Chomsky on the “New Cold War”
By Sean at 12 September, 2008, 6:41 am
Noam Chomsky has given his take on the whole South Ossetia-Russia-Georgia-US imbroglio. I haven’t read Chomsky in years. He rarely says anything he hadn’t already said 20 years ago; and his penchant toward focusing on American hypocrisy is simply stating the obvious. He has a tendency to overdetermine American power thereby creating a monolithic, well oiled imperial machine controlled and manipulated by a cabal of American capitalists. Unfortunately things aren’t that simple and after a few reads, that line gets old. Fast.
Nevertheless, many listen to Chomsky and sometimes, yes, sometimes he has some interesting observations. Since Russia has moved back onto his analytical radar, I provide a few excerpts from his “Towards a Second Cold War?” to get readers’ thoughts.
After opening with the usual diatribe against American hypocrisy and cynicism, Chomsky writes,
The Russian propaganda system made the mistake of presenting evidence, which was easily refuted. Its Western counterparts, more wisely, keep to authoritative pronouncements, like Levy’s denunciation of the major Western media for ignoring what is “blindingly obvious to all scrupulous, good-faith observers” for whom loyalty to the state suffices to establish The Truth – which, perhaps, is even true, serious analysts might conclude.
The Russians are losing the “propaganda war,” BBC reported, as Washington and its allies have succeeded in “presenting the Russian actions as aggression and playing down the Georgian attack into South Ossetia on August 7, which triggered the Russian operation,” though “the evidence from South Ossetia about that attack indicates that it was extensive and damaging.” Russia has “not yet learned how to play the media game,” the BBC observes. That is natural. Propaganda has typically become more sophisticated as countries become more free and the state loses the ability to control the population by force. (Emphasis mine)
I think his last statement is key here. My previous posting of how CNN edited Putin’s interview was to imply exactlty this. American media is far more sophisticated in crafting a message while Russia’s, as show by Vesti’s crude parlor tricks, remains hopelessly amateur. I happen to think CNN’s editing of Putin’s interview is worse on an ideological level because it falls within acceptable parameters. Crass manipulation of the message is mystified by the logic of harmless, and more important, practical editing. To my knowledge the full interview with Putin, as relayed by the transcript, was never aired on CNN in the States. Even if it was, the main clips of Putin accusing the US of orchestrating the war were repeated endlessly on pretty much every American news outlet, making the content of whole interview superfluous. Plus, as Yasha Levine notes in his article, CNN viewers on both sides of the pond got different versions. Levine writes,
Despite the “unprecedented access” hook, for its U.S. feed, CNN reduced the 30-minute interview into a series of sound bites that seized and ridiculed Putin’s crackpot theory that the Republican party started the war to boost McCain’s ratings. CNN’s international audience, enjoying the news from hotel rooms all round the world, got to see a little more of the footage. But most of it had to do with Russia’s ridiculous “non-political” decision to ban some American poultry importers from doing business with Russia because of their poor quality control standards. CNN’s intentions were clear: Putin must come off looking like a fool. And it seemed Putin gave them the perfect material.
But back to Noam. One of the things I appreciate about his article is that he puts the Clinton Doctrine (“Washington has the right to use military force to defend vital interests such as “ensuring uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies and strategic resources”) at center stage rather than its heir, the Bush Doctrine of preemptive strike. But as Chomsky notes, even the Clinton Doctrine was hardly new.
Clinton was breaking no new ground, of course. His doctrine derives from standard principles formulated by high-level planners during World War II, which offered the prospect of global dominance. In the postwar world, they determined, the US should aim “to hold unquestioned power” while ensuring the “limitation of any exercise of sovereignty” by states that might interfere with its global designs. To secure these ends, “the foremost requirement [is] the rapid fulfillment of a program of complete rearmament,” a core element of “an integrated policy to achieve military and economic supremacy for the United States.” The plans laid during the war were implemented in various ways in the years that followed.
When you throw in America’s self-imposed, messianic mission to spread “freedom” (according to its own definition, by the way) that is quite a mix imperial power politics and ideological fervor. The fact that not just Sara Palin but Barak Obama, John McCain and almost every other politician weds America’s national interests with freedom (at home and abroad) speaks volumes to how it well it resonates with the American public. The imperial rhetoric of both parties was on open display at their conventions. The only difference I heard between them was tone.
Finally, even Chomsky, the old lefty Cold Warrior that he is, doubts a new Cold War is in the making. He writes,
Nonetheless, a new cold war seems unlikely. To evaluate the prospect, we should begin with clarity about the old cold war. Fevered rhetoric aside, in practice the cold war was a tacit compact in which each of the contestants was largely free to resort to violence and subversion to control its own domains: for Russia, its Eastern neighbors; for the global superpower, most of the world. Human society need not endure – and might not survive – a resurrection of anything like that.
I think the abscence of current agreement between theives is important to remember. It sure makes me think those analysts who are conjuring 19th century metaphors to describe the current world order might be on to something. Perhaps it time to review, revive and revise Lenin’s and Rosa Luxembourg’s thoeries of imperialist rivalry as inherent to globalist capitalism.
Popularity: 27% [?]
Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Chomsky rhetoric in the past 100% coincided with the official Soviet propaganda, that’s why
it was a “fresh” point of view in the US media. Since the collapse of the USSR he lost his punch for obvious reasons.
He may reinvent himself if/when the official Russian propaganda will become more and more different from the Western one and more and more defined.
Is Chomsky really relevant? He is still trying to find the 9/11 conspirators. Chomsky is a relic. His opinions are only listened to by lunatic fans of Michael Moore.
Is Chomsky really relevant? He is still trying to find the 9/11 conspirators. Chomsky is a relic. His opinions are only listened to by lunatic fans of Michael Moore.
Quite. Yet Sean quotes him approvingly when discussing matters of historical doctrines. Presumably he will dismiss this rather more authoritative article on the subject by John Lewis Gaddis as being “too simplistic”.
I happen to think CNN’s editing of Putin’s interview is worse on an ideological level because it falls within acceptable parameters.
So editing which is acceptable is worse than editing which is not? Yeah, that’s clear enough.
Of course, that the Russian TV station is government owned and controlled isn’t worth mentioning either.
“Of course, that the Russian TV station is government owned and controlled isn’t worth mentioning either.”
Tim:
Have you ever watched the Russian TV?
Have you ever watched the Russian TV?
Daily.
and you think it is more controlled than CNN?
and you think it is more controlled than CNN?
As far as news, yes. Although I think CNN peddles an awful lot of nonsense, the Vesti is bloody awful: as I’ve said before, the lead item most days is flattering coverage of the President’s day. If this is controlled, I don’t know what it.
But that’s besides the point. The point is there is a rather large difference between a private company editing stuff whilst peddling to an audience from which it draws its revenue, and a government-owned channel doing the same thing. One is a market-driven attempt at getting cash, the other is propaganda.
“Perhaps it time to review, revive and revise Lenin’s and Rosa Luxembourg’s thoeries of imperialist rivalry as inherent to globalist capitalism.”
That sounds like going back to Soviet high school.
Vladimir Posner has to provide a list of his guests to a Kremlin censor before airing them on his show. I’ve never heard of CNN or Fox seeking Bush Administration approval for News guests.
I think Sean’s bias against Chomsky is just west-coast bias. If he taught at UCLA or Stanford instead of MIT, he’d be considered brilliant and groundbreaking.
I had always thought Chomsky’s 1988 “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media” was his most famous and influential (in the sense of widely read) work. American media is far more sophisticated in crafting a message while Russia’s, as show by Vesti’s crude parlor tricks, remains hopelessly amateur.
I think it is kind of weird to call him an old “Cold Warrior”, when his primary work has been in linguistics and behavioral psychology. Politics is a hobby with him, not a profession. Cold Warriors are guys like Dick Cheney, whose hawkish military and foreign policy doctrine were formed during the Cold War and remain largely unchanged since the 1960s. In the 1960s and 70s, Chomsky was writing about “Cartesian Linguistics”.
Regarding television – Russian TV is far more controlled than in the US, and with different sources of controll. US TV worries more about upsetting advertisers and sponsors, Russian TV has more direct ties to the government and presenting the Russian government in a favorable light. As Tim points out, there is quite a bit of prime news time in Russia devoted to making Putin or Medvedev look dignified, responsible, presidential. That isn’t news – it’s public relations.
You can fault CNN and Fox News and others for various similar mistakes, but those occur on 24-hour news programs and rarely is the prime-time network news showing such fluff or contrived interviews.
And, I have to say, most Russians have NO IDEA what American TV is really like. Countless times I’ve had a Russian say that American TV never criticizes the US government or Bush or politicians, and I have to explain that criticizm and satire of our government is a NIGHTLY event on American TV. My wife was shocked to hear the jokes that Jay Leno will make about Bush, Rice, Cheney and any other public figure that is in the news.
In fact, I would say that there is so much joking that it has sort of a numbing effect. Instead of outrage and public reaction, people make jokes.
This can be turned around as well … most Americans imagine Russian TV to be more controlled and repressive than it is. However, the American vision of Russian TV is closer to reality, than the Russian vision of US TV.
Oops, didn’t mean to include that quote of Sean at the end of the 2nd paragraph.
Both Russia and America try to spin reality into something favorable for them. This is the nature of newscasting, today, when you have embedded agents telling reporters on the ground what the official version of reality is. I thought Wolf Blitzer went way over the top when he interviewed Saakashvili, seemingly every hour, on CNN. There was, needless to say, a totally different different perspective being presented on Russian TV, at the same time. Reality probably exists in the gray area, which is omitted from the newscasts, not reported by either side. The sad part of all this is that by the time reality is finally revealed, another news event pops up to supplant the previous misconception of history! Chomsky’s well will never run dry.
You can label me as a pre-post-modern dinosaur but in this thread I pretty much agree with everything Tim and Wally wrote.
Except that, Wally, from what I have read Chomsky for several years now has dedicated more time to his political writings and activities than to the scientific study of linguistics.
Except that, Wally, from what I have read Chomsky for several years now has dedicated more time to his political writings and activities than to the scientific study of linguistics.
I think it is an outspoken hobby of his … he is after all a professor of linguistics at MIT.
He’s even older than McCain, so he’s done lots of different things.
I just happened to look at his bibliography, and his recent (last 10 years) writings have included 4 books on linguistics, but many short articles and books on politics (I count 26).
However, judging a 79 year old man only on what he has done in the last 10 or 20 years, seems biased towards the youth of this forum.
and you think it is more controlled than CNN?
The short answer is absolutely yes. CNN is controlled internally and even that control as Tim rightfully said is revenue based, since each news outfit peddles to its own audience. Just take a look at CNN US and CNN Europe side by side. They are quite different.
US media is the only business specifically protected by the Constitution. Government of any kind has no control over it. This does not mean it never tries to put pressure, but those attempts are largely based on knee jerk reactions of politicians with hurt egos.
Our local sheriff tried to force a talk show host on a local station off the air by stupidly warning the station he would cut off sheriff department information from them. Yes, the talk show host was bad mouthing the said sheriff, BFD! The resulted law suit ended in an undisclosed settlement with one obvious result: the sheriff resigned.
Also, the sheer amount of media outlets in the US precludes any serious government control. While it is no big deal to institute control over ORT, NTV, Rossia and a couple of others plus scare a dozen newspapers into submission. Try pulling something like this with networks, cable channels and newspapers, plus broadcast and satellite radio.
Wally is right. Russians have no concept of how free media in the US is. With a 250,000 people radio market having more stations then the 80 million UK does, it is no big surprise.
The concept of “control” permeates most templates Russians have about most things. A friend of mine who runs a very successful freight forwarding company in Russia told me “Americans” do not let anyone in “their” market. I started poking him with questions and it turned out the logistics company (also a foreign based one) he partners with elsewhere did not want him to enter US market. That somehow is extrapolated on the whole system. Same goes for the media. When facts are not known perception becomes reality and Russians tend to perceive quite a lot.
And so does Chomsky. He should have stayed with linguistics. He does it much better.
Reading that article that Newman linked to reminds me that the right-wing in America is better at myth-building than the left-wing.
I mean, that article starts off with nonsense about Ronald Ray-gun wanting to eliminate all nuclear weapons (hello?) How can the right argue that Reagan both started an arms build-up that ended the USSR, but also sought to end all nukes? Reagan wanted to get rid of old nukes and build new, more mobile nukes, and develop a missile shield making it many times more feasible that we could use those new nukes against the USSR.
So, that article started with the myth of Reagan the peaceful, kumbayah, eliminator of all nukes, and sort of kept skating from there.
Christ, the US military named a ballistic missile test site after the man.
As an aside, I also notice that if you are an old liberal, you are considered out-of-date or out-of-touch.
If you are an old-conservative, other more favorable qualities are imagined – you are a maverick with character. Stubborn? No, that’s character. Hot-headed or ill-tempered? No, that’s passionate in your convictions.
Even if you don’t know how to use email or the inter-tubes.
Because apparently, old liberal ideas don’t work, but old conservative ideas do.
“I had always thought Chomsky’s 1988 “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media” was his most famous and influential (in the sense of widely read) work.”
It’s also his best (political) work.
But God, Herman sucks nowadays.
“I’ve never heard of CNN or Fox seeking Bush Administration approval for News guests.”
There are plenty of people they won’t have on anyway, though. They censor themselves.
“He is still trying to find the 9/11 conspirators.”
No he isn’t. He thinks it was Bin Laden.
“Chomsky rhetoric in the past 100% coincided with the official Soviet propaganda”
No no no no no no no. Chomsky was always anti-Soviet.
“The point is there is a rather large difference between a private company editing stuff whilst peddling to an audience from which it draws its revenue, and a government-owned channel doing the same thing. One is a market-driven attempt at getting cash, the other is propaganda.”
And yet, they both wind up in the same place — crap.
“Also, the sheer amount of media outlets in the US precludes any serious government control. While it is no big deal to institute control over ORT, NTV, Rossia and a couple of others plus scare a dozen newspapers into submission. Try pulling something like this with networks, cable channels and newspapers, plus broadcast and satellite radio”.
Yes, all of these American news sources are incredibly homogeneous. It’s amazing how similar the Americans are in their views, tastes and opinions.
I meant “Yet, all of …”
“Chomsky rhetoric in the past 100% coincided with the official Soviet propaganda”
No no no no no no no. Chomsky was always anti-Soviet.
Maybe in words. I grew up in Soviet propaganda, and when the Iron Curtain fell and I heard/read Chomsky for the first time, – I was amazed – he was essentially repeating (intentionally or not) the mainstream of the Soviet propaganda.
Kolchak: Is Chomsky really relevant? He is still trying to find the 9/11 conspirators. Chomsky is a relic. His opinions are only listened to by lunatic fans of Michael Moore.
-Yeah, he’s only the father of modern linguistic theory – what are you?
“he’s only the father of modern linguistic theory”
I assume nobody here, even those who disparage his political stuff, is trying to diminish Chomsky’s pioneering and still relevant work on linguistics.
Yes, all of these American news sources are incredibly homogeneous. It’s amazing how similar the Americans are in their views, tastes and opinions.
A completely false statement. The only possible explanation (besides ignorance) for such a view is the proximity factor. If you are looking at two persons from the top of St Paul, you might not even be able to tell the difference between a man and a woman.
Unlike Russia, where social pyramid is still in full view, US does not have a single top-down structure, but numerous little hills. People from various backgrounds and social groups differ dramatically. Compare Palin and Obama.
Hense huge differences in politics, especially on economy and social programs. But the proximity factor will make distinctions between contrasting views of, say, Steve Forbes and Hillary Clinton quite blurred for a proponent of nationalization and quisi-government monopolies like Gazprom or Rosneft.
In print media, just look at WSJ vs NYT – two solid, influential, quality outlets with completely different views and respectively different coverage.
In Cable news compare MSNBC and Fox News for very different take on events and accents of coverage.
In Broadcast Radio look at the whole spectrum of views and opinions from Randy Rhodes, Pacifica, Franken on the left to Limbaugh, Savage and others on the right. Toss in nutcases like Alex Jones and Art Bell for added measure.
As for Americans themselves, just take a drive from NYC to LA and compare what you see on both coasts with the center. Even in California, look at electoral maps for each proposition. Districts that have access to the coastline vote left and inland ones vote right with only a few exceptions.
“Yes, all of these American news sources are incredibly homogeneous. It’s amazing how similar the Americans are in their views, tastes and opinions.
A completely false statement. The only possible explanation (besides ignorance) for such a view is the proximity factor. If you are looking at two persons from the top of St Paul, you might not even be able to tell the difference between a man and a woman…. ”
In humble opinion the “differences” you are talking about is like a “difference” between Pepsi-Cola and Coca-Cola. Sure there’s a “difference”. Regarding the political views, I quote from Dmitry Orlove’s lecture “Closing the ‘Collapse Gap’: the USSR was better prepared for collapse than the US”:
“Slide [20] One area in which I cannot discern any Collapse Gap is national politics. The ideologies may be different, but the blind adherence to them couldn’t be more similar.
It is certainly more fun to watch two Capitalist parties go at each other than just having the one Communist party to vote for. The things they fight over in public are generally symbolic little tokens of social policy, chosen for ease of public posturing. The Communist party offered just one bitter pill. The two Capitalist parties offer a choice of two placebos. The latest innovation is the photo finish election, where each party buys 50% of the vote, and the result is pulled out of statistical noise, like a rabbit out of a hat.
The American way of dealing with dissent and with protest is certainly more advanced: why imprison dissidents when you can just let them shout into the wind to their heart’s content?
The American approach to bookkeeping is more subtle and nuanced than the Soviet. Why make a state secret of some statistic, when you can just distort it, in obscure ways? Here’s a simple example: inflation is “controlled” by substituting hamburger for steak, in order to minimize increases to Social Security payments.”
He said it all.
In humble opinion the “differences” you are talking about is like a “difference” between Pepsi-Cola and Coca-Cola.
That’s exactly what I call proximity factor. If you are too far out there, you can’t see the difference. If you can’t see the difference between economic and policy positions of Steve Forbes and Hillary Clinton, or NYT and WSJ, it only means your positions are off the coordinates system. Sure. Hugo Chavez and Fidel would not recognize differences in the US either.
I quote from Dmitry Orlove’s lecture “Closing the ‘Collapse Gap’: the USSR was better prepared for collapse than the US”:
Quoting gobbledygook does nothing to advance your argument. This passage is nothing but an unsubstantiated conjecture. I give you facts and specific points to policy matter differences, you give me fluff. The silly reference to John Williams presupposes that the purpose of inflation figure is to determine SS payments and not the money supply? Right. Тоже мне бином ньютона.
If you get your views from fringe sites, no wonder main stream seems so far you can’t see it clearly.
Sounds like old bolshevik to me
“Maybe in words. I grew up in Soviet propaganda, and when the Iron Curtain fell and I heard/read Chomsky for the first time, – I was amazed – he was essentially repeating (intentionally or not) the mainstream of the Soviet propaganda.”
Except for Chomsky’s view that the USSR was a gangster state and had divvied up the world with the US.
Let’s ask Tim who is able to watch the war on daily basis.
Tim, is Russian media loosing the war? Is BBC wining the screens of Yuzhno-Sakhalinks?
For Russia to win propaganda war in the “west” one most critical element needed. Russia must buy CCN, Fox, ABC, BBC etc. Otherwise there is no chance to “win”.
But!
The whole question is wrong.
It’s not about who wins.
It’s about who fools yourself.
If CNN wants to fool US audience about what Putin said – fine with me.
If Vesti wants to “entertain” Russian audience with funny translation – fine with me.
But I agree with Sean. Western media is far more sophisticated
And western audience is far more amateur 
“I assume nobody here, even those who disparage his political stuff, is trying to diminish Chomsky’s pioneering and still relevant work on linguistics.”
-That’s my point…he’s not some homeless guy yelling on the street. If you disagree with him, challenge his views on the merits rather than name calling.
“If you get your views from fringe sites,”
What exactly is your listenership? Five people?
Yea, right. I cannot see (HUGE) difference between the opinions in the US, because I’m “far out”, but everyone on this blog know exactly what’s going on in my beloved Russia. And all this patronizing … Always that policy of double-standards!!!!!
You know, Dima, I doubt it is double-policy standards. I have other explanation about far-out vs. close-up vision.
It’s always easy to see sorinku, but hard to notice brevno
What exactly is your listenership? Five people?
I am not doing it anymore. When I was, it was 1600 AQH in a third rate market.
, but everyone on this blog know exactly what’s going on in my beloved Russia
I don’t know exactly what’s going on and neither does anyone here and no one has claimed to know it. People here have opinions, not exact knowledge.
It is certainly more fun to watch two Capitalist parties go at each other than just having the one Communist party to vote for.
Actually, despite the whole pantomime feel of the US elections and the incredibly petty and irrelevant arguments about what Obama did or did not say in a store in Hicksville or at what time of night Palin’s daughter was born, at least it is a very real opportunity for Americans to discuss – even if not change – the policies and issues in America. The American blogs are generating thousands upon thousands of posts, comments, flamewars, all dissecting, discussing, arguing over, American politics.
Contrastn this with the Russian election where we had “Putin’s Plan is a Victory for Russia” and precisely nothing else, no explanation of what that plan is (or was!), no discussions, no arguments, just an entire population meekly following one another to vote for the incumbent. All the Russians’ choice of course, but I know which style of election I prefer, despite the many stupidities of US election season.
The Russian and Western mainstream media are both bad – the difference is, the Russian media actually presents more than mere soundbites from Western politicians (yes, Vesti, too) on a regular basis, whereas the Western media does not. Russian cable systems also have Western channels (including Euronews, dubbed into Russian), whereas the US, at any rate, has zippo (unless you have a dish).
It’s not the greater sophistication of the Western media – it’s coverage is quite simply crude (BBC included). It that it has much wider range than the Russian media, as well as the penchant to assume that it is always correct, and that it represents the “international community” (the West having won the Cold War and all). The fact that this Western common sense is not actually accepted in most of the rest of the world (which actually sides closer to Russia on the Ossetian conflict, say) is irrelevant.
Last, the new Cold War. Statements to the effect that there cannot be a Cold War absent ideological opposition are pure BS. The Old Cold War was actually a controlled dance, with neither side ever seriously transgressing on the other side of the global divide drawn at Yalta. The rest was simply rhetoric. Now, the situation is reversed. There is comparatively less talk (though arguably this is more true on the Russian side), but in reality the situation is far more unstable. Russia is trying to reassert itself in Eurasia at a time when many of the regional organizations founded after the collapse are ceasing to be functional. The US is trying to reassert its global hegemony after the Iraq and Afghanistan debacles, and at a time when its alliance – NATO – is also coming apart at the seams. The temptation to provoke “partners” increases in such a situation. Hence, the likelihood of a disastrous confrontation over Ukraine is growing (and meanwhile, Bolivia and Venezuela, which is holding military exercises with Russian strategic bombers, are expelling US ambassadors).
Indeed.
1. SEAN …”CNN is controlled internally and even that control as Tim rightfully said is revenue based, since each news outfit peddles to its own audience. Just take a look at CNN US and CNN Europe side by side. They are quite different.
US media is the only business specifically protected by the Constitution. Government of any kind has no control over it. This does not mean it never tries to put pressure, but those attempts are largely based on knee jerk reactions of politicians with hurt egos.”
The striking omission from all the comments here are the well recorded fact that the CIA has in the past admitted to spending and presumably still does 30% of its huge budget on influencing the media. It does not do it all the time on all subjects which would be self defeating. However on certain subjects there is an instant blizzard of at best bias and at worst misinformation usually on foreign relations matters. A good example are the sayings of Ahmadinejad. This is reinforced by coordinated statements in the same direction by Western leaders who if not in the pay of the United States have at least good reason to reflect before stepping out of line on key issues. Example Sarkozy and Brown have taken to repeating that the Iranian President said he wanted to wipe Israel of the map. He has said a bundle but never that. It is not possible to ignore the fact that the Western media is not just commercially pressured in a certain direction but that in key areas there is bribery of one sort or another. There is nothing new about this of course.
Of course the Russian media is biased and controlled. Putin himself said the other day in effect that Russia had a lot to learn from the West about media presentation.
As for Chomsky it is crucial that he is a linguist. How it must hurt him to hear the endless gibberish pumped out as diplomacy and commentary over the decades. He is quite right that the present abrasive trend in US foreign policy dates back to the partition of Yugoslavia. In South America and the Caribbean on the other hand it is of long standing and unchanging.
“You know, Dima, I doubt it is double-policy standards. I have other explanation about far-out vs. close-up vision.
”
It’s always easy to see sorinku, but hard to notice brevno
You said it all, man.
“It is certainly more fun to watch two Capitalist parties go at each other than just having the one Communist party to vote for.
Actually, despite the whole pantomime feel of the US elections and the incredibly petty and irrelevant arguments about what Obama did or did not say in a store in Hicksville or at what time of night Palin’s daughter was born, at least it is a very real opportunity for Americans to discuss – even if not change – the policies and issues in America. The American blogs are generating thousands upon thousands of posts, comments, flamewars, all dissecting, discussing, arguing over, American politics.
Contrastn this with the Russian election where we had “Putin’s Plan is a Victory for Russia” and precisely nothing else, no explanation of what that plan is (or was!), no discussions, no arguments, just an entire population meekly following one another to vote for the incumbent. All the Russians’ choice of course, but I know which style of election I prefer, despite the many stupidities of US election season.”
———————————————-
1) The Americans “discuss even if not change – the policies and issues in America.” The key word here “discuss”, besides the things they discuss are irrelevant, nobody discusses REAL problems (like when is the America is going to collapse). The SYSTEM gives the people an opportunity to let out the steam and the feeling that they know what’s going on. I claim that this is a mirage. People can talk what’s they wish so long as it doesn’t affect the status quo. I must admit that it is much smarter approach to control the society than that adopted by the rulers of the USSR. Just like a McDonald’s “dinner” give you a feeling that you are well-fed, so does the American “freedom” – you think you have a choice.
2) With all due respect, you and the rest can criticize my dear friend and predecessor Putin, his policies and but election campaign. But as it happens, he was telling the truth during the elections. He did EXACTLY what he was promising to do. It was one country in 2001 and it was a completely different country in 2008. What did G. W. Bush, Jr. do to his country during his reign? Did he fulfill any of his promises?
Putin’s Plan WAS a Victory for Russia!
Go, Russia, Go!
db:
“Indeed”
Oh, touche!
McCain’s porcine noises on “Vesti” – that’s so much worse that Fox’s interview with foreign policy expert Frank Gaffney, who can’t get the name of our democratic, pro-Western ally “Saashkavili” right, and his interviewer, who has trouble locating the schooling received by the “Eastern educated” president:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NELmtKZph6k&NR=1
To be fair and balanced, here is CNN with Wolf Blitzer during the war. These guys are still having trouble figuring out what Putin’s office is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hfE5btPX-c
Your point being?
Tim, please clarify your point.
Do you mean that Americans discuss the issues once every four years only? And between they don’t give a shit?
or
Do you mean that mimes don’t give a shit what Americans think except once in four years?
But I agree with you – it’s huge privilege to discuss. It was very popular kitchen sport in CCCP
\”But I agree with you – it’s huge privilege to discuss. It was very popular kitchen sport in CCCP
\”
On that note the discussions that were being held in the kitchens in the former USSR were broader in the scope. Different premises:
USSR: \”it\’s horrible, everything must change\”
USA: \”we are great, some cosmetic changes could be made\”
db, what do you want Vesti to show? Five minutes of “долгих, продолжительных аплодисментов, переходящих в овацию”?
It’s juts a remake – “Comrad Brezhnev – II, first nap”
ivanov,
Here’s the transcript of the actual exchange:
WOODRUFF: Senator McCain, there’s so much emphasis, of course, today on the younger generation giving. What about Baby Boomers and older folks? What should we be doing?
MCCAIN: Well, I think there are obviously organizations that we have in place for ability to serve, but we ought to really probably do a more and more effective job of utilizing the talents and experience of people who have had very successful lives and careers, and continue to motivate them to serve.
I think that’s part of the proposals that have been made. And we do have the Senior Corps and other organizations. But the fact is that people are living longer and they’re more active and vigorous. And I’m here to tell you that’s a fact. And…
(LAUGHTER)
And…
(MAKES SNORING NOISE) (LAUGHTER)
And…
(APPLAUSE)
And so I — Judy, I really believe that that is one of the under- utilized aspects of community service in America. And I think that would be one of the areas of emphasis really.
Draw your own conclusions.
Wow!
The corps on drugs
real Dima или ху есть the Boss
I think that Dima gave better explanation than Noam.
Example Sarkozy and Brown have taken to repeating that the Iranian President said he wanted to wipe Israel of the map. He has said a bundle but never that.
Actually, he said exactly that.
But do go on.
Do you mean that Americans discuss the issues once every four years only? And between they don’t give a shit?
No, they discuss them with more fervour than usual.
If this is true:
“там стоит во главе государства человек, с которым мы не просто не будем никакого дела иметь, а человек абсолютно непредсказуемый, человек, отягощенный массой патологий, к сожалению, находящийся в несбалансированном состоянии психическом, вы меня, конечно, извините, но употребляющий наркотические средства, о чем хорошо известно западным журналистам, которые не так давно брали у него интервью.”
than it explains all “strange” things Saak is doing.
The striking omission from all the comments here are the well recorded fact that the CIA has in the past admitted to spending and presumably still does 30% of its huge budget on influencing the media.
You are substituting. Every single government agency in US spends money on PR in attempt to influence public opinion via media. It is not control, since the media might or might not get influenced regardless of money spent on it. There is a huge difference between forcing editorial content down media throat backed by a threat to revoke license or close an outfit down.
On that note the discussions that were being held in the kitchens in the former USSR were broader in the scope. Different premises:
Complete BS. The participants scope of kitchen talk was mostly limited to intelligentsiya that knows only how to talk and BS. We all know what happened when these kitchen talkers took over in early 90-s.
The content scope of kitchen talk was (and to a degree that I witnessed it recently) mostly grandiose and dealt with philosophical humanistic pronouncements a la Васисуалий Лоханкин. In contrast, discussions in the US are more about specific policy issues: e.g. taxes.
This is a natural consequence of differences in political structures. US populace votes in local representatives, not party lists and ideologues. And there is no вертикаль.
I claim that this is a mirage. People can talk what’s they wish so long as it doesn’t affect the status quo.
Just like a McDonald’s “dinner” give you a feeling that you are well-fed, so does the American “freedom” – you think you have a choice.
Funny you mention McDonald’s – hardly a place for dinner. But you would know better since Moscow McDonald’s is the busiest in the world. Could it be that Russians long for that meal you disparage?
You claim wrong. You are simply extrapolating Russia/USSR over on other countries.
Somehow missed this one:
I claim that this is a mirage. People can talk what’s they wish so long as it doesn’t affect the status quo.
You claim wrong. You are simply extrapolating Russia/USSR over on other countries. Unfortunately, you have a handicap in this department.
Look at California propositions, how they affected policy and economy over the last 30 years from prop 13 onward. I am sure each state can offer examples of similar magnitude, I just know California well enough to discuss it.
Go tell it to Gray Davis, popularly re-elected governor of California and then popularly recalled in less then a year over issues of energy and tax policy. Find anything even remotely close in Russia.
TIM Example Sarkozy and Brown have taken to repeating that the Iranian President said he wanted to wipe Israel of the map. He has said a bundle but never that.
Actually, he said exactly that.
But do go on.
I checked your source this is what they say he said after clicking hear and there: -
“Our dear Imam said that the occupying regime must be wiped off the map and this was a very wise statement.”
Which given the context is quite different. Apparently in realiy he never even used the word map.
Cyril – You are substituting
Yes there is PR but do you really believe there are no straight payments or other inducements to journalists and media people? The sums involved are colossal – total secret service budget last admitted to be 44 billion dollars – and given the loose budgeting prevalent it is all too easy to encourage the helpful. The recent Pentagon “independant” military analyst scandal springs to mind.
Yes there is PR but do you really believe there are no straight payments or other inducements to journalists and media people?
I try not to operate on belief levels. Do you have any evidence of kickbacks, since that is what it amounts to? Look, a silly affair with a no-outing of a non-active CIA agent has been dragging on for years only to show that media is only culpable of peddling its own bias but not being on the take.
Again, even if one, two or a dozen reporters are on the take, there are hundreds more that are not. Tha’s just on individual level. On the structural level it is even less likely. Is there any evidence whatsoever of any media outfit being controlled/forced by the state to report against its will? I would love to see at least one.
“I claim that this is a mirage. People can talk what’s they wish so long as it doesn’t affect the status quo.
Just like a McDonald’s “dinner” give you a feeling that you are well-fed, so does the American “freedom” – you think you have a choice.
Funny you mention McDonald’s – hardly a place for dinner. But you would know better since Moscow McDonald’s is the busiest in the world.”
Your information about Moscow is circa 1985. No wonder.
Your information about Moscow is circa 1985. No wonder.
Oh really? Dima, for a president, you are pretty uninformed.
This is what happens when you stifle free press. You get bitten in the back first.
I suggest you visit Moscow (it’s very expensive though) and check this info yourself. To cite “free press” on your part is very naive. Numerous time the so-called “free media” was caught lying, by presenting false photos etc.
For example: showing a long line to McDonald’s, claiming that those a current affairs, however any Russian could see that the photo was taken in the 80’s. Another, more recent example: Showing on TV the bombardment by the Georgian forces Tskhinvali, and telling that that is Gori (a Georgian city) bombarded by the Russian forces. So, please see it for yourself, spend some time in Moscow.
To cite “free press” on your part is very naive.
I did not cite “free press”. I cited a specific article with specific facts and specific content that includes images. The free part unfortunately includes a right to lie. However, it is the responsibility of the consumer of news/commentary to do the due diligence and determine how reliable is the source.
Let’s see.
Do you have any substance to challenge the specific article I linked?
Do you have any statistical data that makes whatever is mentioned in the WSJ article factually incorrect?
Do you claim that either of the photos that accompany the WSJ article is not current (2007?)
Was there a line from the 80-s on either of the photos?
If not, you have no case, sorry, thanks for trying, please come again.
The goal of American media is to generate controversy. The goal of Russian media is to produce consent. Most Russians have no idea how adversarial American public discourse is and most Russians would loose their minds trying to follow it. When Kasparov create a little trouble in the streets, most Russians feel threatened and immediately run to Putin for protection. Americans wouldn’t even bat an eye.
The truth is, in Russia Kasparov and his “activities” are hardly noticed. His activities are much more popular abroad. Of course, Kasparov just like the rest of the “free” world hates Russia! Good enough.
And I think the goal of the American media is to brainwash the people so they don’t think and keep shopping at Wall-Mart. I apologize if I’m coming as too harsh. It’s been a very busy week for me, and it’s my Birthday tomorrow! The first BD as the President of Russia!
Cyrill,
Concerning your article, my secretary has looked at it, but it’s screaming to be a paid (hidden) commercial for McDonald’s.
”The first BD as the President of Russia!”
Happy Birthday indeed Dmitry!
In fairness to you Sean, this is some blog of distinction all the same. In the past year or so you’ve had visits from the likes of Michele A Berdy, Julius Caesar, Mike’s Mom, The Devil and now the President of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev. Kudos!:-)
”The first BD as the President of Russia!”
Happy Birthday indeed Dmitry!
In fairness to you Sean, this is some blog of distinction all the same. In the past year or so you’ve had visits from the likes of Michele A Berdy, Julius Caesar, Mike’s Mom, The Devil and now the President of Russia, Dmitry Medvedev. Kudos!:-)\”
Thanks. I feel to be privileged to be in such a honorable company. The blog is indeed a great piece of work, an ultimate venue for people with different viewpoints on current events in Russia. Kudos to Sean!
“In fairness to you Sean, this is some blog of distinction all the same. In the past year or so you’ve had visits from the likes of Michele A Berdy, Julius Caesar, Mike’s Mom,”
Mike has mentioned his momz many times. And you’ve never mentioned me. You’re a bad Catholic Gerald. A bad Irishman. Why does Mike love his momz more than you love me?
I carried you for nine months in the depths of my body and this is what I get!
Candid, your post has excellent chances to win the title “Joke of the year”
To Cyrril.
Re: McDonald Duck
WSJ article is commercial BS. There is nothing on the photos that supports claims of MD The Busiest. Half empty primitive MD – that’s all.
Busiest in the world – what does it mean? That MD business in other parts of the world is much worse than on Moscow photos?
Busiest among MD doesn’t mean best/busiest among food companies in Russia.
WSJ didn’t support it’s claim (paid by MD) with any numbers. I doubt that MD of Russia has even 1/10 turnover of MD of US.
So WSJ article – good sample of BS. Sorry.
I’m doing my best to stay away from MD and even can count my visits there
1. On the road as cheapest option available (arranged and paid by inviting party)
2. Was invited for business “dinner”. I guess main reason was same – cheapest place. The guy really had to keep expenses low – his Porshe cost him a lot…
3. Under family (kids) pressure.
4. Visit to Moscow MD for comparison. Found that MD was really good in producing same fast shit all over the world.
PS. I’m aware that four times doesn’t allow me to be expert in this matter.
Ivanov,
Well said (don’t forget it’s my birthday tommorrow). DM
There is nothing on the photos that supports claims of MD The Busiest.
One of the busiest. I erred and it apparently is loosing to Munich now. Photos would not support anything. Numbers do:
On average, each location serves about 850,000 diners annually — more than twice the store traffic in McDonald’s other markets.
The Pushkin Square location, with its 900 seats and free wireless Internet access, has long drawn more customers than any other McDonald’s in the world. Recently, it’s been running neck and neck with a store at Munich’s Karlsplatz square.
Companies keep and publish their statistics. If you have any numbers that suggest that the MD data is bogus, put it up.
I doubt that MD of Russia has even 1/10 turnover of MD of US.
The issue is not profitability or revenue of all MD in US vs in Russia. Just that one is the second busiest or the busiest in the world. That’s it.
This sliding target gimmick in an argument is a stale USSR propaganda tactic. Dima, pолковник Анисимов был бы разочарован таким простецким приемом.
I just realized that Dima would not know colonel Ansimov, since St Pete Law School students did not go through the отделение спецпропаганды военной кафедры ЛГУ. Sorry, but that explains mediocre use of debating gimmicks.
WSJ didn’t support it’s claim (paid by MD)
If Dima or ivanov have any evidence of collusion between WSJ and MD in publishing this article, I am sure WSJ subscribers and shareholders would love to see it. Care to put up anything other then conjecture?
Медведев думает о промышленности, а народ хочет «МакДональдс»
Sorry, bad link.
Медведев думает о промышленности, а народ хочет «МакДональдс»
”Mike has mentioned his momz many times. And you’ve never mentioned me. You’re a bad Catholic Gerald. A bad Irishman. Why does Mike love his momz more than you love me? I carried you for nine months in the depths of my body and this is what I get!”
Ma, what are you doing on dis blog? Have you my fry up ready yet? And where’s me togs, I’ve a hurlin’ feckin’ match dis evening?!
And stop moaning about the wife. She can cook!
Dima/ivanov,
whats the big deal over the article? Why dont you just take it at face value? If you look at the article itself it says there are less McDonalds in the whole of Eastern Europe than in the Seattle area of the US. Its stands to reason therefore that in the center of Moscow – unofficial population 14 million – a paucity of McDonalds would make the existing ones very busy indeed. Nobody is insulting Russia; sadly, the whole world likes eating this rubbish, and Russians are no immune to McFlurry ice creams or Big Macs. Get over it already.
AEROFLOT PLANE CRASH IN URALS:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080914/tts-uk-russia-crash-ca02f96.html
Poor people. Gosh I hate planes.
Cyrill “Again, even if one, two or a dozen reporters are on the take, there are hundreds more that are not. That’s just on individual level. On the structural level it is even less likely. Is there any evidence whatsoever of any media outfit being controlled/forced by the state to report against its will? I would love to see at least one.”
I did not talk about anybody doing anything against their will nor am I saying that all journalists are on the take. The number is irrelevant but look at the Intelligence budget to influence the media – maybe three billion maybe more – and then look at the extraordinarily inadequate results a free media produces and ask yourself a few common sense questions. Actually the most likely targets for this sort of thing are at editorial level and in the news agencies because it is there that the information is most easily influenced. It is there that it is decided which stories will be run and who will write them. The phenomenon of the article with a headline that contradicts the contents is well known and widespread and originates at editorial level.
Payments to journalists not unnaturally are not front page news every day but try this article, http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=58827 by Jonathan Power with this very apt quote “The military-industrial complex is one thing. At least we know what it is. But the military-academic-journalistic complex is another. We don’t know what it is or how exactly it works, except that Pentagon contracts for universities are ubiquitous and “freebies” for journalists, even if it is merely an all expenses paid trip to a prestigious conference, are an art form for the organisers.”
Then there is: -
German ‘CIA’ used reporters as informants from the May 18, 2006 edition – http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0518/p06s02-woeu.html
The article in the New York Times on the Pentagon military advisors is slightly different in that as far as we know they were not paid directly although sole of them may have been but they were helped in their role as “contract consultants” to the Pentagon in exchange for “helpful” media commentoften directly at odds with the facts. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html
TIM There is an interesting article on the Ahmadinejad misquote at
http://www.mohammadmossadegh.com/news/rumor-of-the-century/
Dear Blog participants,
By continuing this aimless discussion about McDonald’s we provide a (free) advertisement to the company, which kills the health of millions around the world.
I suggest we switch the subject. Has anyone watched an interesting movie lately?
Burnt by the Sun is one of my favorites.
It is a great movie – they are filming a sequel to it in Russia, should be released any time soon.
Richard,
Here’s more info on the Burnt by the sun sequel:
http://twitchfilm.net/archives/010522.html
Enjoy!
DM
“I try not to operate on belief levels.”
Don’t let the magic space ponies know. They may withdraw their blessing. Then you will lose your last four listeners.
Looks like D. Medvedev was right about Saaks-on-drugs
he-he….hard choice for old “founding fathers” of NATO – to deal with talking corps or to deal with live bear
What drugs is he using?
Not really. The goal was to teach Saak how to eat tie
From Georgian Army rules of engagement – “beat a shit out of enemy if they happen to catch our brave troops ever”
http://civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=19509
really, what is he smoking?
Nobody is insulting Russia; sadly, the whole world likes eating this rubbish, and Russians are no immune to McFlurry ice creams or Big Macs.
The Russian version of McDonalds is quite different than what we have here in the US, and actually it is considerably better. Also, from what my inlaws tell me, the food quality and service are really quite good. It isn’t considered cheap food, however. So, McD’s occupies a different sort of niche in Russia than here in the US.
Russia has different sort of quick or fast food places and kiosk’s anyway, that are quite popular and fit well with the culture. The nation does not suffer from a lack of fast food, despite the relative per capita scarcity of McD’s.
really, what is he smoking?
Been around this point before, and seems you returned to it in my absence over the weekend. Why exactly do you characterize Saakashvili as crazy or insane? To me, this image is entirely the result of the Russian government and news medias propaganda compaign against him. Rule #1 in warfare – dehumanize your enemy and make their leader something to be reviled. As usual, you bite it, hook, line, and sinker.
As near as I can tell, Saakashvili wants a perfectly sane and rationale thing: his country made whole again, in accordance with its internationally recognized borders. He also seeks to strengthen his country militarly against a much larger and better armed adversary to the north (and make no mistake, Russia is the adversary of Georgia these days.) He has a group of armed insurgents in these two territories, supported by his northern neighbor and therefore there have been military conflicts. Georgian people have been forcibly driven from these territories since 1991, with no repercussions.
In a similar situation, Russia essentially leveled Grozny and large areas of Chechnya, and really thought nothing of it.
The only reason Russia is involved in this Georgian business at all is proximity and because they seek gain a political advantage from it. Any great tie between the Ossetian people and Russians that you try to sell is complete fantasy. The Russian people care about as much for Ossetians as I care for some tribes in Mexico. Certainly Russians have had greater historical ties with Georgians, which they have swept away as an inconvenience.
By the way, you made some inference earlier regarding passports being given freely to other citizens, making those people citizens of the 2nd country, etc. You really should acknowledge that you’re full of shit on that point. Simply holding a 2nd passport does not make you a citizen of that other country, and positively does not obligate that 2nd country to go to war for you on another nations territory.
I think your comments regarding Saakashvili are insulting and ridiculous, but I guess that is what makes Russians proud these days – moving tanks into Georgia and making wild and unsuitable comparisions to 9/11.
Funny that Russians didn’t get so up in arms over the tragedy in Beslan – it was much more of a state of denial over what clearly was acts of terrorism.
By the way, what explanation did the Kremlin offer for their fabrication of Michael Lee White’s involvement as a US Special Forces agent within South Ossetia? Perhaps it is Medvedev’s sanity that should be questioned for trying to perpetrate such an obviously delusional fraud.
While your busy trying to assess blame and feel good about being a victorious Russian, I see gamesmanship and blame to be placed all around, with several governments (US included) all trying to gain different advantages, to the misfortune of the people who live within these territories.
”The Russian version of McDonalds is quite different than what we have here in the US, and actually it is considerably better. ”
The Russian variant is like Irelands, in that the grub tastes the same and they have ice-creams like ours e.g. McFlurrys (which, its must be said, are very tasty). When I’ve been in the States I avoided McDonalds like the plague, preferring US yummies like gumbo and catfish:-) McDonalds is the cheapest type of food we have here though I know in Russia it isnt that cheap at all. In Ireland people who are unemployed can regularily afford McDonalds; I daresay thats not the case in Moskva. Russian eating habits in McDonalds are mad as well – they want one of everything, each, whereas over here we just get a meal.
”The only reason Russia is involved in this Georgian business at all is proximity and because they seek gain a political advantage from it.”
I said the same thing, and have done since it started. Russia could not give a fiddler’s fuck about these places and are just doing this to probe the knife into the Georgians. The baseless food and wine bans, the deportations of Georgians and now this war. Talk about small-dick syndrome.
”In a similar situation, Russia essentially leveled Grozny and large areas of Chechnya, and really thought nothing of it.”
Never a truer word said. They levelled it twice, actually.
Do you want to poke ivanov The Bear, Shedd? Ok, but don’t complain about my dispropotions!
PS. Busy now but will answer soon. Watch your back
“Never a truer word said. They levelled it twice, actually.”
And rebuilt already … Have you seen Grozny today? It looks much better and modern than an American city of the same size.
… yeah in Germany they serve beer at McDonald’s … but why to still keep advertise this product on this very popular blog?
Shouldn’t we be talking about the downfall of the Lehman Brothers?
PS.: Anti-spam word: “borrow” – how appropriate!
Russkaya skazka
Once upon a time Лиса решила поесть лосятины. Но Лось был здоровый даже для Волка. Тогда Лиса уговорила Волка пойти к Медведю и пообещать ему помочь Лося загнать в ловушку (так как Медведь в одиночку не мог этого сделать). Идея очень понравилась всем. Лиса разработала план…не важно в общем, но загнали они Лося в такое место, откуда он уже не мог убежать.
Тогда Лось говорит “Признаю, вы меня поймали и имеет полное право сожрать. Но у меня есть просьба. Мне в детстве написали tatoo в таком месте – прошу рощения, на ass, что я до сих пор не могу прочитать. Обидно будет помереть и не узнать, что же там написано. Не могли бы вы прочитать мне эту надпись?” Зверям и самим стало интересно, да и Лось никуда уже деться не мог, поэтому они согласились. Лось повернулся к ним задом. Его оппоненты подошли поближе, чтобы разглядеть – так как жопа была большая, а букв видно не было.
Когда Лиса, Волк и Медведь разлетелись от ударов копытами, Лось спокойно ушел по своим делам. Первым очнулся медведь и потирая разбитую морду сказал “Ну я то, дурак, куда полез? Я же даже читать не умею!”
PS It seem to me that NATO General Secretary can not read
The only reason Russia is involved in this Georgian business at all is proximity and because they seek gain a political advantage from it.
I was wondering about Abkhazia. Sochi, the seat of the Olympics is a spit away from Abkhazian border.
It may well make money, but a sequel of “Burnt by the Sun” that somehow resurrects the two main characters sounds awful and cheap–an imitation of commercial Hollywood.
Are you relaxed now?
Wally and Ger, even discarding all the noble sounding language used to justify the actions of both Russia and Georgia (and all other countries, actually), I think that in general Russia’s actions in South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Georgia proper were justifiable and rational.
I’m no fan of either Putin or Medvedev (this much be obvious from all my past comments), but I really think that it would have been a big mistake for them not to respond militarily to Georgia’s actions. Furthermore, we should not ignore that (1) both the Abkhazian and the South Ossetians fought against the Georgians and have been de-facto independent from them virtually from the beginning of Georgia’s existence as an independent state (in 1991 or 92–forgot the exact year); (2) both the Abkhazian and South Ossetians strongly prefer to be with Russia than with Georgia.
Should we say that regardless of what the Abkhazians and Ossetians want they should return to Georgia because the Chechens did not get their independence?
“It may well make money, but a sequel of “Burnt by the Sun” that somehow resurrects the two main characters sounds awful and cheap–an imitation of commercial Hollywood.”
Mikhalkov may have run out of ideas … and after all after all it’s “always about Dollars”, oops “… about Rubles”, – sorry my mistake.
If independent – than someone outside EU, right? If international – at least two different countries, right?
I think Iceland and Christmas Islands would make great team!
Sequels are rarely as good as originals, but one can always hope. With regards to Lehman Bros. it seems like everyone is leaving the bar, at closing time, and the big burly bouncer is about to drop the bar tab on us. What a sobering thought!
Shedd: “making wild and unsuitable comparisions to 9/11″
What I think Dima meant (and he can correct me here) is not the fact that Georgia can go to war — everyone was suspecting that Saak was crazy enough to do just that — but the reaction of the Western leaders (not sure of nations though): which was, in a nutshell, unconditional support for an aggressor who opted for the terror of civilians when other recourse was clearly available (i.e. negotiations, including on the terms of recognition of independence of SO). So the watershed aka 9/11 for Dima is the observation, perhaps obvious, that the word is not just and Russia won’t get a break whether she is right or wrong. These leaders will scale incredible heights of hypocrisy to force her to do the “right” thing according to their worldview.
In that sense, ivanov, of course, Saak is not crazy — he _knows_ that white is white, he just calls it black. So, the right diagnosis here is “hypocrisy” and being a good student of his mentors. I only wonder when they talk “amongst themselves” with Russia not listening, do they believe their own pizdezh’?
And, Shedd, you keep on bringing up the chechen precedent, but things there are not as clear-cut as you’d like us to believe: after all, it is a case of successful ethnic cleansing (the cleansed are, of course, not the chechens).
Shedd: “making wild and unsuitable comparisions to 9/11″
What I think Dima meant (and he can correct me here) is not the fact that Georgia can go to war — everyone was suspecting that Saak was crazy enough to do just that — but the reaction of the Western leaders (not sure of nations though): which was, in a nutshell, unconditional support for an aggressor who opted for the terror of civilians when other recourse was clearly available (i.e. negotiations, including on terms of recognition of the independence of SO). So the watershed aka 9/11 for Dima is the observation, perhaps obvious, that the word is not just and Russia won’t get a break whether she is right or wrong. These leaders will scale incredible heights of hypocrisy to force her to do the “right” thing according to their worldview.
In that sense, ivanov, of course, Saak is not crazy — he _knows_ that white is white, he just calls it black. So, the right diagnosis here is “hypocrisy” and being a good student of his mentors. I only wonder when they talk “amongst themselves” with Russia not listening, do they believe their own pizdezh’?
And, Shedd, you keep on bringing up the chechen precedent, but things there are not as clear-cut as you’d like us to believe: after all, it is a case of successful ethnic cleansing (the cleansed are, of course, not the chechens).
And, Shedd, you keep on bringing up the chechen precedent, but things there are not as clear-cut as you’d like us to believe: after all, it is a case of successful ethnic cleansing (the cleansed are, of course, not the chechens).
I could make the same case for “ethnic cleansing” of Georgians from South Ossetia and Abkhazia since 1991. There are many Georgians who were born and raised in these regions that saw themselves driven out of those territories since 91/92.
As to the 9/11 comparisons and the world being a just place – very lame argument. What Medvedev did was directly compare the events of Tskhinvali with terrorists attacks of September 11th, even citing the body counts as comparable. He furthered cried regarding killing of “Russian citizens”. Absolutely silly. Passports do not citizens make, particularly when you us it as an artificial mechanism to assert your control over a territory within another nations border.
This would be like the US handing out passports to Cubans and then when those people are mistreated by the government, justifying an invasion based upon harm to US citizens. Then we would cry about how unjust the world is, and perhaps make a comparison to Beslan or the Moscow theater crisis. You can imagine how well that would play in Russia.
The “West” generally acknowledges that SO and Abkhazia are part of Georgia, within their borders, and they occupy separatist forces that are supported directly by Russia. Georgian forces are periodically attacked by these separatists, it is and was a fairly common event, and the Georgian artillery retaliated.
Was it an absolutely inappropriate use of force on a largely civilian area? Yes. But in the eyes of the West, Russia simply exploited the situation that they were waiting for, and have been crying crocodile tears every since.
Russia could have defused this problem long ago, but the political/diplomatic solution would involve SO and Abkhazia being returned to Georgia, which Russia is absolutely opposed to, not for any humanitarian reasons, but because it would allow for more rapid Georgian assent into NATO. There is also the pipeline politics involved, as business and economic strategy is throughly mixed with Kremlin international politics. Further, occupation of SO and Abkhazia and support of separatists there gives Russia a knife in the side of Georgia that they can twist at their leisure.
Georgia’s game is essentially a desire to strengthen their country both economically and militarily, which they see as being most possible through alliances with the West and NATO. Shevardnadze made this point ratherly clearly – they are small nation only seeking their best opportunity for improvement. They also seek to make their nation whole, in the sense of their internationally recognized borders, which is a condition for joining NATO as I understand it.
The US has interest in the pipeline politics and keeping Russia “in check”, in the sense of limiting their power and authority beyond their own borders. There is also an increasing US desire to stage smaller military bases across the globe, in support of the “war on terror” and to allow for more rapid mobilization of small military forces to almost anywhere on the planet. This is part of the post Cold War military strategery of the Bush administration.
I predict that Georgia will lose SO and Abkhazia, essentially writing them off in order to join NATO. They will not become independent, but will be absorbed into the Russian Federation, which they essentially are at this point anyway (there is no de facto independence when almost their people are considered “Russian citizens” by the Russian government) In the interim, the US will treat Georgia almost as if they are part of NATO. A US base in Tblisi is likely, even more so if the airbase at Manas is closed.
I really think that it would have been a big mistake for them not to respond militarily to Georgia’s actions
I would say that Russia has encouraged separatists within Georgia for years and that made the Georgian military response increasingly likely. In other words, rather than defusing it, they were adding gunpowder and cynically accusing the US of doing the same. And the Russian military was conveniently in the immediate vicinity when it all started. How lucky.
In fact, most of the Kremlins actions here remind me of something the US would do in Latin America, so I guess the Russians have been paying attention.
Consider the Russian response if a foreign government handed out passports to all Chechens during that conflict, and provided direct military aid, including “peace-keepers” in Chechnya.
A guy goes into a bar, looking to start a fight with his neighbor. They’ve been arguing about the location of a fence on their property. The guy finds the neighbor, taunts him, says a few things about his wife or mother, until the neighbor takes a swing at him. The guy promptly hits him in the kneecap with the lead pipe he was carrying, beats the neighbor up a bit, checks his pockets to make sure he isn’t carrying a knife or gun so he can’t retaliate, and proceeds to tell everyone the neighbor swung first.
Said guy further complains that the neighbors brief attack in the bar was just like a mugging several years ago down the street, where a victim was killed.
If we saw this in a bar, we would recognize that the guy set up the neighbor.
Wally, you seem to totally ignore the South Ossetians and Abkhazians. Yes, I’m sure that Russia exploited the situation to its advantage (something all states do). But we simply cannot ignore that (1) both the Ossetians and Abkhazians were never happy about their status as Georgians; (2) the bloody fighting that resulted in their de-facto independence from Georgia was locally driven (Russia did not instigate those conflicts); (3) neither area has been under Georgian control for many years (a 17-year-old South Ossetian fighter NEVER lived under Georgian control).
Would it be right to tell the South Ossetians and Abkhazians, “sorry guys, you are Georgians after all.”?
“Sequels are rarely as good as originals, but one can always hope. With regards to Lehman Bros. it seems like everyone is leaving the bar, at closing time, and the big burly bouncer is about to drop the bar tab on us. What a sobering thought!”
There are some signs that this may spill over to Russia … Our commercial banks have borrowed too much money already, hoping to borrow more when the time to pay comes (the economy is going up!), but I see some ominous signs …
“Shedd: “making wild and unsuitable comparisions to 9/11″
What I think Dima meant (and he can correct me here) is not the fact that Georgia can go to war — everyone was suspecting that Saak was crazy enough to do just that — but the reaction …”
Indeed, Georgia’s actions could have triggered a war of a much bigger scale … yes the comparison with 9/11 is justifiable.
Russia’s military response was justifiable, Medvedev’s comparisons with 9/11 was not.
Ok, I amplified somewhat.
Are you relaxed now?
ivanov, “to wonder” does not necessarily mean “беспокоиться”. Do not translate your puns from Russian. They make no sense. Even less then your trademark quotes.
I think that in general Russia’s actions in South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Georgia proper were justifiable and rational.
Kolya, this would be true if this particular event happened in vacuum. Russia’s actions in the last decade are at least partially responsible for creating it. As Shedd pointed numerous times, the passport issue taints anything Russia might claim. It was as much a peace keeper there as that fox in a hen house. It’s intentions are quite transparent.
Yes, wishes of people in Abkhazia and SO must be considered and respected. Georgia would be much better off, just letting it all go.
”And rebuilt already … Have you seen Grozny today? It looks much better and modern than an American city of the same size.”
They’d wouldnt have had to rebuild it f they didnt level it in the first place.
Wally, are you sure you were W.Shedd when writing so many bukaff about the stuff you know* so little?
As I’m not sure (as W.Shedd I know usually writes more sense than no sense) – I’ll answer to your predictions only
It LOST them many-many years ago. And this August Georgia lost last chance to convince them to join Georgia some day.
But first Saak will have to eat his tie. “Writing off” is suicide for Saak. Not because he breaks his own promise but because his “friends” would be happy to use this fact to kick him out. And he has enough “friends” who are just waiting for opportunity.
International law is not your strongest point, isn’t? You might be surprised to find out how many US citizens have Russian passport and citizenship. So don’t poke Russia as she might decide to protect Russians over there
Whether they will join or will be absorbed are irrelevant now. Who knows – some day Alaska might want to be independent from Sarah Palin and join The Land of Abramovich.
For now both SO and Abkhazia are on their own and have been for more then 16 years.
And – as Kolya told you – they haven’t expressed ANY desire to re-unite with Tbilisi.
You know what? I would be glad to see this. Really. NATO already half dead. With USA treating “Georgia almost as NATO member” – it will be dead in no time. Read the NATO’s Charter. It’s not only about protecting any of its member if attacked. It’s also about getting approval of EVERY member in case of getting a new one – small and scared in particular. One thing to get Eston-n-n-n-n-n-i-a-a-a-a-a-a into NATO. Very reasonable and “hot” guys indeed.
But are you – you, Shedd – are you ready to die for Saak? Or just probably – as almost US VP says? You might, you might. But I doubt that Germans want to visit Kavkaz rather than tourists or businessmen.
So Putin was not that crazy after all?
Or was he if – according to Saak at his recent meeting with NATO – he planned all this (aggression etc) years ago?
(nothing personal – just asking for credentials).
Base in Tbilisi is likely ONLY if it is aimed AGAINST Russia. Because as base for “the terror war” is not suitable and can’t substitute Manas AT ALL. Before you argue with this – let me say with Lavrov’s words “Who are you f… lecturing me about military bases?”
But again – if you are ready to die for democracy – I have no problem with that
“Приходите к нам с мечом – не пожалеете” (с)
*”know” as opposed to “hear”
I was just concerded about you spitting everywhere (so typical for Russians)
I think that in general Russia’s actions in South Ossetia, Abkhazia and Georgia proper were justifiable and rational.
there is no need to repeat silly things by you.
What prevented Georgia to spread its passport – or better two plus a case of Borzhomi as bonus – to Ossetians and Abkhaz?
What passport do you have? I’m almost sure you have Russian citizenship
Send the tie with these words to Saak. He would much better off.
omg…so many ашипок
I guess I’m giggling too much
”And rebuilt already … Have you seen Grozny today? It looks much better and modern than an American city of the same size.”
They’d wouldnt have had to rebuild it f they didnt level it in the first place.
Irishman,
These things happen unfortunately. The Russians didn’t start the Chechen war.
A propos, how many civilians have the Americans killed in recent years while chasing the ever evasive “Al-Qaeda” in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Not to mention, what happen to most of the cities of Germany and Japan during WWII.
The fact remains, Grozny is a very attractive modern city now, whose buildings and houses are built in stone and bricks, unlike the American houses.
Shit happens, Ger, shit happens
They’d wouldnt have had to rebuild Dresden (etc) if they didnt level it in the first place.
PS. It was “joint decision”. Dudaev decided to use streets of Grozny to ambush Russian Army. Urban fighting without leveling something?
”Shit happens, Ger, shit happens
They’d wouldnt have had to rebuild Dresden (etc) if they didnt level it in the first place.”
Yeah ivanov. You’d think the Russians would have learned from Dresden, maybe?
”These things happen unfortunately. The Russians didn’t start the Chechen war.”
For a President of Russia your knowledge of history is shockingly bad. But then again, reared in the Russian education system, that was probably what you were taught.
Anyway, for the record, bombing of Chechnya began in november 1994, and the first Russian ground forces were butchered that december in the infamous ‘New Years Eve massacre’in Grozny. The Russian army proper moved in shortly afterwards. Before all this there had been no Chechen action against Russia in Russia proper, excluding Chechnya. And before you answer ‘Russia didnt invade, Chechnya is in Russia’ yes I know but the first military act of the engagement was Russian, decided earlier by Boris Yeltsin, Pavel Grachev and Sergei Shakhrai in Moscow.
Ger, please don’t f….ng lecture about Chechnya. Otherwise I’ll tell you “the truth” about Ireland
”These things happen unfortunately. The Russians didn’t start the Chechen war.”
For a President of Russia your knowledge of history is shockingly bad. But then again, reared in the Russian education system, that was probably what you were taught.
Anyway, for the record, bombing of Chechnya began in november 1994, and the first Russian ground forces were butchered that december in the infamous ‘New Years Eve massacre’in Grozny. The Russian army proper moved in shortly afterwards. Before all this there had been no Chechen action against Russia in Russia proper, excluding Chechnya. And before you answer ‘Russia didnt invade, Chechnya is in Russia’ yes I know but the first military act of the engagement was Russian, decided earlier by Boris Yeltsin, Pavel Grachev and Sergei Shakhrai in Moscow.
Irishman,
You speak with such confidence as if you were there, fighting alongside the Chechens and their Al-Quaeda sponsors on the streets of Grozny.
As for the Russian President I’m well taught Russian (and American as well) history, I’ve a PhD in Law, by the way.
As for the events of 1994, before any Russian forces moved into Chechnya about 10,000 ethnic Russians were massacred by Chechens, children raped (I don’t mention women), property taken, non-Chechens had to flee…. The Russians in August, 2008 did in South Ossetia what they failed to do with that “Americans-lover” Yeltsin in 2003 in Chechnya, namely to protect their citizens from being massacred.
May all those massacred by Chechens and their Al-Quaeda sponsors rest in peace.
What passport do you have? I’m almost sure you have Russian citizenship
Like with most of your assumptions and things you claim and think you know, this one is wrong. I do not have it. I left the USSR, I never resided in Russia. Yes, I have to spend $300 every time I go there just for the privilege of not having a Russian passport. It is quite worth the cost though.
As for US citizens having Russian passports, although it is not something people get in trouble for, but it constitutes a violation of oath of citizenship in the US. I am not sure US would care too much about them, just like US citizens that enter Russia (or any other place) using non-US passports will not likely going to get any support from the US if they get in trouble.
whose buildings and houses are built in stone and bricks, unlike the American houses.
Oh my… that really hurts. Russian construction standards FTW! Seriously, though, I have little knowledge of East Coast, but in the West, wood is preferable to brick. Earthquakes, remember?
This is the end, my only friend the end:
The West Begins to Doubt Georgian Leader
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,578273,00.html
Did someone mention ‘hot potato’???
Found via Bruce Sterling’s blog on wired.com:
http://blog.wired.com/sterling/2008/09/cluster-bombing.htmlhttp://blog.wired.com/sterling/2008/09/cluster-bombing.html
(…) “The details that Western intelligence agencies extracted from their signal intelligence agree with NATO’s assessments. According to this intelligence information, the Georgians amassed roughly 12,000 troops on the border with South Ossetia on the morning of Aug. 7. Seventy-five tanks and armored personnel carriers — a third of the Georgian military’s arsenal — were assembled near Gori. Saakashvili’s plan, apparently, was to advance to the Roki Tunnel in a 15-hour blitzkrieg and close the eye of the needle between the northern and southern Caucasus regions, effectively cutting off South Ossetia from Russia.
“At 10:35 p.m. on Aug. 7, less than an hour before Russian tanks entered the Roki Tunnel, according to Saakashvili, Georgian forces began their artillery assault on Tskhinvali. The Georgians used 27 rocket launchers, including 152-millimeter guns, as well as cluster bombs. Three brigades began the nighttime assault.
“The intelligence agencies were monitoring the Russian calls for help on the airwaves. The 58th Army, part of which was stationed in North Ossetia, was apparently not ready for combat, at least not during that first night.
“The Georgian army, on the other hand, consisted primarily of infantry groups, which were forced to travel along major roads. It soon became bogged down and was unable to move past Tskhinvali. Western intelligence learned that the Georgians were experiencing “handling problems” with their weapons. The implication was that the Georgians were not fighting well.
“The intelligence agencies conclude that the Russian army did not begin firing until 7:30 a.m. on Aug. 8, when it launched an SS-21 short-range ballistic missile on the city of Borzhomi, southwest of Gori. The missile apparently hit military and government bunker positions. Russian warplanes began their first attacks on the Georgian army a short time later. Suddenly the airwaves came to life, as did the Russian army.
“Russian troops from North Ossetia did not begin marching through the Roki Tunnel until roughly 11 a.m. This sequence of events is now seen as evidence that Moscow did not act offensively, but merely reacted… ”
****
So far a lot of mileage (or is that kilometerage in the EU) is being made out of this that Russia is some sort of a threat etc. etc. but it looks like the party may soon be over and the Hawks will loose ground (if they ever really held any in the first place). I suppose reality had to hit sooner or later…
Just FYI
http://www.richw.org/dualcit/law.html
So, you are not expert in Russia. You are expert in CCCP… Did you get US citizenship when CCCP was alive? Or did you visit Russia with Soviet passport?
Well, you don’t have to answer.
But if you did visit – you confirmed your Russian citizenship! And this thing stinks. The only way to get rid of it – to apply in writing to the President and formally renounce citizenship (but only if you have another one!).
But you forgot to mention –
What prevented Georgia to spread its passports – or better two – to Ossetians and Abkhaz?
\”But you forgot to mention -
\”
What prevented Georgia to spread its passports – or better two – to Ossetians and Abkhaz?
For some reasons they didn\’t wanted Georgian passports, no?
Just FYI
http://www.richw.org/dualcit/law.html
Thanks ivanov. I was wondering what Cyrill meant since a friend of my family has both Lebanese and US citizenship. Not to mention many American Jews have both US and Israeli citizenship. BTW, as of November Israelis will not need a visa to go to Russia. Now if I could only convince the racist Israeli government to give me a passport since my wife is an Israeli citizen. No visa travel to Russia is all I’m asking! Well . . . that and healthcare.
Sean.
I can not help you with visa – unless you apply for working and residence permit there. But no problem with health care. I doubt you want to get it free. Кто лечится даром – тот лечится даром. But for some very reasonable sum – you’ll get a very reasonable treatment. Or come to Iceland and stay here for half a year to be entitled for local medical system (almost as free as Soviet one but better – beds, equipment, clinics).
Thanks Aleks.
I think Clinton telling this to the dead ears
Of course they knew…
But most interesting is the silence about Medeved’s claim that Saak is on drugs and that western reporters know this.
I guess in “western” capitals some people are looking for space goats now.
And then the mAss media will claim they were misleaded by authorities (as with Saddam’s WMD).
So, you are not expert in Russia. You are expert in CCCP…
I never claimed to be an expert on anything, except being an interpreter.
But by this logic Тимофей Грановский would not be an expert on Medieval Europe, since he never lived there.
Or did you visit Russia with Soviet passport?
No.
Thanks ivanov. I was wondering what Cyrill meant since a friend of my family has both Lebanese and US citizenship. Not to mention many American Jews have both US and Israeli citizenship.
This is tricky. US born citizens can have foreign passports with no problems. US does not care. However, using a foreign passport is in essence showing allegiance to a country whose passport you present to officials. For those of us, naturalized citizens, this might be construed as a violation of oath of citizenship.
This is what I was told at the swearing in ceremony. There was a guy from (then) INS that asked if any of those about to be sworn in had any foreign tips planned within three weeks and advised to cancel them since there was no way they could get US passports that quick.
I know not of any cases where this was used for any reprimand but my understanding is that if a US citizen arrives to a country on a non-US passport, US consulates will not care much for them if they get in trouble.
What prevented Georgia to spread its passports – or better two – to Ossetians and Abkhaz?
I was not aware they did not have Georgian passports. As I said many times, if they do not want to be part of Georgia, then their wishes must be respected and accounted for. Overwhelming desire for self determination, including becoming a part of another country, should outweigh sovereignty.
Georgia lost this just like Serbia lost Kosovo when Georgians (and Serbs) started moving out.
лечится даром – тот лечится даром
Should be кто лечится даром – тот даром лечится.
Well . . . that and healthcare.
Sean, I don’t think anyone in Russia is getting lots of free health care. In the last several years I spent over half a year total there dealing with my mother’s cancer. She would have gotten nothing without bribing doctors and hospital officials of all levels right and left. And even with that the care was horrible compared to US where I saw my wife going through cancer at the same time.
Another tidbit – as a retired senior she had a right to get free medications. The problem was that unlike US where you get reimbursed, she could only get free stuff in a government pharmacy. Well, needless to say, there was never anything there. So we had to pay for all her chemo drugs out of pocket.
Sean, I don’t think anyone in Russia is getting lots of free health care.
Not Russia, Cyrill. Israel. And it’s not free. You pay taxes for it.
<em Simply holding a 2nd passport does not make you a citizen of that other country, and positively does not obligate that 2nd country to go to war for you on another nations territory.
Quite right. The Republic of Ireland used to (maybe still does) dish out Irish passports to people in the North subject to a few conditions, but wisely stopped short of pretending that these people were Irish citizens who should be afforded the full protection of the Irish army.
Which is why, probably, Ger is actully as orange as the Boyne and is really called Billy.
Have you seen Grozny today? It looks much better and modern than an American city of the same size.”
I’m sure most Americans would rather live in the places that they do than in Grozny under Kadrov.
There are some signs that this may spill over to Russia …
As president, you might want to check where you have invested this oil stabilisation fund. Because I doubt it is invested in Russia, nor held as cash in Russia.
Now if I could only convince the racist Israeli government to give me a passport since my wife is an Israeli citizen.
I’m not sure how many places do give out passports on marriage alone. Certainly not the UK, where my wife would have to live for 3 years before applying for citizenship. And certainly not Russia which, as far as I am aware, offers no route for a Brit to gain citzenship, or even an easier time getting a visa through marriage.
I can not help you with visa – unless you apply for working and residence permit there.
I suspect you could not help him with that, either. If you wanted to get Sean a work visa for Russia, your application for a 2009 quota would have had to be in by now. And I don’t know if you have had much experience getting a quota in the last 12 months, but it is miles harder than it was.
”Ger, please don’t f….ng lecture about Chechnya. Otherwise I’ll tell you “the truth” about Ireland”
Kiss my arse ivanov. Perhaps when you can tell the truth about your own country, ivanov, then you can graduate onto others like Ireland. Typical Russian – very touchy indeed when it comes to Chechnya. And rightly so, cos ye did level the place. Fucking animals.
”As for the events of 1994, before any Russian forces moved into Chechnya about 10,000 ethnic Russians were massacred by Chechens, children raped (I don’t mention women), property taken, non-Chechens had to flee…”
President Medvedev, you are not only totally confused, but totally wrong. These things happened AFTER the Russian army moved in 1994, and were carried out by RUSSIAN troops.
In fact the statement is such a lie I’m wondering are you taking the piss.
”Which is why, probably, Ger is actully as orange as the Boyne and is really called Billy.
”
DOH! Outted!
”but wisely stopped short of pretending that these people were Irish citizens who should be afforded the full protection of the Irish army.”
We’ve an air force of about ten planes. Need I say more?:-)
“President Medvedev, you are not only totally confused, but totally wrong. These things happened AFTER the Russian army moved in 1994, and were carried out by RUSSIAN troops.”
No they didn’t. There was mass ethnic cleansing of non-Chechens in Chechnya in the early 1990s. The Jewish Telegraph Agency carried a long series of articles on this at the time.
”or even an easier time getting a visa through marriage.”
Its actually ridiculous. Being married to a Russia gives you no favour at all getting visas. In reverse case for the wife, getting an Irish visa is just a rubber stamping exercise, always performed with courtesy.
Which leads me to the reasonable conclusion that the existence of Russian visas is really just a money racket, rather than an attempt to control numbers and quality of entrants into countries, as is the case in Ireland/UK etc.
Getting a Russian visa is very easy.
”No they didn’t. There was mass ethnic cleansing of non-Chechens in Chechnya in the early 1990s”
Sorry, I believe this to actually be wrong or at best exaggeration. Mass ethnic cleansing did not occur in Chechnya before 1994. I wouldnt doubt that Russians got a hard time there, as the country was fairly lawless, but mass ethnic cleansing – 10,000 people killed before the Russians arrived – no way. Propoganda. If you have a link to such numbers please provide it Chris.
“Which leads me to the reasonable conclusion that the existence of Russian visas is really just a money racket, rather than an attempt to control numbers and quality of entrants into countries, as is the case in Ireland/UK etc.”
I was under the impression that any Middle Eastern or Pakistani jihadi or Eastern European mafioso could get a UK visa no problem. Sure looks yjay way.
”Getting a Russian visa is very easy.”
Its not hard getting a Rus visa you just have to pay. Its a business. And it is very tedious.
But my wife doesnt pay for an Irish one simply cos she’s married to a Paddy, and the paperwork is very simple. Russian embassies are really just little commercial units of the Russian government abroad.
”I was under the impression that any Middle Eastern or Pakistani jihadi or Eastern European mafioso could get a UK visa no problem. Sure looks yjay way.”
Pakistanis as far as I know have special ability to get UK visas cos they were a colony. I would have thought terrorists by definition are people who have done, you know ,terrorist stuff. Being from the Middle East or Pakistan and having Islamic leanings does not make one a terrorist.
Are these the same type of foreign terrorists that invaded Dagestan en mass in 1999, or, you know, are they real ones?
“Mass ethnic cleansing did not occur in Chechnya before 1994. I wouldnt doubt that Russians got a hard time there, as the country was fairly lawless, but mass ethnic cleansing – 10,000 people killed before the Russians arrived – no way. Propoganda. If you have a link to such numbers please provide it Chris.”
I assume the 10,000 figure does not refer to people murdered, but to people ethinically cleansed, which is not the same thing. I love the euphemism “fairly lawless” for people breaking into your apartment, raping all the women, and kicking you out onto the street with no belongings.
I actually looked at the JTA website a minute ago but they don’t seem to have articles before 1998 online anymore. Le Monde also wrote about it. I don’t have time to do your research for you.
It is kind of telling that the JTA were the only people writing about the subject in any detail at the time.
“Are these the same type of foreign terrorists that invaded Dagestan en mass in 1999, or, you know, are they real ones?”
Don’t be a twit.
There was mass ethnic cleansing of non-Chechens in Chechnya in the early 1990s.
I know two people very well who lived in Grozny at the time, one was my old Russian teacher (an ethnic Russian) and the other is a friend of mine here on Sakhalin (also an ethnic Russian). Both of them told me the same thing: that things were tolerable until the Russian army arrived, at which point they were told to get out as things were going to get nasty, and anyone left behind would deserve whatever is coming.
Getting a Russian visa is very easy.
It is? Pray tell how?
“It is? Pray tell how?”
Amass documents. Go to embassy. Pay fee. Get visa.
Amass documents. Go to embassy. Pay fee. Get visa.
And this gets you what? A work permit? A residency visa? A 3 month tourist visa?
“I know two people very well who lived in Grozny at the time, one was my old Russian teacher (an ethnic Russian) and the other is a friend of mine here on Sakhalin (also an ethnic Russian). Both of them told me the same thing: that things were tolerable until the Russian army arrived, at which point they were told to get out as things were going to get nasty, and anyone left behind would deserve whatever is coming.”
Grozny is (was) a multiethnic city with a large Russian population, and is not representative of Chechnya.
“Mass” is probably an overstatement, sinceit implies some kind of large-scale organized campaign.
“And this gets you what? A work permit? A residency visa? A 3 month tourist visa?”
It gets you any visa I’ve ever gotten.
Speaking of visas, I’d be curious to learn how many businesses are still cheating the visa regime for their foreign employees.
It gets you any visa I’ve ever gotten.
Then you’ve not got a work permit or residency visa in the last couple of years.
The process for getting a working visa in Sakhalin, which I believe is the same everywhere, is:
1. Company applies for work permit quota for coming year. They must state job title and nationality of person for each visa they require. Company must justify each position.
2. If lucky, and after a few months, quota is approved.
3. Individual gets medical.
4. Individual gets diploma notarised, legalised, and translated in home country
5. Company submits medical and diploma to immigration as part of application for LOI.
6. Individual takes LOI, visa fee, application form to embassy.
7. Individual is issued with 3-month “work entry visa”. Individual goes to Russia.
8. Company issues contract as per job description on quota.
9. Company applies for work permit for individual, contract must be attached to application.
10. Company applies for multi-entry work visa (the green one).
Step 1 is extremely difficult for any company, and has become much more so over the last year. Step 4 takes ages and costs an awful lot. Steps 9 and 10 take up to 60 days. The process must be repeated each year. As soon as your contract expires or you leave your job, you must hand back your work permit and leave the country.
Yeah, getting a visa in Russia is easy. Just a few documents and a trip to the embassy.
Speaking of visas, I’d be curious to learn how many businesses are still cheating the visa regime for their foreign employees.
On Sakhalin, very few.
“Then you’ve not got a work permit or residency visa in the last couple of years.”
I wouldn’t know — this is something my employer takes care of. Since I’m not a business, I don’t really care.
“On Sakhalin, very few.”
I get the impression that this has really changed in the past 7-8 years. It seems like when I first came here three-quarters of foreigners were registered as “foreign consultants in Cyprus” or working with only business (or tourist!) visas.
I wouldn’t know — this is something my employer takes care of.
So when you said:
Getting a Russian visa is very easy.
you meant:
Getting a Russian visa is very easy for me, because my company takes care of everything.
“Then you’ve not got a work permit or residency visa in the last couple of years.”
I get a work permit every year.
This what I do:
1. Get medical test.
2. Get photos. Give photos to employer.
3. Wait.
Of course, this is from my POV, not that of my employer.
“Getting a Russian visa is very easy for me, because my company takes care of everything.”
Is there somebody else that matters?
I get the impression that this has really changed in the past 7-8 years. It seems like when I first came here three-quarters of foreigners were registered as “foreign consultants in Cyprus” or working with only business (or tourist!) visas.
I can only vouch for Sakhalin, but believe Moscow-based companies have had the same experience, but about 2-3 years ago companies got massive fines for this sort of stuff. On Sakhalin, most thought it became unworthwhile to try to duck the system any more, and just passed on the cost of compliance to their customers. Plus you used to be able to come in and out willy-nilly on a business visa, now you can only spend 180 days in the country, which screwed everyone right up.
Technical visas can still be used, but your company has to be manufacturing something.
Of course, this is from my POV, not that of my employer.
Don’t you need to do the whole diploma notarisation nonsense?
Ah, hang on! You’re a court-appointed-Russia-friendly. You get yours fast-tracked.
“Don’t you need to do the whole diploma notarisation nonsense?
Ah, hang on! You’re a court-appointed-Russia-friendly. You get yours fast-tracked. ”
Bing!
I gave them a copy of my MA diploma years ago.
“I can only vouch for Sakhalin”
My impression is that this is the case in Moscow as well.
I remember the shudder of dread that passed through the expat community when they started the 180-day business visa law.
(“I have to abide by the law! Oh noes!”)
Speaking of law enforcement, is it only me, or does it seem like all the kiosks and tables on the street selling pirated DVDs in Moscow have vanished in the past month?
”I love the euphemism “fairly lawless” for people breaking into your apartment, raping all the women, and kicking you out onto the street with no belongings.”
Chris, I do appreciate this but I dont think this actually happened. In Chechnya at the time the place was full of released prisoners and actual lunatics (let out of asylums, literally) but as far as I’ve read there was no actual campaign by the Chechens involving systemic ethnic cleansing. Thousands of Russians were killed all over the country, which makes me wonder how many of them were cleansed if they were still there.
”Ah, hang on! You’re a court-appointed-Russia-friendly. You get yours fast-tracked. ”
Bing!”
I was offered a job in Moscow a few months back and the company said they’d be renewing my visa ”every 3 months”. I have to say I’ve never heard that one before. When I worked there we had a mnogokratnaya visa and it got registered and that was it. I suppose the law has changed or something.
“Chris, I do appreciate this but I dont think this actually happened. In Chechnya at the time the place was full of released prisoners and actual lunatics (let out of asylums, literally) but as far as I’ve read there was no actual campaign by the Chechens involving systemic ethnic cleansing. Thousands of Russians were killed all over the country, which makes me wonder how many of them were cleansed if they were still there.”
I don’t think it was systematic. I think it was ethnic violence by individuals and small groups.
Grozny had, what, a 50% non-Chechen (not “Russian,” dammit) population, and the Naursky district was largely Cossack, since relocated to Stavropol.
“I was offered a job in Moscow a few months back and the company said they’d be renewing my visa ”every 3 months”.”
Sounds like a shady business.
”I don’t think it was systematic. I think it was ethnic violence by individuals and small groups.”
I dont have Russian-language sources either, so I am a bit crippled in that sense, a la Averko. But during lawless times all sorts of atrocious stuff goes on – during the Irish Civil War cuckolds, slighted farmers, guys done out of money etc, all had their revenge.
A friend of mine used to work with two women (sisters) who (at least claimed that they) had been gang-raped and expelled from their home in Chechnya around 1993.
I think part of the issue here is that Dudaev did not have support from the Chechen elite, intelligentsia or “middle class.” His support was the hicks up in the mountains who still believe in blood feud. And you tend to turn a blind eye when your support base gets out of line.
”Sounds like a shady business.”
It was an organic chemistry lab. I think they hadnt special permission to hire foreigners. Something to that effect. Money was good though. Am still baffled they offered me the job though – maybe there was dodginess involved. Chemists grow on trees in Russia, and they tend to be better than us here-more disciplined in knowledge. Most of us only learn what we have to, the Russians actually love it.
”I think part of the issue here is that Dudaev did not have support from the Chechen elite, intelligentsia or “middle class.” His support was the hicks up in the mountains who still believe in blood feud. And you tend to turn a blind eye when your support base gets out of line.”
I cant disagree with this. At the first Chechen congress, I think in early 1991, Dudaev was simply reviled by everyone with even a modicum of education, and generally laughed at. I think a lot of policital enemies underestimated him and Chechnya paid for it down the line.
“I cant disagree with this. At the first Chechen congress, I think in early 1991, Dudaev was simply reviled by everyone with even a modicum of education, and generally laughed at.”
Would you support Dudaev?
I don’t know if this is true, but I’ve heard that Dudaev opened the prisons on purpose to increase the ranks of his boyz. FWIW.
On to the Noamster. I read him a lot when I was in my 20s (the politics, not the linguistics). He’s the kind of person who will really blow your mind when you read him for the first time with little background knowledge, but gets stale once you learn more about the subject matter (he can be simplistic) and realize he says the same thing over and over.
Not that saying the same thing over and over is necessarily a bad thing, if that thing is right.
I think they hadnt special permission to hire foreigners.
Meaning, they didn’t have a quota.
I don’t know if this is true, but I’ve heard that Dudaev opened the prisons on purpose to increase the ranks of his boyz.
Saddam Hussein did this in the run-up to the invasion. This was written about in some detail at the time, but surprisingly rarely mentioned when the chaos and murder ensued later on. At the time, people put it down to a deliberate tactic on the part of Saddam Hussein to make anyone governing the country post-Saddam extremely difficult.
Not that saying the same thing over and over is necessarily a bad thing, if that thing is right.
Which in the case of Chomsky, it rarely is. He is extremely dishonest in his handling of source material, a characteristic which plagued even his early works. And his central message has been that the USA is morally no better, and possibly worse, than Nazi Germany.
You also have to wonder about a man who refers to “alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities”.
“And his central message has been that the USA is morally no better, and possibly worse, than Nazi Germany.”
Well, he doesn’t really say that.
“You also have to wonder about a man who refers to “alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities”.”
At the time he wrote that, they were alleged.
Though it’s true it’s not a high point in his career.
Well, he doesn’t really say that.
Are you at all familiar with Chomsky’s work?
In American Power and the New Mandarins we have this:
We have to ask ourselves whether what is needed in the United States is dissent – or denazification. The question is a debatable one. Reasonable people may differ. The fact that the question is even debatable is a terrifying thing. To me it seems that what is needed is a kind of denazification. What is more, there is no powerful outside force that can call us to account – the change will have to come from within.
and then in the same book:
[O]ne must applaud the insistence of the Secretary of State on the importance of historical analogies, the Munich analogy, for example. As Munich showed, a powerful and aggressive nation with a fanatic belief in its manifest destiny will regard each victory, each extension of its power and authority, as a prelude to the next step.
And in Backroom Boys:
[A]s [Defence Secretary Robert] McNamara rather prissily explained to a Senate committee, the North Vietnamese leaders’ “regard for the comfort and even the lives of the people they control does not seem to be sufficiently high to lead them to bargain for settlement in order to stop a heightened level of attack”… Any Nazi could have said the same about Winston Churchill.
If you can read German, he likens JFK’s policies in Central America to the policies of Nazi Germany in an article in Der Spiegel (Sean’s spam filter is eating anything with links in).
He continues the theme in Imperial Ambitions, where Chomsky states that: “the pretenses for the invasion [of Iraq] are no more convincing than Hitler’s”.
He in on record as responding to Tony Blair’s defence of the US led invasion of Iraq with:
I suppose Hitler believed what he was saying too.
At the time he wrote that, they were alleged.
Which doesn’t explain why in a recent interview he says of his 1977 article:
The story about the Khmer Rouge … I suspect must be the best, most careful, accurate” chronicle. “Nobody’s found a thing [that’s inaccurate]. If we were to rewrite it now, we’d do it exactly the same way.”
Presumably meaning, he still considers the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge to be mere allegations.
“Are you at all familiar with Chomsky’s work?
Uh, yes. Comparing this or that part of US policy to this or that part of German policy does not mean you are equating the two.
“Presumably meaning, he still considers the atrocities of the Khmer Rouge to be mere allegations.”
Presumably, you are completely wrong, since he has refered to them many times. Especially when discussing US support of the Khmer Rouge in the 1980s.
Frankly, your usually well-functioning brain appears to turn off when you are discussing people who are politically opposed to you.
”I don’t know if this is true, but I’ve heard that Dudaev opened the prisons on purpose to increase the ranks of his boyz. FWIW.”
That is true. Completely. There was a general amnesty granted in 1991 to anyone locked up during the Soviet period. Literally everyone in jail was just let out – gates opened.
”The story about the Khmer Rouge … I suspect must be the best, most careful, accurate” chronicle. “Nobody’s found a thing [that’s inaccurate]. If we were to rewrite it now, we’d do it exactly the same way.””
I dunno much about Chomsky but after reading that statement, perhaps its just as well.
“I dunno much about Chomsky but after reading that statement, perhaps its just as well.”
I am not a Chomsky fan, but in his defense what he is refering to is the lack of media coverage, in the 1970s, of alleged atrocities in East Timor (which turned out to be true) to alleged atrocities in Cambodia (which also turned out to be true). The point was that the same evidence was viewed as justified in Cambodia but not in Timor, because the former was a US enemy and Indonesia an ally.
”Would you support Dudaev?”
No. Apart from anything else, his public statements during the war infuriated the Russians, bringing on even more misery, whilst he was on the phone to Moscow saying something else entirely. If he’d kept his mouth shut half the time he may have got to meet Yeltsin, and the fun and games stopped months earlier. But the minute Russian tanks rolled in, he had majority support in Chechnya. He had warned for years that it would happen eventually, and told the Chechens ”it’ll be just like it always was – the Russians move in and crush us when we want to do our own thing” – and this played on old, and justified, Chechen fears. He was of course correct.
Maskhadov, on the other hand, was a fine leader, and, in a country less fractious and prone to division, and with genuine Russian help, might have made a fist of the place.
“in a country less fractious and prone to division,”
That’s sort of the problem there.
Unfortunately you are right about the US media. The propaganda is very powerful using the media in US, and many people believe in that media
“But the minute Russian tanks rolled in, he had majority support in Chechnya.”
I really don’t buy this. He may well have had majority support abong Chechens, but I doubt it with respect to the still relatively large at that time non-Chechen population.
Comparing this or that part of US policy to this or that part of German policy does not mean you are equating the two.
No, it doesn’t. But it is true that Chomsky’s central message has been that the USA is morally no better, and possibly worse, than Nazi Germany.
Presumably, you are completely wrong
Feel free to point to any article where Chomsky retracts his comments about “alleged atrocities”. For my part, I have quoted him as saying that he stands by his comments.
Frankly, your usually well-functioning brain appears to turn off when you are discussing people who are politically opposed to you.
How Chomsky stands politically is of no interest to me whatsoever. I judge him on what he’s written and no more. That you were daft enough to follow him at some point and now feel the need to defend him is neither here nor there either, for that matter.
I am not a Chomsky fan, but in his defense what he is refering to is the lack of media coverage, in the 1970s, of alleged atrocities in East Timor (which turned out to be true) to alleged atrocities in Cambodia (which also turned out to be true).
If you’re going to defend Chomsky, at least do so competently. His exact words are:
What filters through to the American public is a seriously distorted version of the evidence available, emphasizing alleged Khmer Rouge atrocities and downplaying or ignoring the crucial U.S. role, direct and indirect, in the torment that Cambodia has suffered.
and he later says:
If, indeed, postwar Cambodia is, as [Lacouture] believes, similar to Nazi Germany, then his comment is perhaps just, though we may add that he has produced no evidence to support this judgement. But if postwar Cambodia is more similar to France after liberation, where many thousands of people were massacred within a few months under far less rigorous conditions than those left by the American war, then perhaps a rather different judgement is in order.
Clearly, Chomsky is witholding judgement on the Khmer Roughe regime, the nature of which was – contrary to what you say – was well known at the time thanks to people like Lacouture. And he’s in on record as defending that article and its contents.
“No, it doesn’t. But it is true that Chomsky’s central message has been that the USA is morally no better, and possibly worse, than Nazi Germany.”
No, it isn’t, and only a person reading the stuff tendentiously would say it was.
“Feel free to point to any article where Chomsky retracts his comments about “alleged atrocities”.”
Since his archive is behind for-pay shield, it would be kind of hard for me to do, now, wouldn’t it?
“For my part, I have quoted him as saying that he stands by his comments.”
He has stated that the comparison between the depiction, based on the evidence of the time, between reports of atrocities in Cambodia and East Timor, was valid, which is obviously very different than denying the occurence of the atrocities, which he doesn’t. If he did, his assertion of US complicity in them would be a bit odd: http://books.google.ru/books?id=nTMEirKUw-QC&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=chomsky+barsamian+khmer+rouge&source=web&ots=-CdTvqOYD0&sig=gfbdGkKTemqXqeCEe_7RS6wyEr0&hl=ru&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result
“How Chomsky stands politically is of no interest to me whatsoever. I judge him on what he’s written and no more.”
I don’t think you’ve ever read a book by the guy in your life. I think you plucked quotes off of some rightwing website.
I have no interest in “defending” Chomsky. I am interested in presenting people’s views accurately.
“His exact words are:”
And the quote contradicts what I said how?
“If you’re going to defend Chomsky, at least do so competently.”
This statement does not say much for the level of your debating technique.
“was well known at the time thanks to people like Lacouture.”
By the way, you know this exactly how?
You are also evading the central point that the Khmer Rouge atrocities were well-known, but the Indonesian ones were not.
”I really don’t buy this. He may well have had majority support abong Chechens”
Thats what I meant. I should have qualified the statement. He was reviled by Russians in Chechnya.
”That’s sort of the problem there.”
The notion of government controlling the whole of Chechnya is one that doesnt sit well with them. Before the Russians took over each aul was governed by an elected council of elders and ran itself basically. The only time the auls and tribes became united was under Shamil, who used violence and force and notions of jihad to make the auls compliant. Indeed Islam is only in Chechnya about 300 years, and most Chechens hated Shamil – he was Dagestani! Anyway this fractious nature not only makes them hard to govern, it also makes them easier to conquer.
No, it isn’t, and only a person reading the stuff tendentiously would say it was.
So constantly comparing, unfavourably, the actions of the US with Nazi Germany over 3 decades is not conveying a central message has been that the USA is morally no better, and possibly worse, than Nazi Germany? Yes, it is.
He has stated that the comparison between the depiction, based on the evidence of the time, between reports of atrocities in Cambodia and East Timor, was valid, which is obviously very different than denying the occurence of the atrocities, which he doesn’t.
No, that wasn’t it at all. He was presented with reports of Khmer Rouge atrocities and instead of determining their accuracy, he chose to cast considerable doubt on their accuracy to strengthen his case about his perceived under-reporting of other atrocities (which he never described as “alleged”). Chomsky had no grounds whatsoever for doubting the reports, and now it is known to all that they were accurate, rather than revising his position, he restates it.
I have no interest in “defending” Chomsky. I am interested in presenting people’s views accurately.
Then I invite you to start doing so.
By the way, you know this exactly how?
Because people like Chomsky were able to read and then comment on his reports. Kind of difficult to do if these reports don’t exist.
You are also evading the central point that the Khmer Rouge atrocities were well-known, but the Indonesian ones were not.
I’m not avoiding any point, and the one you mention is not a central one. The atrocities in East Timor were covered by Australian journalists, John Pilger for one. They may not have received the same volume of coverage as those in Cambodia, but this point can be made without second guessing the reports coming out of Cambodia.
”So constantly comparing, unfavourably, the actions of the US with Nazi Germany over 3 decades is not conveying a central message has been that the USA is morally no better, and possibly worse, than Nazi Germany? Yes, it is.”
FWIW the comparison is ridiculous. The Nazis were of course much worse. Where does he get this notion from?
I didn’t want to but I was provoked by unprovoked aggression of this Irish animals that live in Ireland in large quantity. So this is the truth! Ireland is full of animals!
Well, I have never been there but this doesn’t matter as I know the truth!
Anyway, here is the six points ceasefire deal, Ger. I’m not lecturing you about such F-country* as Ireland. You don’t lecture me about more F-Russia.
This is only two points…shit I’ll think about four other points later.
*F-country = fabulous country (and what you think, Ger?)
”I didn’t want to but I was provoked by unprovoked aggression of this Irish animals that live in Ireland in large quantity. So this is the truth! Ireland is full of animals!”
What animals? Badgers, deer?
”You don’t lecture me about more F-Russia.”
ivanov I’ll say whatever I want. This is a Russia blog in english. Your WANKER of a country fucking levelled a small province and killed AT LEAST 40,000 people, and possibly up to 60,000 in the process, not to mention raped and tortured thousands more.
And dont give me your bulshit ”I know this soldier, that soldier, blah blah blah”. I dont give a fuck what your mate Dmitri from Kislovodsk said. The numbers above are objective facts. You can, as usual, ignore them if you want.
The Irish, inspite of causing the British far more trouble in the 1970s than the Chechens did Russia in the 1990s were never subjected to aerial bombardment or mass murder afterwards. Spot the difference? Your government places NO value on life at all, unless it is politically convenient to do so, such as recently in South Ossetiya. Russia is one of the last places on earth that can criticise anyone about military operations.
Don’t worry – I will
I admit – it’s not Russian strong point – to criticize someone’s military operations
Russia has never fought fair – contrary to Europe that always capitulated promptly. Never cared about it’s soldiers – like Americans in Japan… etc.
PS. I wonder if Ger has sense of humor? In Russian sense of it?
ivanov,
What Irishman said, exactly.
Also, stop dreaming about Russia rising at the expense of West troubles. Russia always rises behind the West and sinks ahead of the West (as does the rest of the world). When the West is doing well, Russia is doing reasonably well too. When the West is in trouble, Russia really suffers.
If you think Wall Street has trouble now, just look at this:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6ff9306c-83f1-11dd-bf00-000077b07658.html
I lobe this – EXACTLY! And don’t forget to point finger!
shit….”I love” of course.
Candid, I still think that Wall Street is in trouble. And I don’t need to read FT about Russian “stock market” (can’t stop laughing… russian socks market…lol).
From my point – the sooner it collapses the better. It’s not market – it’s casino!
If you think Wall Street has trouble now, just look at this:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6ff9306c-83f1-11dd-bf00-000077b07658.html
Does anyone ever wonder why most economic reporting is virtually devoid of people? Or I should say people who aren’t bank managers, CEOs, major shareholders, etc. The report Candide cites is just one of many examples. The tendency to anthropomorphize the economy and market always strikes me as quite perverted. It as if the health of this mythical god, the Economy, is an end in itself. I guess this is what Marx meant when he wrote,
“It is an enchanted, perverted, topsy-turvy world, in which Monsieur le Capital and Madame la Terre do their ghost-walking as social characters and at the same time directly as mere things. It is the great merit of classical economy to have destroyed this false appearance and illusion, this mutual independence and ossification of the various social elements of wealth, this personification of things and conversion of production relations into entities, this religion of everyday life. “
{{applause}}
{{applause}}
I just saw the film, The Corporation, for the first time last night. Actually, I only saw about half of it before reaching a threshold of tolerance… I’ll watch the other half tonight. But I recommend it. The basic theme is the legal treatment of corporations as human individuals (the actual legal anthropomorphism of an economic contract), and following that logic, illustrating how they are textbook psychopaths. Good stuff…
WTF! looks like McCain is stealing my words!!!
”PS. I wonder if Ger has sense of humor? In Russian sense of it?”
No. Especially after an evening of putting manure into the garden, followed by a tv documentary on Cromwell. Entirely disagreeable stuff I can tell you.
”The tendency to anthropomorphize the economy and market always strikes me as quite perverted.”
I hope you’re right Sean, but sadly i doubt it. Since last summer when the markets started going downwards funnily enough people started losing their jobs and stuff got more expensive. A coincidence? I think not.
”As for the events of 1994, before any Russian forces moved into Chechnya about 10,000 ethnic Russians were massacred by Chechens, children raped (I don’t mention women), property taken, non-Chechens had to flee…”
President Medvedev, you are not only totally confused, but totally wrong. These things happened AFTER the Russian army moved in 1994, and were carried out by RUSSIAN troops.
In fact the statement is such a lie I’m wondering are you taking the piss.
———————————————-
Irishman,
I wish you new what you are saying … it’s really sinful, but I cannot even be angry with you since you’ve been brainwashed by this one-sided propaganda for years. If you ever decide to see to what extend you were wrong refer to this website (if you read Russian):
http://genocide-chechnya.front.ru/numbers/num_1/num_1_2.htm
The article is entitled: “Russians! Don’t leave – we need slaves!” This is a common graffiti that could be seen all over Chechnya in 1991-94 before the Russian Army “invaded”. The article contains facts of the genocide against Russians. It’s more horrible than Ruwanda: Rape of teenagers, forcing dogs to have sex with Russian women, killed children, looting, robberies, etc, etc, etc …
Of course, it’s “the Russian propaganda”, or is it?
”The article contains facts of the genocide against Russians. It’s more horrible than Ruwanda: Rape of teenagers, forcing dogs to have sex with Russian women, killed children, looting, robberies, etc, etc, etc …”
I refer you to this, posted earlier by Tim Newman:
”I know two people very well who lived in Grozny at the time, one was my old Russian teacher (an ethnic Russian) and the other is a friend of mine here on Sakhalin (also an ethnic Russian). Both of them told me the same thing: that things were tolerable until the Russian army arrived, at which point they were told to get out as things were going to get nasty, and anyone left behind would deserve whatever is coming.”
I do know that Russians were mistreated, and bady so, between 1991-1994, but I am highly doubtful about the animal rapes and also wonder at the scale of it, if it did indeed happen at all. The books I have read on the war were written by westerners in the mid-nineties. They made no mention of such rapes, though they did speak of robberies and murders, but not anywhere near the scale of what would happen later when the Russians arrived. I should also note that what I have read did not spare the Chechens either – indeed, Chechen brutality was one of many themes – but I have never heard of any large-scale deliberate campaign targeting Russians pre 1994. Apart from anything else thousands and thousands of Russians did not leave Chechnya until after the Russian bombardment – which makes me wonder how wide scale your ”Rwanda genocide” was really.
I am in no way defending Chechens either – I am fully aware of how brutal they are. But the Russians were worse, much worse, and they were supposed to be the government ‘restoring constitutional order’. My arse.
Come on! More horrible than Rwanda? Don’t be obscene!
Listen, I’m sure some Chechens raped and killed Russians. Chechnya was a lawless place during the days of Dudayev. But before the war there was no organized anti-Russian genocidal campaign. I also talked to Russians who lived there. They acknowledged that during Dudayev Chechnya was becoming a more dangerous and thuggish place than ever before, and that’s why they left. But it was a family decision, not a decision imposed by the Chechens, and they never said anything about genocidal rapes and killings of Russians. They actually liked the Chechens and said that a Chechen friend will prove much more loyal than anyone else.
”refer to this website (if you read Russian):
http://genocide-chechnya.front.ru/numbers/num_1/num_1_2.htm”
I’m going to read it. It’ll take me a while and I’ll need a dictionary, but I will respond to it.
Murders of non-Chechens (not Russians, dammit) by Chechens, yes.
Killings organized by Dudaev and animal rapes, I doubt it.
I’d just like to add that I’m not trying to insult ordinary Russians – my rants are firmly aimed at the Russian government, and apologies for going over the top at times. Russia is cool, the language is cool, the government are not:-(
And I’m not having a go at Chris Doss either, even if he is a self professed court-appointed Russia Friendly;-)
”Killings organized by Dudaev and animal rapes, I doubt it.”
I thought the Chechens were extremely averse to rape, but I do know they did rape occasionally -it cant be said that they didn. I never ever heard of animal rape there though.
“But the Russians were worse, much worse,”
I think that has mainly to do with technological level and the different nature of the terrain (metaphorically speaking).
“I’d just like to add that I’m not trying to insult ordinary Russians – my rants are firmly aimed at the Russian government, and apologies for going over the top at times. Russia is cool, the language is cool, the government are not:-(”
But the thing is, some (not all) of the things you accuse the government of are not actually in the government’s control. A great deal of the carnage of CWI and to a lesser extent CWII was because they didn’t know what they were doing, not out of malevolence. It was not the kind of conflict Russia had any experience with. Their military doctrine was designed for fighting NATO, not counterinsurgents.
”But the thing is, some (not all) of the things you accuse the government of are not actually in the government’s control.”
Isnt it a Russian saying – ‘what is to be done and who is to blame’? – or maybe its Irish?
Does anyone ever wonder why most economic reporting is virtually devoid of people? Or I should say people who aren’t bank managers, CEOs, major shareholders, etc
Eh? I read loads of economic commentary by people who are not bank managers, CEOs, and major shareholders.
But I’m not surprised you haven’t found them.
Oh, I see what you mean. I think. You mean why don’t people who write about economics also write about people affected by them?
They do. There are dozens and dozens of people writing about the effects of wrong-headed economic policies on individuals.
For example, this is a cental theme of Naomi Klein’s work. The problem with Klein is that she is clueless about economics.
I thought the Chechens were extremely averse to rape, but I do know they did rape occasionally -it cant be said that they didn. I never ever heard of animal rape there though.
We have this in Wales, only it’s normally consensual.
10-1 odds that Tim has never actually read Klein.
Doug Henwood is a big exception to the “economists don’t mention people” trope. But then he is not part of the mainstream, well, only on the banks of it.
”I thought the Chechens were extremely averse to rape, but I do know they did rape occasionally -it cant be said that they didn. I never ever heard of animal rape there though.
We have this in Wales, only it’s normally consensual”
Have any of you read Patrick O’Brian’s Aubrey/Maturin novels? There’s a funny scene in ‘HMS Suprise’ when one of the shiphands has to be hanged for soddomy of a goat. It was a Royal Navy rule that the animals on the men-of-war couldnt be molested by sailors, punishable by hanging. Capt. Aubrey is furious that one of his lads has been caught and has to be executed publicly in front of all the other other ships and crew parked in dock!
“There’s a funny scene in ‘HMS Suprise’ when one of the shiphands has to be hanged for soddomy of a goat. It was a Royal Navy rule that the animals on the men-of-war couldnt be molested by sailors, punishable by hanging.”
Ever read Terror by Dan Simmons? He says the same thing.
”Ever read Terror by Dan Simmons? He says the same thing.”
It happened quite commonly back then seemingly!
Well, wouldn’t it? You have 100+ men at sea for years. Of course they’ll be going after everything in sight.
The death penalty for sex between men upon an Imperial Navy vessel is actually a plot point of Simmons’ (very good) book.
10-1 odds that Tim has never actually read Klein.
Don’t ever become a bookie.
She had a regular column in The Guardian (might still do) during the 3-4 years when I would read it daily. She provided much of the material for my old blog back in 2003.
Columns in the Guardian don’t count.
Yeah, she still does.
I wonder if she still believes in the fixed wealth fallacy, which carries some weight in this parish? Which is the economic equivalent of somebody who writes on geography thinking the world is flat.
Columns in the Guardian don’t count.
Of course not. That would involve you having to admit that perhaps I have read Klein’s work after all, so you’ll reduce the definition down to one which makes you look less foolish.
”Well, wouldn’t it? You have 100+ men at sea for years. Of course they’ll be going after everything in sight.”
Try 850 men, the crew of HMS Victory. A beast of a ship. I’ve always wanted to go and see her in Pompey, never did though:-(
I dont know what the scentence for man-man sex, but going at the animals was hanging.
Try 850 men, the crew of HMS Victory.
Try 296 men, the combined complement of the Safe Astoria and the Lunskoye-A.
That would have to be one sexy goat, or I would have to have a deep and meaningful emotional attachment to it, to risk death.
Noah’s Ark most have been a zoophile’s heaven.
“That would involve you having to admit that perhaps I have read Klein’s work after all, so you’ll reduce the definition down to one which makes you look less foolish.”
No, I am not concerned about how I appear, foolish, wise like Solomon, or otherwise, to the few readers of a blog, or the even smaller subset of them who compose your ideological cohort. Newspaper columns do not count as “work.” Kagarlitsky’s work is not his Moscow Times or NG articles, they are Restavratsiya v Rossii and Obuchenie. Marx’s work is Capital, not his articles on the Civil War.
”Try 296 men, the combined complement of the Safe Astoria and the Lunskoye-A.”
It doesnt bear thinking about. Gay love on an oil-rig in the Sea of Okhotsk. A kind of Russian Brokeback Mountain, with sea instead of mountains, and or rather mountains of red-tape instead of real mountains. Brrr!
Am I imagining things, or has there been not one comment, or more than two or three, here regarding the subject of the actual piece Sean posted?
“It doesnt bear thinking about. Gay love on an oil-rig in the Sea of Okhotsk. A kind of Russian Brokeback Mountain, with sea instead of mountains, and or rather mountains of red-tape instead of real mountains”
And a bear.
Newspaper columns do not count as “work.”
According to whom? You?
What a load of bollocks.
Nope, according to just about anybody.
Guess what? Blogs don’t count as work either.
So, we have now made clear that Tim has in fact not read Klein’s book, and so is continuing his usual habit of attacking his enemies arguments in their weakest, most dumbed-down, Strawman Walking form.
Which, in academia, is a crime.
Nope, according to just about anybody.
Using the Mike Averko definition of “just about anybody”, maybe.
Do we discount the columns of David Halberstam as not being included in his work? No. Nobody does. They are part of his output, part of his work, reading his columns is reading his work. The same with Klein.
So, we have now made clear that Tim has in fact not read Klein’s book, and so is continuing his usual habit of attacking his enemies arguments in their weakest, most dumbed-down, Strawman Walking form.
Of course, attacking arguments presented in a newspaper column doesn’t count, because they are not really part of the author’s output, according to Chris. Which is utter bollocks.
Which, in academia, is a crime.
I don’t know about academia, but in the real world anyone who stumps up a 10-1 bet and loses would have the good grace to either pay up or shut up, not start moving the goalposts and making stuff up.
A “work” represents a person’s developed thought in edited, polished form. In the modern world, it is usually peer-reviewed, with footnotes. Thus, to attack a person’s arguments, that is what one attacks. To not have read the work for somebody interested in taking a position on a person’s views is laziness, arrogance, or a combination of the two.
500-word columns written for a crap newspaper’s lay audience are, at best, supplementary to that work. Or perhaps we should also include Naomi Klein’s personal correspondence, daily to-do lists, and things she moans out while having an orgasm. (If “ooooh, Ger!!!!” turns out to be one of them, we’ll be in trouble.”
It’s been so long since we’ve had a flamewar! This is awesome!!!!
A “work” represents a person’s developed thought in edited, polished form. In the modern world, it is usually peer-reviewed, with footnotes.
You are simply assigning your own definition of what constitutes a journalist’s or author’s work.
I ask you again, can we dismiss David Halberstam’s columns and only criticise his books? What about Robert Fisk, from whom the vast majority of output is in columns?
To not have read the work for somebody interested in taking a position on a person’s views is laziness, arrogance, or a combination of the two.
No it’s not. If somebody writes economically illiterate nonsense in a newspaper, then is fair to ascribe economic illiteracy to that person without being compelled to go to the bother and expense of reading their books.
500-word columns written for a crap newspaper’s lay audience are, at best, supplementary to that work.
At best? Again, you are simply stating your opinions as fact. And The Guardian is hardly some crap newspaper, it is one of Britain’s most established quality dailys.
”… things she moans out while having an orgasm. (If “ooooh, Ger!!!!” turns out to be one of them, we’ll be in trouble.””
I’ll have to check my records to see if I boned her. My database is down at the moment!
“I’ll have to check my records to see if I boned her. My database is down at the moment!”
For Tim’s sake, I hope you took notes!
Who provoked this unprovoked war? That’s the kveschen!
Not to get too deep into this Naomi Klein love/hate fest, but I would agree that for an academic, their “work” is well-cited papers and projects, etc.
However, Klein isn’t an academic. She is a journalist (by education) and author.
So, is her primary work her newspaper columns or her books … seems to be at the crux of the argument/bet.
She has 3 books, first one published in 2000. She was a journalist before that, working as an intern and then “editor” it appears. Most of her newspaper columns, as near as I can tell, came about after her publishing her first book.
I’m included to say that she is an author and part-time freelance newspaper columnist. Of course, her education in journalism makes that a sticky decision.
In either case, she is definitely not an economist. Journalists, strictly speaking, gather and report data, quotes, or facts (or as close to the facts as can be ascertained). She forms many conclusions based upon that gathering of information that range far from her field of expertise. She seems to be more of a pop icon than a researcher, economist, or academician, which should leave anyone with a technical or analytical mind questioning the validity of her conclusions.
That’s my 2 cents. You boys can continue to duke it out.
Does she have a French accent? She’s a little bit broad in the hips for my taste, but I’d have to say I’d hit that (provided she has the accent).
It’s been so long since we’ve had a flamewar! This is awesome!!!!
Who provoked this unprovoked war? That’s the kveschen!
————————————————
World events, and our passion for discussing them (+some free time on our hands)?
” She seems to be more of a pop icon than a researcher, economist, or academician, which should leave anyone with a technical or analytical mind questioning the validity of her conclusions.”
I have no opinion of Klein whatsoever. I’ve never read her.
Klein is not an economist, so criticising her for not being one is strange. Not being an economist does not mean you have no authority to speak on the subject. In fact, it’s that elitist line of argument that’s largely contributed to the chaos we’re witnessing in the market today. Like Freud, the “free market” might be a theory with lots to endorse it, but it’s founded on the patronizing idea that one size fits all, and if you don’t think it fits you, you are either ignorant fools, or there is something abnormal with you.
I’ve never read her Guardian columns, but I have read “The Shock Doctrine”, and would call it classic investigative reporting, compiling source materials and eyewitness accounts to expose a pattern of economics. You can debate if this type of economic system is more or less beneficial to the common good, or you can debate if it is intentionally designed and coordinated by some elite cabal or is instead so prevalent because it is a self-propagating, path of least resistance type of system. But you can’t really debate the source materials and first hand accounts of how economic decisions have impacted the daily lives of people. If you have a worldview in which you don’t believe economic systems have a responsibility to be just and fair, you’re not going to agree with Klein’s condemnation of disaster capitalism. If on the other hand, you do, you’re probably going to appreciate the clear, concise way she’s laid out the ways in which our current economic system has failed to meet this responsibility. It’s pretty straightforward.
I’ve never read Chomsky and don’t see anything new in these excerpts. But one thing I’d like to hear people talk more about it the Cold War being one of ideologies (at least officially). What’s going on between the US and Russia has nothing to do with ideologies. It’s more a turf war… So yes, more akin to imperialism.