NATO occupied nations count as some of the most corrupt nations on earth where mafias are given free hand to traffic in human slaves, drugs and arms by western patrons in exchange for political control.
Bogdanov, with reference to "proletariat" and "bourgeois" and your use of these words in your post, you are missing the point of my criticism, which was not about the merits or otherwise of these terms, but the idea that somehow Ukraine easily divides into these. Second-guessing a little what you DO mean, I can assure you it does not. On re-reading my own post I realise that I probably didn't make that clear.
To Bogdanov: indeed, words are just words. But the associations which some words have are so painful or so obscene because of what those who made those words their jargon did in the name of those words and in the name of the ideology into which those words were conscripted, that the words themselves have become revolting by association.
This is easy enough to understand in regard to Nazi jargon. If they want to be taken seriously, Russians and Russia apologists need to understand the equivalent in regard to Soviet jargon.
sevodnya_net. Regarding my use of the "profanity" words ("proletariat", "bourgeoisie", and so on) -- I do it intentionally to stir some emotions among my opponents. Because, it is funny for me to watch how so many people in the West afraid of this "Marxist jargon". And react accordingly. These are just words! With their unique meaning. They do not bite! Why they are so scary? This is apart, of course, from the fact that, in some cases, they better than any other words may describe the ideas I am trying to present. I could say "the social group which owns the means of production, the upper class (not to be confused with aristocrats) in the capitalist society" or simply say "bourgeoisie". What is wrong with that? I didn't kill anyone by doing so. I am not trying to offend anyone. :-) :-)
Nussiminen finds amusement in allegations that he/she says I’ve made about “Russia’s alleged shortcomings” in preceding posts. Nussiminen is very easy to amuse, since there are no such allegations. An allegation is an assertion made without proof. Yet in my posts I named the organisation that conducted the poll about Russians’ attitudes, quoted precise figures from the poll, named the Russian historian who was arrested for investigating Stalinist crimes, and referred to major news events regarding Russia’s outbursts against those who do not yield to its spin on history whose veracity no one, nowhere, disputes.
None of these are allegations; they are merely reports or what has, in fact, happened. So where are the allegations, Nussiminen?
Perhaps Nussiminen’s quick sense of amusement is explained by the fact that as a Swede, he/she has the privilege of living in a country that has not been invaded and brutally occupied by anyone in living memory. Russia’s neighbours, who have had their freedom extinguished, their countries shattered, their loved ones killed or transported in cattle wagons to Siberian slavery or to Nazi concentration camps (sometimes different members of the same family being sent to each), and who have seen everything they have valued and worked for either stolen or destroyed in tandem by Nazi Germans and by Soviet Russians do not have such a ready sense of humour any more. Indeed Russians themselves would be quite unamused if their country’s attitude to the Soviet Union, Stalin and Communism were replicated by Germans’ attitude towards the Third Reich, Hitler and Nazism. There’d be very little laughter to be heard in such an event – except, of course, from Nussiminen, safely tucked away in Sweden who may, for all I know, think that a hypothetical German rehabilitation of Hitler and Nazism would be the funniest thing he’d ever heard – almost as funny as a Russian rehabilitation of Stalin.
Bogdanov i don't know what Ukraine you think you are writing about in your post, but it isn't the one I know. It's also disappointing (because I'm assuming you're the G. Bogdanov who used to say some interesting things on PL's blog) to hear you spouting glib nonsense about the "proletariat" and "bourgeois" sections of the country(!) Is this some sort of disease that's spreading at the moment - "jargon flu" perhaps. I'm sure you are more intelligent than that! Or the irony of suggesting Crimea should "return" to Russia (who nicked it from the Crimean Tartars of course, but lets not go down that road). I'd also like to know when you think Eastern Ukraine was part of Russia, btw - how far back to we have to go for that - it is interesting that one doesn't see too many Russian flags at Shakhtar Donetsk or Zorya Luhansk games - maybe that fact isn't relevant - and maybe it is) In short your comments merely underline my point, to be frank.
(Why is pro-Kremlin propaganda always so laughably naff. For heaven's sake, at least be subtle about it once in a while :-) )
It's not without a sense of refined amusement that one notes M6' obsession with Russia's alleged shortcomings. The apologists of the Zionist statelet come to mind immediately with their similar eulogising of the IDF and its commitment to land-grabbing and indiscriminate killing, NATO-style. And -- of course -- the Zionist statelet constitutes a most shining, beautiful model of democracy; if only its less civilized neighbours could finally get it.
M6 just can't admit the fact that the peoples of the former Warsaw Pact countries have come to realize hands-on what "Western Democracy" actually entails. As I'm writing these very lines, I note with pleasure how the Latvians have begun to express outright hatred and contempt of their Western puppet government and its Swedish financial overlords imposing -- partly so on behalf of the European Union -- misery and austerity on the hapless citizenry. Being a Swede myself, it hasn't been lost on me what repercussions would propagate across the Baltic, should Latvia either file for bankruptcy or heavily devalue its currency. That would very significantly hurt my dear fellow petty-bourgeois compatriots economically, and they deserve it too!
I conclude this post by saying loud and clear that Putin is doing a GREAT job as a statesman. No wonder imperialism (here we go again :-) ) and its media outlets and, by extension, the faithful believers are angry at him.
And yet more reason for Russia’s neighbours to be concerned for their security. A poll just released by the Levada-Centre showed that only 57% of those questioned considered that Russia needed democracy - the lowest number since 2006. 26% believed that democratic governing was not suitable for Russia, and nearly 95% of respondents said they had little or no influence on what was happening in the country.
A country with such skepticism about democracy and democratic institutions and such overwhelming passivity towards those who govern it is a prime target for falling into government-dictated political extremism, all the more so given that political extremism is its historical legacy. The widespread reports of cheating in the current local elections do little to allay such concerns. These are realities that Russia’s neighbours must live with. Their need for an effective security shield between themselves and their unpredictable large neighbour is self-evident.
Here’s more compelling evidence from today’s news (though not reported on RT) of why Russia’s neighbours need the security of NATO. News has just emerged of how last month Russian historian Mikhail Suprun, who was investigating the fate of Germans imprisoned in the Soviet Union during WW2 was arrested in the latest apparent clampdown on historical research into the Stalin era by Russian authorities.
The arrest has provoked outrage amongst historians in Russia, Germany and Europe generally, and is seen as part of the KGB/FSB-controlled Russian government’s program to rehabilitate Stalin, to control history of WW2, and to hide the historical crimes of the organisation they serve from Russian people and from the world.
Russia has always reacted with fury against nations or organisations or individuals who dare to tell history as it is. The Baltic countries, Poland, the EU and its own researchers and internal organisations such as Memorial have been the special targets of Russian anger. Meanwhile, access to archive material of the 1930s, 40s and 50s continues to be universally restricted.
A country with such a destructive past as Russia and that continues in such deep denial about that past, remains a very real threat to its neighbours and to the wider world community. Just think of the ongoing danger Germany would be perceived to pose if it clung to the same deep denial of its criminal Nazi past as Russia does to its criminal Soviet past.
your posts @ 15 October, 2009 are great. I wouldn't say it better. If you take into account the Pope's "holly" crusades, your 500+ years become about 1000 years. The "international community" is NOT just some arrogant people, it is a gang of nazi looters, cold blood killers and puppets of Americans and Zionists. They admit in written text (Georgia Guidestones) that they plan to exterminate the 90% of Earth's population...
To Bogdanov:
Most of Ukrainians are proletariats as well as the others. That's why the NWO have awakened nationalism in the worst form of fascism and nazism in Ukraine so that they are sure about two things:
a. Ukrainian people will never realise their plight and who 's responsible, so that they just talk about "bad Russians" and their exploitation will continue forever.
b. Ukraine will never be a friend of Russia and it will continue as a colony of USA forever.
But "forever" is a ... very long time and nothing lasts forever. Now with the crisis about, the American Dream turned to a ... nightmare. What happens next is unpredictable. As a rule, Russians are crazy and Ukrainians are more crazy...
To Sevodnya_Net:
Imperialism is common to every large country. Whenever expansion stops, a decay begins. However, the West overdo it with imperialism for about 1000 years...
Sevodnya_net: In case my posts seem incomprehensible to you, just ignore them. I wouldn't spend any time myself on something that makes absolutely no sense at all. But to address the issue of Russian versus Western imperialism, the below questions may prove helpful:
1) Which imperialism has a 500+ year legacy of unbridled looting, war, genocide, and environmental destruction?
2) Which two states are by far the most hated in the world today? Clue: According to their own rendition of world affairs, they have to "fight terrorism" all the time.
>> What would the appropriate circumstances be for a dissolution of the philanthropic society called NATO? >>
M6 answered:
>> Once Russia has genuinely changed in these respects and in its ongoing interference in its neighbors' affairs, surrounding countries will no longer feel apprehensive about it, and NATO’s function as an insurance against possible future Russian aggression will no longer be relevant. >>
So the demise of the WP and the USSR proper wasn't enough then. Putin -- intelligent and morally dignified as he is -- drew the dead right conclusion that "The International Community" is a group of arrogant people and took action accordingly. Hence, "The Russian Threat" persists, right?
But the real entertainment comes here:
>> At that time, NATO can fully transform itself into something new, in full partnership with Russia, as a defensive organization against common threats to both Russia and the West. NATO is trying to edge towards that re-alignment already, but Russia’s behavior makes it difficult. >>
Sorry, M6 -- you're not right. Completely. Remember the below exercise?
>> Please also address the corollary question whether these conditions are even compatible with humanity's continued existence on this planet. >>
Even though you left it out, the correct answer -- NO -- is plain for all but yourself to see. In short: Having obliterated Russia and its people, NATO -- possibly under another name, mind you -- can fight the remaining "common threats"; a euphemism for the world's immiserated global majority. Got you, M6.
Lastly: "Monarchist" = "Prone to grovelling before power".
sevodnya_net. The stunt of Komsomolskaya Pravda which you mentioned about is not something unknown in Russia. I mean, it was not created artificially in the newspaper for the sake of Kremlin imperial ambitions. It is just reflection of the reality. Demographically, Ukraine is constructed from three pretty much incompatible pieces: Eastern (Russian majority, Proletariat :-)), Western (currently ruling Ukrainian minority, Bourgeoisie :-)), Crimea (Tatar's land, probably Proletariat as well :-)). They don't like each other. They do not even suppose to be together. And they were not previously. The current map of Ukraine was created totally artificially during Soviet time. Based purely on the administrative reasoning and with the assumption that the Soviet Union will exist forever. And according to this map, a big chunk of Russian population in one day found themselves being "converted" to Ukrainians. So, even though I am totally against redrawing the maps and changing country borders (actually, I am against any borders!), in this specific case and in its current form Ukraine doesn't have much chances to survive on its own (without the West periodically pumping money and politically supporting ruling cast). At least, there will be no peace in the Ukrainian land. Even, without slightest Russia's involvement. I think, the best solution for the Ukraine (you may interpret it as my Russian imperial ambitions :-) would be to put things where they belong -- Eastern Ukraine and Crimea should be returned back to Russia (another option -- Crimea becomes an independent country) and the Western Ukraine becomes either a separate country or a part of Poland.
To get back to the subject. A map was recently published in a certain newspaper which portrayed the political boundaries of the state of Ukraine in 2015 as contracted around a small region around Lvov, Ukrainian speaking heartland. Where did this map see the light of day? It was published in that bizarre journalistic anachronism, Komsomolskaya Pravda. Now I don't believe for one moment that Russia is planning to invade Ukraine (Putin may be bad but I don't believe he is mad). However, it is all very well for me to sit here in Britain and say that. The fact that Russia is even making such provocative predictions about one of its erstwhile colonies, is worrying enough - and says a lot. But with stunts like that NATO doesn't need its own propaganda. This is one reason why I asked Nussiminen if he would care to comment on the differences between "Western" and "Russian" imperialism.
In his post of 10 October Nussiminen asks in what circumstances would it be appropriate for NATO to be disbanded.
In the eyes of its East and Central European members and aspiring members, NATO is a guarantee of safety against the continuing imperial twitches of a Russia that has not repudiated its Soviet-era aggression, has not cleansed itself of its Soviet-era crimes against humanity, has not reconciled with all its neighbors, and continues to embrace some of the most offensive aspects of Stalinist lies. Once Russia has genuinely changed in these respects and in its ongoing interference in its neighbors' affairs, surrounding countries will no longer feel apprehensive about it, and NATO’s function as an insurance against possible future Russian aggression will no longer be relevant.
At that time, NATO can fully transform itself into something new, in full partnership with Russia, as a defensive organization against common threats to both Russia and the West. NATO is trying to edge towards that re-alignment already, but Russia’s behavior makes it difficult.
Marxism-Leninism is about as scientific as the Flat Earth Society. Marxism-Leninism produced economic and social disaster and suffering on a mammoth scale wherever it was applied – China is no exception, either. Social injustice, state violence and corruption are rife, but the economy is not a total disaster because Marxist principles have been largely abandoned. Furthermore, Marx himself was a fake. He wrote much about the workers, but there is record of him only once ever darkening the door of any factory anywhere, and looking inside. He was nothing other than a book-bound theorist, writing about things of which he had no practical experience. Analysis of Marx’s writings is devastating to his credibility. His has been shown to have, time and again, not only quoted sources out of context, but deliberately misquoting sources, and intentionally making them out to say in some cases the very opposite of what their original authors were actually saying. No wonder Marxism was the premier failure of the 20th Century.
I don’t know where Nussiminen lives, but I live in the middle of capitalism, and have done for most of my life. I work in one of the financial pillars of the capitalist society, and I am more than very well aware of its flaws, injustices and its many problems, and I certainly don’t worship capitalism, much less a monarchy (where does Nussiminen get that strange idea from?). It’s just that based on my knowledge of Marxist societies, and based on first-hand experience of visiting the disaster that was Marxist-ruled East Germany and the disaster that Marxism left behind in Estonia immediately after its liberation, I know that Marxism is so incredibly more hopeless and toxic than capitalism that there is hardly a comparison.
Others know this too, and Marxist jargon is viewed in much of the wider world as little better that clap-trap.
I guess the main problem Marzipan6 and Sevodnya_net are having with salient features of capitalist society being denoted by scientific terminology is three-fold. And, moreover, it's something Marzipan6 and Sevodnya_net have 100% in common with the vast majority of the West's bourgeoisified population as a whole. Here are the relevant issues:
1) As you pointed out "Imperialism", "Bourgeoisie" and a host of other words emerged -- and remain -- as scientific concepts. But they were to become not only adopted but also scientifically further elaborated by, most notably, Marx and Lenin. No heroes of the bourgeoisie, for sure.
2) As a result, Marzipan6 and Sevodnya_net as faithful capitalist media consumers won't ever get used to any scientific discourse or debate as far as capitalist society is concerned.
3) Within the confines of this backward -- essentially monarchist -- mindset, any outfits created for the preservation of capitalist power, be it NATO, the IMF, or the CIA, will easily become revered as institutions of sheer virtuousness.
One gets the full picture of this state of mind as soon as one also takes into account the way the bourgeoisie's enemies are being perceived.
Nussiminen. I love your posts! By the way, I have no idea why Marzipan6 and sevodnya_net have problems with the terms you are using (assuming that both of them educated enough to know the meaning or the words "imperialism" and "bourgeoisie"). It seems to me that you are using them very properly in the context you provide them in. May be M6 and SN scared by those words because Marxists chose to use them? But, those words were not originated in Marxism. More than that -- as far as I know, Marxists didn't even change their meanings.
As to NATO... Surely, it makes world more secure. Meaning, it provides better security for the Bourgeoisie of the Western Imperialism in their exploitation of the 3rd world countries and the Western Proletariat.
Post's statistics: The word "imperialism" was used 2 times, "bourgeoisie" -- 2 times, "proletariat" -- 1 time. :-)
Ergatis postulated that "It is the same for EVERY large country that wants to remain large... As a rule, if it stops expanding it will start shrinking..." Er, that's an interesting idea which demands some explanation, I think :-)
As for Nussiminen, I took your advice and tried substituting the terms "Democacy" and "International Community" for "Bourgeoisie" and "Iimperialism" (or it may have been the other way round) and I found that your post made even less sense than before :-)
20 November, 2009, 20:09
NATO occupied nations count as some of the most corrupt nations on earth where mafias are given free hand to traffic in human slaves, drugs and arms by western patrons in exchange for political control.
19 October, 2009, 19:23
Bogdanov, with reference to "proletariat" and "bourgeois" and your use of these words in your post, you are missing the point of my criticism, which was not about the merits or otherwise of these terms, but the idea that somehow Ukraine easily divides into these. Second-guessing a little what you DO mean, I can assure you it does not.
On re-reading my own post I realise that I probably didn't make that clear.
19 October, 2009, 07:55
To Bogdanov: indeed, words are just words. But the associations which some words have are so painful or so obscene because of what those who made those words their jargon did in the name of those words and in the name of the ideology into which those words were conscripted, that the words themselves have become revolting by association.
This is easy enough to understand in regard to Nazi jargon. If they want to be taken seriously, Russians and Russia apologists need to understand the equivalent in regard to Soviet jargon.
18 October, 2009, 13:57
sevodnya_net. Regarding my use of the "profanity" words ("proletariat", "bourgeoisie", and so on) -- I do it intentionally to stir some emotions among my opponents. Because, it is funny for me to watch how so many people in the West afraid of this "Marxist jargon". And react accordingly. These are just words! With their unique meaning. They do not bite! Why they are so scary? This is apart, of course, from the fact that, in some cases, they better than any other words may describe the ideas I am trying to present. I could say "the social group which owns the means of production, the upper class (not to be confused with aristocrats) in the capitalist society" or simply say "bourgeoisie". What is wrong with that? I didn't kill anyone by doing so. I am not trying to offend anyone. :-) :-)
18 October, 2009, 02:44
Nussiminen finds amusement in allegations that he/she says I’ve made about “Russia’s alleged shortcomings” in preceding posts. Nussiminen is very easy to amuse, since there are no such allegations. An allegation is an assertion made without proof. Yet in my posts I named the organisation that conducted the poll about Russians’ attitudes, quoted precise figures from the poll, named the Russian historian who was arrested for investigating Stalinist crimes, and referred to major news events regarding Russia’s outbursts against those who do not yield to its spin on history whose veracity no one, nowhere, disputes.
None of these are allegations; they are merely reports or what has, in fact, happened. So where are the allegations, Nussiminen?
Perhaps Nussiminen’s quick sense of amusement is explained by the fact that as a Swede, he/she has the privilege of living in a country that has not been invaded and brutally occupied by anyone in living memory. Russia’s neighbours, who have had their freedom extinguished, their countries shattered, their loved ones killed or transported in cattle wagons to Siberian slavery or to Nazi concentration camps (sometimes different members of the same family being sent to each), and who have seen everything they have valued and worked for either stolen or destroyed in tandem by Nazi Germans and by Soviet Russians do not have such a ready sense of humour any more. Indeed Russians themselves would be quite unamused if their country’s attitude to the Soviet Union, Stalin and Communism were replicated by Germans’ attitude towards the Third Reich, Hitler and Nazism. There’d be very little laughter to be heard in such an event – except, of course, from Nussiminen, safely tucked away in Sweden who may, for all I know, think that a hypothetical German rehabilitation of Hitler and Nazism would be the funniest thing he’d ever heard – almost as funny as a Russian rehabilitation of Stalin.
17 October, 2009, 21:20
Bogdanov i don't know what Ukraine you think you are writing about in your post, but it isn't the one I know. It's also disappointing (because I'm assuming you're the G. Bogdanov who used to say some interesting things on PL's blog) to hear you spouting glib nonsense about the "proletariat" and "bourgeois" sections of the country(!) Is this some sort of disease that's spreading at the moment - "jargon flu" perhaps. I'm sure you are more intelligent than that! Or the irony of suggesting Crimea should "return" to Russia (who nicked it from the Crimean Tartars of course, but lets not go down that road). I'd also like to know when you think Eastern Ukraine was part of Russia, btw - how far back to we have to go for that - it is interesting that one doesn't see too many Russian flags at Shakhtar Donetsk or Zorya Luhansk games - maybe that fact isn't relevant - and maybe it is)
In short your comments merely underline my point, to be frank.
(Why is pro-Kremlin propaganda always so laughably naff. For heaven's sake, at least be subtle about it once in a while :-) )
17 October, 2009, 16:12
It's not without a sense of refined amusement that one notes M6' obsession with Russia's alleged shortcomings. The apologists of the Zionist statelet come to mind immediately with their similar eulogising of the IDF and its commitment to land-grabbing and indiscriminate killing, NATO-style. And -- of course -- the Zionist statelet constitutes a most shining, beautiful model of democracy; if only its less civilized neighbours could finally get it.
M6 just can't admit the fact that the peoples of the former Warsaw Pact countries have come to realize hands-on what "Western Democracy" actually entails. As I'm writing these very lines, I note with pleasure how the Latvians have begun to express outright hatred and contempt of their Western puppet government and its Swedish financial overlords imposing -- partly so on behalf of the European Union -- misery and austerity on the hapless citizenry. Being a Swede myself, it hasn't been lost on me what repercussions would propagate across the Baltic, should Latvia either file for bankruptcy or heavily devalue its currency. That would very significantly hurt my dear fellow petty-bourgeois compatriots economically, and they deserve it too!
I conclude this post by saying loud and clear that Putin is doing a GREAT job as a statesman. No wonder imperialism (here we go again :-) ) and its media outlets and, by extension, the faithful believers are angry at him.
16 October, 2009, 22:48
And yet more reason for Russia’s neighbours to be concerned for their security. A poll just released by the Levada-Centre showed that only 57% of those questioned considered that Russia needed democracy - the lowest number since 2006. 26% believed that democratic governing was not suitable for Russia, and nearly 95% of respondents said they had little or no influence on what was happening in the country.
A country with such skepticism about democracy and democratic institutions and such overwhelming passivity towards those who govern it is a prime target for falling into government-dictated political extremism, all the more so given that political extremism is its historical legacy. The widespread reports of cheating in the current local elections do little to allay such concerns. These are realities that Russia’s neighbours must live with. Their need for an effective security shield between themselves and their unpredictable large neighbour is self-evident.
16 October, 2009, 22:13
Here’s more compelling evidence from today’s news (though not reported on RT) of why Russia’s neighbours need the security of NATO. News has just emerged of how last month Russian historian Mikhail Suprun, who was investigating the fate of Germans imprisoned in the Soviet Union during WW2 was arrested in the latest apparent clampdown on historical research into the Stalin era by Russian authorities.
The arrest has provoked outrage amongst historians in Russia, Germany and Europe generally, and is seen as part of the KGB/FSB-controlled Russian government’s program to rehabilitate Stalin, to control history of WW2, and to hide the historical crimes of the organisation they serve from Russian people and from the world.
Russia has always reacted with fury against nations or organisations or individuals who dare to tell history as it is. The Baltic countries, Poland, the EU and its own researchers and internal organisations such as Memorial have been the special targets of Russian anger. Meanwhile, access to archive material of the 1930s, 40s and 50s continues to be universally restricted.
A country with such a destructive past as Russia and that continues in such deep denial about that past, remains a very real threat to its neighbours and to the wider world community. Just think of the ongoing danger Germany would be perceived to pose if it clung to the same deep denial of its criminal Nazi past as Russia does to its criminal Soviet past.
16 October, 2009, 20:33
To Nussiminen:
your posts @ 15 October, 2009 are great. I wouldn't say it better. If you take into account the Pope's "holly" crusades, your 500+ years become about 1000 years. The "international community" is NOT just some arrogant people, it is a gang of nazi looters, cold blood killers and puppets of Americans and Zionists. They admit in written text (Georgia Guidestones) that they plan to exterminate the 90% of Earth's population...
To Bogdanov:
Most of Ukrainians are proletariats as well as the others. That's why the NWO have awakened nationalism in the worst form of fascism and nazism in Ukraine so that they are sure about two things:
a. Ukrainian people will never realise their plight and who 's responsible, so that they just talk about "bad Russians" and their exploitation will continue forever.
b. Ukraine will never be a friend of Russia and it will continue as a colony of USA forever.
But "forever" is a ... very long time and nothing lasts forever. Now with the crisis about, the American Dream turned to a ... nightmare. What happens next is unpredictable. As a rule, Russians are crazy and Ukrainians are more crazy...
To Sevodnya_Net:
Imperialism is common to every large country. Whenever expansion stops, a decay begins. However, the West overdo it with imperialism for about 1000 years...
15 October, 2009, 20:59
Sevodnya_net: In case my posts seem incomprehensible to you, just ignore them. I wouldn't spend any time myself on something that makes absolutely no sense at all. But to address the issue of Russian versus Western imperialism, the below questions may prove helpful:
1) Which imperialism has a 500+ year legacy of unbridled looting, war, genocide, and environmental destruction?
2) Which two states are by far the most hated in the world today? Clue: According to their own rendition of world affairs, they have to "fight terrorism" all the time.
15 October, 2009, 20:24
M6 confirms my assumptions to the hilt. I asked:
>> What would the appropriate circumstances be for a
dissolution of the philanthropic society called NATO? >>
M6 answered:
>> Once Russia has genuinely changed in these respects and
in its ongoing interference in its neighbors' affairs,
surrounding countries will no longer feel apprehensive
about it, and NATO’s function as an insurance against
possible future Russian aggression will no longer be
relevant. >>
So the demise of the WP and the USSR proper wasn't enough then. Putin -- intelligent and morally dignified as he is -- drew the dead right conclusion that "The International Community" is a group of arrogant people and took action accordingly. Hence, "The Russian Threat" persists, right?
But the real entertainment comes here:
>> At that time, NATO can fully transform itself into
something new, in full partnership with Russia, as
a defensive organization against common threats to
both Russia and the West. NATO is trying to edge
towards that re-alignment already, but Russia’s
behavior makes it difficult. >>
Sorry, M6 -- you're not right. Completely. Remember the below exercise?
>> Please also address the corollary question whether
these conditions are even compatible with humanity's
continued existence on this planet. >>
Even though you left it out, the correct answer -- NO -- is plain for all but yourself to see. In short: Having obliterated Russia and its people, NATO -- possibly under another name, mind you -- can fight the remaining "common threats"; a euphemism for the world's immiserated global majority. Got you, M6.
Lastly: "Monarchist" = "Prone to grovelling before power".
15 October, 2009, 15:23
sevodnya_net. The stunt of Komsomolskaya Pravda which you mentioned about is not something unknown in Russia. I mean, it was not created artificially in the newspaper for the sake of Kremlin imperial ambitions. It is just reflection of the reality. Demographically, Ukraine is constructed from three pretty much incompatible pieces: Eastern (Russian majority, Proletariat :-)), Western (currently ruling Ukrainian minority, Bourgeoisie :-)), Crimea (Tatar's land, probably Proletariat as well :-)). They don't like each other. They do not even suppose to be together. And they were not previously. The current map of Ukraine was created totally artificially during Soviet time. Based purely on the administrative reasoning and with the assumption that the Soviet Union will exist forever. And according to this map, a big chunk of Russian population in one day found themselves being "converted" to Ukrainians. So, even though I am totally against redrawing the maps and changing country borders (actually, I am against any borders!), in this specific case and in its current form Ukraine doesn't have much chances to survive on its own (without the West periodically pumping money and politically supporting ruling cast). At least, there will be no peace in the Ukrainian land. Even, without slightest Russia's involvement. I think, the best solution for the Ukraine (you may interpret it as my Russian imperial ambitions :-) would be to put things where they belong -- Eastern Ukraine and Crimea should be returned back to Russia (another option -- Crimea becomes an independent country) and the Western Ukraine becomes either a separate country or a part of Poland.
14 October, 2009, 18:03
To get back to the subject.
A map was recently published in a certain newspaper which portrayed the political boundaries of the state of Ukraine in 2015 as contracted around a small region around Lvov, Ukrainian speaking heartland.
Where did this map see the light of day? It was published in that bizarre journalistic anachronism, Komsomolskaya Pravda. Now I don't believe for one moment that Russia is planning to invade Ukraine (Putin may be bad but I don't believe he is mad). However, it is all very well for me to sit here in Britain and say that. The fact that Russia is even making such provocative predictions about one of its erstwhile colonies, is worrying enough - and says a lot.
But with stunts like that NATO doesn't need its own propaganda.
This is one reason why I asked Nussiminen if he would care to comment on the differences between "Western" and "Russian" imperialism.
14 October, 2009, 17:55
Nussiminen, the problem I have with your posts is simply that I haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about :-)
14 October, 2009, 10:36
In his post of 10 October Nussiminen asks in what circumstances would it be appropriate for NATO to be disbanded.
In the eyes of its East and Central European members and aspiring members, NATO is a guarantee of safety against the continuing imperial twitches of a Russia that has not repudiated its Soviet-era aggression, has not cleansed itself of its Soviet-era crimes against humanity, has not reconciled with all its neighbors, and continues to embrace some of the most offensive aspects of Stalinist lies. Once Russia has genuinely changed in these respects and in its ongoing interference in its neighbors' affairs, surrounding countries will no longer feel apprehensive about it, and NATO’s function as an insurance against possible future Russian aggression will no longer be relevant.
At that time, NATO can fully transform itself into something new, in full partnership with Russia, as a defensive organization against common threats to both Russia and the West. NATO is trying to edge towards that re-alignment already, but Russia’s behavior makes it difficult.
14 October, 2009, 10:20
Regarding Nussiminen’s post of 13 October:
Marxism-Leninism is about as scientific as the Flat Earth Society. Marxism-Leninism produced economic and social disaster and suffering on a mammoth scale wherever it was applied – China is no exception, either. Social injustice, state violence and corruption are rife, but the economy is not a total disaster because Marxist principles have been largely abandoned. Furthermore, Marx himself was a fake. He wrote much about the workers, but there is record of him only once ever darkening the door of any factory anywhere, and looking inside. He was nothing other than a book-bound theorist, writing about things of which he had no practical experience. Analysis of Marx’s writings is devastating to his credibility. His has been shown to have, time and again, not only quoted sources out of context, but deliberately misquoting sources, and intentionally making them out to say in some cases the very opposite of what their original authors were actually saying. No wonder Marxism was the premier failure of the 20th Century.
I don’t know where Nussiminen lives, but I live in the middle of capitalism, and have done for most of my life. I work in one of the financial pillars of the capitalist society, and I am more than very well aware of its flaws, injustices and its many problems, and I certainly don’t worship capitalism, much less a monarchy (where does Nussiminen get that strange idea from?). It’s just that based on my knowledge of Marxist societies, and based on first-hand experience of visiting the disaster that was Marxist-ruled East Germany and the disaster that Marxism left behind in Estonia immediately after its liberation, I know that Marxism is so incredibly more hopeless and toxic than capitalism that there is hardly a comparison.
Others know this too, and Marxist jargon is viewed in much of the wider world as little better that clap-trap.
13 October, 2009, 17:59
I guess the main problem Marzipan6 and Sevodnya_net are having with salient features of capitalist society being denoted by scientific terminology is three-fold. And, moreover, it's something Marzipan6 and Sevodnya_net have 100% in common with the vast majority of the West's bourgeoisified population as a whole. Here are the relevant issues:
1) As you pointed out "Imperialism", "Bourgeoisie" and a host of other words emerged -- and remain -- as scientific concepts. But they were to become not only adopted but also scientifically further elaborated by, most notably, Marx and Lenin. No heroes of the bourgeoisie, for sure.
2) As a result, Marzipan6 and Sevodnya_net as faithful capitalist media consumers won't ever get used to any scientific discourse or debate as far as capitalist society is concerned.
3) Within the confines of this backward -- essentially monarchist -- mindset, any outfits created for the preservation of capitalist power, be it NATO, the IMF, or the CIA, will easily become revered as institutions of sheer virtuousness.
One gets the full picture of this state of mind as soon as one also takes into account the way the bourgeoisie's enemies are being perceived.
12 October, 2009, 20:14
Nussiminen. I love your posts!
By the way, I have no idea why Marzipan6 and sevodnya_net have problems with the terms you are using (assuming that both of them educated enough to know the meaning or the words "imperialism" and "bourgeoisie"). It seems to me that you are using them very properly in the context you provide them in. May be M6 and SN scared by those words because Marxists chose to use them? But, those words were not originated in Marxism. More than that -- as far as I know, Marxists didn't even change their meanings.
As to NATO... Surely, it makes world more secure. Meaning, it provides better security for the Bourgeoisie of the Western Imperialism in their exploitation of the 3rd world countries and the Western Proletariat.
Post's statistics:
The word "imperialism" was used 2 times, "bourgeoisie" -- 2 times, "proletariat" -- 1 time. :-)
12 October, 2009, 18:45
Ergatis postulated that
"It is the same for EVERY large country that wants to remain large... As a rule, if it stops expanding it will start shrinking..."
Er, that's an interesting idea which demands some explanation, I think :-)
As for Nussiminen, I took your advice and tried substituting the terms "Democacy" and "International Community" for "Bourgeoisie" and "Iimperialism" (or it may have been the other way round) and I found that your post made even less sense than before :-)
Post comment