"... and the desire for respect that sometimes conflicts with your rational pursuit of self-interest. One of the problems in a liberal society is that it doesn’t give you a source of striving for higher ends if you simply have peace and prosperity. And I think that you can see this both on the left and the right today, where, in the United States we're having a lot of disputes over mask wearing and vaccination mandates. And protesters are wearing stars of David, saying that their requirement to get vaccinated and to wear masks is like Hitler's treatment of the Jews. And I think that's a perfect example of complacency.
You're living in a liberal society. The government is not asking very much of you, but even the slightest imposition on your individual freedom, you compare it to the worst tyrannies of previous ages. You can only do that in a society that's really forgotten what real tyranny is like. And I think that one of the things that has happened with Putin's invasion of Ukraine is to remind people what real tyranny looks like...."
From "Francis Fukuyama on Ukraine, liberalism and identity politics/‘Vladimir Putin is going to be remembered as one of the fathers of the Ukrainian nation’" (Spectator). Fukuyama is promoting his new book "Liberalism and Its Discontents."
Fukuyama also says this about Ukraine, declaring that "Vladimir Putin is going to be remembered as one of the fathers of the Ukrainian nation when this is all over with":
The big problem in Ukraine prior to the war was corruption. And the corruption came from the fact that much of the economy was owned by six or seven oligarchs that were a kind of byproduct of the way the Soviet Union collapsed. What's remarkable is that structure has really crumbled now. Ukraine has experienced a birth of a nation that really would not have been possible but for the invasion. So the oligarchs have all fled. Their properties are being confiscated or destroyed... by the Russians. ...
None of the Russian speakers, as far as I can see, have any sympathy now for Russia given what they’ve done in Kharkiv and other Russian-speaking territories. I think that the whole earlier division has really been replaced by an extraordinary sense of national unity around Zelensky and around the idea of a free Ukraine. So Vladimir Putin is going to be remembered as one of the fathers of the Ukrainian nation when this is all over with.
[Interviewer: And Zelensky, who most of us have come to consciousness of as a war hero president, how did you rate him before all this happened? Was he deeply implicated with these oligarchs? Was he ruling by permission of them?]
Francis Fukuyama: To a much less extent than other Ukrainian politicians. He had been linked at the time of his election to [Ihor] Kolomoisky. And there had been a lot of suspicion that he was acting on his behalf. I think that after he became elected, he proved that actually wasn't true. You know, they continue to act against Kolomoisky’s interest. There was a big reversal of a privatisation that they were trying to contest, and he didn't manage to do that. And I think that the thing that was remarkable about Zelensky was that he was the outsider candidate that was elected over other candidates that were much more representative of oligarchic interests by an incredible margin, which indicated that the Ukrainian people as a whole really wanted an outsider that wasn't connected to any of the existing corrupt elite....
Posts
69 comments:
Fukuyama is right. In 50 years when the USA has legalized pedophilia, the dollar has crashed, and the Pax-Americana Culturama Export Drama has ceased to exist, Ukrainians, Russians, Chinese, and many many others are going to look back and say....
..."There but for the grace of god would I have gone."
The Vladimirs and JinPings of the world have a far better chance of rehabilitation than Joey Lids.
Fukuyama is right, but I don't think his point is very substantial--the greater ease of our lives has not made us happy, it has made us petty. But why go to masking and vaccines (which arguably have significant consequences) when he has a much better example in BLM/woke/microaggression BS?
"The government is not asking very much of you, but even the slightest imposition on your individual freedom, you compare it to the worst tyrannies of previous ages."
I have held this Fukuyama fellow in low regard for reasons I don't even remember, but this latest solidifies my opinion of him. "Slightest imposition on your individual freedom"? Is he unaware of, or does he just dismiss, objector's belief that the government is requiring them to inject a dangerous substance into their bodies? How is this a "slightest imposition"? (For the record, I am thrice vaxed.)
Here's the fallacy:
"The government is not asking very much of you, but even the slightest imposition on your individual freedom, you compare it to the worst tyrannies of previous ages."
COVID restrictions were not the slightest imposition. They were part of the bigger picture, intended to inure us to larger issues like travel restrictions, vaccination mandates that caused essential workers to lose their livelihoods, ostracizing people for daring to visit relatives, and to make the push for mail-in voting. It's on a par with those tyrranies, only just subtle enough to convince a lot of people that it was necessary.
Augh...'tyrannies' - and when I tried to post the correction, it substituted "trannies!" Why, autocorrect, why?
"...which indicated that the Ukrainian people as a whole really wanted an outsider that wasn't connected to any of the existing corrupt elite...."
Imagine that happening here.
Anyway, Fukuyama's diagnosis of the 'end of history' a few decades ago has certainly not occurred. At least not in the manner he foresaw. What's missing in this article is the recent moves by the current Global Hero of the Day, Zelenskyy. He has banned all opposition political parties with ties or leanings toward Russia. And he previously banned 3 television networks who were seen as pro-Russia or at least, not anti-Russia. Democracy is tricky.
Again, imagine this happening here.
I don't know if Ukraine has come so far so quickly or if we've fallen so far so quickly.
We haven't forgotten what tyranny looks like; we just typically aren't allowed to point it out. We knew Communism was tyranny, but it was considered gauche to say so. We know China and Saudi Arabia are tyrannies, but we do a lot of business with them. We know Iran and Palestine are tyrannies, but they seem to have powerful constituencies. Putin just happens not to be useful to anyone powerful in the West, except as an enemy.
Agree with Temujin.
Why would anyone pay attention to FF? He was massively wrong about "the end of history."
How about a little humility or admitting he was wrong? The Left never admits it is wrong. But we now have to spend billions on net carbon zero despite the fact that the CAGW crowd has been wrong for over 50 years.
And this: FF, "The government is not asking very much of you, but even the slightest imposition on your individual freedom, you compare it to the worst tyrannies of previous ages."
The whole mask thing was totally and completely unnecessary. The science and data proved it. It was a symbol of control. And one thing leads to another. The censorship on this issue was horrible.
I'll take the Founders over FF any day. He doesn't know shit and was shockingly wrong before. Fuck him.
Real tyranny: A Slavic Spring, 8 years... 32... 33 trimesters to disenfranchise, deny essential services, and sustain military and paramilitary attacks on native people. Operation of Wuhan-style labs in darkness. Diversity, Inequity, and Exclusion. Normalizing capital abortion (e.g. one-child/selective-child), establishing a religion that denies women and men's dignity and agency, for social, redistributive, clinical, and fair weather causes, thereby reducing human life to negotiable commodities.
He makes some good points, but far too much is just mindreading of Ukrainians from 5,000 miles away. And there's no evidence that the Ukraine has gotten less corrupt, or that the current crop of Billionaires who control the ecoomy are'nt going to replaced by other equally corrupt billionaires.
In any case, Zelensky outlawing oppostion parties and nationalizing the media is not - I repeat not- a good sign. Right now, most Ukrainians are united to resist the Russian invasion. But later on, when the Russians have enforced their peace terms, many Ukrainians are going to wonder why they fought for so long, and lost so many people, when the same peace could've been had at 1/3 the price.
"You're living in a liberal society. The government is not asking very much of you ...."
Evidently, Fukiyama is not affected by confiscatory taxation, unnecessary licensing requirements, outlawing of drugs shown effective in early treatment of COVID, inflation, loss of a business, etc.
Government during COVID deprived millions of their livelihood. That seems like a big ask. Lefties love creeping oppression. Say, what happened to the Tea Parties and the implicit constitutional requirement of reasonable bail?
The Covid restrictions were a huge f*king deal. They caused people to lose their livelihoods, transferring untold amounts of wealth from the hoi polloi to wealthy corporations, thus enriching the oligarchies that are really running our politics, caused plenty of deaths unrelated to Covid due to factors such as untreated conditions, depression, etc. Hurt children's development, which will have long term effects for decades, and were used to curtail civil liberties. Not to mention the censoring of debate concerning the very real concerns regarding all these government "slight impostions." All based on crappy "science." And forcing people to inject a substance that may very well have unanticipated long term consequences while working to conceal the many adverse immediate effects or face losing their jobs is not a small imposition either. Even if all this was necessary it is still not a "slight imposition." Fukuyama is a clown.
It's an interesting idea that Russia invading Ukraine unified Ukraine. This was the result for Finland after the Winter Wars with the USSR.
Could Ukraine become like Finland? It remains to be seen, but that would be the best possible outcome.
The whole mask thing was totally and completely unnecessary. The science and data proved it.
Yes, under the best of circumstances (i.e. training, supplies, disposal), passive personal protection devices including masks break even at best, and accelerate infections at worst (e.g. silent spread). Sequestering in place increased exposure in calm and poorly ventilated environments. Not to mention a distinct lack of goggles, and, at least according to a clinic in Wuhan, 3, not 2, meters social distancing.
BTW, I get annoyed at this personalization of the war. And this constant smear that Putin is Hitler or a "tyrant". Putin is an elected President. There are oppostion parties. HE's not trying to "conquer the Ukraine". There have been anti-war protests and people were jailed and dispersed, but no one killed. There are even, from what I've read, a few anti-putin newspaper or TV stations operating.
Its not Nazi Germany or even Red China. Meanwhile, go on a USA network TV and try to defend PUtin and see what happens. Assuming they will even let you on.
Tyranny may not be mask mandates. But tyranny IS "freezing a law abiding citizen's bank accounts--depriving them of their personal wealth--because they question your precious mask mandates."
The Sargent Schultz routine from the left is getting exhausting.
"You're living in a liberal society. The government is not asking very much of you ...."
Liberal as in divergent. Principles, principals matter.
I wonder how the people in rest homes who died because state governors forced Covid positive people back into the rest homes so that hospitals could make more money would feel about the government's "slight imposition?" I'd ask them, but they're dead.
A significant portion of Ukraine's population was ethnic-Russian or pro-Russian. In Ukraine's 2013 Presidential election, that portion of the population formed a electoral coalition that elected Viktor Yanukovych -- who ran on a platform of improving relations with Russia -- to a surprise victory. (This was similar to Donald Trump's surprise victory in the USA's Presidential election.)
Although the European Union's observers declared that Yanukovych had won the election fairly, Ukrainian zealots refused to accept him as the elected President. Especially in Kyiv, street protests continued for three straight months. (Compare this to the truckers' protests in Ottawa, which lasted just two weeks.)
Ukraine has a Deep State that wanted Ukraine to join the European Union and NATO. This Deep State undermined Yanukovych persistently. (Compare to how the USA's Deep State undermined President Trump.)
After only about three months, Yanukovych felt compel to flee from his elected office and from the country.
Because Yanukovych thus was removed from his elected office, those Ukrainian regions that were overwhelmingly ethnic-Russian and that had voted overwhelmingly for Yanukovych decided that they wanted to secede from Ukraine and to join Russia -- where their future votes might be respected.
Crimea did manage to conduct a referendum and so voted to secede and to join Russia.
The Donetsk and Luhansk regions have not been allowed to do likewise.
=====
Until Yanukovych was removed from his elected office, Ukraine's ethnic-Russians had lived in Ukraine peacefully and cooperatively.
=====
Without Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, Ukraine will have a population that is much more Ukrainian. As such, the Ukrainian language and culture will develop better.
Ukraine will not have to deal with another election where a pro-Russian politician might be elected President. Only anti-Russian politicians will have any possibility of being elected. There will not be another situation where Ukrainian protesters and Ukrainian Deep State officials will remove a pro-Russian President from his elected position.
Finland had a national identity--recognized by the Russian empire--already and did not need the Soviet invasion of 1939 to find it. The Finnish Civil War was a nationalist victory over Soviet-supported Reds among others.
The first peace settlement of 1940 took a good piece of Finnish real estate and forced about 10% of Finnish speakers into the smaller area.
Tsar Nick II was among other things Emperor of All the Russias including Kiev and other places, Tsar of Poland and other places, and Grand Prince of Finland and other places.
No mention of Ukraine, and IIRC my Russian history the Romanovs never recognized a discrete Ukraine but just added regions and oblasts as they took over without much distinction of ethnicity. Lviv used to be Lemberg in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and was Lvov during the years of Polish ownership (1919-1945). The borders there all trundled westwards without affecting the ethnic-national demographics too much at the time--outside the virtual extinction of the Jews and the expulsion of the Germans.
In a sense, Lenin and Stalin created a modern Ukrainian identity that Putin is merely solidifying, so Fukuyama is half-right on that, but not the first to notice.
I would add Strategypage (Dunnigan and Bay) and van Creveld's As I Please for commentary on the Uke War. But in truth very little can be known for sure.
"One of the problems in a liberal society is that it doesn’t give you a source of striving for higher ends if you simply have peace and prosperity."
FF apparently is speaking as an atheist. Believers understand just how much work needs to be done to "walk the talk". But it requires serious work and is focused on oneself as well as society. Most wokesters would rather focus their daily 2 minutes of hate on others because it is far easier and maintains the illusion that one is not to blame for the state of affairs in America. It's the other guy's fault, just like Biden does. We can see where that is getting America and it won't end well.
Too many Americans today are not investors in America, but dividend clippers of capital value built before their time. Takers, not makers.
On Ukraine, I find it hard to believe that ethnic Russians (aren't they a substantial minority?) in Ukraine are going to become big supporters of Ukrainian nationalism when the government discriminates against them and they look down their nose at Ukrainians. Long way to go on that
melting pot.
In the first episode of Servant of the People, where Zelenskyy plays a school teacher who is elected President of Ukraine after a profanity-laced tirade against government corruption is recorded by a student and goes viral, the Ukrainian oligarchs each think that one of the others rigged the election and got their man elected.
He is correct on his first point (about exaggerated claims of oppression), wrong on his second point (about Putin and Ukraine.) That's about usual for him.
Then there was the lone maskless surfer arrested and jailed for endangering the public out on the ocean by himself.
But requiring people to wear masks is just a “slight” imposition on freedom.
I recall some old tale about letting the camels nose into the tent…
You're living in a liberal society. The government is not asking very much of you, but even the slightest imposition on your individual freedom, you compare it to the worst tyrannies of previous ages.
The government isn't "asking", it's demanding, on threat of losing your job
And the government's demand is utterly unjustified by anything other than the egos of the people doing the demanding. The Covid shots do not cut the transmission rate of Covid, this is firmly established.
Yet still they demand
Sorry, but tyrannical government doesn't start with the death camps, it starts with taking away people's jobs / ability to live their lives
Not only is the concept of history a mystery to the man, apparently so is 'the thin end of the wedge.'
"The government is not asking very much of you"
WTF? The government isn't "asking." It's imposing. It's imposing on weak grounds, in violation of normally applicable law. In many places, it has behaved illiberally.
"even the slightest imposition on your individual freedom, you compare it to the worst tyrannies of previous ages"
Who did that? Nobody says it's like the "worst." But some of the worst tyrannies started with small steps, for seemingly good intentions. The #Resistance called BS. We'd like to keep society liberal, in the old sense, not ruled by arbitrary edicts.
Plus he is totally naive on the lack of higher ends. Progressivism has long styled itself as an alternative faith. Pursuing social justice and battling systemic racism and saving the planet are plenty high for most leftists. They mean to destroy the basis of liberal society. They are ending the end of history domestically, along with Putin and Xi abroad.
I think that one of the things that has happened with Putin's invasion of Ukraine is to remind people what real tyranny looks like
Russia's invasion of Ukraine is tyrannical. (I prefer the word atrocious, but I will use the word tyrannical here.)
Also, however, the treatment of elected President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 was tyrannical.
The tyrannical actions of Ukrainian zealots in 2014 started a chain of events that led to Russia's tyrannical invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
=======
In 2014, the US Government should have advised Ukrainians to accept Yanukovych properly as their elected President until the next election. Instead, the US Government encouraged -- and, it's likely, guided and funded -- the devious campaign to remove President Yanukovych from his elected position.
It seems that, during those events, the Obama Administration's "point man on Ukraine" was Vice President Joe Biden.
======
The Obama Administration's justification for the abuse of elected President Yanukovych was that he allegedly was corrupt.
That's rich. Our own "point man on Ukraine" was Joe Biden, a remarkably corrupt politician.
Another justification was that Yanukovych was a puppet of the Russian Goverment.
That's rich too. When Biden ordered Ukraine to fire the country's Attorney General within two hours, the firing was done obediently within two hours.
As far as I can tell, based largely on mostly reading things he's put out since Ukraine as I was only marginally familiar with his 'End of History', he has completely boomaranged around from his claim that 'liberal democracy won' to checking for a new autocrat to be hiding under his bed every night.
Where’s narcisco?
From what I've read, it was Russia's 2014 invasion that unified Ukraine. The pro-Russian areas of the country have gotten to see in Donetsk and Luhansk precisely what Russian rule is like, and it's a lawless, mercenary, gangster-driven shit show. This new familiarity with Putin's regime has been suggested as why there has been no inkling of acceptance of the current invasion in the eastern half of the country.
“it doesn’t look Nazi” - more at the link to short video clip
👉🏽 https://youtu.be/Dllzj7n16us
Pridefulness is an empathic gesture to a parade of lions, lionesses, and their unPlanned cubs... the circle of life. hakuna matata
Then there was the lone maskless surfer arrested and jailed for endangering the public out on the ocean by himself.
Take a knee to the cargo cult, and viable legal indemnity, not the science.
Personally, I started calling the masks Burqas long ago.
"Vladimir Putin is going to be remembered as one of the fathers of the Ukrainian nation when this is all over with..."
By that, I am understanding Frank Fukuyama to be saying that 'Putin is going to be remembered as one of the fathers of the Ukrainian nation, the way that King George III is going to be remembered as one of the fathers of the American nation...' It would be a bad rap on George III, and Fukuyama might not like it, but I'm just trying to understand his point.
for a country claiming to be
= Constitutional democracy : government with consent of the governed =
I have never seen such confusion about which way the consent flows and demand originates - or what is relationship between citizen and government
without a firm basis in Individual Rights theory this tangle cannot be resolved.
“Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law.”
How I wish her essays are better known / more widely read and understood
“Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law.”
"You're living in a liberal society. The government is not asking very much of you ...."
always remember the undertone when you hear 'the government' [to which a citizen has to consent] and as liberal Fukuyama has consented to "the very little" that has been asked of him and is aghast at anybody dissenting
that is the root of a tyrannical mind which he would call liberal thinking -
- tyranny does not need tyrants just demand for submission against will -
with artfully diffuse language to disguise
Remember when there were hundreds of thousands of Russian troops massed on Ukrainian borders, making the whole region a tinderbox, and our plucky Ukrainian allies, nevertheless, embarked on a new offensive agains those citizens of Donbass who refused to accept the government that Victoria ("I am worried about our Biolabs") Nuland chose for them, creating thousands of refugees into Russia?
These are just the facts, BTW, as available in the western media up until just a four weeks ago. One wag on Twitter had it that Putin controlled the western press up to that fateful day, which is why googling from before the invasion, for example, is so misleading.
"From what I've read, it was Russia's 2014 invasion that unified Ukraine. "
Crimea had a plebiscite in which about 90% of citizens voted and they voted to become part of Russia by nearly 90%. What divided Ukraine was the coup that the US fomented there just prior to Russia Annexing Crimea. You should maybe set your searches to something like 2014 to 2020 if you want information not crammed full of war propaganda.
Maybe blissful ignorance is strength though, and it's better not to know, then your love for Big Brother will warm you. If this is your take, don't read about how the regime in Kyiv used actual violent genocidal Nazis to occupy the Russian speaking regions.
Me? The timeline from that coup that Lindsey Graham, John McCain, and the "eat salad with a comb" lady instigated to the impeachment for meddling in Ukrainian affairs is a bit too tight for me to accept what US regime propagandists say.
fukuyama was a historical, and as a protege of huntington and mansfield that's unforgivable, the revolutions of 1789 1830 and 1848 were reversed whole or in part, now czars make stupid decisions like launching the crimean wars, so do kaisers, marxism arose out of the last of these risings, long story short,
Blogger Tom T. said...
From what I've read, it was Russia's 2014 invasion that unified Ukraine. The pro-Russian areas of the country have gotten to see in Donetsk and Luhansk precisely what Russian rule is like, and it's a lawless, mercenary, gangster-driven shit show.
posted on YouTube on Feb 28, 2014 re. Ukrainian rule, lawless, mercenary, gangster-driven shit show.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SBo0akeDMY
and some more from Apr 3, 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hE6b4ao8gAQ
“Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law.”
It requires n-way reconciliation. That is a religious (i.e. behavioral) philosophy that is not ethical (i.e. relativistic), but internally, externally, and mutually consistent in a universal frame.
Fukuyama is part of the Zoom class. Shutdowns didn't mean him losing his business, and inflation doesn't affect him much.
A little perspective would help. Taxes on tea weren't that onerous either.
"Fukuyama has consented to "the very little" that has been asked of him and is aghast at anybody dissenting"
Since he is part of the caste that makes the rules to their own liking, all we really need for "unity" is for the rest of us to think like him or be crushed under the boot of the "liberal order," you know, like the Canadian truckers.
https://youtu.be/B6s2jo6CNJY
Eyewitness report from Ukraine…
Here, b/c I didn’t want to forget.
"Me? The timeline from that coup that Lindsey Graham, John McCain, and the "eat salad with a comb" lady instigated"
Didn't Obama have responsibility the coup? he was president and it certainly would have required his approval above all others.
"That's rich too. When Biden ordered Ukraine to fire the country's Attorney General within two hours, the firing was done obediently within two hours."
This raises the question, which is the more corrupt? Ukraine or the US? Arguably the US since it is the larger and more powerful.
"Didn't Obama have responsibility the coup? "
Yes. Biden was his in charge of Ukraine, but Obama had responsibility. Amy Klobachar, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain all appear meeting with Nazis and encouraging them to aggressive war and promising them weapons in the YouTube banned documentary "Ukraine On Fire."
"Are we the baddies?" is a good question. Putting Biden in charge of a country with that amount of corruption was a world class mistake and we will be paying for it for years and years, is my guess. Why we should line up behind a corrupt kleptocrat like Joe Biden and march into WW3 is beyond my reckoning, but apparently, all it will take is one false flag chemical attack by the Ukrainian Nazis, preferably in Russian speaking areas, where noises had already been made in the past re "useless populations."
Putin is still a strongman leader who takes a massive percentage of Russian wealth for his personal use, and for that of his oligarch supporters, that is how they do business there, complete with violent suppression of the opposition. There are no good guys here. The Ukrainian people suffer for the depravity of Joe Biden, who led them down the primrose path, and whose leadership I have a say in. Putin and the Russian people are not America's problem. Ukraine fucked up, they trusted Joe Biden, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Amy Klobachar.
MadTownGuy said...
Augh...'tyrannies' - and when I tried to post the correction, it substituted "trannies!" Why, autocorrect, why?
____________________________________________________
Because it is a computer program, written by one or more computer programmers, that is to say one or more human beings. And human beings seek power over others. Corrupting your text against your will is one way to exercise power over you.
This has been A Serious Answer to a Possibly Rhetorical Question®. We now return you to your regularly scheduled rhetoric.
So we are fragile little souls who think a moth lighting on our shoulder is the iron boot of tyranny, eh? How about this: the government deep state used covid to replace a president and undermine our democratic voting process. It was a coup in disguise as a medical intervention.
Eff Fukayama.
I have a dream. Russians and Ukrainians make peace, join forces, conduct a minor incursion into DC, get hold of Joe Biden and re-install him into the senior nursing care facility he is missing from.
Oh crap, Ahnold gets called out and dragged by a Russian and told to check his files for the letters she wrote to him about what Ukraine was doing to Russians in 2015. Not sure that video was as persuasive is he had hoped,
https://mobile.twitter.com/r_u_vid/status/1506085675363278848
"Only a little bit tyrannical" is like "only a little bit pregnant." Is you is, or is you ain't?
That's something of a historical truism, isn't it? It's the brutal suppression of movement that wins them sympathy, and it's external threats to a country that create national unity.
As for the rest, Fukuyama's opinion about how much government control qualifies as oppressive is worth as much and as little as anyone else's. Like most academics, he's detached and distant from the concerns of most ordinary people, and pointing out that rhetoric may be overheated does not mean that there aren't real and legitimate grievances.
Fukuyama has, willy-nilly, been stuck to his 30-years-or-so-old "End of History" thesis that he's having an awfully hard time climbing out of the self-dug hole.
I am reminded, tangentially, of a review Allan Bloom wrote of John Rawls' A Theory of Justice somewhere back in the early 70s. It gets progressively more and more brutal as he calls out Rawls on one error after another; but the end is the capstone: He calls A Theory of Justice "A first philosophy for the Last Man."
"Are we the baddies?" is a good question. Putting Biden in charge of a country with that amount of corruption was a world class mistake
======
mistake or clue to Obama = "Mr.big guy"
this could be where Biden f'ed up on cut-outs
Tim in Vermont: Even if one assumes that a Russian-run post-invasion plebiscite has much informational value, that doesn't address my point that Russian rule *since then* has poisoned the well.
But suppose I'm wrong. Where's the support for the current invasion from the eastern Ukrainians? Why isn't there a pro-Russian uprising from all the people who were upset by Maidan? What's your explanation?
rcocean said...
In any case, Zelensky outlawing oppostion parties and nationalizing the media is not - I repeat not- a good sign. Right now, most Ukrainians are united to resist the Russian invasion. But later on, when the Russians have enforced their peace terms, many Ukrainians are going to wonder why they fought for so long, and lost so many people, when the same peace could've been had at 1/3 the price.
It's rather pathetic that your'e so damn eager for Ukraine to lose.
Esp. when there's no real evidence that the Russian Army is capable of carrying through
Putin's "peace terms" are "Ukraine gets dismembered now, and put in a weakened state with no allies so that Russia can invade later and finish them off."
So there's no real difference between accepting them, and accepting unconditional surrender.
Which is why the Ukrainians, much to your disappointment, aren't going to accept them
rcocean said...
BTW, I get annoyed at this personalization of the war. And this constant smear that Putin is Hitler or a "tyrant". Putin is an elected President.
You can't possibly be serious. Because I know you're not this stupid
Putin was "elected President" in a system where no one was allowed to compete with him.
Yes, he's a tyrant
There are oppostion parties.
Yep. They're just not allowed to win, not allowed to get public exposure, etc.
it's kind of like what teh Dems and our Tech Overlords want for America.
And you are saying it's legitimate?
HE's not trying to "conquer the Ukraine".
Yes, he is.
Because that's the entire purpose of "Ukraine may not join NATO / the EU."
To keep Ukraine weak and isolated so it can be controlled / conquered by Russia.
I believe you like to call it "Ukraine is in Russia's sphere of interest", which translates as "the people of Ukraine can do whatever they want, so long as they want what Putin wants".
Its not Nazi Germany or even Red China.
1: It's not 1939 Nazi Germany. That doesn't make it any sort of free society not ruled by a tyrant
2: You might want to look up number of people Putin had murdered, or thrown in jail on BS charges, for the "crime" of opposing him.
Then you might want to try pulling your head out of your ass.
Or, maybe not. You seem rather comfortable having it there
Meanwhile, go on a USA network TV and try to defend PUtin and see what happens. Assuming they will even let you on.
You've just spent your entire post celebrating Putin and his censorship, and now you're whining about the less censorship that happens int he US?
Maybe you really are that stupid
Blogger Mike Sylwester said...
A significant portion of Ukraine's population was ethnic-Russian or pro-Russian.
Those are some impressive weasel words.
1: Exactly what % of Ukraine is "ethnic Russian"?
2: What % currently is "pro-Russian"
In Ukraine's 2013 Presidential election, that portion of the population formed a electoral coalition that elected Viktor Yanukovych -- who ran on a platform of improving relations with Russia -- to a surprise victory
Unlike Trump's victory, this one actually was backed, and almost assuredly funded, by Putin.
It's one of the weaknesses of a small democracy being manipulated by a larger and richer nearby dictatorship: the dictator can try to buy the other country's electorate, or at least enough to win
Although the European Union's observers declared that Yanukovych had won the election fairly,
Yeah, because we always trust the EU
Ukrainian zealots refused to accept him as the elected President. Especially in Kyiv, street protests continued for three straight months. (Compare this to the truckers' protests in Ottawa, which lasted just two weeks.)
IOW, people who aren't complete fucking morons did not want their country ruled from Moscow / turned into another Belarus
Ukraine has a Deep State that wanted Ukraine to join the European Union and NATO. This Deep State undermined Yanukovych persistently. (Compare to how the USA's Deep State undermined President Trump.)
Every fucking person in Ukraine with a functioning brain wanted to be part of the EU, not Putin's Russia
Trump's an American nationalist. Trump's motto was "America First"
Yanukovych's a Russian nationalist / Putin stooge. He's pretty much diametrically opposed to Ukrainian nationalism.
Comparing the two just exposes you as a fraud
After only about three months, Yanukovych felt compel to flee from his elected office and from the country.
After figuring out that he wasn't going to be able to sell Ukraine to Putin after all, he bailed. Sanity won.
Because Yanukovych thus was removed from his elected office,
He wasn't "removed", he removed himself. You just said so
those Ukrainian regions that were overwhelmingly ethnic-Russian and that had voted overwhelmingly for Yanukovych decided that they wanted to secede from Ukraine and to join Russia -- where their future votes might be respected.
Yeah, because nothing says "respecting your votes" like a government that jails or kills all effective opposition.
Crimea did manage to conduct a referendum and so voted to secede and to join Russia.
Gee, and who supervised that "referendum"?
IIRC, Mongolia held a referendum after WWII as to its future, with USSR / Russian vote counters.
Wouldn't you know it, Mongolian "Independence fromChina" won with 100% of the vote, with almost 500k votes
So, for those NOT historically ignorant, "referendum in Russian controlled area" does not lead one to think the vote was honest.
The Donetsk and Luhansk regions have not been allowed to do likewise.
What a shame
Now, you might remember that in 1994 Russia signed an agreement with Ukraine where Ukraine agreed to give up their nukes, and Russia agreed to honor Ukraine's borders.
Could you point us to the part of that agreement that said "Russia will honor Ukraine's borders unless it first gets some separatists to 'demand' separation from Ukraine"?
No? It doesn't say that?
So everything you wrote about is meaningless bullshit from a Putin suck-up
Thanks for clearing that up
Mike Sylwester said...
Until Yanukovych was removed from his elected office, Ukraine's ethnic-Russians had lived in Ukraine peacefully and cooperatively.
So long as they thought they might be able to enslave all their countrymen the way the people in Belarus have been enslaved, Putin's tools in Ukraine were willing to be non-violent. Once they found out they couldn't turn Ukraine into a Russian satellite, they switched to violence.
FIFY
Without Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk, Ukraine will have a population that is much more Ukrainian. As such, the Ukrainian language and culture will develop better.
After Ukraine has been partially dismembered and forced to give up any hope of allies, it will be easier for Russia to swallow the rest.
FIFY
Ukraine will not have to deal with another election where a pro-Russian politician might be elected President. Only anti-Russian politicians will have any possibility of being elected. There will not be another situation where Ukrainian protesters and Ukrainian Deep State officials will remove a pro-Russian President from his elected position.
So, Ukraine has a "Deep State" that is actually patriotic, and loves its country, and Mike finds that to be a bad thing
You really are a sick fuck
Mike Sylwester said...
Also, however, the treatment of elected President Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 was tyrannical.
You are so fucked up.
Under your definition, the trucker's protest in Canada was "tyrannical", and therefore Trudeau's response was appropriate.
In 2014, the US Government should have advised Ukrainians to accept Yanukovych properly as their elected President until the next election. Instead, the US Government encouraged -- and, it's likely, guided and funded -- the devious campaign to remove President Yanukovych from his elected position.
Russia paid to get him in, US paid to get him out.
If the Russian interference in teh Ukrainain election was valid, then so was the US interference.
The Obama Administration's justification for the abuse of elected President Yanukovych was that he allegedly was corrupt.
Which is because it wouldn't have been polite to state the truth: He was a Putin lackey who would utterly fuck up the country if allowed to have power.
Another justification was that Yanukovych was a puppet of the Russian Goverment.
That's rich too. When Biden ordered Ukraine to fire the country's Attorney General within two hours, the firing was done obediently within two hours.
Apparently Mike is really bitter at the US having more influence that Russia.
So, Mike, I take it you're a Russian nationalist, not an American one?
tim in vermont said...
Remember when there were hundreds of thousands of Russian troops massed on Ukrainian borders, making the whole region a tinderbox, and our plucky Ukrainian allies, nevertheless, embarked on a new offensive agains those citizens of Donbass who refused to accept the government that Victoria ("I am worried about our Biolabs") Nuland chose for them, creating thousands of refugees into Russia?
So, Russia massed troops on the Ukrainian border to try to intimidate the Ukrainian gov't into letting Russia's violent tools in Donbass continue their purge of Ukrainians from that part of Ukraine?
And what you're upset about is that the Ukrainians wouldn't roll over and play dead for Putin?
According to the agreement Russia signed with Ukraine in 1994, that area is part of Ukraine, now and forever.
The fact that Russia has spent the last 8 years violating that agreement puts all the onus on Russia, where it will remain until they get the hell out and stop tormenting separatist movements
tim in vermont said...
Crimea had a plebiscite in which about 90% of citizens voted and they voted to become part of Russia by nearly 90%.
in 1945 Mongolia had a "referendum" where almost 500k people "voted", and 100% of them "voted" the way the Russian vote counters wanted.
So, for those of us who are not historical ignoramuses, that story doesn't mean what you seem to think it means
What divided Ukraine was the coup that the US fomented there just prior to Russia Annexing Crimea. You should maybe set your searches to something like 2014 to 2020 if you want information not crammed full of war propaganda.
What divided Ukraine was that Putin's attempt to buy the 2014 election was briefly successful, before being overturned by people who were sane enough not to want to be ruled from Moscow.
Or who were sane enough not to want to turn into another Belarus
because, not being complete fucking morons, they understand that those are the only options when your government is "pro-Russia", and Russia is right next door.
Oh, but that's right. You think that Ukraine should be in Russia's "sphere of influence", by which you mean they shoudl be Putin's slaves
Maybe blissful ignorance is strength though, and it's better not to know, then your love for Big Brother will warm you. If this is your take, don't read about how the regime in Kyiv used actual violent genocidal Nazis to occupy the Russian speaking regions.
I don't give a flying fuck what anyone does to keep themselves from being enslaved to Putin
Because whatever they do, it's more legitimate than being under Putin's control.
Were you a "better Red than dead" kind of loser? I wasn't. I was ready for the US to incinerate teh entire world in nuclear fire, rather than let the USSR / Russians take over.
So since the Ukrainians aren't doing that, their lesser response is entirely justified, and I couldn't give a shit what it is
tim in vermont said...
Putin is still a strongman leader who takes a massive percentage of Russian wealth for his personal use, and for that of his oligarch supporters, that is how they do business there, complete with violent suppression of the opposition.
Ok, so, we're in agreement:
If you let teh Russians in charge, by, for example, letting Putin buy the victory of a toady and having that toady take charge, your country will be quickly enslaved by a corrupt dictator who will violently suppress any opposition, aking it so that the 2014 election would be the last remotely valid election Ukraine would ever have
But, somehow you go from that to "but it was really bad for the US to stop that slavery before it started"
WTF?
Quick question: before Russia started annexing parts of Ukraine, did the corrupt Ukrainian oligarchs "violently suppress the opposition"?
No?
"Are we the baddies?" is a good question.
Why yes, it is.
So:
Putin's side (and apparently yours): Massive corruption and violent suppression of opposition
Ukraine's side (that' your'e opposed to): Massive corrupt without violent suppression of opposition, since if they'd had that Yanukovych would never have won in the first place
Yes, Tim, you and Mike and Achillies are the baddies here
Let's clean up some history, shall we?
Viktor Yanukovych was elected President of Ukraine in 2010
He took office
In February 2013, the Verkhovna Rada (Ukrainian parliament) overwhelmingly approved finalizing a political association and free trade agreement with the European Union (EU).
In November 2013, a wave of large-scale protests (known as Euromaidan) erupted in response to President Yanukovych's sudden decision not to sign the agreement, instead choosing closer ties to Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union.
The Revolution of Dignity (Ukrainian: Революція гідності, romanized: Revoliutsiia hidnosti), also known as the Maidan Revolution,[2] took place in Ukraine in February 2014[2][1] at the end of the Euromaidan protests,[1] when deadly clashes between protesters and the security forces in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv culminated in the ousting of elected President Viktor Yanukovych and the overthrow of the Ukrainian government.[1][2]
There was never a "should we move closer to Russia" vote of the Ukrainian people that the Russian side won
In 2004, amendments were adopted that significantly changed Ukraine's political system; these changes are sometimes referred to as the 2004 Constitution. In 2010, then-President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych reverted these changes on the basis of a ruling made by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. Following the events of Euromaidan, the 2004 amendments were reinstated.
So, looks like the Ukrainian "Deep State" was under the control of the Russian tool Yanukovych.
So, I don't know where Mike Sylwester got this BS:
In Ukraine's 2013 Presidential election, that portion of the population formed a electoral coalition that elected Viktor Yanukovych
Because the Presidential election was in 2010
tim in vermont said...
Crimea had a plebiscite in which about 90% of citizens voted and they voted to become part of Russia by nearly 90%.
http://electionresources.org/ua/president.php?election=2010®ion=01
2010 Presidential election vote between Viktor Yanukovych and Yulia Tymoshenko:
February 7, 2010 Runoff Election Results - Autonomous Republic of Crimea
Registered Electors 1,559,474
Voters 1,049,591 67.3%
Invalid Ballots 12,627 1.2%
Against All 34,005 3.2%
Candidate Votes %
Viktor Yanukovych 821,244 78.2
Yulia Tymoshenko 181,715 17.3
So, the idea that 90% of voters came out and voted 90% in favor of separation from Ukraine is so beyond ludicrous that we're at a "no thinking person can believe those results are honest" state of affairs.
WTF Tim?
Post a Comment