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

Inside Putin's Circle

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 239 posts

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#121

Post by trhway »

huhtenberg wrote: post #62
ordu wrote: post #3

> These men are known in Russia as the “siloviki” — “men of force”, or perhaps even, in the Irish phrase, “hard men”. Just to clarify. The word "siloviki" made from "силовые структуры", which may be translated literally as "structures of force", or less literally but preserving some meaning "armed organizations" (maybe "armed forces", but I think that in English "armed forces" doesn't include the likes of police and…

"siloviki" is literally a "men of power" ("sila" in Russian is "power" in English) => these include the FSB (an FBI equivalent, or the ex-KGB in practice) and MVD (the police). That's it.

Good news - as result of Ukraine war failure these lowlifes are starting to eat each other - the director of foreign intelligence of FSB has just got arrested for "embezzling money intended for sabotage and gathering of intelligence in Ukraine and for providing false information about political situation in Ukraine" :)

From https://www.thedailybeast.com/now-russia-is-bombing-western-... :

"Meanwhile, panic appears to be setting in within Putin’s inner circle, with the Russian leader allegedly firing eight generals and putting the head of his FSB spy arm Sergei Beseda and his deputy under house arrest"

Russian: https://meduza.io/news/2022/03/11/zhurnalist-andrey-soldatov...

All that while 3 generals have already been killed in Ukraine in addition to uncounted number of officers with no major military success. That is bound to cause "friction" between various arms of the "siloviki". There is also a large fight brewing between FSB and Chechens (they have been in "cold war" state) as large convoy of Chechen forces in Ukraine was completely destroyed by Ukrainians based on information that seems to had been leaked by FSB.

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#122

Post by AussieWog93 »

khuey wrote: post #104
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #61

"I believe, however, that Putin and the siloviki (though not many in the wider elites) welcome this isolation [from the west]. They are becoming impressed with the Chinese model: a tremendously dynamic economy, a disciplined society and a growing military superpower ruled over with iron control by a hereditary elite that combines huge wealth with deep patriotism, promoting the idea of China as a separate and superior…

"The Chinese model" is fundamentally underwritten by exporting vast quantities of goods to the West which Putin just blew up any hope of doing.

The CCP is moving away from that, though, and towards an economy driven more by domestic consumption.

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#123

Post by scoopertrooper »

tenpies wrote: post #110
hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea of a centralised planned state fell with the USSR, and it was widely argued that it fell _because_ of central planning. China is becoming a counter-example for the people who have always been fond of the idea of having a state ruled by an "elite", with the perception that democracy is fragile and doesn't work for long-term (more than a 4/5 years mandate) planning.

Governments can be learning organizations, especially when they have long time horizons and balance agenda with reality. If anything, I think China has shown that central planning can work and is even the envy of Western leaders (see: Canadian PM Trudeau's admiration). The implicit agreement in China is that in exchange for your freedom, you receive prosperity. Russia - especially after the West seriously damages the…

China doesn't have a centrally planned economy though. It certainly has a lot of state intervention, but resources are primarily allocated through market mechanisms.

Much of its industrial policy actually resembles that of democratic states like Korea and Japan.

I'd argue China's experience presents a great argument for a mixed market economy that allows state intervention, while also recognising the importance of markets and decentralised economic coordination.

However, we shouldn't overhype China's progress. The fact of the matter is that China was always destined to become an economic juggernaut given its population size, stability, and resources.

It's just China had been tied down by Mao and his supporters managed to hijack the government for several decades and hindered China's ascent with their whacky policies. We're now seeing it snap back to where it belongs.

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#125

Post by pstuart »

khuey wrote: post #104
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #61

"I believe, however, that Putin and the siloviki (though not many in the wider elites) welcome this isolation [from the west]. They are becoming impressed with the Chinese model: a tremendously dynamic economy, a disciplined society and a growing military superpower ruled over with iron control by a hereditary elite that combines huge wealth with deep patriotism, promoting the idea of China as a separate and superior…

"The Chinese model" is fundamentally underwritten by exporting vast quantities of goods to the West which Putin just blew up any hope of doing.

Other than fossil fuels and vodka, what does Russia have to offer the world?

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#126

Post by DenisM »

the_lonely_road wrote: post #94
hcarvalhoalves wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea of a centralised planned state fell with the USSR, and it was widely argued that it fell _because_ of central planning. China is becoming a counter-example for the people who have always been fond of the idea of having a state ruled by an "elite", with the perception that democracy is fragile and doesn't work for long-term (more than a 4/5 years mandate) planning.

The world changed in a very significant way over the last 70 years. Even more so over the last 20 years. It may very well end up that the Information Age has tipped the scales and our large meandering decentralized democracies are no longer the superior model they were back when it took 4 weeks to get a letter from New York City to Washington DC. Now it’s a synchronous call with satellite footage of every inch of the…

Monoculture kills its host, nothing to do with communication speed.

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#127

Post by dragonwriter »

qiskit wrote: post #108
js2 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a native U.S. English speaker and I didn’t think twice about “wear a gun”. People absolutely say that. It’s not even pedantically incorrect: 2 (b) to carry on the person; wear a sword https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wear https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Wearing+a+gun%22&tbm=bks

> I’m a native U.S. English speaker and I didn’t think twice about “wear a gun”. Maybe it's regional. I've never heard it said that way before. "Are you wearing a gun"? "Concealed wearing laws"? Doesn't sound right, but I guess people do use it. Don't cops ask "Do you have a gun on you" or "Are you carrying?". I think most of us would find it weird if a cop asked us "Are you wearing a gun?".

”Wearing” a gun pretty specifically is used for having it in, or at least with, a holster (I’ve seen it used a lot, and always with that meaning; it is pretty much the combination of wearing the holster and carrying the gun that goes in it; I’ve mostly seen it used of people who do that regularly as part of a job or lifestyle, either speaking about them in general or discussing whether they were or were not doing so at a particular time.) “Carrying” is more general and more often of interest.

> Don't cops ask "Do you have a gun on you" or "Are you carrying?"

In person, I’be most frequently observed the former (fortunately, not much experience), but on TV both cops and crooks tend to use “carrying” with an implied direct object a lot.

> I think most of us would find it weird if a cop asked us "Are you wearing a gun?".

Sure, because that's not what a cop is likely concerned about.

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#128

Post by ZeroGravitas »

The bit about welcoming the patriotism of war reminded me of the 'conspiracy theory' that Putin blew up some of his own people in order to consolidate his power.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings

Now, some people believe that, some people don't, but since just before he invaded Ukraine he announced that they were one people, he's literally done the same thing again, blowing up "his own people", for his own political games, but openly.

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#129

Post by SavageBeast »

hvs wrote: post #23
user249 wrote: post #18

Quoted post unavailable.

Hacker News isn't an activist group, it's a tech website. Individuals on this site may or may not be "doing" something about Ukraine but there is no reason to associate this with HN being "good" or "bad". I've seen this sentiment in other places as well. Everything doesn't have to be coopted into activism for the current cause.

"Everything doesn't have to be coopted into activism for the current cause."

- sadly this is too long to easily fit on a tee shirt or I swear Id have one made right now. You make a very insightful point.

Re: Inside Putin's Circle

#130

Post by netsharc »

mikkom wrote: post #119

Evaluation of Russia by Finnish Intelligence Colonel (subtitles) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kF9KretXqJw I think this is something you should watch if you are interested in how russia works. It's very straight talk and clarified russian mindset a lot for me at least.

Also a long and great Twitter thread: https://nitter.net/kamilkazani/status/1501360272442896388
Post reply on HN