291–300 of 322 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there enough nations on Russia's side to call them a bloc? It seems like almost everyone is supporting Ukraine.
North Korea is definitely part of the Russian bloc now. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clypr5985ejo
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, murder is easy after collapse. But murder is not a fix.
That response disregards the thrust of my point, as well as the parallel to the famous quote "war is the continuation of politics by other means." If a population does not believe they have more productive options, that is what will be left. This is often compounded when the existing powers have an easy time with murder BEFORE collapse, such that any moral prohibition would be hypocritical and self-defeating. Let me…
'It's astonishing how many people really seem to think that total collapse / destruction of a system can be an effective way for fixing things'
'Czar Nicholas was "prosecuted" quite rapidly after the russian revolution.'
The current system works better than any previous system for redress. In fac the regime is having to bypass the system/break the system in order to get away with what they are getting away with. Destroying the system will not put them in their place. Breaking the system in fact gives them more of what they want. More power. More ability to abuse the current environment.
Taking us back to the previous system, and putting in the hard and mundane work of keeping it working is the much better solution if people want redress, not continuous 'we just need to break it a little more because feelz/it's simpler/our political class (that we could, you know, work to get voted out) suck (and all we do is whine about it)'.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That response disregards the thrust of my point, as well as the parallel to the famous quote "war is the continuation of politics by other means." If a population does not believe they have more productive options, that is what will be left. This is often compounded when the existing powers have an easy time with murder BEFORE collapse, such that any moral prohibition would be hypocritical and self-defeating. Let me…
You responded to 'It's astonishing how many people really seem to think that total collapse / destruction of a system can be an effective way for fixing things' with 'Czar Nicholas was "prosecuted" quite rapidly after the russian revolution.' as the only tangible you gave. Then this spiel on the people and desire for violence. The current system works better than any previous system for redress. In fac the regime is…
What, this actual system, where (even ignorign the deep violence it metes out to folks in other places) every fucking week I get to hear about how someone has been murdered by it?
It's rich to hear folks talk about "wannabe murders" out of one side of their face while ignoring long-term, violence that this system does every day.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ukraine never had its own independently controlled/operated nukes. The USSR deployed nukes on various territories but all command and control was completely centralized within Russia. Ukraine/Belarus/Kazakhstan returned the Soviet nukes to Russia under the same agreement and received some nonbinding assurances and cash in exchange - it was nothing like a formal pact. Had any of these countries tried to reverse engine…
Ukraine had the nukes in physical possession and they had enough expertise to eventually disassemble them and replace the electronics. Choosing to not do this to avoid a hypothetical external aggression was a bad choice, because they were invaded anyway.
And Ukraine's where they're at today because of bad decisions. Russia's negotiations to end the war started on literally day 2. And they involved absolutely no land concessions or anything like that - the big issue was not joining NATO. Such offer would now be labeled a crushing to defeat for Russia, given how the war is going.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That response disregards the thrust of my point, as well as the parallel to the famous quote "war is the continuation of politics by other means." If a population does not believe they have more productive options, that is what will be left. This is often compounded when the existing powers have an easy time with murder BEFORE collapse, such that any moral prohibition would be hypocritical and self-defeating. Let me…
You responded to 'It's astonishing how many people really seem to think that total collapse / destruction of a system can be an effective way for fixing things' with 'Czar Nicholas was "prosecuted" quite rapidly after the russian revolution.' as the only tangible you gave. Then this spiel on the people and desire for violence. The current system works better than any previous system for redress. In fac the regime is…
I explicitly said I was responding to both parents, and enumerated my response to each. (To be evenhanded, I could also have been unclear that my responses were distinct)
My response to the post you quoted was '2. The problem, ithkuil, is if the population does not see any other way to effectively fix things. (System capture, pareto distributions, disenfranchisement, etc.)'
The comment you are focusing on, regarding prosecution, was in response to Dragonwriter's earlier post regarding feasibility of prosecution after collapse.
Your final statement implies that you took my statement directed entirely at the US system vs. at a generalized statement (Warning?) on when people see revolution as a legitimate option.
I chewed over and decided to not touch too much more on the US aspect because I think it distracts from the original point I was trying to make, but I will say statements such as: 'The current system works better than any previous system for redress' are apt to my initial warning, as the US is clearly in a period of local retreat, (both as I think you touch on elsewhere in your comment, and not for the first time in history, to be clear) especially if the redress you seek is against political or white-collar crimes, and addressing that requires urgency, awareness, and action, including Voting, as you say, that I worry I don't see with the proactivity that is needed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the country has to survive and recover rather quickly, not collapse, for your prosecution scenario to be likely and effective against any significant share of the people who caused this.
It's astonishing how many people really seem to think that total collapse / destruction of a system can be an effective way for fixing things
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> we’re joining the Russian federation. Based PM, from one of your neighbors just North of the Danube.
Why not just move to Russia yourself? Live under a strong traditional leader and culture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn’t call it “using” I would call it “supporting” since most of us fight willingly. There is no way any army could hold back Russia for 5 years if we weren’t extremely determined and willing to fight.
I would call it using. Because we could've sent troops there, we just chose not to. You are obviously doing it for your own reasons, but we are just happy to see you get slaughtered, as long as our people don't get killed.
As for the fact that the West could've sent troops but chose not to, yes, that does hurt a lot of Ukrainians, and some do feel used. But we'll fight and win anyway, to defend our homeland, because we have no choice - material support from the West is better than nothing.