Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Revolution in Kiev

zyalt.livejournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 377 posts

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#271

Post by nhaehnle »

snitko wrote: post #253
nhaehnle wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you call anarchism is really a very specific subcategory called anarcho-capitalism. In any case, it is similarly naive as other strands of anarchism. Power vacuums will inevitably be filled. The question is: What do you want them to be filled with.

Calling something naive doesn't make it so. Saying "Power vacuums will inevitably be filled" doesn't make it true because you say so. What if there is no power vacuums and people don't want to be ruled by anyone? Is there anything to be filled then? What I personally consider to be naive is the idea that governance is inevitable, but that's no logical argument against government, so I don't go around saying it.

Anarchism very explicitly calls for a power vacuum to be created. That's actually what the word means. Now, I can easily believe that a majority of people wouldn't want to be ruled by anyone, but what do you do about the minority who want to rule over the rest?

Society needs a response against this minority, and this response needs to be organized somehow. Somebody will be in a role of organizing the defense of society against those who would seek to rule over it. But now it sounds as if that somebody (or somebodies) are in a pretty powerful position, no?

This is why so many anarchists are so counter-productive. Of course the basic notions of allowing personal liberty and to be baseline-skeptical against authority are good. The thing is, you won't actually achieve personal liberty by just getting rid of any sort of government-like thing. It would be more productive to discuss what kind of government is best suited to protect personal personal liberty.

Note that none of this is a defense of governments as they exist today. It is more a reminder that those who most seek to overthrow what they perceive to be the current oppressors are the most likely to end up being the future oppressors. Or, in comic form: http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=3246#comic

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#272

Post by dualogy »

mladenkovacevic wrote: post #70
csomar wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't upvote this enough. People do indeed believe in revolutions, and thinks by burning stuff that wealth will be made. 3 years later (Tunisian here), we found out that it's not a revolution. The dictator might have been ousted by external agencies. While the protests are legit, the outcome is not. This made me a new opinion: You can have power over another entity by using damage (burning, and crashing stuff). But…

Welcome to reality my Tunisian friend. I'm sorry its not more positive because I'm sure you were promised much better. Yes my country had a "revolution" like this too. I myself was in the streets banging pots and pans and standing up to cordons of riot police. When it was all over, and "real democracy" took over, the country was sold to German banks company by company, factory by factory. Its still in the process of…

As a German (not a banker), I'm very curious what country you're from..

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#273

Post by acqq »

mladenkovacevic wrote: post #10

Reading stuff like this is a wonderful way to remind me how naive and easy to manipulate people generally are.

Exactly. As documented here:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lpXbA6yZY-8

The Revolution Business, 2011 - Consultants are helping people countries like Ukraine and Egypt build a foundation of knowledge in order to start revolutions.

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#274

Post by snitko »

nhaehnle wrote: post #271
snitko wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling something naive doesn't make it so. Saying "Power vacuums will inevitably be filled" doesn't make it true because you say so. What if there is no power vacuums and people don't want to be ruled by anyone? Is there anything to be filled then? What I personally consider to be naive is the idea that governance is inevitable, but that's no logical argument against government, so I don't go around saying it.

Anarchism very explicitly calls for a power vacuum to be created. That's actually what the word means . Now, I can easily believe that a majority of people wouldn't want to be ruled by anyone, but what do you do about the minority who want to rule over the rest? Society needs a response against this minority, and this response needs to be organized somehow. Somebody will be in a role of organizing the defense of soci…

> It is more a reminder that those who most seek to overthrow what they perceive to be the current oppressors are the most likely to end up being the future oppressors

Precisely. This is why I'm no fan of revolutions.

> Society needs a response against this minority, and this response needs to be organized somehow

If I hire a protection/defense agency to guard against those who wish to rule me, this agency only has a very limited amount of money and power. It cannot tax me indefinitely and it cannot print money. If I suspect it does something wrong with my money, I go to a competitor - and trust me, there will be plenty willing to have my money and do a better job.

Now, as I mentioned, this is only possible if people understand there need not be any force ruling them. If people think that they just need better rulers (like, I guess, they do in Ukraine, and like they do in Russia) then they are doomed to be enslaved by their rulers without regard for their interests. Thus, I agree with you that the vacuum has to be filled if it exists (if people believe they need a ruler), but if it doesn't exist then nothing can fill it. That's why I said the problem is in the people's minds, the problem is that they believe they need a better government.

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#275

Post by dualogy »

memracom wrote: post #141
smsm42 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah right, that's John Kerry (under orders from Barack Obama) who is orchestrating Ukrainian revolution. That's one of the funniest theories about that whole mess I ever read. >>> but it could just as well be part of a clever complex multi-year gambit by the Russians who have a strong tradition of playing chess You realize that not all Russian are the same, not all of them drink vodka, are chess grandmasters, wear u…

I have been to Russia more than once. And I speak Russian well enough to travel there on my own, with no support from any travel agencies or guides. On one occasion a couple of guys wanted to steal my suitcase, because I foolishly left the airline stickers on it so they knew it had to contain something worth stealing. But they didn't grab it. They didn't pull out a weapon. Instead they smiled and laughed and try to t…

> If you don't fall for their tricks, then you are free. That is how chess works.

It is? We should play some time, this could get interesting.

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#276

Post by thesz »

stdbrouw wrote: post #230
thesz wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it doesn't fully explain changes. Numbers don't match. Take a look at another statistics - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Latvia#Vital_st... Number of births per 1000 had fallen right after end of "Russian occupation" and never ever regained 14.2 right before Latvian independence.

Your point being that fertile people are happy people?

Directly answering your question - No.

There's a point of time where Latvia went EU route, namely 1995. Nothing changed at that time. The trend started in 1991 (when USSR was split) continued until not very far past. The most important consequence of that trend is low fertility.

I also would like to comment on your question. From what I saw in my life, happy people are fertile people. The people who feels support from all directions are fertile people. And also happy ones.

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#277

Post by jotm »

altero wrote: post #68
prostoalex wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point to specific paragraphs that would do such things?

For start Ukraine treaty does not handle subsidies. So France and other countries would be able to 'dump' their subsidized agricaltural product on Ukranien market. Ukraine farmers do not get subsidy, they have higher prices and would eventually bankrupt. Industry is concetrated on east and exports/imports mainly to Russia. EU would make it very hard to trade with Russia. Factories could not sell product and could not…

| For start Ukraine treaty does not handle subsidies. So France and other countries would be able to 'dump' their subsidized agricaltural product on Ukranien market. Ukraine farmers do not get subsidy, they have higher prices and would eventually bankrupt.

That's great news! It means cheaper products and new entrepreneurs (with better ideas and better funding) taking control of the horribly outdated agriculture industry.

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#278

Post by thesz »

gritzko wrote: post #251
radicalbyte wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know a number of Belorussians, and they all want to move to the EU. They also regularly drive to Poland for shopping, because it's cheaper and more things are available there :)

Hell yes! Folks from Saint Petersburg shop in Finland. They even order parcels to Finnish addresses next to the border because Russian mail sucks badly. Once I was crossing from Finland to SPb and I was questioned by customs on whether I've bought my stuff in Finland. Apparently, everybody's doing that and they are trying to tax it. Goods are unreasonably expensive in Russia. I was living in Netherlands which is not…

The Russian mail "sucks" because there was a sudden horrifying jump in mail packages volume. Russian Postal Service wasn't prepared to that. It is doing progressively better as time goes.

If you want to talk about cleptocracy, let's talk about US a little bit. Let's start from yellow light duration scandals (from the top of my head): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdD5fvYHtKQ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_light_camera#United_States_...

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#279

Post by snitko »

marcosdumay wrote: post #255
scribu wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only true worthwhile revolution comes when people realize they don't need anyone to rule them. When the majority realizes that, no more revolutions and violence can follow. Indeed, in an anarchy, you don't have any regime to stage revolutions against. But violence? Oh, you'd get plenty of that. It would just be distributed, instead of organized: survival of the fittest.

Well, that's quite a jump from "people ... don't need anyone to rule them" into anarchy. Why do you think both concepts are equivalent?

Actually that's what I meant, indeed, so he was spot on. Anarchy means no rulers. It doesn't mean absence of law and order and violent gangs of rapists running on the streets with molotov cocktails and baseball bats. Law and order are provided not by a violent monopolist (government), but instead by the free market.

Re: Revolution in Kiev

#280

Post by thesz »

mantas wrote: post #138
thesz wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those commenters have very justified disdain. They want Ukraine to join European union. and the fate of Ukraine will be pretty grim in that case. My (not only mine's, actually) conclusion is based on experience of former Baltic USSR republics and former states from the Socialist block, including Bulgaria, Slovakia, etc. Never mind that burning car tires means producing benzopirenes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzo…

FYI, Baltic states and ex-ussr-satellites are doing great in EU. Sure we still got a long way to go. But current state is good enough. Well, at least 10x better than Ukraine, Belorussia and other ex-ussr states that stayed together with Russia. Many Russians/Ukrainians/Belorussians come to ex-ussr-now-eu for shopping and medical procedures. Why? Stuff is cheaper and better quality here in Lithuania. And salaries are…

You should ask not only your friends and relatives, but all people all around, forming the proper representation. For example, you haven't asked farmers about changes that came to them. Or industrial workers. I almost certain about that.
Post reply on HN