President Volodymyr Zelenskyy believes that Ukraine and its allies are very close to the moment when Russia can be forced to end or at least halt the war, but this would require the United States to impose tough sanctions on Russia.
Snokhachestvo and the cultural approaches similar to it are prevalent in those people who are Russia’s elite now, but generally seem very rare as far as I can see.
And that stuff about Europe and homosexuality seems for me a kind of “the hungry doesn’t understand the full”, more of jokes and separation than of really thinking that’s true. It’s just that there are people outside the prison and inside it, and those inside can’t afford to behave freely. It’s almost envy, except without even negative feelings. More like alienation - “they live so much easier that for them homosexuality is a real concern”.
Also there’s the criminal culture homosexuality, as a marker of status in the criminal hierarchy, which is demonstrably non-consensual, and one can see a psychological parallel between living freely in general inside a prison and being gay in a place where people get raped. A nonsensically careless behavior, something like that. And being nonsensically careless is weak.
The Tsar and the viceroys, plundering the country and living the good life.
They followed their own laws. If a law was too cumbersome to make, they didn’t. It was an absolute monarchy, but if you compare today’s Russia’s judicial system to the imperial one - the latter seems very humane. By stats, by procedures, by stories of people who witnessed it.
and there’s no shortage of either because, according to Russian culture throughout the ages, good fathers make sure that their sons are strong men by raping the son’s wife
The kind of peasant communes and huge families where such things happened wasn’t actually natural. It was becoming the more common, the more people were becoming personal serfs. That is, there was that transition during Catherine where state serfs (which in practice meant almost a free man) were given to nobles en masse, she considered that a better arrangement. Sort of a privatization.
In the position of son, you’re just expected to take it, otherwise you’re weak, and the “father” will make sure that’s an even worse fate.
Nah, not that. If we make this comparison, for them it’s the father’s right, and you are subordinate. It’s not about fear of punishment, it’s about enduring for endurance’s sake. Almost morality.
The Siloviki do indeed want to free Ukrainians – so they bomb cities.
No, they don’t. They want to kill and loot and subjugate.
People who you are maybe looking for here are not those who try to somehow explain the state’s justifications for this war. It’s those who think that this has to be finished anyway regardless of whether the war should have been started.
Free them from their “European gayness”, that is. Such is the perversity of the Russian psyche.
I haven’t met such real people. OK, to be honest, probably I didn’t realize but I have.
The point is - almost nobody really thinks that about gayness and what not, but everybody thinks it’s smarter to play along, that’s what I meant by the amorphousness of mind of Russians.
Or, differently put: You sure you’re looking at the water you’re swimming in? I’m not Russian, I only lived there, and I was able to see the water. Swimming feels quite a bit different in Russia than it does virtually everywhere else.
It does, but it’s more of a culture of virtuous suffering, like doing your work the hard way instead of loosening up a bit and doing it better, but with less “honest labor” or something. And lies. The virtuous suffering thing is often stupid, but sometimes a strength. The lies however are usually stupid, yet Russians somehow always start with lies and then maybe work it up to saying the truth.
And that stuff about Europe and homosexuality seems for me a kind of “the hungry doesn’t understand the full”, more of jokes and separation than of really thinking that’s true.
I’m talking about an underlying psychosexual current. Of course people don’t believe in the literal truth of these kinds of things, it’d be like believing that dreams are literally true. But there’s still a reason why you’re having these particular kinds of dreams, and not different ones.
They followed their own laws. If a law was too cumbersome to make, they didn’t. It was an absolute monarchy, but if you compare today’s Russia’s judicial system to the imperial one - the latter seems very humane.
Do you think it’s even constitutional for Putin to deputise people with presidential powers? That any court would challenge him? Law in Russia was, and is, subordinate to the powers that be.
Nah, not that. If we make this comparison, for them it’s the father’s right, and you are subordinate. It’s not about fear of punishment, it’s about enduring for endurance’s sake. Almost morality.
That’s the attitude of those considered strong, yes. You either become them or you break and end up with a tattoo saying “slave” on your forehead or something.
People who you are maybe looking for here are not those who try to somehow explain the state’s justifications for this war.
I’m not talking about the state’s justification, but about the justification of the cultural psyche. Russia, as a psyche, doesn’t want to see Ukrainians with forehead tattoos, it wants Ukraine to be part of it. Part of the same ethos, with maybe slightly different dances, clothing, and they can continue pronouncing things with h instead of g as long as they admit they’re Russians, that they accept, as you put it above, the father’s authority. And the only way that psyche knows how to convince the son of the father’s authority is by cruelty.
The virtuous suffering thing is often stupid, but sometimes a strength.
It’s not. It destroys social cohesion, it breeds neurosis. With true courage, it doesn’t matter whether you live or die for the cause, as long as the cause is virtuous. This Russian strength, though, it only can ever make sense if you’re dying for it, living for it indeed is stupid, at the same time its strength in dying for it is not stronger than that of true courage. It’s precisely why Russians don’t know where the fuck that cart is racing. But go, it must. Why. Why not make camp and have a party.
The reason is simple: Without the people neurotic, distrustful, and accustomed to bowing to authority, the central authority would fall, because people would actually be able to organise bottom-up. The central authority knows that, and thus does nothing to combat it, the people, well, it’s Russia’s only way to greatness, isn’t it? Any alternatives?
Which brings me to Navalny’s balls of steel, returning to Russia: Yes, that’s impressive. That’s strong, “virtuous suffering”. But it’s also accepting the status quo. You can’t be a revolutionary against a system by holding onto the ethos that fuels it.
But there’s still a reason why you’re having these particular kinds of dreams, and not different ones.
I dunno, if we are going to that level, then I see plenty people not from Russia in the interwebs having this. In case of MENA people - much stronger.
It’s a problem, but not such a deep one. Even among ex-military people from older generation.
Do you think it’s even constitutional for Putin to deputise people with presidential powers? That any court would challenge him? Law in Russia was, and is, subordinate to the powers that be.
No, Putin has been logically fully described in the “Dolls” show. He just wants to torture and kill people better than him, and the law he’s interested in only as long as he can call whoever he wants destroyed “state criminals”.
I’m saying that the Russian empire was different, and even the USSR was different.
That’s the attitude of those considered strong, yes. You either become them or you break and end up with a tattoo saying “slave” on your forehead or something.
Yup, I’m saying it’s not the only idea of morality in the whole of Russian society and not even the dominant one.
It definitely is the one emanating from the state.
Part of the same ethos, with maybe slightly different dances, clothing, and they can continue pronouncing things with h instead of g as long as they admit they’re Russians, that they accept, as you put it above, the father’s authority
In this case no, it’s not the father. It’s the same master. Slaves replace their own dignity with their master’s importance.
So those really thinking Ukraine shouldn’t be independent are the people terribly irritated by Ukrainians not willing to have a master. If Ukrainians wanted to have a master, that master would have a lower status than their master, in their opinion, so it would all be fine - Ukraine is a separate country, but Ukrainians are in the same general status. It’s envy - why can they have this and we can’t. A typical village thing by the way.
Like that anecdote about hell and a Jewish cauldron, guarded by three imps to throw those escaping back in and prevent them from helping others, a Ukrainian cauldron guarded by one imp to just throw those escaping back in, and a Russian cauldron unguarded.
It’s not. It destroys social cohesion, it breeds neurosis.
Yep, in this regard we agree. It also breeds idiocy and cowardice with all participants certain they are being wise and brave and sacrificing.
The reason is simple: Without the people neurotic, distrustful, and accustomed to bowing to authority, the central authority would fall, because people would actually be able to organise bottom-up. The central authority knows that, and thus does nothing to combat it, the people, well, it’s Russia’s only way to greatness, isn’t it? Any alternatives?
That’s where you are wrong.
As you might have guessed, one can’t punish FSB for entrapment, they are the ones doing the punishing. So that’s what they were doing since Soviet times. Everyone trying to “organize bottom-up” will just be detected by FSB before being visible for anyone else.
They are proactive. They have their agents of various kinds in youth groups, in hobby groups, everywhere. They even provoke such “organizing”.
They literally lure teens into “political” groups. Just for everyone with potential to be under control.
It would be problematic, say, in the US, if FBI tried to put someone in jail for being a member of a group the leader and half other members of which are state agents, and which approached that someone first. In Russia it’s not. They are always fishing for people willing to do something.
I’ve literally heard of more cases where a (say, anarchist) group had such agents, but it all became known because of some other crime (a murder in that case), than in “extremist” sense. Meaning this happens very silently.
So, about distrust. It’s well-substantiated. Russians can’t organize in Russia and can’t, frankly, trust a Russian in such things.
Similar to Armenians TBH, it sometimes seems there are more agents of various intelligence services and oligarchs in Armenia and diaspora than people really interested in changing something.
Which brings me to Navalny’s balls of steel, returning to Russia: Yes, that’s impressive. That’s strong, “virtuous suffering”. But it’s also accepting the status quo. You can’t be a revolutionary against a system by holding onto the ethos that fuels it.
Absolutely! That’s exactly what his action communicated.
I think he was trying to send a signal to that layer of deeply skeptical people that he’s one of them and not of those like Sobchak and Nemtsov and similar. And he was successful, he’s seen very differently from them.
Except see my previous part about special services’ work. The real problem is not in nobody willing to organize. Without it, whether Navalny would do his sacrifice or not, Russia’s government would have changed around 2012.
I’m saying that the Russian empire was different, and even the USSR was different.
Different, yes of course, what I’m trying to get at here is that there’s still consistencies. The three systems are different coats of paint on the same dysfunction. There’s also been some progress, I already mentioned the nuclear family, but the overall problem won’t be fixed until the dysfunction is understood, organically, by society.
That’s where you are wrong.
As you might have guessed, one can’t punish FSB for entrapment, they are the ones doing the punishing.
I don’t think we actually disagree: The forces that I described breed the type of people the FSB needs to do its enforcement. Cynical, ruthless, eager to suppress their trauma by inflicting it on others. In Tsarist times there was more, religion and all that, a very old notion of what God’s plan for society is, roles for everyone, in the USSR at least a number of them were actually ideologically convinced, by now, power is the only ideology. They’re mighty so they must be right, don’t they?
Except see my previous part about special services’ work. The real problem is not in nobody willing to organize.
Russia had a revolution before, it can have one again. Bluntly put: The Kremlin guards are less well armed than Ukraine. Revolutions aren’t organised, they happen once the collective psyche reaches a breaking point. No words, just people’s subconsciousness noticing the mood of the people around them, assessing the chances: “Am I going to be alone, or are we going to march together?” and suddenly decades happen in weeks.
What would be important is having a couple of ideas on what will come after that. How to not lose the moment, again. Who would be the current-day Bolsheviks, opposed to the deposed-of system but also to the freedom of the people? How to convince Yuri Shevchuk to accept being crowned Tsar. I’m only half joking.
by now, power is the only ideology. They’re mighty so they must be right, don’t they?
It’s not about “right”. It’s that you can’t trust anyone, and if you make a mistake, your own input to any revolution doesn’t happen.
Russia had a revolution before, it can have one again. …
Collective psyche can be regulated. It will happen when people in Kremlin make a mistake.
Who would be the current-day Bolsheviks, opposed to the deposed-of system but also to the freedom of the people?
Yes, that is where I’ll add that making a transitional committee of Yashin, Navalnaya and others, augmented with the older wave like Kasparov and Portnikov, might not be a good idea. Only allowing ex-commies (ex-system in this case) to “turn democrat” and become the government like in 1991 can be worse.
I’d probably trust escapist communists like RSD and groups of edgy ancap children more.
Snokhachestvo and the cultural approaches similar to it are prevalent in those people who are Russia’s elite now, but generally seem very rare as far as I can see.
And that stuff about Europe and homosexuality seems for me a kind of “the hungry doesn’t understand the full”, more of jokes and separation than of really thinking that’s true. It’s just that there are people outside the prison and inside it, and those inside can’t afford to behave freely. It’s almost envy, except without even negative feelings. More like alienation - “they live so much easier that for them homosexuality is a real concern”.
Also there’s the criminal culture homosexuality, as a marker of status in the criminal hierarchy, which is demonstrably non-consensual, and one can see a psychological parallel between living freely in general inside a prison and being gay in a place where people get raped. A nonsensically careless behavior, something like that. And being nonsensically careless is weak.
They followed their own laws. If a law was too cumbersome to make, they didn’t. It was an absolute monarchy, but if you compare today’s Russia’s judicial system to the imperial one - the latter seems very humane. By stats, by procedures, by stories of people who witnessed it.
The kind of peasant communes and huge families where such things happened wasn’t actually natural. It was becoming the more common, the more people were becoming personal serfs. That is, there was that transition during Catherine where state serfs (which in practice meant almost a free man) were given to nobles en masse, she considered that a better arrangement. Sort of a privatization.
Nah, not that. If we make this comparison, for them it’s the father’s right, and you are subordinate. It’s not about fear of punishment, it’s about enduring for endurance’s sake. Almost morality.
No, they don’t. They want to kill and loot and subjugate.
People who you are maybe looking for here are not those who try to somehow explain the state’s justifications for this war. It’s those who think that this has to be finished anyway regardless of whether the war should have been started.
I haven’t met such real people. OK, to be honest, probably I didn’t realize but I have.
The point is - almost nobody really thinks that about gayness and what not, but everybody thinks it’s smarter to play along, that’s what I meant by the amorphousness of mind of Russians.
It does, but it’s more of a culture of virtuous suffering, like doing your work the hard way instead of loosening up a bit and doing it better, but with less “honest labor” or something. And lies. The virtuous suffering thing is often stupid, but sometimes a strength. The lies however are usually stupid, yet Russians somehow always start with lies and then maybe work it up to saying the truth.
I’m talking about an underlying psychosexual current. Of course people don’t believe in the literal truth of these kinds of things, it’d be like believing that dreams are literally true. But there’s still a reason why you’re having these particular kinds of dreams, and not different ones.
Do you think it’s even constitutional for Putin to deputise people with presidential powers? That any court would challenge him? Law in Russia was, and is, subordinate to the powers that be.
That’s the attitude of those considered strong, yes. You either become them or you break and end up with a tattoo saying “slave” on your forehead or something.
I’m not talking about the state’s justification, but about the justification of the cultural psyche. Russia, as a psyche, doesn’t want to see Ukrainians with forehead tattoos, it wants Ukraine to be part of it. Part of the same ethos, with maybe slightly different dances, clothing, and they can continue pronouncing things with h instead of g as long as they admit they’re Russians, that they accept, as you put it above, the father’s authority. And the only way that psyche knows how to convince the son of the father’s authority is by cruelty.
It’s not. It destroys social cohesion, it breeds neurosis. With true courage, it doesn’t matter whether you live or die for the cause, as long as the cause is virtuous. This Russian strength, though, it only can ever make sense if you’re dying for it, living for it indeed is stupid, at the same time its strength in dying for it is not stronger than that of true courage. It’s precisely why Russians don’t know where the fuck that cart is racing. But go, it must. Why. Why not make camp and have a party.
The reason is simple: Without the people neurotic, distrustful, and accustomed to bowing to authority, the central authority would fall, because people would actually be able to organise bottom-up. The central authority knows that, and thus does nothing to combat it, the people, well, it’s Russia’s only way to greatness, isn’t it? Any alternatives?
Which brings me to Navalny’s balls of steel, returning to Russia: Yes, that’s impressive. That’s strong, “virtuous suffering”. But it’s also accepting the status quo. You can’t be a revolutionary against a system by holding onto the ethos that fuels it.
I dunno, if we are going to that level, then I see plenty people not from Russia in the interwebs having this. In case of MENA people - much stronger.
It’s a problem, but not such a deep one. Even among ex-military people from older generation.
No, Putin has been logically fully described in the “Dolls” show. He just wants to torture and kill people better than him, and the law he’s interested in only as long as he can call whoever he wants destroyed “state criminals”.
I’m saying that the Russian empire was different, and even the USSR was different.
Yup, I’m saying it’s not the only idea of morality in the whole of Russian society and not even the dominant one.
It definitely is the one emanating from the state.
In this case no, it’s not the father. It’s the same master. Slaves replace their own dignity with their master’s importance.
So those really thinking Ukraine shouldn’t be independent are the people terribly irritated by Ukrainians not willing to have a master. If Ukrainians wanted to have a master, that master would have a lower status than their master, in their opinion, so it would all be fine - Ukraine is a separate country, but Ukrainians are in the same general status. It’s envy - why can they have this and we can’t. A typical village thing by the way.
Like that anecdote about hell and a Jewish cauldron, guarded by three imps to throw those escaping back in and prevent them from helping others, a Ukrainian cauldron guarded by one imp to just throw those escaping back in, and a Russian cauldron unguarded.
Yep, in this regard we agree. It also breeds idiocy and cowardice with all participants certain they are being wise and brave and sacrificing.
That’s where you are wrong.
As you might have guessed, one can’t punish FSB for entrapment, they are the ones doing the punishing. So that’s what they were doing since Soviet times. Everyone trying to “organize bottom-up” will just be detected by FSB before being visible for anyone else.
They are proactive. They have their agents of various kinds in youth groups, in hobby groups, everywhere. They even provoke such “organizing”.
They literally lure teens into “political” groups. Just for everyone with potential to be under control.
It would be problematic, say, in the US, if FBI tried to put someone in jail for being a member of a group the leader and half other members of which are state agents, and which approached that someone first. In Russia it’s not. They are always fishing for people willing to do something.
I’ve literally heard of more cases where a (say, anarchist) group had such agents, but it all became known because of some other crime (a murder in that case), than in “extremist” sense. Meaning this happens very silently.
So, about distrust. It’s well-substantiated. Russians can’t organize in Russia and can’t, frankly, trust a Russian in such things.
Similar to Armenians TBH, it sometimes seems there are more agents of various intelligence services and oligarchs in Armenia and diaspora than people really interested in changing something.
Absolutely! That’s exactly what his action communicated.
I think he was trying to send a signal to that layer of deeply skeptical people that he’s one of them and not of those like Sobchak and Nemtsov and similar. And he was successful, he’s seen very differently from them.
Except see my previous part about special services’ work. The real problem is not in nobody willing to organize. Without it, whether Navalny would do his sacrifice or not, Russia’s government would have changed around 2012.
Different, yes of course, what I’m trying to get at here is that there’s still consistencies. The three systems are different coats of paint on the same dysfunction. There’s also been some progress, I already mentioned the nuclear family, but the overall problem won’t be fixed until the dysfunction is understood, organically, by society.
I don’t think we actually disagree: The forces that I described breed the type of people the FSB needs to do its enforcement. Cynical, ruthless, eager to suppress their trauma by inflicting it on others. In Tsarist times there was more, religion and all that, a very old notion of what God’s plan for society is, roles for everyone, in the USSR at least a number of them were actually ideologically convinced, by now, power is the only ideology. They’re mighty so they must be right, don’t they?
Russia had a revolution before, it can have one again. Bluntly put: The Kremlin guards are less well armed than Ukraine. Revolutions aren’t organised, they happen once the collective psyche reaches a breaking point. No words, just people’s subconsciousness noticing the mood of the people around them, assessing the chances: “Am I going to be alone, or are we going to march together?” and suddenly decades happen in weeks.
What would be important is having a couple of ideas on what will come after that. How to not lose the moment, again. Who would be the current-day Bolsheviks, opposed to the deposed-of system but also to the freedom of the people? How to convince Yuri Shevchuk to accept being crowned Tsar. I’m only half joking.
It’s not about “right”. It’s that you can’t trust anyone, and if you make a mistake, your own input to any revolution doesn’t happen.
Collective psyche can be regulated. It will happen when people in Kremlin make a mistake.
Yes, that is where I’ll add that making a transitional committee of Yashin, Navalnaya and others, augmented with the older wave like Kasparov and Portnikov, might not be a good idea. Only allowing ex-commies (ex-system in this case) to “turn democrat” and become the government like in 1991 can be worse.
I’d probably trust escapist communists like RSD and groups of edgy ancap children more.