrative for me that T. Phil seems to be proud that imaginary British Hiroshima’s bomb was dropped onto Japaneese.
    Typical WASP.

  230. CanSpeccy says:
    @FB

    The British had ZERO nuclear technology…everything was done in the US…starting with Fermi [who was Italian]…

    Sounds like bullshit.

    Here’s what the National Interest reports:

    On July 4, 1945, a select group of men met in a room in Washington, DC to decide how to use the first atomic bomb. Not all of them were Americans because the Bomb was not an American invention; use of the new weapon required approval from Britain, its co-inventor. For instance, the 1943 Quebec Agreement forged by United States President Franklin Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Winston Churchill specified joint development and control of atomic weapons.

    The British Empire was the first nation to investigate nuclear explosives seriously. By 1941, the Brits had calculated the critical mass of fissionable material required for a bomb, worked out the basics of bomb design and the gaseous diffusion enrichment of uranium. All this information came to the United States with the “British Mission”—the team of top-flight British scientists who joined the Manhattan Project.

    But America is not always a reliable ally, and British generosity wasn’t reciprocated.

    • Replies: @FB
  231. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @FB

    By the time the American Jewish team tested the megaton class devices in 1954, the Russians were there too, in 1955 they tested the RDS37…even more powerful than the American bombs

    So in the end the Goyim built a bigger bomb than the Jews. LOL.

    Your racist spin on events is truly bizarre.

    And your comment about that:

    “ridiculous popinjay fops from the upper class that were useless eaters…BOJO”

    is more drivel.

    Johnson is in no way “upper class”. He’s of Muslim, Jewish, German and American immigrant ancestry. His father is a writer and environmentalist. His mother is an artist of American Russian Jewish ancestry.

    I mention these facts since you apparently don’t know how to undertake the most elementary research before spouting off in the most offensive and ignorant way.

  232. @FB

    When, repeatedly, you haven’t a clue about the subject, why don’t you just shut up.

    By the time the Manhattan Project started my former employer ICI had made 3kg of U235 before the US was even in the War. The plan was to make the rest in Canada but the US had more industrial capacity and, so, the Manhattan project. After the war, the US ratted on the deal (as it did on jet aircraft and computers). Even so, the UK had its own fusion bomb to test in 1952.

    The link tells part of the story.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-33540282

    You are a victim of US prolefeed.

    • LOL: FB
    • Replies: @FB
  233. If the English would not bomb the Norwegian heavy water plant to smithereens Germans would explode nuclear weapon in beginning of 1945.
    English got hint about nuclear weapon from Hitlers speech, where he promised his army a terrible weapon.
    English US and Russians were 10 years behind copycats.
    In US Fermi was the scientific brain. The seven Hungarian Jews, were only seven midgets.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    , @FB
  234. @Ilyana_Rozumova

    No. The Germans had the wrong approach. Their bomb was not going to work anyway. The UK was the leader in the route to making a bomb from before WW1. British physicists like Rutherford put the basics in place. They are less well known than the Continentals because the British focussed on experiment more than theory. They had the money to do more than think.

  235. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Can…yes the British had a nuclear program that was in the laboratory stage…ie the work was mostly math…this is a very far cry from inventing a working bomb, most especially the design for Fat Man, which T. Phil claims was a British design…

    The leading phsycisists were again JEWISH…Rudolf Peierls, a German emigre and Otto Frisch from Austria…

    At the University of Birmingham, Rudolf Peierls and Otto Frisch co-wrote a memorandum explaining that a small mass of pure uranium-235 could be used to produce a chain reaction in a bomb with the power of thousands of tons of TNT.

    This program staarted in 1940 and was cryptically code-named Tube Alloys…

    But it produced no real EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS…such as a chain reaction…in reality, to someone who knows high energy physics, this is equal to the first baby steps…

    And yes after the Americans absorbed the British-Canadian program into the Manhattan Project, they then turned around and reneged on every point of the agreement and basically cut the British loose without sharing any practical knowledge of the design of a WORKING DEVICE…

    Typical American backstabbing…

    So yes, there is a little bit of granularity that you have added to the discussion and my statement that the British had Zero nuclear technology was a little bit of shorthand, because I didn’t want to get into the details…plus I anticipated someone or other would protest my rather backhanded characterization, and then I would further elaborate…

    But T. Phil’s statements are just whacko…think about it…if Fat Man was a British ‘design’ as he claims…why then didn’t the British just go ahead and build their own after the Manhattan project was dissolved…?

    Now as for your points about what the Brits contributed in WW2…the much ballyhooed Battle of Britain was a half assed air skirmish that the Germans did not prosecute with any real determination…this was because Hitler continued to believe that he could ‘turn’ Britain and get it to either declare neutrality or even join the Axis in their war against Russia…

    The whole thing was a storm in a teacup, compared to the magnitude of the action going at the Eastern Front…no objective observer could contest that…

    The Middle East battles were likewise very much a peripheral matter to the real action in the East…Hitler did get petroleum throughout the war, even from Rockefeller and the likes of of Prescott Bush…plus he had the Romanian oil fields…

    The British did contribute a lot to the Pacific theatre, which you failed to mention…my take is that the British were actually more effective with what resources they had than the Americans, whoc seemed to have great trouble with the Japs in land wars like in Iwo Jima…Russian generals after rolling over a much bigger Jap force in Manchuria in 1945 were puzzled that the US had so much difficulty with the Japs, who really lacked effective land war tactics and equipment…

    Of course if we talk about Britains war in the Pacific, we must also acknowledge the huge numbers of Indian and other colonial troops, who acquitted themselves well and made an important contribution…which has never been properly acknowledge to this day…so the Brits were no less hypocritical than the Americans they love to pillory…they acted by the same playbook…

    Also Scots officers were discriminated against and were denied promotions and important field commands…

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  236. FB says: • Website
    @Ilyana_Rozumova

    In US Fermi was the scientific brain. The seven Hungarian Jews, were only seven midgets.

    That’s complete bullshit…I’m not even going to bother to debunk that, since it is pure bunk on its face…

  237. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    LOL…GREAT COMMENT…

    Business Administration is the higher education equivalent of special ed…

    God help us that these fucking half-wits have managed to take over the machinery of commerce and industry…

    • LOL: CanSpeccy
  238. melpol says:

    Putin is an overrated enemy of the US, it is true he has rusting old nukes but fear not he will never use them. In a major speech Putin bragged about his new hypersonic weapon, that speech drummed up new business for Western arms manufacturers. Putin is a friend of Trump and he may even be a CIA asset. If Putin retires he would love living near a Colorado ski resort.

    • LOL: FB
  239. FB says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    T. Phil…I really don’t have much time to waste on your mushroom ravings…but just to set the record straight…the British atomic bomb test in 1952 was a FISSION device…only about 25 kilotons…

    It wasn’t until 1958 that the Grapple Y was tested…Britain’s first thermonuclear [hydrogen] device…it yielded a respectable three megatons…about 100 times more powerful than the 1952 fission bomb…

    That made Britain the third country to develop a thermonuclear weapon…but three megatons was the highest they ever achieved…still, it was sufficient leverage for the US to take Britain under its wing and make it a nuclear vassal, as great powers are wont to do when upstarts on the periphery start building up a head of steam…

    Quit dreaming about Lewis Carrol tales and start getting sober…

  240. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @FB

    …yes the British had a nuclear program that was in the laboratory stage…ie the work was mostly math…

    You gotta have the idea before you can build the thing. But sure, it was the US that had the resources to do that. And, importantly, the US could undertake the Manhattan project out of range of German air-raids and missile attacks.

    Thing is, though, many of those scientific refugees from the European mainland took their ideas to Britain, not the US, which tells you something about Britain’s standing in the world of science and technology at the time.

    Furthermore, without the post-war flood of European scientists, the US might never have become the world’s dominant power in science and technology, a status now slipping away, as China overtakes the US in R and D investment, while the US academy has become a money-making racket for overpaid university bureaucrats.

    Now as for your points about what the Brits contributed in WW2…the much ballyhooed Battle of Britain was a half assed air skirmish that the Germans did not prosecute with any real determination…this was because Hitler continued to believe that he could ‘turn’ Britain and get it to either declare neutrality or even join the Axis in their war against Russia…

    I think that’s a misconception. Hitler no doubt thought it worth a try to con the Brits into thinking they could keep the empire if they kept off Hitler’s back, but neither Chamberlain nor Churchill were that naive.

    But under a full-scale Germans blitz of London and other cities, the Brits were obviously more likely to cave. However, the Royal Air Force saw the bastards off, due partly to their use of radar, and partly to Britain’s prewar mobilization (urged by Churchill from the Parliamentary back bench, and carried out by the supposedly gutless wimp, Chamberlain), which saw Britain out-produce the Germans in war planes during the late 30’s and throughout the war.

    Hitler failed to appreciate the significance of defeat in the Battle of Britaiun because he thought he could beat the Russians within a matter of months — then turn on the Brits before they could raise a land force (at the time they had only four divisions, or perhaps only two, to Hitlers 40).

    Instead, however, the Germans suffered years of blood, sweat, toil and tears losing the war with Russia, by which time Britain and allied forces were ready to launch the Western front, which neatly blocked the Commies who would otherwise undoubtedly have rolled far West of Berlin in pursuit of their aim of Communist world empire.

    The British did contribute a lot to the Pacific theater, which you failed to mention…my take is that the British were actually more effective with what resources they had than the Americans

    Well they had the aid of hundreds of millions of Indians to assist them. Over 80 thousand Indians died in the service of the Empire.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @FB
  241. bronek says:
    @Anon

    I’ve been saying that for years. The top step of the ladder of “capitalism” is the corporatist kleptocracy. I enjoy it when the partyokracja in La CessPool Grande’s oratoria is about bogeyman info concerning the world of shekels

  242. bronek says:
    @Philip Owen

    We are very lucky that Unz created this site. We don’t need to conduct ourselves as uncouth primitives. Let’s try and keep communique within civil realms.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  243. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    You gotta have the idea before you can build the thing.

    This is ABSOLUTELY TRUE…the idea is everything..

    Look I’m not trying to downplay the British accomplishments…Britain was the CAPITAL of world scientific knowledge for a very long time…while Americans were basically savages that contributed nothing to the world of hard knowledge…

    You’re right about the Yanks screwing over the Brits with the jet engine too…a magnificent invention by one of my heroes Sir Frank Whittle…GE just copied the Whittle engine [which the Brits naively gifted], and even then they lagged badly for years…

    I will mention here that in rocketry the Germans were on top…Von Baurn’s A4 [knowns as V2] was a remarkable feat…every single rocket engine since is based on this grandfather…

    Britain also had an incredibly effective industry, and I agree with you about the production numbers…that is very common knowledge…

    What I hold against the English is their incredible snobbery…especially towards the Scots…who made MOST of the incredible scientific breakthroughs in the Enlightenment…to name just three…Lord Kelvin…James Clerk Maxwell…James Watt…the English simply coopeted these great Scotsmen, somehow turning them into limeys, at least in the common consciousness…

    And here is where I will go off on a little tangent my dear Anglo friend…because I think you suffer from the same delusions…

    Let’s go back 5,000 years to the Corded War Culture [sometimes known as the Battle Axe Culture]…

    Corded Ware culture encompassed a vast area, from the Rhine on the west to the Volga in the east, occupying parts of Northern Europe, Central Europe and Eastern Europe.

    These were the original Aryans, carrying the R1a gene…and they disseminated the Indo-European language…covering all of Europe and even Iran and northern India…

    These are facts…I don’t want to hear from pissants about the use of the term Aryan…they reshaped the world with their technology of the domesticated horse, the wheel and crushing weapons like the Battle Axe…

    Corded Ware stone-axe in the Museum für Vor- und Frühgeschichte (Berlin). Ca. 2800-2400 BCE.

    Boat-shaped battle axe, characteristic of Scandinavian and coastal-German Corded Ware.

    The Aryans of the Corded Ware Culture were simply unstoppable…they ranged far and wide and conquered brutally…killing the men and taking the local women and households…which is why the Y chromosome of R1a is so widespread…while the maternal chromosomes vary widely from region to region…

    Now here is my beef with the English [and Germans too]…they are an offshoot of the Aryans, carrying the R1b chromosome which no one knows how it originated…

    Long long after the Aryan conquests of most of the known world, the Germanic carriers of R1b made waves of conquests in continental Europe and the British Isles, most notably the Anglo Saxon invasions in the fifth and sixth centuries…

    But they never subdued Scotland, where still many clans carry the R1a…for instance David Hume the philosopher…Clann Somhairle, sometimes anglicised as Clan Sorley [LOL]…descending from the famous Norse-Gaelic leader Somerled, and confirmed R1a…

    The Germanics made even smaller inroads in Scandinavia, where R1a is still dominant, especially in Iceland…

    Incidentally Nikola Tesla is also R1a, as is Tom Hanks and Anderson Cooper…

    Clearly the Germanic English were always threatened by the superior Scots genetics, their sustainable way of life and their broad-hearted nature…

    Some of the good genes did make it into the Germanic English…for instance Sir Francis Drake was R1a…

    Trooped man, and horse, and bow and spear, their gathering word was Bellenden

    –Sir Walter Scott

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  244. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Oh and btw…just to prove my point that the English were deeply envious of Scots…there is the Dress Act of 1746…which outlawed the tartan kilt…

    Btw the Highland Kilt was nothing like the ceremonial small skirt of limey propaganda…it was a 12 YARD SWATH OF CLOTH that could be draped around the body in a hundred different ways…

    The garment, which could be looped and knotted to create different outfits to accommodate the fickle Highland weather, was part of a practical workman’s wardrobe. As the politician Duncan Forbes wrote in 1746, “The garb is certainly very loose, and fits men inured to it to go through great fatigues, to make very quick marches, to bear out against the inclemency of the weather, to wade through rivers, and shelter in huts, woods, and rocks upon occasion; which men dressed in the low country garb could not possibly endure.”

  245. CanSpeccy says: • Website

    And here is where I will go off on a little tangent my dear Anglo friend…because I think you suffer from the same delusions…

    LOL

    Didn’t know nuthin’ about this magic R1a gene. Must read about it. My grandma was a pure blooded highlander, so maybe I got it too, though probably not since the Scots are a diverse lot: blonde blue-eyed Vikings of the same tribe as the Icelanders in the North East, lightly built, dark-haired immigrants from Ireland in the West, plust Picts and Britons, whoever they were, and all the recent arrivals: Jews, Pakistanis, Hindus, Chinese and Africans.

    As for English snobbery toward the Scots, I was never aware of it. John Buchan related how, when at Oxford, a bunch of Scottish students formed a lively Caledonian Society, which prompted some English students to form a club for those of pure English descent. However, the Anglophiles had to abandon their project for lack of anyone entirely free of Scottish ancestry.

    But yes, the Scottish enlightenment was a most extraordinary thing: James Boswell, Adam Smith, David Hume, Sir Walter Scott, Robbie Burns, Robert Louis Stephenson. And Arthur Conan Doyle was Scotch extraction too. These are among the most the British literary figures most admired in England. I’ve read them all, pretty well cover to cover.

    Then, added to that great literary efflorescence, Edinburgh New Town (now horribly scarred by a hideous laminated-wood-beam, hemi-cylindrical Safeway Stores on Princess St.) and the burst of scientific genius. Amazing. Where did it come from? A tiny nation mired for generations in petty wars and near universal poverty, then wham, they transform the world’s understanding of economics, science and philosophy, and invent the novel too — the biggest waste of time prior to television and the Internet.

    I don’t expect ever to cross the Atlantic again, but if I do, I hope it will be possible once again to take an overnight sleeper (do they still have such a thing I wonder) from London to Edinburgh, and then take a stroll in the cool light of dawn up the ramp from Waverly Station and down the street to the North British Hotel for a breakfast of oatmeal, tea, and cold buttered toast with Scotch marmalade and kippers.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @FB
  246. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    As for English snobbery toward the Scots, I was never aware of it.

    It was the ruling class…not ordinary folk…although nowadays even ordinary folk are taken in by the British propaganda…Tommy Sheridan tells a good story of how a couple of dorks driving by in a bimmer in Edinburgh made quite the racket when they recognized this good man…

    Also things were very different years ago…never mind centuries ago…

    Btw how does BOJO justify his big NYET to IndyRef 2…?

    Being of Highland stock [at least partially] does explain your quite good qualities which you have shown repeatedly here…

  247. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    A tiny nation mired for generations in petty wars and near universal poverty, then wham, they transform the world’s understanding of economics, science and philosophy, and invent the novel too…

    Hmm…

  248. FB says: • Website

    Oh and btw the way Can, since you mention Adam Smith…

    Disagreement exists between classical and neoclassical economists about the central message of Smith’s most influential work: An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). Neoclassical economists emphasise Smith’s invisible hand, a concept mentioned in the middle of his work – Book IV, Chapter II – and classical economists believe that Smith stated his programme for promoting the “wealth of nations” in the first sentences, which attributes the growth of wealth and prosperity to the division of labour.

    Yes Smith’s views have been thoroughly bastardized and distorted by the fucking limey imperialists…who sought to justify every unnatural thing under the sun as being somehow rooted in basic philosophy…

    I guess the invisible hand applied real well to the Plantations of Ireland…at least dirtball Tom Friedman was honest, that the invisible hand contains an IRON FIST…

    Fuck the Invisible hand of limey twisting sophistry…the Scots, especially the Highlanders were always an egalitarian people…which is why they will still be around long after the English are coopted by the pakis…

    Btw…not trying to pick on you…I think you are a pretty good guy…one of the best here, easily…just would like to hear your own personal opinion on IndyRef 2…if you don’t mind…

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  249. CanSpeccy says:
    @FB

    Yes Smith’s views have been thoroughly bastardized…

    No point in listening to what people say about Smith. Nobody’s actually read him — except me, the Complete Works including the Theory of Moral Sentiments and the Essay on Language! Same problem with Ricardo. He’s always cited in favor of shipping people’s jobs to China, no-one ever noting that he said free trade was good provided there was no factor (capital, technology, labor) mobility, which there could not be then, but is universal now.

    Smith’s invisible hand made perfectly good sense in the context of a competitive free market, a thing now almost entirely of the past. And indeed Smith would be generally hated and abused if he were to appear today to express his views on Google, FB, Amazon etc.

    Concerning the Indy Ref, my first thought is that referendums are not part of the Constitutional settlement of 1869 and represent either a failure of good government, or a means to con the people into accepting what the Government will not accept responsibility for.

    The people cannot decide complex issues sensibly. They lack the knowledge, and if they had the knowledge they would still lack the capacity, energy and time to analyze it properly.

    Secondly, it seems to me that reliance on referenda to decide issues of national unity is a recipe for national disintegration. If the self-serving clowns in Edinburgh don’t win a yes for breaking up the UK today, they will hold another and another and another until they do win. Likewise, London, much more important than Scotland. London, if it had its own government, would certainly vote to leave Britain and join the EU. Soon you’re likely to have a civil war on your hands, because people don’t see why a bunch of uppity Asian, Middle Eastern and African settlers in London should be free to tear the country apart.

    I think the success of Johnson’s government will depend very largely on how he handles the Union. Northern Ireland, I think, is bound to split, since the Papists are gaining on the Prods and once the demographic balance tilts, the North will join the Republic. Geographically, that seems a tidier arrangement, and its no great loss to the UK — just one or two percent of GDP. So good luck to them.

    The loss of Scotland would be quite different and, to me, a tragedy. Question is though, what can the British Government do to make the Scots feel more at home in Britain than in the EU? One thing, for sure, is to bring a virtual halt to immigration. Glasgow is almost 1o% ethnic now, and within a generation, at the rate of immigration that occurred during the Blair and Cameron years, both Edinburgh and Glasgow would join London, Birmingham, Leicester and Luton, and many other urban areas where the indigenous people are a minority in their own home.

    Beyond that, the scheme of devolution imposed by Blair should be totally redesigned. Scotland is no more a unit than the United Kingdom. Shetland and the Orkneys have little if anything in common with Edinburgh and Glasgow. Ditto the Hebrides. And the highlanders never much liked those lowland bastards.

    So there you have scope for not one but five Scottish provinces. And if your going to give Shetland its own government, then obviously Yorkshire with a greater population than all of Scotland will want its own government. So devolution, if it is to be done intelligently, requires not two extra governments, Welsh and Scotch, but about twenty five. London would be problem, though, as it is essentially alien occupied territory. However, the central government could finesse that problem by declaring London the Capital Region, essentially under central government control.

    Certainly, it seems remarkable to me that, when I was born, England ruled the greatest empire the world has ever seen, yet today cannot keep the tiny United Kingdom in one piece.

    I met a traveller from an antique land,
    Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
    Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
    Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
    And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
    Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
    Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
    The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
    And on the pedestal, these words appear:
    My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
    Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
    Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
    Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
    The lone and level sands stretch far away.”

  250. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    I meant the Constitutional Settlement of 1688.

  251. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    One other thing about Brexit and migration. There’s more to it than merely blocking the flood of Syrians and Libyan, Pakistanis, and Nigerians who are progressively replacing the infertile people of Britain.

    Stopping mass replacement immigration was a prime the concern for probably most Leavers. But for many of the the Remainers, especially the young, it was the freedom to leave Britain that justified EU membership. And anyone who has endured an Edinburgh winter, the cold East winds the leaden skies, it is quite understandable that that impulse is particularly strong among the people of Scotland who’ve been leaving because of bad weather for centuries.

    Today, the EU is a fake democracy, having a parliament without power and an unelected committee to make the law, which is anathema to democrats. Moreover, in adopting the Euro, the EU provided the Germans a means to screw other the EU nations (though not Britain which kept its own ever depreciating currency), by underpricing German goods while overpricing goods of all their European competitors. This created widespread unemployment except in Germany which has responded to a domestic labor shortage in accordance with the Coudenhove-Callergy plan for the Islamization of Europe through mass Middle Eastern immigration.

    But if the EU were ever to transform itself into a defender of the European peoples and of Western civilization, then I don’t see why the Brits might not some day rejoin.

    • Replies: @FB
  252. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Concerning the Indy Ref, my first thought is that referendums are not part of the Constitutional settlement of 1869 and represent either a failure of good government, or a means to con the people into accepting what the Government will not accept responsibility for.

    That’s interesting…so when a government puts a historic question before the people, that is to be avoided…I would bet dollars to donuts that the grand poobahs of the ruling elite think exactly that…proles intruding on their absolute [and ill-gotten] power…perish the thought…

    Look Can, I see you have a fondness for Scots and keeping them within the Union under the Butcher’s Apron…which Scots increasingly don’t see as their own flag…

    I also agree that there has been a lot of very fair and honest dealing between the two peoples since Scotland gave up its independence…yes many Englishmen are fond of Scots, and the feeling is also often mutual…

    Certainly Scots have not been abused or kept down as second-class citizens, like the Irish…

    But the two peoples ARE different, on many important levels…Scots want a more socially just society…the English proles are happy to be swept along by the bunkum of parasite capitalism…

    Scotland is no more a unit than the United Kingdom.

    You see that’s where you English part with reality…I find your people generally not able to regulate your desires with sufficient self-authority…you want to believe what makes you feel good…

    As for a five-piece Scotland…wow…sure there are regional differences that persist in every modern nation state, because the distance scale wasn’t as effortless as it was now…back in the day, even the folks in the next village over were kind of ‘foreign’…

    Doesn’t mean anything in today’s world…

    As for the ‘tragedy’ of a split…I don’t see it…if it’s what the Scots people want, then let them have their say…BOJO has zero authority to block that…and it will only boomerang back to the English, who now at least want to retain the mini-empire of the UK…

    Btw, what good did the British Empire with India and all do for you or your neighbor…?

    You were just a victim of imperialist brainwashing…do you think the grand poobahs of the day cared a whit about the grandiosity and ‘romance’ of the mighty empire…pfft…you have to realize you are dealing with people who are only interested in me, myself and I…and that means padding your nest and climbing for more power…

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  253. @CanSpeccy

    Vincent Price reads ‘Ozymandias’

  254. @bronek

    Tell that to @FB. His behaviour has been disgusting and outrageous.

  255. @FB

    R1b was spread by the Beakers from Southern Portugal. Read Prof. Barry Cunliffe. R1a was a blow back to the stepped from Europe. Get up to date.

    • Replies: @FB
  256. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @FB

    As for the ‘tragedy’ of a split…I don’t see it…if it’s what the Scots people want, then let them have their say…

    This is not a disagreement to be resolved. But may I point out, that when last asked — in what was promised at the time would be a once in generation referendum, the majority of the Scots people did not want.

    As for the authority of the government, it has all the authority it needs to govern. That is what the people send representatives to Parliament to do — to govern. The people then having the opportunity from time to time to kick their representatives out and replace them with others. That, under the existing constitution, is as far as the rights of the people to govern go. I think it is as good a constitution as is likely to be conceived, despite the manifold injustices and outright crimes that result from it.

    Under existing law, the British Government is under no obligation to allow another Scottish independence referendum and the present administration will surely not allow another Scottish independence referendum. However, the present administration will certainly seek to persuade Scotland’s separatists that they are better off in the UK than in the EU. Naturally, every effort the government makes in that direction will be dismissed by the independentists, in particular the folks in Edinburgh seeking jobs for the boys with a national government and the EU: ambassadorships, EU Council Memberships, etc., plus lots of free lunches.

    But what seems likely to determine the outcome of this struggle is economics. If the EU resolves the economic injustices created by the Euro, and if it creates a more genuine democracy, i.e., a parliamentary system under which the elected representatives write the law, then I can see Scotland, with or without the rest of Britain, returning to the EU.

    However, if Britain, the nation that lost an empire but has yet to find a role, does find a role, then opinion could swing the other way.

    I think this is a long shot, but it seems to be what Johnson’s Brain, Dominic Cumming, is aiming to do. But what he’s thinking is not yet obvious.

    Apparently Cumming is opposed to Britain’s aircraft carrier program, which is encouraging since the aircraft carriers are useless except as an adjunct to America’s global policing role, from which Britain should withdraw. Britain is no longer able to dictate the course of world history and should cease to be a vassal of an increasingly demented American Empire. As an independent state (unaggressive, internationally cooperative, but with its own independent nuclear deterrent), Britain could set an example of a more civilized and pacific approach to international relations.

    One puzzle that you may be able to explain, is why a minority of Scots so detest inclusion within a devolved United Kingdom, yet wish to relinquish their political and economic independence through a merger with the much larger more bureaucratic and less democratic EU. In particular, is there really any factor, other than the desire of young people in Scotland to have an EU Passport thereby having unfettered freedom to leave their cold and infertile land for residence in amid the lush prosperity of the European continent.

    • Replies: @FB
    , @FB
  257. Oddities. Mishustin is Jewish. The end

  258. FB says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    Look T. Phil…a little knowledge is a dangerous thing…

    R1b is associated with the Bell Beaker culture, which came AFTER the Corded Ware culture…also there is litle connection with the even earlier Yamnaya culture, thought to be the beginning of the domestication of the horse, the wheel and the Indo-European language…

    R1b was detected in two male skeletons from a German Bell Beaker site dated to 2600–2500 BC at Kromsdorf, one of which tested positive for M269 but negative for its U106 subclade (note that the P312 subclade was not tested for), while for the other skeleton the M269 test was unclear.

    In a 2015 study published in Nature, the remains of a later Bell Beaker male skeleton from Quedlinburg, Germany dated to 2296–2206 BC were analyzed. The individual was found to be carrying haplogroup R1b1a2a1a2. The study found that the Bell Beakers and people of the Unetice culture had less ancestry from the Yamnaya culture than the earlier Corded Ware culture.

    The authors of the study took this to be a sign of a resurgence of the indigenous inhabitants of Western Europe in the aftermath of the Yamnaya expansion.

    This ties in with Maria Gimbutas theory of the ‘old’ cultures of Europe which were generally matriarchal and sedate, being invaded and displaced by the dynamic Aryans bearing R1a…

    So here we see that R1b could in fact be more closely tied to these ‘old’ European peoples…but again…nobody knows…

    It’s not as simple as your point blank statements, which are intended, childishly, to contradict what I say here…

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  259. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Naturally, every effort the government makes in that direction will be dismissed by the independentists, in particular the folks in Edinburgh seeking jobs for the boys with a national government and the EU: ambassadorships, EU Council Memberships, etc., plus lots of free lunches.

    Sure…and along with all that, these same Edinburgh ‘independentists’ will be seeking free hot lunches for the bairns, along with many many other benefits for the deserving folk who have been subjected to mighty Britain’s neoliberalism and austerity for the last fifty fucking years…

    Many more important points of difference…look admit it, Scots are a distinct people with a different outlook than you English…but you will never admit to that because as I said the English are notorious for wishcasting [that’s your comfort zone]…while Scots are given to quite severe introspection head on…

    I hate to say this to you because you are a decent fellow and I hope we can remain on brotherly terms…but you are cut from weaker cloth…maybe it has something to do with the land itself…not many gentle rolling meadows of Wiltshire in the Highlands…

    Btw…how do you reckon that Brexit referendum was okay, but IndyRef no go [goose, gander]…Canada had two referendums on Quebec, so why not Scotland…?

    And besides, things are very different now that England has decided to leave the EU…Scotland OVERWHELMINGLY voted to remain…

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  260. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    However, if Britain, the nation that lost an empire but has yet to find a role…

    Agree…

    Britain is no longer able to dictate the course of world history and should cease to be a vassal of an increasingly demented American Empire. As an independent state (unaggressive, internationally cooperative, but with its own independent nuclear deterrent), Britain could set an example of a more civilized and pacific approach to international relations.

    Agree…

    One puzzle that you may be able to explain, is why a minority of Scots so detest inclusion within a devolved United Kingdom, yet wish to relinquish their political and economic independence through a merger with the much larger more bureaucratic and less democratic EU.

    Yes that is puzzling…I put it down to self confidence…Scots have been in the subservient role for so long…never really true partners…that self confidence may have eroded somewhat…sad as that may sound…

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  261. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    Moreover, in adopting the Euro, the EU provided the Germans a means to screw other the EU nations…

    Totally agree with this…the EU is basically total bullshit designed to make the rich countries richer, and the poor poorer…

    I’m still puzzled why Scots are so enamored of this hideous contraption…mulling on my earlier comment a bit, I wouldn’t put it down to lack of self confidence, at least not entirely…perhaps not even majorly…there’s something more at play here…I think the Scots have a very keen sense of social justice and have always been an exemplary egalitarian civilization…

    So I think it may be more a case of rejecting neoliberalism and Thatcherite TINA [Fuck that shit]…and ditching the hopeless ideology of the English…while overlooking the fact that fucking Germany is screwing everybody sideways…

    Still…very good question…will mull some more…

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  262. @FB

    So keep quiet until you acquire some knowledge. I too have read Antony. I have even visited the Khavlinsk site. As you will know from Antony, there are no Neolithic skeltons available perhaps because they exhumated their date. Three copper age skeletons have recently been found and the Y DNA analysed. The results are totally unexpected and confusing. The wealthiest burial is R1b. A ‘celt’. The next is R1a, A ‘slav’. Then there is a guy whose head was struck several times and his body abandoned, perhaps in a ditch. Q1a, a ‘mongol’. The current thought is that the Khavlinsk predecessor for he Samara culture to R1b! Given the above this is not conclusive.

    Bell Beaker culture formed in Iberia following a substantial partial replaced of the Neolithic population by R1b, undoubtedly originating in the stepped. 100% male replacement took place and substantial associated female replacement. There is no evidence of war, unlike the boundary between Corded Ware and Yamanaya. It could have been mostly disease.

    In the British Isles, the replacement was 90%, men and women. The surviving neolitihic populations seems to have been culturally independent showing a resurgence in numbers in Southern England by the iron age.

    The Iberia/continent debate has been going on for a long time. The medieval Irish said they are Milesians (Iberian), the Scots that they were Scythians, the Welsh/Cornish that they were Trojans. Archaeology, arrival of farming, Megalithic Culture, Bell Beaker Culture suggests an Atlantic route. The Bell Beaker’s actually showed respect for the tombs builts by the Neolithic farmers, leaving them undisturbed but using the entrances for their own burial ceremonies. The Bell Beaker culture also reached the Corded Ware Culture, not all of it, specifically those parts that are R1b today, CWC incorporating R1b, I1 and R1a populations. Only the area now R1b converted to Bell Beaker culture. There are certainly Bell Beaker’s from the East in the British population structure but it is not clear that they arrived in the first wave. There is not enough DNA to say so. Violent chariot cultures appear to have been iron age immigrants. Sykes and Oppenheimer were strong on this point. Cunliffe has restored their arguments. The genes may have arrived with them. Cunliffe considers the Atlantic route to have failed around 900 BC when the Phonecians started to take control of the Iberian and SW French routes for copper trading. He points to linguistic evidence that this is when Celtic languages started to differentiate.

    Genetics first confirmed this. R1b strongly maps to the above cultures and Iberia/British groups reaching its highest level in Wales at 93% which also has particularly strong mtDNA presence from H and J groups also found in Iberia. Then finer grained genetics started to show up ‘German’ R1b but there are not enough skeletons of the right age and Corded Ware included I1 and R1a, neither of which have shown up in Britain. German researchers, keen to keep the Celts in German lands support the violent attack from Germany line. Popular science in the US likes this line. It happened on their Eastern front after all. British scholars still point to the better archaeological support for the Iberian route. Such DNA as is available can be used to support either view.

    You are the damaged child not me.

    • Replies: @FB
  263. @FB

    Because national sovereignty without power is an illusion. Mexico and Canada have less say in the standards the US market effectively dictates than Malta does in the EU. A decision to have a different standard for RF testing or whatever, is a commitment to extra costs. In the EU, a small nation gets a lot of sovereignty and when it matters, international soft power. It can always leave if that doesn’t work. The nation’s of the UK have no independence of any kind and the UK is giving up a huge part of its power. Scotland and Wales would have a great deal more independence than Belarus or Armenia, when inside the EU and access to the world’s biggest single market and free trade area. Wales is a net exporter of goods so freed of a currency run for the financial sector in London, might expect to show some growth.

    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    , @FB
  264. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @FB

    look admit it, Scots are a distinct people with a different outlook than you English…

    The people of Scotland are no more a single nation than the the people of England. The Norsemen of Caithness have no connection with the fourth century Gaelic settlers from Ireland who occupy the Western Isles and the West Highlands, or the Picts of the East Highlands, or the Britons and Angles (yes bloody Anglos) of the lowlands. And the peoples of the Orkney’s and Shetlands are of yet other ethnicities.

    https://www.scottishorigenes.com/news/medieval-ethnicity-map-scotland

    And the English are no more homogeneous. The people of Yorkshire, more numerous than all the people of Scotland, are mainly derived from North Sea Viking settlers who are quite different in facial structure to the descendants of Viking settlers in South-Eastern England who are of the Danish tribe. And there are a dozen other obvious English groups one could mention, in addition to the Neanderthals to be seen in the more isolated villages of the South West, and the bunch of non-English speakers who have driven the English almost entirely out of London.

    No, your argument for Scotch independence is a cover for a simpler and sadder reality, which is that Scottish youth wants an EU passport as a means to leave Scotland. Just as the finest prospect a Scotsman ever did see in the 18th Century was the fine high road to London, so today the finest prospect for a Scotsman of any spirit is an economy class flight to one of the great capitals of Europe, or the Mediterranean beaches of France, Greece and Spain.

    The corrupt and anti-democratic governance of the EU is simply the price that some Scots are willing to pay for that guaranteed freedom to leave Scotland for warmer climes.

  265. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @FB

    Scots have a very keen sense of social justice and have always been an exemplary egalitarian civilization…

    That’s the effect of a harsh climate, the rough terrain and the sparsity of people, not genetics. You see it here in Western Canada. In the Southern cities, people are almost as pushy and obnoxious as in London or Paris. I would guess that is true also Glasgow and Edinburgh. But get away to a small town or a remote island and people are more considerate of one another. Get off the blacktop in the North and just about anyone you meet whether they’re on foot or in a vehicle will pause to exchange a word, to see that all’s well, before passing you by.

    • Replies: @FB
  266. CanSpeccy says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    The nation’s of the UK have no independence of any kind

    Excuse me, but that is complete drivel as this listing of devolved powers indicates.

    In the EU, a small nation gets a lot of sovereignty and when it matters, international soft power.

    LOL. The EU was sold to the Brits as a “common market”, i.e., a trade deal with no restraint whatever on national sovereignty. Yet now most nations of the EU are saddled with the EURO, they are forced allow free entry to as many Syrian “refugees” as Frau Merkel allows into Germany, and they will likely soon face a levy for an EU military.

    One has to be naive, indeed, to suppose that the EU will not mutate to a sovereign superstate in which components such as Scotland, Latvia and Lithuania will have no more sovereignty than the County of Cornwall in the United Kingdom. What’s more, if they don’t mind their P’s and Q’s, the people of an “independent” Scotland could well find themselves forced to obtain visas either to work in England, or even to travel through England on their way to that great bureaucratic heaven in Brussels.

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  267. FB says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    T. Phil…I have no idea what you are talking about [and neither do you] because you have addressed nothing I have said about the Corded Ware culture which has yielded MANY samples from many geographically dispersed sites and they are all R1a…

    You talk about one exhumation of three individuals…get real man…

    Gibutas’ Kurgan hypothesis is widely accepted and that is exactly what I said about the ‘indigenous’ neolithic peoples of Europe…the males of which were largely displaced by Aryans and their Indo-European language…

    Your bafflegab does not clear up the central mystery of R1b…yes they were found in the Yamnaya culture that spawned the Corded Ware Culture…but were these the ‘old’ ‘indigenous’ Europeans that the Kurgan hypothesis postulates…

    No one knows for certain…you mention a lot of different stuff that really has nothing to do with this central question…

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    , @Philip Owen
  268. FB says: • Website
    @CanSpeccy

    What are you yapping about…?

    You keep going on about the ‘harsh’ climate of Scotland…and that the young people all want to escape their miserable little country…like we are talking about Ukraine here…

    I keep sensing a distinct essence of English snobbery in the undertones of what you say…and then you wonder why the Scots want a divorce…

    Anyway, it’s been interesting but ultimately frustrating, since you always revert to [at least mild] snootiness as a fallback position in regards to Scots…nobody can possibly be on the level of you English…you are world famous for that…

    • LOL: CanSpeccy
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
  269. Seraphim says:
    @FB

    It seems that the more Gimbutas’ Kurgan hypothesis is shrinking, the myth of the Kurgan-‘Aryan’ Whites is growing!

  270. CanSpeccy says:
    @FB

    I keep sensing a distinct essence of English snobbery in the undertones of what you say…and then you wonder why the Scots want a divorce…
    …nobody can possibly be on the level of you English

    Or as P.G. Wodehouse said:

    It’s not hard to tell the difference between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine.

    But, come on, man. The English have to put up with a Scotch monarch, all kinds of lousy Scotch Prime Ministers, constant carping about calling the Scotch Scotch, instead of Scottish — as if the English language were the property of the Scotch. No wonder sometimes the English seem a bit snooty.

    But we’d be heart-broken to see you sucked back into that EU swamp.

  271. @Anon

    Power tends to concentrate. It does not matter what the system.

    Nothing can keep concentrated power in check except hybrid individualist-collectivist systems, tailored to address what we have learned of the full scope of human nature, and eternally open to revision to correct for unforseen consequences.

  272. Sankara says:
    @Philip Owen

    500 years of capitalism have succeeded in ruining 6000 years of civilization ! Since the planet is on the brink of desaster….

    • Replies: @Philip Owen
  273. @Sankara

    Not even close. Thorium molten salt reactors can power vertical farming and a more or less circular economy. Meanwhile crop yields continue upwards. We will be rewilding in a generation.

  274. @FB

    The three individuals were at Khavlinsk, the site for the domestication of the horse, ridership of the horse, a contender for first use of the wheel and the origin of sheep with long wool. Who they were is critical. Join the dots as given.

  275. @CanSpeccy

    Been drinking meth with Nigel clearly.

    • LOL: FB
  276. FB says: • Website
    @Philip Owen

    That’s actually a reasonable comment Phil…although I think you are giving the EU too much of a free pass…

    For small countries like the ones you mention, membership may have some benefits…but what about the flow of finance and capital…it’s a two way street…the big German corporations are going to have a free hand to eat up everything and rearrange the economy in a tilted way that suits them, not the little country…

    Personally I see this as enough reason to stay out, even for those small countries…

  277. Johan says:
    @A123

    “democratic defects”

    That’s funny, democracy is per definition defectuous at the core, and all the way up through and through, the line ‘to call out democratic defects in a member state’ is merely a comical nonsensical ideological phrase.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All The Saker Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The unspoken statistical reality of urban crime over the last quarter century.
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings